City sidewalks, city ‘considerations,’ mostly lip service
Lead Summary
By
Rory Ryan-hcpress@cinci.rr.com
Hillsboro City Council members Lee Koogler, Dick Donley, Bill Alexander, Justin Harsha, Rebecca Wilkin, Claudia Klein, Ann Morris and Tracy Aranyos will be hearing two appeals in regard to another dubious city sidewalk replacement project in the 100 block of South High Street (west side) at the July 10 council meeting.
According to the July 10 meeting agenda released by the city today, council members will hear two appeals on proposed sidewalk replacements:
• An appeal of the 127 South High Street sidewalk replacement by Mary Hamilton of Wilkin-Wilkin Insurance; and,
• An appeal of the 123-125 South High Street sidewalk replacement by Steven D. Wilkin.
Last year, property owners on the opposite (east) side of the 100 block of South High Street received letters from the city stating: “Property owners are responsible for all costs incurred for the sidewalk replacement process, per City of Hillsboro Ordinance 96.15. The expense for the sidewalk replacement will be based on the street frontage of the property. Service will include complete demolition and removal, along with all materials and labor. Property owners will have the option of a lump-sum payment, or the expense can be assessed to the properties' taxes and paid over a five-year period.”
On Sept. 5, 2016, South High Street business and/or property owners Gary Schraw, Ramona Collins, Rachelle Trefz, Rosemary Ryan and yours truly also signed a letter of appeal to the city over a similar sidewalk replacement project and significant expense to private property owners.
In the letter of appeal, it was noted that on Aug. 29, 2016, Hillsboro Record Custodian Eric Daniels said – quoting Special Administrative Assistant Heather Collins – that the city has NOT charged any business and/or property owners since the current administration assumed office on Jan. 1, 2012 in the uptown areas of Main Street, one block from the center of town, east and west; and, High Street, one block from the center of town, north and south. Thus, this proposed project – at the total expense of business and/or property owners in the affected area – would be a first for the present administration.
The 2016 appeals letter to city council continued:
The city is asked, with all due respect, to provide the following information:
• Given that many city sidewalks are in similar – or worse – condition, including sections owned by city officials (photographic evidence is available), who made the decision that this section of South High Street would be a high priority at business owners’ expense?
• Each business and property owner is entitled to a written expectation of the extent of limited customer access to the South High Street sidewalks. Please provide it.
• Each business and property owner is entitled to a written statement of the potential responsibilities and liabilities (e.g. personal injury, workers’ compensation, unforeseen accidents, etc.) during the construction period. Please provide it.
Ohio Revised Code Section 727.07 states: "When a street, alley, public highway, sidewalk, wharf, or landing within a municipal corporation is graded, or pavements are constructed in conformity to grades established by the authorities of the municipal corporation, and the expense of such work is assessed on the lots or lands benefited thereby, such lots or lands shall not be subject to any special assessment occasioned by any subsequent change of grade in such pavement, sidewalk, street, alley, public highway, wharf, or landing unless a petition for the change is subscribed by a majority of such owners. The expense of improvements occasioned by such change of grade, not so petitioned for, shall be included as part of the cost of the improvement to be paid by the municipal corporation."
Please confirm that the city shall adhere to ORC 727.07.
To date, this business and property owner in the 100 block of South High Street has not received responses from council. In spite of the fact that we were the first business to pay – upfront – for the dubious sidewalk replacement, which replaced 12-inch concrete with less than half that.
* * *
At the Hillsboro City Council meeting on Sept. 12, 2016 (see http://www.highlandcountypress.com/Content/In-The-News/In-The-News/Article/Council-approves-moratorium-on-water-sewer-rates/2/20/34815), Council President – and attorney – Lee Koogler said: “We’ll consider any appeals that are made to council.”
That’s a very convenient and political phrase and verb choice. “We’ll ‘consider’ any appeals that are made to council.”
Here are a few other unexceptionable words that are synonymous with “consider:”
• Contemplate.
• Review.
• Mull.
• Ponder.
• Assess (my personal favorite).
• Evaluate.
• Appraise.
There’s certainly no real action connected to the verb. We can “consider” everything until the cows come home; but at some point in time, real action is necessary.
Consider this:
To put Koogler’s “consider” into proper context, let’s “consider” the emergency room doctor who tells a patient – who happens, at the moment, to be bleeding from multiple wounds – “We’ll ‘consider’ a proper remedy.”
Meanwhile, the poor soul might as well assess his own future consideration and ask a family member for a Band-Aid or 10.
Koogler, presumably, also considered his own words from last September: “Mr. Ryan is asking us, essentially, to look at the issue and see whether or not council agrees with the decision to move forward in the 100 block … with the sidewalk project.”
That’s funnier than a moll (not to be confused with mull) in church.
What those of us on South High Street asked council in 2016 was clear. Yes, clear. Clear as crystal.
What answers did you provide? As our appeal was in writing, surely you responded to all of the South High Street taxpayers in kind? Maybe I missed your response. Maybe it’s still under “consideration.” It’s only been 10 months and two days. Maybe you’ve been busy in court. Who knows.
Frankly, I’ve moved on from paying almost two grand to the city for property that I don’t own – in addition to the various and sundry taxes. I’d just like someone from city council to either ask nicely when they demand more of my money and maybe, just one time, say thank you.
By the way, the city’s sidewalk project on the east side of South High Street did “considerable” damage to Mr. Schraw’s building. Maybe council will “consider” Ohio Revised Code Section 727.07.
If not, they can consider this.
Good luck to the folks across the street on July 10. I hope council considers your appeal. They ignored ours.
Rory Ryan is publisher and owner of The Highland County Press – still your only locally owned and operated newspaper.
According to the July 10 meeting agenda released by the city today, council members will hear two appeals on proposed sidewalk replacements:
• An appeal of the 127 South High Street sidewalk replacement by Mary Hamilton of Wilkin-Wilkin Insurance; and,
• An appeal of the 123-125 South High Street sidewalk replacement by Steven D. Wilkin.
Last year, property owners on the opposite (east) side of the 100 block of South High Street received letters from the city stating: “Property owners are responsible for all costs incurred for the sidewalk replacement process, per City of Hillsboro Ordinance 96.15. The expense for the sidewalk replacement will be based on the street frontage of the property. Service will include complete demolition and removal, along with all materials and labor. Property owners will have the option of a lump-sum payment, or the expense can be assessed to the properties' taxes and paid over a five-year period.”
On Sept. 5, 2016, South High Street business and/or property owners Gary Schraw, Ramona Collins, Rachelle Trefz, Rosemary Ryan and yours truly also signed a letter of appeal to the city over a similar sidewalk replacement project and significant expense to private property owners.
In the letter of appeal, it was noted that on Aug. 29, 2016, Hillsboro Record Custodian Eric Daniels said – quoting Special Administrative Assistant Heather Collins – that the city has NOT charged any business and/or property owners since the current administration assumed office on Jan. 1, 2012 in the uptown areas of Main Street, one block from the center of town, east and west; and, High Street, one block from the center of town, north and south. Thus, this proposed project – at the total expense of business and/or property owners in the affected area – would be a first for the present administration.
The 2016 appeals letter to city council continued:
The city is asked, with all due respect, to provide the following information:
• Given that many city sidewalks are in similar – or worse – condition, including sections owned by city officials (photographic evidence is available), who made the decision that this section of South High Street would be a high priority at business owners’ expense?
• Each business and property owner is entitled to a written expectation of the extent of limited customer access to the South High Street sidewalks. Please provide it.
• Each business and property owner is entitled to a written statement of the potential responsibilities and liabilities (e.g. personal injury, workers’ compensation, unforeseen accidents, etc.) during the construction period. Please provide it.
Ohio Revised Code Section 727.07 states: "When a street, alley, public highway, sidewalk, wharf, or landing within a municipal corporation is graded, or pavements are constructed in conformity to grades established by the authorities of the municipal corporation, and the expense of such work is assessed on the lots or lands benefited thereby, such lots or lands shall not be subject to any special assessment occasioned by any subsequent change of grade in such pavement, sidewalk, street, alley, public highway, wharf, or landing unless a petition for the change is subscribed by a majority of such owners. The expense of improvements occasioned by such change of grade, not so petitioned for, shall be included as part of the cost of the improvement to be paid by the municipal corporation."
Please confirm that the city shall adhere to ORC 727.07.
To date, this business and property owner in the 100 block of South High Street has not received responses from council. In spite of the fact that we were the first business to pay – upfront – for the dubious sidewalk replacement, which replaced 12-inch concrete with less than half that.
* * *
At the Hillsboro City Council meeting on Sept. 12, 2016 (see http://www.highlandcountypress.com/Content/In-The-News/In-The-News/Article/Council-approves-moratorium-on-water-sewer-rates/2/20/34815), Council President – and attorney – Lee Koogler said: “We’ll consider any appeals that are made to council.”
That’s a very convenient and political phrase and verb choice. “We’ll ‘consider’ any appeals that are made to council.”
Here are a few other unexceptionable words that are synonymous with “consider:”
• Contemplate.
• Review.
• Mull.
• Ponder.
• Assess (my personal favorite).
• Evaluate.
• Appraise.
There’s certainly no real action connected to the verb. We can “consider” everything until the cows come home; but at some point in time, real action is necessary.
Consider this:
To put Koogler’s “consider” into proper context, let’s “consider” the emergency room doctor who tells a patient – who happens, at the moment, to be bleeding from multiple wounds – “We’ll ‘consider’ a proper remedy.”
Meanwhile, the poor soul might as well assess his own future consideration and ask a family member for a Band-Aid or 10.
Koogler, presumably, also considered his own words from last September: “Mr. Ryan is asking us, essentially, to look at the issue and see whether or not council agrees with the decision to move forward in the 100 block … with the sidewalk project.”
That’s funnier than a moll (not to be confused with mull) in church.
What those of us on South High Street asked council in 2016 was clear. Yes, clear. Clear as crystal.
What answers did you provide? As our appeal was in writing, surely you responded to all of the South High Street taxpayers in kind? Maybe I missed your response. Maybe it’s still under “consideration.” It’s only been 10 months and two days. Maybe you’ve been busy in court. Who knows.
Frankly, I’ve moved on from paying almost two grand to the city for property that I don’t own – in addition to the various and sundry taxes. I’d just like someone from city council to either ask nicely when they demand more of my money and maybe, just one time, say thank you.
By the way, the city’s sidewalk project on the east side of South High Street did “considerable” damage to Mr. Schraw’s building. Maybe council will “consider” Ohio Revised Code Section 727.07.
If not, they can consider this.
Good luck to the folks across the street on July 10. I hope council considers your appeal. They ignored ours.
Rory Ryan is publisher and owner of The Highland County Press – still your only locally owned and operated newspaper.