Correcting "Factual Errors"

Isn't it refreshing that the Miami Township Trustees trawl the local newspaper editorials just salivating to squash any "incorrect" information that is put forth. For example, take the editorials appearing in the 2/7/07 edition of the Milford Miami Advertiser. Apparently some citizens had the audacity to question the prohibitive amount in the Township budget allocated to salaries and benefits for Township politicians and employees.

Quoted from the 2/14/07 Viewpoints column of the Advertiser as written by Miami Township Trustee, Ken Tracy:

A recent letter about the Miami Township operating budget contained factual
errors.

I want to inform residents about the true cost of the services they receive from the outstanding departments at Miami Township.

In the 2007 Miami Township budget, only 48 percent of our costs cover payroll and benefits for the police, fire, medical services, road maintenance, parks and recreation and administration, not the 55 percent that was in a couple of recent publications. Miami Township has been successful at keeping costs down, despite not controlling workers' compensation and retirement expenses, which are set by the state.

One of the articles said the cost to every resident in Miami Township to fund the services provided at $6,875. That is not true.

The investment to homeowners to receive police and fire protection, medical services from
our trained paramedics, road maintenance and a recreation program with beautiful parks is $464 annually for a $100,000 home. Your tax bill is broken out this way: 64 percent goes to your schools, and 24 percent comes to Miami Township. The remaining funds go to the county, public libraries and the vocational school district. These numbers can be verified by
the Clermont County Auditor's Office.

***

Ken, just because people's views don't comport with your own doesn't mean that others are "factually incorrect," it is a matter of interpretation. You give an apples to oranges comparison and I doubt anyone even noticed. You are entitled to your opinion and so is everyone else. The Township should stop trying to spin the information they don't agree with as being factually incorrect. Get on with governing, not damage control.

Stormwater Management Utility

Just back from the "open public meeting" discussing the proposed stormwater utility district and fee. Boy, were there a lot of hacked off people! Seems as though many people are frustrated by the lack of responsiveness of the departments that are now in charge of dealing with stormwater issues. People with cisterns and others are not happy at the prospect of paying $3.81 per month for the new utility. Many concerns centered around the fact that the county seemingly rubberstamps development plans without enforcing provisions of existing stormwater regulations.

Many residents blamed other parts of government for allowing the current problems to occur. Dissenters of the proposal frequently blamed the county's rapid growth for negatively altering the environment. Most agreed with McManus that problems with standing water and creek and ditch overflows are a problem, but were displeased that the burden of funding a solution might fall on the residents who lived here long before most developments.

County leaders were blamed on more than one occasion for allowing the problems to occur without offering accountability. Commissioners Bob Proud and Mary Walker attended the meeting along with County Administrator David Spinney, who twice stepped in front of the podium to clarify speakers' concerns or defend the county's actions.

See the article quoted above in its entirety at: http://news.communitypress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070224/NEWS01/702240321

Speaking of "defending"... the mighty eloquent Mary Walker in a burst of defensiveness stood up and squarely put a resident in her place after the resident stated that during her experience she had difficulty in having County staff and elected officials return her calls and correspondence. Apparently, even though the comment by the resident was vague and addressed the entire county apparatus, Walker took it as a personal insult. Poor Mary.

The proposed stormwater utility will have the authority to inspect and maintain the system, but not to ENFORCE. Unfortunately, that duty falls on the shoulders of the current structure -- the structure which was so clearly identified as being INEPT! Can anyone tell me how the Chief Building Offical got his job? Which commissioner is he related to?? I am dying to know.