Archive for Dan Policastro

Opinions on the Sidewalk Issue

In response to a Nextdoor Mariemont post about the removal of sidewalks and putting up of a fence around the tax building by Mr. Dan Spinnenweber, I replied to resident Stephanie Eversole’s post where she shared that the elementary school has now opened the lower lot near the playground for parents to park in for pick up and drop off. Here is my added comment to her post, and then the continuation in response to Cynthia Wolter’s post, sharing a few of my experiences with the Mayor and Council and how I have seen things work.

“Stephanie is right. However, Steph, the school sent that letter only a couple of weeks before school let out. I’m hoping they advise parents/grandparents/guardians again as school starts up so perhaps more people will take advantage of that lower lot. I happen to know the school is also looking into other possible parking lot expansion solutions, but many are cost prohibitive right now, especially with the hill at the edge of the existing lot that goes down into the field. Options are being considered, though, so know that the school board is on top of this. It’s just a shame that talks weren’t pursued more aggressively with Mr. S and the Mayor prior to this sidewalk removal being given the go-ahead.

Cynthia, regarding political posts on Nextdoor Mariemont, the site is great for curb alerts, sales and upcoming events, but it is also a forum for discussion on community issues that all residents need and deserve to know about. Nextdoor andMariemont.com are the only two places people can do so freely. Not everyone can make council meetings, and in many, many cases, the public isn’t informed of “hot topics” and so they don’t know they NEED to go. (Although I strongly urge residents to call Sue Singleton at the Village Administration Office and ask to be added to the email list for Council Meeting agendas and minutes.) And even if residents do make it to meetings, the “3 minute limit” that was put in place a couple of years ago stops people from having their full say – or the Mayor threatens to have police throw you out (check out ICRC tapes if you don’t believe me). Town meeting speakers get shut down from talking about topics of importance – or get dirty looks from certain council members, as my husband and I did this year when we brought up the sidewalks, others tried to chime in, and the Mayor kept redirecting the issue.

I do agree that residents should reach out to their Council reps as well. I have personally called my Council rep, Dennis Wolter, regarding chalking tires in the tax lot to see if METRO riders were actually parking and taking up parking space back in 2012 – in hopes of targeting the real issue in Spinnenweber’s lot and avert any sidewalk removal or fence building. Nothing ever came of it, except for the Mayor presenting it as Dennis’ idea during a Council meeting. But it was never pursued.

I called Dennis and Chief Hines about putting crossing guards at the Inn crosswalk to PNC due to the ridiculous timing of lights and the drivers who whip around the corner into the crosswalk without looking. I was told the lights can’t be changed as they are on timers and it’s very intricate, and I was also told there was no money for a crossing guard/officer there. So, I suggested putting up bright “children crossing” signs or those bright green safety men at the crosswalks during school drop off/pick up times. The Chief was really good about getting this together, but the signage was not permanent and eventually disappeared. The Village never did anything else to provide better safety, and the numerous signage posted at stop light level is to confusing for drivers to take in, especially if they are not from around here.

I asked Dennis and the Chief about trimming the overgrown bushes along the tax building’s lot on Madison Rd. because drivers coming out of those driveways could not see around them and it was a safety hazard for students/parents walking in the morning.  The Chief did address this immediately and worked with Spinnenweber to cut down the bushes.

And I asked Dennis about finding a suitable route for kids to walk to school this past year since the sidewalk after the alley by Mios had been torn up due to construction of the new condos. Dennis said he was going to look into it, but I never got any answer or resolution to the issue. Dennis may have pursued this, but I never heard back, nor was anything ever done.

Cynthia, I am aware of the commitment and time Council members give to the Village. I have had several friends who’ve served on Council over the years. They do care about the community, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t problems with leadership. Just a few of these are:

  • Bad decisions being made at the top – some of which are out of the Mayor’s jurisdiction but which he is involved in anyway,
  • Lack of regular and accessible communication with the public,
  • A long-needed for an overhaul of our Village Codes and Ordinances to allow for smoother decision-making and less emergency votes and one-off changes of the code as issues come up,
  • Too much oversight from the Mayor, who sits on almost every resident-seated committee (these are supposed to be separate to allow for fair decision-making),
  • No term limits on the Mayor’s seat, which does not allow for fresh ideas and leadership as needs and dynamics in our Village change.

And these are just a handful of items.

People in Mariemont feel intimidated by the Mayor and are quickly belittled or ignored by a couple of Council members, and so they choose not to spend time and energy where their voices won’t be heard. So, regarding posting political action items on Nextdoor – and Mariemont.com – I say let people share what they know and voice their concerns where it works for them and where fellow residents can support and encourage eachother to take action toward positive change. AND I would strongly encourage residents to contact Council members – the more we bring issues of concern to light, the more attentive residents will be on future items of public concern so they won’t mysteriously slip through the cracks like this sidewalk issue did.

Suzy Weinland

Commentary on the 2014 Village Town Meeting

Commentary on the 2014 Village Town Meeting

The past twelve months has seen an extraordinary flurry of significant issues come before the Mariemont Village Council. Many of these have long range implications for the financial health of the Village and the cultural richness of living in the Village of Mariemont.

Few of these salient issues were touched upon on Sunday, March 23 in the ‘State of the Village’ address presented by Mayor Policastro. Indeed, only two important public concerns surfaced in the brief Question and Answer period at the end of the Meeting. We all were pleased when the Mayor agreed to conduct a village-wide survey concerning back or side door pickup of recyclables.

Issues that merited discussion and explanation included:

  1. The rationale behind the refusal to build a roundabout or convert the 6-way intersection at Murray Avenue into a 4 way stop sign intersection.
  2. The stonewalling of a JEDZ (Joint Economic Development Zone) with Columbia Township even as council pursues JEDZs with far-removed communities.
  3. The tax implications of the lay-offs at Kellogg’s and the very real threat that the Kellogg Plant will close its doors altogether at the end of 2015.
  4. The elimination of the two elected officials, Village Clerk and Treasurer, with consolidation into an appointed ‘fiscal officer’.
  5. A discussion of the Safe Routes to School progress
  6. South 80 development
  7. Eastern Corridor discussions about the extension of Route 32
  8. The financial impact of purchasing a $750,000 fire engine and the Mayor’s unilateral hiring of a 10th police officer, even as the Village is experiencing a significant decrease in revenues from the State
  9. Discussions on greater collaboration for essential services with adjoining communities to capture economies of scale and scope.

More openness and candid discussion could have made the meeting one of the most important in many years. What could have been a real opportunity to discuss the true state of the Village and its future, the pros and cons of the decisions and their results ended up instead being a speech about grant pursuits, volunteer recognition and mustering the troops against real and perceived threats to the Village. The address seemed anemic compared to what really happened in the community over the past year.

Open Letter to Mariemont Council and Mayor Policastro

Dear Mariemont Council and Mayor Policastro,

By now you have most likely received numerous emails or phone calls opposing the variance granted to Spinnenweber Builders to remove the West St. sidewalk around the Executive Building and erect a 5 foot fence and rolling, timed gates.

We would like to state for the record that we are opposed to this, and are disappointed that this issue was not brought to public attention before being voted on. We know that at least some Council members were completely unaware that this issue was being considered – including the one whose district this is in! An issue that affects so many Village residents deserves open debate instead of being quietly sent to the Planning Committee for a vote. Pro-active communication is vital to maintaining a healthy, trusting partnership between a government and its residents. We realize Mr. Spinnenweber has the right to build a fence on his property if he chooses, but our experience is that he is aggravating residents by singling out “Moms” for parking in his lots, forgetting that these same parents are some of his tenants best customers! Positions like this give the appearance that he is not concerned about working with the Village to retain and improve walkability.  It also gives the appearance that he does not support our schools and childrens’ safety. And the Village giving into his demands – this and others – without public discussion doesn’t make for a trusting environment between residents and their Council/Mayor.

Our arguments against the removal of the sidewalks and putting up of a fence around the Executive Building are in the attached flier here

To add a little bit of personal insight and background to those on Council who are not familiar with this issue…

I (Suzy) vocally opposed this issue, along with other residents and developers and engineers of the new school buildings, during the July 2012 Council meeting where this issue was presented by Mr. Spinnenweber. It was tabled due to opposition and in order to see how the parking and pedestrian flow would be with the new school drop off/pick up lanes. I suggested to Mr. Wolter, and he presented to Council, the idea of chalking tires in the Executive Building lot to catch cars parked there all day. The police used to do this years ago, as Metro bus riders were parking there to go downtown for the day. To date, that suggestion has been ignored. During that Council meeting in July 2012, Mr. Spinnenweber blamed “Mariemont Moms” for taking up all the spaces where his tenants and their visitors needed to park.  That is, to my mind, absurd. Parents who park there for 10-15 minutes while dropping off/picking up their child at 8:15 a.m. or 3:15 p.m. are not the culprits to long-term parking issues. And there could not possibly be such a huge influx of visitors to the Executive Office or to the retail establishments during these select times, that every single space in the lot needs to be open.

As for removal of sidewalks, families with children, as well as other residents out for walks and bike rides, use the sidewalks on West St. daily. They are necessary for getting from point A to point B, and connect Madisonville to Wooster Pike. Removal cuts off this main artery, and also creates a safety hazard. Public right-of-ways are a precious commodity in a village like Mariemont.  We have recently added several new ones, to the Village’s credit.  To reverse course and remove sidewalks sets a bad precedent. Once lost, they would be very expensive to replace in the future.

If parking is the sole issue, would it not be in Mr. Spinnenweber’s best interest to develop the empty grass lot with the semi-trailer into a nice parking lot to aid in parking for his tenants, while working with the Village to fix the sidewalk on the east side of West St. and continue it through that grass lot to the corner Strand shops? Perhaps he and the Village could also work together on a landscaping solution, since removal of all the Gum trees have left it quite unsightly as well. We think it would make sense for the Village to work with Mr. Spinnenweber to chalk tires and ticket anyone parking there for more than a few hours. We think it would be beneficial for Mr. Spinnenweber to act reciprocally about parking, since the school has allowed their lot to be used after 4 p.m. for those frequenting the Strand venues as well as the restaurants and movie theater area (owned by Mr. Spinnenweber.)

We would like to see the Village, the school board and Mr. Spinnenweber come together, along with any residents who would like to voice their ideas, to brainstorm with some solutions to the parking issues. One idea we have is to develop part of the ME field into a parking lot for teachers. This grass field is huge, and was meant to be used for football and other sports WAY back when the building was a high school and jr. high school. Then, the field was used for jr. high football and soccer when they were housed at Dale Park. With the new jr. high in Fairfax having its own sports fields, and with the ME field only being used for a few rec soccer practices that could still be held on a slightly smaller field, this is a very viable option.

This is a small neighborhood with limited parking, and we all need to work together to do what is best for the residents and the Village. Forcefully separating areas and making them unfriendly to pedestrians is not what Mary Emery envisioned and goes against one of the primary reasons people move to Mariemont.

Council, we implore you to consider your constituents’ concerns regarding this variance.  In addition, we encourage the Council to work with Mr. Spinnenweber to address his concerns in a manner that satisfies all parties.  The Village is a wonderful partner for businesses/developers, but must act with consideration for the tradition and charm of Mariemont.

Thank you,

Suzy Weinland

 

Link to page with Council and Mayor contact information.

Mariemont.com Staff encourages all interested residents to attend the Village Town Meeting on March 23rd

The Mayor’s October ‘Bulletin’

The contributors to the Web site Mariemont.com are pleased that Mayor Policastro has reaffirmed (in his bulletin here) that Mariemont.com is not the ‘official’ website for the Village of Mariemont. Indeed, Mariemont.com is an independent website and has never held itself out as an official website for any portion of the Greater Mariemont experience.

Mariemont.com is a rich repository of information for the residents of Greater Mariemont with a complete listing of the Social Organizations within the Village, a Master Calendar of Village Events, an electronic version and archive of the Village TownCrier, and a fairly comprehensive business directory. In addition, it has a blog where fair, uncensored editorial content may be posted along with featured businesses, performances, events, awards, appointments, schools, sports, meetings, real-estate statistics, medical matters, editorial opinion and so on.

Mariemont.org is the official website of Village Government, but is not the ‘official’ website for the nonprofits, religious organizations, schools, businesses and most individuals residing in the Village.

For several years, council members and some of us have urged the Mayor to upgrade the Mariemont.org website and have even volunteered to help with this effort, but the Mayor has resisted. Now, using the taxpayer’s dime, he has hired an outside design firm to build the site. One wonders who is going to maintain the website with dynamic and current content.

P.S.

The editorial about the legalization of drugs alluded to in the Mayor’s Bulletin was the lead editorial that occupied an entire page on the Cincinnati Enquirer Opinion Page on Tuesday, September 17, 2013 and it can also be accessed on Mariemont.com by viewing the archived September blogs (dated September 1st). Both the Editorial Page Editor for the Enquirer, David Holthaus, and I were surprised that most of the ‘Letters to the Editor’ were very supportive of the ideas expressed in the article.

–Richard Wendel, Editor and an Administrator of Mariemont.com

Opportunities Squandered by Village Officials–By Mike Lemon

Opportunities Squandered by Village Officials–By Mike Lemon 

As a 34-year Mariemont resident, former Mariemont mayor and current Columbia Township
administrator, I have had my feet planted in both communities for many years.  Most recently I was involved in two recent failed projects that could have easily delivered significant financial opportunities for both Mariemont and Columbia Township, had it not been for the questionable judgment of our Village officials. As a concerned Mariemont resident, I believe it is important for all Village residents to understand the facts of what happened so that we can all hold our Village officials accountable for their actions.

The two recent projects I am referring to are: 1) the proposed improvement at the 6-way intersection of Plainville, Madisonville and Settle Roads (commonly referred to as the roundabout project; and 2) the Joint Economic Development Zone (JEDZ). Together, these projects had the potential of generating millions of dollars for the Village of Mariemont without any new tax increases to Village residents. However, our Village officials declined to participate or engage in negotiations on either project.

The “Mayor’s Bulletin” of August 2013 provided the Mariemont mayor’s slant on the reasons for Mariemont officials rejecting both projects. Unfortunately, much of the information contained in that bulletin is misrepresented, incomplete, or inaccurate. Attempting to address each point in the mayor’s report would require too much space to set the record straight and only lead to more bulletins and wasting of taxpayer’s dollars. However, there are several observations I would like to share.

Six-way Intersection Improvement – A $1.7 Million Grant from the OKI Regional Council of Governments

As the Columbia administrator, I observed Columbia Township act in good faith, seeking a collaborative, cooperative approach to this project. I also observed Trustee David Kubicki’s repeated attempts to engage with Mariemont officials in negotiations continually stonewalled. After many meetings and phone calls, Mr. Kubicki even challenged our officials to take the $1.7 million grant the township received and design its preferred intersection improvement, but Mariemont officials would not even recommend or consider a new design. In the end, the Township had no choice but to relinquish any improvement which would have been entirely paid for by Columbia Township’s grant. Columbia Township is now moving the roundabout concept to Bramble and Plainville and leaving the financial fate of the six-way intersection and entry into the Village solely in Mariemont officials’ hands.

Joint Economic Development Zone (JEDZ) – A Multi-Million Dollar Revenue Opportunity

Columbia Township made it known early in discussions with Mariemont officials that it was important to get the JEDZ issue on the ballot in November. Knowing this, Trustee Kubicki personally expended a considerable amount of energy and time trying to engage our Mariemont officials. Trustee Kubicki even offered to go to a council meeting and discuss the JEDZ. He was warned by the mayor, who advised Mr. Kubicki that he would only be allowed three minutes to talk, not to attend. After four months of phone calls, meetings and discussions without progress toward an agreement, and with time to get the issue on the ballot growing perilously short, the Township received a peculiar letter from the mayor asking for a written proposal! This led Columbia Township officials to conclude that Mariemont was not really interested in collaborating or partnering in an agreement, but only stonewalling again. As a result, the Township began discussions with other communities, while still holding open the offer to accept a proposal from Mariemont. Despite efforts by councilmen Cortney Scheeser and Jeff Andrews to schedule a special council meeting to discuss the issue (before Columbia Township signed an agreement with another community), a council vote was taken and failed by 4-2, effectively abandoning the opportunity to partner in a JEDZ. Within 10 days, Fairfax and Columbia Township had completed negotiations and agreed to form a partnership on a JEDZ.

While the “Mayor’s Bulletin” stated the Township was only willing to give the Village 10% of the revenue collected (as evidenced by the agreement with Fairfax), I know the truth is that discussions took place with Mariemont officials for figures up to 50%, although not all the township trustees were aligned on that amount. Indications from the trustees were the figure was more likely to be 20-30% in an agreement, plus repayment for the expenses for collecting taxes. There would be absolutely NO cost to Mariemont, only revenue to use as it wished.

Columbia Township officials have been accused by Mariemont officials of withholding information. Nothing could be further from the truth. All information available was provided by me to the Village, and nothing was held back. The projections on revenue from the JEDZ were completed by an economic development professional, using methodologies commonly used in industry. Explanations of how the figures were derived were also provided by the same development professional in a meeting with Mariemont officials. Conservative figures indicted the JEDZ would generate approximately $706,000 annually. Based upon the intent of a 40-year agreement with three 10-year renewal options (as signed with Fairfax), our community lost an opportunity to capture revenue for the next seventy years for any purpose it wished! How much it lost depends upon what the negotiated split would have been and the cost of tax collection. However, based upon a quick spreadsheet analysis, the following chart reflects the range of revenue lost if a 1.0% earnings tax and a 5% tax collection fee of generated revenue are used. (If a 1.25% earnings tax (the current Mariemont rate) had been negotiated, the impact would show an even more significant loss for Mariemont.)

% Split 90-10 80-20 70-30 60-40 50-50
Est. Revenue $706,378 $706,378 $706,378 $706,378 $706,378
Collection Fee (5%) $35,319 $35,319 $35,319 $35,319 $35,319
Net $671,059 $671,059 $671,059 $671,059 $671,059
           
CT Annual Share $603,953 $536,847 $469,741 $402,635 $335,530
MM Annual Share $67,106 $134,212 $201,318 $268,424 $335,530
           
MM Loss-70 Yrs. $4,697,414 $9,394,827 $14,092,241 $18,789,655 $23,487,069

If the percentage our Village received was between 20-30%, this equates to between $9 million and $14 million dollars of free money lost!

The Lost Opportunity for Our Village

So what could have happened if an agreement was reached on these two initiatives?  We could have…

  • Increased our Village revenue by millions of dollars without increasing taxes to residents and businesses. (What would these millions of dollars have done for improving our streets, for improving parks and the pool, for police protection, for fire protection and more? Would it pay for a community comprehensive plan or for a Village administrator?)
  • Replaced six-way confusing intersection with improved design and new entry into our Village at no cost to Mariemont
  • Provided pathway and design for extension of bike path from Fairfax
  • Extended the customer base for our retail and commercial businesses in Mariemont through development of Plainville Road and Wooster Pike.

 

I saw these two projects as a tremendous opportunity for Columbia Township and the Village of Mariemont to work together to accomplish three things…

  • Improve two adjacent communities
  • Support economic development
  • Help stabilize finances following the severe impact of State cut-backs and estate tax elimination.

However, our Mariemont Village officials decided that these projects were not in the best interest of Mariemont and declined to participate. While there are obviously differences of opinion on these two projects, one has to wonder what is really driving the decisions of our Village officials and whether they are in the long-term best interest of Mariemont and its residents. In the meantime, I know Columbia Township is putting this episode behind it and is moving forward with its plans to improve the township. I also know that Columbia Township will continue to collaborate with surrounding communities when it can, and I know it will certainly include Mariemont when possible.

Having served the Mariemont community for 13-years as a councilman and mayor and as a long-time Mariemont resident, just thinking of the lost opportunities is very distressing to me.  I hope you are as disturbed as I am and will begin to take a closer look at the current leadership and how it is managing the long-term interests of our Village.

Click here for more information regarding the JEDZ legislation

Click here for the Mayor’s August Bulletin

By Mike Lemon