What does Buckeye Lake Council know that Baltimore doesn’t?
Just in case anyone missed last week’s Beacon, Buckeye Lake Village Council basically “killed” a 30 dwelling “low income” housing development. The ordinance was up for its third and final reading, but no one moved for its adoption.
If you read the article, the proposal is very similar to the proposal that Baltimore Council members unanimously approved. According to The Beacon, Buckeye Lake’s mayor did not agree with the council decision. Buckeye Lake has lots of maintained dwellings, some better than others, and a wide range of values. If you have ever driven off of Ohio 79, you will see a combination of “maintained” dwellings, as well as some that are in very poor condition.
It was stated that the homes would lease for $ 400 -600 per month, and with an “option to buy” after 15 years. One council member stated, “This is government housing”, and “it is feared that the properties would not be maintained”. It was also stated that “I have many reasons why I don’t think the is a benefit for the village”.
If you read the Feb. 9 Beacon article, you know the proposal for “Fairlawn Village” in Baltimore is based on the very same standards. Our council passed it unanimously on the very first reading as an “EMERGENCY”.
I have read the last two years of Council minutes and found not a single “NO” vote from any council member. Even though she is gone, Village Administrator Hall has them trained well.
I guess that based upon the spending that this administration has done and is still doing, you need more taxpayers to pay the income tax and more revenue for the water/ sewer systems.
I have no problem with “low income” residences, as long as they can afford to maintain their dwelling, but in this case, one Buckeye Lake Council member “feared” that the “government” would not properly maintain the dwellings during the initial 15 year period.
That fear, and unstated others, resulted in the ordinance “dying.” Here in Baltimore, it appears the village administration cannot wait to get the new revenue that will follow the construction and occupancy of this project. What happens if the new residents cannot afford their water/sewer bills or the income tax, if they are working? Maybe, due to “government” ownership, new residents will get a “discount” on the water/sewer costs. Will the development be treated the same as everyone else, paying “on time” or your water is shut off ($75 charge) plus another $75 to get it turned back on? And, by the way, with “government” ownership for 15 years, is there any property tax revenue for our county, village or schools ?
Buckeye Lake Council seems to have a problem in dealing with the Fire/EMS problem, but the “housing proposal” was addressed rather promptly, and is likely to become a dead issue in Buckeye Lake. Only time will tell if it is also a dead issue in Baltimore.
Charles R. Lamb