Saturday, July 30, 2011

(VIDEOS) SMALL TOWN STARK COUNTY: "DEMOCRACY IN ACTION" - SUGARCREEK TWP CITIZENS DEFEAT BEACH CITY GOV'T TAKEOVER ATTEMPT


The SCPR loves it when individual citizens and or groups of citizens band together to fight, within the processes of democracy, for their rights.

Last Wednesday, a group of Sugarcreek Township residents led by Jim Baltzly of the township successfully fought off an attempt by the village of Beach City (number a few hundred residents) to annex their properties into the village.  Stark County commissioner voted unanimously against the annexation. 


 

The village - which got its start in the 1890s - in recent times has run into a problem with having enough "inside-the -village" users of its electricity to justify its existence.



Solution?

Annexation!

Of course Stark Countians are very familiar with the "A" word as it has been used extensively by Canton's Director of Annexation Sam "Darth Vader to the Townships" Sliman and Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr the now lame duck mayor of Massillon (by virtue of having been defeated by Kathy Catazaro-Perry in the March, 2011 Democratic primary election).

Opposers to Beach City (Village) found they had the sympathetic ear of Stark County commissioners when on the 27th of this month the found that the Village was attempting to do an annexation of an unreasonably large tract of land (about 157 acres) and very little benefit to the target of the annexation.  Of the 157.7 acreage tract, a mere 1.6 acres belonged to those consenting to the annexation try.

Had the Village been successful, it appears that the Sugarcreek Township targets would have incurred an unproductive expense for electric service inasmuch as they had contracted either with Ohio Edison or American Electric Power for service (the township residents paying for the capital expenditure - one such expenditure having been $12,400).

Other negatives on the annexation would have been:
  • being subject to Beach City's 1% (perhaps, so to be 1.5%) income tax
  • not being able to use firearms at will on their farms, and a
  • a curtailment of the right to burn refuse
Beach City officials say that the benefits would have been
  • Village provided electricity
  • Village provided fire and police protections, and
  • Village provided water
One of the consequences to the Sugarcreek Township targets is that Beach City has sent out notices to them (among others) that their water is to be cut off on August 1st according to Baltzly.

The SCPR commends the Sugarcreek Township residents for availing themselves of their democratic rights to preserve the way of life!

Here is a video of Baltzly speaking about the commissioners' decision and the consequences that township residents close to Beach City face in light of the decision and in the face of apparent internal financial and infrastructure challenges that the Village is working upon.

No comments: