The Huntington Urban Renewal Authority had several important issues on its agenda at its meeting Monday in the Huntington City Council Chambers, although there were some things that stuck out as odd.
Most notably, there was an election for new officers. Some of the wording used when electing and nominating the new officers was confusing. The commissioners had no problem going back and tidying up minor mistakes or inaccuracies after the fact, so it would be unlikely the election results will be voided. The actual title is "president", but several of the members used both that term and "chairperson".
The new officers are: President Nate Randolph, Vice President Brandi Jacobs-Jones, Secretary Diane Munfson and Treasurer Herb Stanley. Dr. Philip Carter, the previous president, was nominated for several of the open offices but respectfully declined all nominations. The officers serve a one-year term (all commissioners are nominated for five-year terms, according the HURA Web site).
There was also an issue with a large sum of money being "a figment on paper". Apparently there was $500,000 in an account that HURA thought could possibly be available to the Authority, but according to Mufson the money was an "insurance value" and is not available to HURA.
The most hotly debated topic at the meeting was that of the Land Bank Authority. HURA and the Huntington Municiple Development Authority are both vying to be in charge of the local Land Bank Authority, which is a group that oversees properties that have tax liens on them and are turned over to the city government for development. The HURA members (minus Jacobs-Jones, who also serves as the chairperson of HMDA and abstained from the votes to avoid a conflict of interests) passed a motion to be in charge of the Land Bank Authority. The motion was non-binding and is (simply stated) HURA proclaiming that it would be the better organization to oversee things.
Commissioner Carter introduced a motion to host a study on land banks in Huntington to help HURA better understand what exactly it will need to do and some of the struggles the committee could face. HURA's logic was that since it dealt more with residential development as opposed to HMDA dealing with mostly commercial property. It is up to the city which group will be in charge and will be voted on at a later date.
There was also a motion to move HURA's checking and savings accounts from Chase to a local bank. According to Mufson, Chase was assessing charges to the accounts for lack of activity. All present members agreed that banking locally was a wise move. First Sentry Bank was mentioned as a potential place to move, but Jacobs-Jones moved that the commissioners take a closer look at what the different banks had to offer HURA before they make a decision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Isn't the election issue really just a semantics game? I doubt any official would ever reverse the election simply because of naming convention.
ReplyDeleteWhy bureaucratize a bureaucracy that may not be able to handle the level of bureaucracy already imposed on it? I say if they got the election done and it was fair, why should we criticize based on nomenclature?
For an organization that seemed to pride itself on being "a protector and growth advocate for the neighborhoods", I would like to think they would be able to get the nomenclature right.
ReplyDeleteIs it a big deal? No. The problem is it reflects poorly on HURA and the commissioners for letting it happen. Is it too much to ask that they cross their T's and dot their I's correctly?
Great use of personality while still telling all the elements of the story. That is what I think makes a good blog.
ReplyDeleteTo add to the discussion here, the level of incompetence HURA put on display today is seen only when people don't care. What else can explain not knowing how long your own term is or the name of the positions in your own organization? They even admitted their current monthly commitment is only 1-2 hours, which means their commitment can only comprise the monthly meeting.