Must read by Joe Sonka: "Tolling body approves low-income mitigation plan following minimal public comment on report few have seen."

There's a temptation to view this selfishly, in that any help at all given to low-income metro residents might alleviate New Albany's anticipated pass-through problems once tolling begins.

However, we mustn't lose sight of the bigger picture. Put simply, these measures are insufficient, as necessitated by a colossally expensive solution to a problem that didn't exist, and have been contrived just as non-transparently as the boondoggle they pay less than lip service to "mitigate."

Jeff G points to this instance of ROTFLMAO, as reported by Marcus Green at WDRB:

The states promised other steps, such as establishing one “walk-up” center for managing toll accounts on each side of the river; allowing two vehicles to register under a single account; and erecting signs in some poorer neighborhoods showing how to get to toll-free bridges.

But here's the part that should resonate for New Albanians already disturbed by the Gahan administration's disdain for transparency, as relayed by Joe Sonka at Insider Louisville and signposted by the Bookseller (italics ours).

Tolling body approves low-income mitigation plan following minimal public comment on report few have seen

After one minor question and little discussion, the tolling body of the Ohio River Bridges Project today unanimously approved a mitigation plan for low-income and minority commuters who will be disproportionately affected by tolls on two new bridges set to be completed within two years.

The plan — based on a report that was not made public until just before the vote, and only reported on in the media over the last two days — was approved after a single citizen made a public comment on the plan, which she had not yet had the chance to review ...

... (Cathy Hinko of the Metropolitan Housing Coalition) took great issue with the fact that the report was not officially released to the public until just before the tolling body voted to approve it, noting that she had only read about it in the media the day before.

“My comment was made based on a news article,” said Hinko. “So after my comment, I read (the report) and listened to their presentation at the same time to figure out what’s going on. And think about the hundreds of thousands of people that this affects… You had to be very tuned in to even know about this, and it seems important enough for people to have been shown it.”

Hinko also criticized the optics of the meeting, noting that an all-white board was voting on something that will greatly affect minorities, while they made no effort to give those communities access to the meeting so they could give their input.

“They are so out of touch with the whole concept of serving people, that although the only thing on the agenda was how to deliver services to people who they call the ‘E.J. (environmental justice) community,’ they put it out on Westport Road where no one can come,” said Hinko. “They are blind to the optics of even making sure that there was at least one person of color in the room. They don’t even think about convenience for people. They don’t even think about how this report should have been out with people being able to review it earlier, where people had two weeks notice. Where they might have had the meeting at 5:00, at a site where anyone across the river could come.

“That’s how out of touch they are. They don’t even think that way. That’s what makes it so sad.”