UPDATE: The JT followed our tip and is on the story. They interviewed Becker and Mount Pleasant President Carolyn Milkie and found that the communities want to "straighten out" their borders. As our commenters have pointed out, the issue is more likely centered around high-crime neighborhoods that the village doesn't want to deal with any more. But at what price will Racine take on these resource-intensive areas? Perhaps the former Case plant?
Original post:
Racine Mayor Gary Becker and Mount Pleasant officials are meeting to discuss changes to the communities' borders.
Preliminary talks would "straighten out" the borders between the communities and possibly result in the city receiving more land in exchange for taking on high-crime areas that are currently in the village.
The discussions are preliminary and no decisions have been made on the borders. City Council members have been asked not to discuss the matter with the media.
Like the racine police dept. doesn't have enough "High Crime" areas to deal with!! Let's cut police officers jobs and yet take on other communities problems, all for shitty run down land??? You gotta be kidding us right???
ReplyDeleteWow. Let's jump to conclusions before we know what the story is.
ReplyDeleteso... RAcine takes more of Mead ands 21st in exchange for areas off of Ohio.... is this for more taxes... or a higher drain on our Police...
ReplyDeleteRacine needs to take ALL of the Mt. Pleasant area south of the city. Mt. Pleasant has neglected it for years and it affects the city. The city has the know-how and the resources to properly deal with it and turn things around down there.
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget, the land comes with property taxes, which can fund extra services that may be needed there. Also, our police departments cooperate on a gang task force that patrols that area from time to time.
Racine needs to take over the South. The Mount Pleasant Police can't handle the major crime that happens there. At least the Racine PD has the experience and the resources.
ReplyDeleteI would agree that the City should talk over that part of Mt Pleasant.
ReplyDeleteBecker is right on this issue