Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Economy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pike County commissioners defend nonrenewal of Milford farmers market lease after public criticism
Summary
Public commenters urged the commission to restore the Milford Farmers Market and to revise public‑gathering permit policy; commissioners said the county chose not to renew the lease and suggested alternate locations, calling the decision a policy choice rather than an eviction.
Public commenters pressed Pike County commissioners on Feb. 18 to restore the Milford Farmers Market after the commission declined to renew the market’s lease on county property. Commissioners defended the decision at the meeting and urged the public to pursue alternatives.
Deborah Chandler (speaker 3) asked whether the market could return to its former site and said market vendors provide community value and supports, asking the commission to reconsider. Isabel Smith (speaker 7) challenged prior explanations for denying rallies on the courthouse steps, saying the Bluestone on the courthouse steps is the same material used in New York City sidewalks and implying the steps’ restriction was inconsistently applied.
Commissioner (speaker 1) said the county received a written request for renewal and reached a policy decision not to renew the lease: "We did not renewals. It was not an eviction," the commissioner said, adding the county is not preventing vendors from operating elsewhere and suggesting Key Foods, borough parking lots or other private locations as alternatives. A separate public commenter (speaker 5) urged the county to rewrite its public‑gathering permit policy so the grounds for denial are clearer to constituents.
Why it matters: the dispute pits the commission’s stated preference for protecting brick‑and‑mortar businesses and county property against vendors and community members who say the market generates local commerce, community learning (for example, food education) and foot traffic for downtown businesses.
What commissioners said: one commissioner acknowledged the value of community input and said that in future similar decisions they would like to give the public more voice, but maintained that the commission has the legal authority to decide whether county property is available for the market. The commissioners recorded voice votes on other business items during the meeting but did not reverse the lease decision.
The meeting included calls from citizens for clearer public‑gathering rules; commissioners asked staff to provide the existing policy and said they would consider whether revisions are appropriate.
