ODOT must explain decision to relocate District 4 offices

Unless Ohio Department of Transportation officials are claiming national security as the reason for their closed-door decision to relocate the District 4 administrative offices and maintenance operations from Ravenna to Akron, the public has a right to know all the details surrounding this surprise move
Why Akron and not some other major city in the district, such as Youngstown? And why the secrecy?
The expenditure of taxpayer dollars demands transparency in all that government does. Whose bright idea was it not to seek proposals for prospective sites, which would have ensured that ODOT is getting the biggest bang for the public buck?
We are in absolute agreement with state legislators from Mahoning and Trumbull counties who have asked Gordon Proctor, state transportation director, and Mohamed Darwish, District 4 deputy director, to put the relocation plans on hold until every aspect of this decision has been publicly scrutinized.
Districtwide search
In addition, we believe that the state agency has an obligation to conduct a districtwide search for a site for the administrative and maintenance facilities so it can determine if the property in Akron is, in fact, the best.
Earlier this month, state Rep. Kenneth Carano of Austintown, D-59th, asked ODOT to explain the impending relocation of the offices and here's what Al Rakas in the director's office wrote, in part:
"ODOT has looked at a number of pieces of property for possible purchase with the intent of building a new building. However, an existing property in Akron has recently come on the market that appears to have everything the district is looking for. It is the old Federal Express call center site, located on S. Arlington Rd. This site has buildings and land and will accommodate our needs. The cost savings of buying an existing building vs. building a new one is in the $7 million to $10 million range. OODT is currently in negotiations to purchase the site, including all buildings. Therefore, with the exception of a garage facility, no major construction of an office building will occur. However, if we purchase the property, we will be constructing a maintenance garage on the property that will be bid through the State Architect's Office."
But as Carano points out, neither he nor his colleagues, nor any local government or development officials in the Mahoning Valley were aware that a site search was being conducted by the state agency. Indeed, Rakas' revelation that a new maintenance garage will be constructed certainly begs the question: Does that facility have to be built in the vicinity of the administrative offices?
Cost prohibitive
ODOT officials contend that the current location of the district operations in Ravenna is no longer adequate and that renovation of the building would be cost prohibitive. But if cost is a factor, who says that the Akron site provides the best value for the public dollar?
District 4 encompasses Mahoning, Trumbull, Ashtabula, Portage, Stark and Summit counties and so the location of the of the offices is of concern to all local governments.
Akron does not meet the centrally-located test.