Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

January - March 2002 Newsletter (Issue #9)

Apr 21, 2002

As we stated in our last Newsletter ......
The more things change the more they stay the same ?–
Since last November?’s election there has been a return to the ?“usual suspects?” excepting one in each of the cases. The School Board is humming along in a more effective manner. There is a refreshing new air of cooperation that is obvious during Board meetings. The TownshipTrustees are moving forward with Violet Pointe?’s Cooperative Economic Development (CEDA). Economic development is on the horizon for our region. While at Lockville Road it?’s the modified version of the shell game. Out with one of the old and back by ?“Emergency?” Resolution with another of the old, ?“seasoned appointment candidates?”. A very interesting way to alter the results of the citizenry?’s voting outcome.

Maxey Appointed back to City Council
A fly on the wall heard just after the results were in last November 6th that John Washington would resign his seat on Pickerington?’s City Council, and that Craig Maxey would be appointed to fill the remainder of Mr. Washington?’s term. Not one week had passed since Maxey?’s last place finish in the City Council race; and already city leaders had come up with a plan to have him reinstated. It seems the motto at City Hall continues to be ?“Voters be damned, we?’ll do what WE want to do!?”

To make this appointment, City Council?’s ?“Rules Committee?” chaired by Brian Fox and including Doug Parker held interviews to determine whom would best fill the seat to be vacated by Mr. Washington. The Committee interviewed thirteen candidates for the position, yet conveniently chose Maxey to fill the open seat. Brian Fox, upon introducing Maxey as his and Parker?’s choice, said that Maxey was the most ?“seasoned?” of the candidates.

?“Look at how many people voted for him, no other candidate for the position can say they received that many votes.?” Fox said. Gee Brian, none of the other candidates can say they came in LAST PLACE either!


Though Mr. Maxey clearly has more City Council experience than any of the other candidates, we?’re not sure that?’s necessarily a GOOD thing. Here are some of the highlights of Maxey?’s Council service:

1. Maxey served as previous head of the Service Committee, who approved the million-dollar ?“streetscape?” project that is now coming under fire for being dangerous for school bus (and other) traffic.
2. Maxey also served as the ?“lead?” negotiator for the City of Pickerington?’s participation in the Cooperative Economic Development Agreement (CEDA) ?– and failed to come to terms with the other parties. Pickerington is now on the outside looking in as Violet Township, Canal Winchester, and Fairfield County all work together to bring the commercial/light industrial development that our community so desperately needs.
3. Maxey?’s Chairmanship has lead to numerous ?“Emergency pre-annexation?” deals and contracts that now have the City in court (spending taxpayer dollars). This practice has also lead to a nearly endless array of residential subdivisions. And because they are approved by ?“Emergency?”, there is nothing the voters can do about it.
4. Maxey is also the only ?“appointment?” candidate meeting before the Rules Committee that contributed $500 to the past election efforts of the Rules Committee Chairperson, Brian Fox.
5. Maxey is the 3/06/01 ?“sponsor?” of the City of Pickerington?’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan that puts the bulk of any futuristic Industrial Park on lands outside the Pickerington Local School District. This means that any tax revenue generated by this development would go to City Council, not Pickerington Schools!
6. Maxey is also the sponsor of the Ordinance to repeal the opportunity of a citizen vote against the automatic re-zoning of annexed lands to automatic R4 zoning.

Isn?’t it clear:

o That the voters in the City of Pickerington wanted Maxey off their City Council?
o That City Council and Mayor Hughes have completely ignored the will of the voters by appointing Maxey?
o That it?’s ridiculous that they did this by ?“EMERGENCY LEGISLATION?” so that the voters in Pickerington could not repeal their action?

It?’s time for new leadership in Pickerington!

Now the Machine can get cranked back up!
Residential Re-zonings now fill the backed up agendas in the Sub-committees of Planning & Zoning and Service. The ?“flow?” of legislation is from Planning & Zoning to Service Committee and then to the full City Council. This can happen in as short as a 7-day period of time. Of course a few perfunctory ?“Public hearings?” are thrown in for the appearance of legitimacy. As an example:

116 units on 21.8 acres (the Monebrake property) As posted in the 3/4/02 Lancaster Eagle Gazette
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Pickerington, Planning and Zoning Commission, will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, March 12, 2002, at 7:20 P.M. at City Hall, 100 Lockville Road, for open discussion regarding proposed rezoning 21.8+/- acres from AG (Rural District) to PR-10 (Planned Condominium/Apartment Residence) for ''The Homestead'' a condominium development located north of Long Road, just East of Georges Creek (the Monebrake property) Details of the above are available at the office of the Municipal Clerk: Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk. March 4, 2002, LEG #3428808
Pickerington

Tuesday, April 9th @ 7:30 pm - Planning & Zoning
Thursday, April 11th @ 7:30 pm ?– Service Committee
Tuesday, April 16th @ 7:15 pm - 2nd ?“Public Hearing?”
Tuesday, April 16th @ 7:30 pm ?– City Council Meeting

There?’s the process - all meetings are public. It?’s doubtful that City Council or any of its committees will actually listen to voter input. But if you care about our community and our schools you might want to make an appearance at one or more of these meetings. Let your elected officials know that more residential development, particularly HIGH DENSITY residential development, is not what our community needs at this point.

Cost of Community Services (COCS) Last year we introduced a piece in one of our earlier Newsletters that we feel is important to update and re-introduce to our larger readership.

Why all of this matters
The Local Government Information and Education Network of the University of Illinois Extension Service, in conjunction with the Ohio State University Extension, recently published a brief on the Cost of Community Services (COCS). This paper ?“summarizes studies that use fiscal impact analysis to determine whether various forms of land use contribute to or detract from local government budgets.?”

?“When farmland, open space, and woodlands are converted to residential development, local tax revenues increase substantially because property values increase; but the local government and the school district are also required to provide added services to the new residents. Does the increased revenue cover the costs of the new services? That is the question the COCS studies set out to answer.?”

The studies determine that amount of dollars spent by governmental entities (schools, municipalities, emergency services, etc.) as a ratio of dollars brought in through taxes. Here are the findings:

?“Virtually all of the studies show that the COCS ratio is substantially above 1 for residential land; demonstrating that residential land is a net drain on local government budgets. The average estimate ranges from about $1.15 to $1.50, which means that for every dollar collected in taxes and non-tax revenue, between $1.15 and $1.50 gets returned in the form of local government and school district services. On the other hand, the COCS ratios for the other two land use categories (Commercial/Industrial and Farmland/Open) are both substantially below 1. For Commercial/Industrial the ratio usually ranges from .35 to .65 indicating that for every dollar collected, the local government provides only about $.35 to $.65 worth of services. For agriculture and open space, the ratios are only slightly smaller, usually ranging from .30 to .50.?”

?“According to the COCS studies, the largest single expenditure category for communities is the public school system, accounting for 61.4% of spending.?”

?“The COCS findings indicate that residential development often brings costs to the community that are not fully borne by the new residents but are instead distributed throughout the community.?”

?“Two conclusions emerge when reflecting on the COCS issue.
1. The first is that residential development invariably leads to increased demand for publicly provided services. As a result, increases in local tax rates to fund additional service tend to follow growth.?”

2. ?“Second is that it is important for members of any community to ask themselves the broader question, ?‘How do we manage growth in our community along with all of the impacts (both positive and negative) that it brings??’?”
How this applies to you!
Pickerington?’s City Council, Mayor Hughes, and City Manager Joyce Bushman continue to create and approve (by EMERGENCY LEGISLATION) more and more annexations ?“with zoning attached?” which means that the zoning is already figured out. In recent years they have approved the building of over 5,000 new residential units in our community, while building a Barnes & Noble and some restaurants as a means of commercial/industrial development. In essence, as is backed up by this report, they are loading you and I (regardless of whether we live within the city?’s boundaries) with a greater tax burden.

Council?’s insistence to annex land for an ?“Industrial Park?” outside our school district ?– last year Pifer ?– then Weiser ?– NOW Thorton. Pickerington City Council?’s March 6, 2001 ?“Comprehensive Land Use Plan?” doesn?’t help the PLSD..... IT HURTS IT.


So where are we today?

1. No cooperation from the City of Pickerington to join in the CEDA. The open invitation exists.

2. No efforts by the City of Pickerington to slow down residential growth, to the contrary Pickerington?’s INSISTANCE to subsidize residential development.

3. Pickerington?’s efforts to THWART citizen?’s Initiatives.

4. Court Cases: (and more court cases)

a.) 2001-CV-00272 Case regarding notifications, zoning changes, etc.

b.) 2001-CV-00697 Case regarding potential improper use of municipal funds.

c.) 2001-CV-00778 Case regarding City of Pickerington?’s efforts to void the Canal Winchester/Pickerington Sewer & Water agreement.

d.) 2002-CV-00040 Case regarding challenges to potential Contract Zoning, Discriminatory Fees, Inducements, etc.


The alternative ?–

The issues of community growth, it?’s planning, how it happens or failing to plan for its occurrence and letting development just take its course is a nationwide problem. Not long ago a film company produced a documentary titled ?“Subdivide and Concur?”. PATA has purchased a copy of this 30-minute video and is more than willing to make this available on loan to interested members of this community.

From Subdivide and Concur ... http://www.subdividefilm.com/

?“As more and more open space is carved up for houses and roads, and people inch to work on clogged freeways shrouded in smog, the costs of uncontrolled growth are making front page news. Voters are going to the polls to support growth management and the preservation of open space. Many Americans are taking stock of the way we grow, and looking for alternatives that more closely match contemporary desires.?”

Subdivide and Conquer is a 30-minute film that examines the social, environmental and economic costs of poorly planned growth, and how these effects are felt by all of us in some way. The film also introduces a variety of measures for reigning in uncontrolled growth and for building more livable communities.


Isn?’t it time for a true Comprehensive land use plan. Not a ?“staff written?” plan. Not a plan that puts the bulk of any potential Commercial / Industrial land uses outside the Pickerington Local School District.

The (3/6/01) Council approved City of Pickerington?’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan is available for public viewing at the Pickerington Public Library. It is also available, on loan from PATA. Since the plan is conveniently color-coded, it?’s very easy to see the predominance of residential units within the Pickerington Local School District. Maps tell the tale of a faulty plan ?– one that does not provide the needed revenue generating tax base the members of this community deserve. School District boundaries don?’t change! We must make the best land use decisions within our boundaries.


*footnote - This material written by: Allen M. Prindle, Professor of Economics, Otterbein College and Thomas W. Blaine, Northeast District specialist, Community Development, Ohio State University Extension. LGIEN Fact Sheet 2000-001

The center section of the Newsletter lists a spreadsheet of campaign contributors in the November 2001 Pickerington election. That spreadsheet is posted under the "Our Pages" section of this web site.

Shortly after last falls election a large daily newspaper printed a series of popular articles related to election contributions. Titles and sub-titles of these articles ranged from ?“Access at City Hall?”, ?“Building Relationships?”, and ?“Paving the Way?”. PATA has waited patiently for the same type of reporting locally. As this hasn?’t materialized, we have compiled the above spread sheet from the public records of early post election 2001 reports. Campaign finance reporting was only done by (2) of the City Council candidates before the election (Mr. Hackworth & Mr. Shaver). All candidates complied with the post-election reports. Here are the figures.

As our community continues to bulge at the seams with residential growth the question of the impacts of Costs of Community Services (COCS), previously mentioned in this issue, come front and center.


PATA SUPPORTS SCHOOL/FIRE LEVIES


Having said all of that, PATA realizes that not approving the Violet Township Fire Department and Pickerington Local School District levies on this May?’s ballot will only lead to diminished services from both of these outstanding groups. Neither of these entities has any control over the number of people they serve; they are dependant upon the leadership provided by Violet Township Trustees and Pickerington City Council in how the land in our community is developed.

Given this, PATA urges all area residents to get out and vote on May 7th. Vote in favor of both the school levy and the Fire Department levy, and remember why you are having to vote to pay more taxes when it comes time to cast your ballot for City Council, Mayor, and Trustee in November of 2003.

Pickerington Local School District Issue 4

Violet Township Fire Department Issue 13




It?’s worth repeating from Allen Prindle ?–

?“Virtually all of the studies show that the COCS ratio is substantially above 1 for residential land; demonstrating that residential land is a net drain on local government budgets.?”


It?’s time for a change. It?’s time to focus on the cause rather than the effect. Let?’s maintain our desirable service levels.

Passage of these levies will maintain vital community services, but unless you want to see an endless sea of levies a true evaluation for this community needs to be implement. Why are we not using the services of professionals? Is it too far away to seek the assistance of knowledgeable people from Otterbein or Ohio State University? Were municipal funds expenditures of approximately $150,000.00 to keep annexing lands through contract zoning and inducements really a good deal?


And Speaking of annexations

Least you forget, the process of annexing away has continued. The hearings for the annexations mentioned in our last Newsletter have now been tentatively scheduled before the Fairfield County Commissioners. The facts are below:

675+ ADDITIONAL ACRES NOW BEING ANNEXED, 25 +/- ACRES ARE SCHEDULED TO BE COMMERCIAL, AND 38 ACRES ARE FOR A TAX-EXEMPT CHURCH. 40 ACRES WILL BE APARTMENT / CONDOS RIGHT BESIDE YOUR NEW SCHOOL SITE. 100 CONDOS OR ZERO LOT LINE UNITS WILL BE BUTTED UP AGAINST JEFFERSON WOODS. THE LIST GOES ON...

 HIGHER DENSITY ZONING WAS PROMISED

 REDUCED TAP FEES WERE USED AS ENTICEMENTS

 EMERGENCY PASSAGE WAS THE METHOD


THESE PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS WERE FORMERLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL 11/20/01. THESE ANNEXATIONS (316) SOUTH OF TOWN & (362) NORTH OF TOWN WILL BE OPEN TO A PUBLIC HEARING ON TUESDAY APRIL 30TH BEGINNING AT 1:30 PM AT THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY COURTHOUSE. (tentative schedule ?– it is suggested to call first)

WILL CITY SANITARY SEWER & WATER NOW BE DUPLICATED WHERE SERVICES ALREADY ARE ESTABLISHED VIA FAIRFIELD COUNTY UTILITIES?

LET THESE PEOPLE KNOW HOW YOU FEEL ?–

FAIRFIELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

COMMISSIONERS: JON MYERS,
JUDITH SHUPE,
ALLAN REID

FAIRFIELD COUNTY COURTHOUSE
210 EAST MAIN ST., LANCASTER, OHIO
43130
(740) 687-7190 OR (614) 837 ?– 0763,
FAX (740) 687-6048.

Your attendance at this public hearing is what democracy is all about. If other commitments interfere - write, fax, or call.

The efforts you take will surely be less costly than the tax increases these annexations will spur.


And even more annexations

Just before the Columbus Dispatch reporter had submitted his story ?“Bid to fight annexation law falters?” ?– you guessed it. The City of Pickerington was filing yet another batch of annexation petitions (3/27/02). Weiser, Thorton, Schiefer, Bigus, Strait, Fee...

Which school district?
?– That?’s right
- Canal Winchester !

All in the name of an Industrial Park that does the PLSD no good !




PATA accepts no contributions from any organization or $ for advertising. Because of this we are reliant on the good will of our readers to fund upcoming newsletters. If you appreciate the facts and the alternative point of view
expressed here, please feel free to send $5, $10, whatever you can afford to....

PATA
P.O. Box 518
Pickerington, OH 43147

Email ?– pickeringtontaxpayers@hotmail.com

Web site address ?–
http://neighborhoodlink.com/org/pata



Bob Harding
Contact Person, PATA

755-2464

As a service to our expanded reader base we would like to make you aware of a potential tax savings known as the ?“Supplemental Tax Roll back?”

 The Fairfield County Auditors Department has forms for consideration of the 2-1/2% Supplemental Rollback Form. For consideration of this tax break you must own and live in your residence. Qualification & Completion of this potential tax reduction takes effect the following year, according to auditor officials.

Forms are available at - http://www.co.fairfield.oh.us/AUDITOR/index.htm

Or via mail ?– Fairfield County Auditors
210 E. Main Street
Lancaster, OH 43130
(740) 687-7162
* PATA suggest you check your status with your own tax
advisor. We do not perform any tax services.

http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/org/pata
email: pickeringtontaxpayers@hotmail.com
(614) 755-2464