Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

January - March 2003 PATA Newsletter

May 02, 2003

Published by citizens for citizens
Issue # 13 Dates for January ?–March 2003

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has."
-- Margaret Meade

** see "Our Pages" for the historic residential building permits for Pickerington & Violet Township. Building Permit Graph tells the Truth.


Pickerington?’s Majority Rule ?“Myth?”

A basic concept of democracy -- majority rule -- has become a myth in Pickerington.

In a democracy elected public officials are charged to represent the legal will of a majority. Those officials are entrusted with the legislative power to act on behalf of these electors with their actions reflecting the dictates of this majority.

Majority rule thus prevents special interests from subverting the will of the many for the advantage of the few.

Sadly, majority rule -- in terms of public officials representing the will of the electorate -- no longer exists in Pickerington.

** see "Our Pages" BIA behind opposition to Growth Control.

What makes the Truth Untrue? -- NOTHING !

Like the old fable about the King with no clothes, no misdirection or whitewashing could change the fact he was indeed naked. Despite the best efforts of Pickerington?’s elected & appointed officials and their allies to spin the hype, the facts are STILL the facts!


Is YOUR Participation in the Democratic Process here being Heard and Observed?

Neither heard, nor acted upon. If the will of the majority was not a myth in Pickerington there would not have been 87 new housing permits issued from January ?– March 2003 since a huge percentage of citizens demanded slower residential growth at last November?’s election.

** See "Our Pages" 1st Quarter City Building Permits increase by 185%

- Never forget that 2002 was a record year of housing permits issued by the City of Pickerington.

A 185% increase in housing permits from last year is not -- Slowing down!

 ?“We were going to slow growth down anyway?” - Lou Postage (Mayor) Pickerington Times ?– Sun January 8, 2003.
 ?“We need to see a visible sign this month that growth is slowing down - Lisa Reade (concerned area resident) Pickerington Times ?– Sun February 12, 2003.

And Lou?’s still at it!

 "Do I think that's going to stymie growth in Pickerington? No, I don't think so?”, said Lou Postage (speaking to HIS Community Authority Plan) ?– Business First April 11,2003.

If majority rule existed here in Pickerington there would be no need for a ballot initiative to institute a TRUE Moratorium or Recall efforts.

Nor would the Ohio Supreme Court be considering a legal action taken by electors against their representatives seeking another democratic right -- THE RIGHT TO VOTE. Not one of these actions would be necessary IF the direction of majority rule was observed. Thank God, our Constitution, Bill of Rights and City Charter provide for them.

Students in our high school are fortunate to have an up-close and personal lesson in how the supporters of a democracy can pursue their rights when their elected representatives refuse to accept the responsibilities entrusted to them.

Our current majority rule myth is a localized ?“Problem of Democracy?” and as such needs a localized solution. We have two very serious breaches of trust: a refusal to follow the dictates of an elector majority and a clear, conscious and flagrant denial of basic citizen rights.

So what do our citizens have a choice to do?

CREATE A REAL MORATORIUM

Today residents are out with yet another CITIZEN INITIATIVE to provide the type of comprehensive Growth Plan our area so desperately needs. It includes:

o A two year moratorium on permits to construct new single family residential units.
o Continued construction of homes on existing approved lot owners will not be impaired.
o No impacts to Senior Housing units.
o Guidance toward City Government to include a Growth Management Plan requiring:
?• No more than 1-1/2 % growth per year.
?• The services of an outside planning firm.
?• A 10 - year Capital Improvements plan for infrastructure needs analysis.
?• An allotment plan to distribute permits on a proportional basis.
?• No impacts of growth controls on commercial and non-residential properties.

A CHANGE OF THOSE IN OFFICE
Additionally petitions exist for the RECALL of City Officials that have been in the words of the Building Industry Association of Central Ohio (BIA) ?“Pro Growth Advocates?”.

It has been written that for the past several years the City of Pickerington has steamrolled over the rights of its citizens to have a voice against the City?’s growth-at-all costs land rush. Cited evidence of such are:
o Pre-Annexation zoning density agreements arranging zoning prior to public hearings.
o Inducements to developers to annex their properties.
o Payment by the City of ALL legal fees to annex.
o Waiving or offering preferential utility fees rates.
o The attack from every conceivable angle to thwart citizen petitions by City Officials and specially hired legal counsel by:
 Passing Ordinances by ?“Emergency Legislation?” and thus eliminating citizen opportunities to conduct referendum efforts.
 Rejecting the few referendum efforts on ?“technical?” grounds.
 City Officials not appropriate Board of Election Officials declaring subject matter of petitions as not appropriate.
 Intimidation of the citizens involved in the petition process.

The result ?– The City?’s population soars while the schools slash programs and sink deeper into debt.

From the material presented to PLSD voters lets re-quote the obvious:

The lack of a Commercial Tax Base in the PLSD results in residential property owners shouldering a large portion of the tax burden. PLSD website: http://www.pickerington.k12.oh.us/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld009.htm

70.9% residential ?– 14.4% Commercial ?– 0.9% Industrial

The result of the district?’s low commercial tax base is a low valuation per student. PLSD website:
http://www.pickerington.k12.oh.us/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld008.htm

Out of 15 Central Ohio School Districts Pickerington?’s ability to financially support its student population from assessed property value is dead last!

As PATA have said for years here is what is needed.

Controlled Residential Growth
Increased Commercial / Industrial Tax Base


From the minutes of the February 10, 1998 Pickerington Planning and Zoning meeting Mr. Goldman (attorney for numerous developers in our area) stated. - it is no longer true that single family developments could not afford to educate the students which were generated from them.

HOGWASH !!

Local newspaper headline of March 13th - School Official ?“tags growth as a revenue problem?”.
--- yet the majority of our School Board refrains from voicing their opposition toward those that promote our escalating growth rates.

Another year - another School levy.

So we are all getting a 7.9 mill property tax proposal that is projected to raise $6,000,000.00 per year for 5 years. However, we are told that we are projecting a $6,000,000.00 debt next year ?…. So what happens in the years following year one of levy collection?

More Homes = More Schools = More Operating Dollars Needed =

TROUBLE!!






 Is anyone surprised?

Communities around Ohio address their problems differently. Some are not ?“too proud?” to learn from others.
1. "We play a very important role as community leaders and watching out for and doing what's best for the community." ?– Lancaster School Board President Ron Burns. ?– Lancaster Eagle Gazette.
2. ?“Canal Winchester?’s has always required developer?’s to work with the school district?”, said Allan Neimayer Canal?’s Economic Development Director regarding the Villages Feb. 5th Ordinance requiring all new development to work with the school district regarding land or monetary compensation. ?– SE Messenger.
Is the pie chart below an example of one or more of some of the following?
Philanthropy ?–
Dedication to Community ?–
Caring ?–
Conniving ?–
Parasitism ?–

** see "Our Pages" Funding Sources for School Levy Campaign

► Illustrating the point again from previous PATA Newsletters ?– Residential Developers & Contractors contribute a few thousand dollars toward school levy issue campaigns leaving the bulk of this areas residents to pick up the tab for the COST$ in millions from the GROWTH these developers bring to our schools. ◄

Feb. 5, 2003--Dominion Homes (Nasdaq:DHOM - News) reported that net income for the twelve months ended December 31, 2002 increased 62% to a record $24.5 million from $15.1 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2001.

Homewood Corporation announced today record deliveries for the three months ended December 31, 1999.

M/I Schottenstein Homes Inc., July 2001, the Columbus, Ohio-based firm today reported net income of $13.2 million in the second quarter ended June 30. The net income figure was a 17 percent increase over the $11.3 million earned in same period a year earlier.

Magic Trick Time (a.k.a. - I hope no one is really watching what we?’re doing)

#1
Community Authority - - Brought to you by the Mayor & the Developers !!

Not withstanding the press conferences, ?‘special?’ additions of the Pickerington Communicator, and all the dutiful Council Members singing the praises of the Community Authority lets turn over the cards and see what lies underneath:

 No documents have been reviewed by the public.
 No promised ?“teamwork?” between the City?’s Mayor and any Township Official ?– or- School District Official took place in drafting this proposal. The ?“You win with People?” Mayor has crafted this ?“deal?” with DEVELOPERS. The same developers that come into town to ?“take-over?” City Council meetings to express THEIR CONCERNS.
 The proposed Community Authority ONLY costs residents. No developer cost is borne.
 The Community Authority is NOT a measure that limits growth rates?…more to the point it is being proposed as ?“tool?” that will exacerbate growth.
 With last Septembers glut of Plat approvals this sitting City Government in alliance with these developers intends to build out every possible subdivision giving us 1,000 acres or more in new homes.
 At 3,000 homes on these and other lands platted on 2001 & 2002 the addition of 4,500 students to this district is in line with figures from Joyce Bushman, City Manager @ 1.5 students per home.
 Such a student population increase would require: 2.4 new Elementary Schools, 1 Middle School, most of 1 Junior High School and most of 1 Senior High School. In today?’s figures of construction (not including debt service) these building costs would exceed $86 million dollars. A figure far above the numbers proposed by Mayor Postage.
 None if the funds raised by increased millage to new homes within a proposed Community Authority are used for the Operating Costs to educate?…. **remember that is why they?’re on the ballot again!

Magic Trick Time (a.k.a. - I hope no one is really watching what we?’re doing)

#2
Recreation Land (Please don?’t pay attention to the Sewer Plant Expansion)
-- Brought to you by the City Manager & the Ohio EPA!!

Again with the Press Conferences, news releases, and hype let?’s not forget to look under the shells:

 The Sewer Plant (also known as Waste Water Treatment Plants or WWTP) Expansion that is told to the Public as not using EPA Loan funds by the Ohio EPA on December 13, 2003.

 Specific questions as to funding sources at the August 29, 2002 ?‘Public Hearing?’ were asked, but the answers to those interested in the August meeting received the OEPA?’s answer only in December 2002.

 The City Manager applying for Division of Environmental and Financial Assistance (DEFA) EPA Loan funding on October 25, 2002.

 The City Manager notes in her monthly reports to Council from May 2002 to year end noted the Reviewing of DEFA Water Restoration Program Funding under the heading of WASTEWATER PLANT EXPANSION:

 The City Manager lists in her 2003 Budget Proposal a $9,000,000.00 figure related to Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion. This budget was submitted to the Finance Committee of the Pickerington City Council in November 2002.

 The City Manager?’s (DEFA Loan application) of October 25, 2002 lists a plant expansion of $9,900,000.00 a 10% increase from her own budget figures and also lists the inclusion of $1,940,000.00 in additional collector sewer lines.

 The City Manager?’s Option Extension Contract of 1/31/03 lists a 2 month extension to 3/31/03 and a written contract by April 18, 2003. No formal records authorizing such a contract exist in the form of any public meeting of City Council or its sub-committees.


Simply stated ?– an almost $10 million dollar Sewer Plant Expansion assures upward of another 5,000 homes as ?“customers?” to pay for this debt.