|
|
Don't be sorry
Don?’t be sorry for anything. Only a respectable reporter would make sure you and he understood whether or not you were on the record. Obviously with a reporter with these low ethics and integrity you were taken tremendous advantage of and for that, we?’re all sorry.
You now have a better time and forum to present your findings right here. I am willing to believe that many media people read this forum. There are enough out there with honor and integrity that may be able to restore yours and our respect for the local media.
Coyote and Roadrunner, if Mr. Hackworth is able to present you with data to support pursuing a paper township for the city, can you post the data in one of the sections to the left?
Lastly, don?’t let what is bound to be a barrage of opposition dissuade you from the cause. You have seen, like we all have, what low levels of morals people will stoop to in this forum.
By Clair
|
|
|
|
|
|
City assets
To answer the start up costs question you must understand that what ever percentage of assets the City taxpayers represent of the fire department is what portion of the assets they could take with them if they choose to form a new city fire department. In other words, if the total property valuation of the City represents 35% of the fire department then 35% of those assets belong to the City tax payers. They are required to keep an assets list and those assets would be divided up by a court. So if the City did start their own fire department then they would not start empty handed.
However I believe a better way would be for the paper township be created within an economic agreement between the City and the Township and the process as I understand it would go to the County Commissioners. In exchange for the Township's cooperation the City would take their assets and have a long term contract with the township for fire services. If the City was financing the fire service through their income taxes they could pay the township what they are current receiving for fire service from the city and each year there after they could increase that funding based on the City's assessed value. So this would keep the township fire department whole and service would not change for the City. If the trustees were able to get out of their current thinking this could work.
One added issue here is that the City has imposed impact fees for the Police department that is currently paying a huge portion of police department debt. The city could impose impact fees for the Fire department and that money could be use to provide new equipment.
Currently what is being proposed is to lock the city into a long term contract and have the city give up its right to ever form a paper township.
Here is the reality; our City's police levy is currently sitting at 3.9 effective mills. Our City police budget is rising faster that our general revenues. One way to bring in more money for the Pickerington PD is through passing a levy renewal. To renew that levy to the original 5.5 mills will by the time the issue gets on the ballot raise the city's property taxes by 2 mills if passed by the voters.
The fact also is the fire department is wearing down their levies. They will soon need to come to the voters to pass yet another fire levy. Currently the effective millage is sitting at 7.01 mills. They are waiting for the school levies to pass so not to ruin their chances The original fire levies were sitting at 11.5 mills.
So if we add the 4.5 mill levy for the fire and the 2 mill levy for the police then we are looking at increasing our property taxes soon by 6.5 mills just to maintain our police and fire services.
That means our $150,000 home owner is going to need to find more money to pay his taxes. To the tune of $341 per year.
How will this affect the school levies?
By Ted Hackworth
|
|
|
I?’m no mathematician
Ted,
Wow, I am blown away by the information you?’ve gathered so far. I?’m no mathematician so let me ask some simple questions.
I think you need to also provide the geographical makeup of the city and township separately. For example, how many of the square miles of the township are in the city. Let?’s say it is also 35%. Is it a safe bet to assume that 35% of the existing fire equipment is enough to safely cover our 35% of the geography? If it is true then are firefighters considered part of the assets we are paying for? If so, then you have 35% of the manpower to man and operate 35% of the equipment then why do we need any sort of agreement with the township to operate our equipment? We already have a working fire station in the city which I assume we would capitalize. Granted it is old and small but it is a start. I read in the minutes of a service committee meeting where a former councilman offered a suggestion to resolve vehicle storage issues by constructing a vehicle storage building at the police station property that would house the police vehicles and a good portion of the service department vehicles. If we were collecting impact fees on fire and police services then couldn?’t the storage building be made so it also held another moderate sized fire station?
Also on the geography quiz, I understand that the makeup of dwellings and buildings are different in the township and city and that would have to be taken into account in whether what we capitalize would be sufficient for the city. I also know response time is a critical issue in making up a fire department. Given that we are more closely located together (density) than the township is, we may actually be able to offer better response time and quality of service with a smaller fire department and if you didn?’t have to worry about responding to Wal-Mart you cut probably what, 20 runs per day out of the equation? Additionally, the buildings in the city are generally newer than those in the township (an upside to the explosive growth? I?’m kidding) and would require less runs overall ?– possibly?
If you feel that an agreement with the township for long-term fire services is a good idea, I disagree. Hopefully you see the results of attempts at cooperation right in front of you now. Don?’t let the city be held hostage by a contract that puts the township at any advantage over us. Make a clean start. I can appreciate your opinion but you need to remember the keyword in Pickerington politics is payback. Unless you make a clean break you open yourself to paybacks and they won?’t just come from the township folks. You have some people close to you whose entire future and political agendas hinge on giving the city away to the township.
So continue to dig and analyze but don?’t forget to be on guard at all times. Your data is convincing so far in the benefits to the city by secession. Don?’t give up a single benefit to appease anyone in the township. They wouldn?’t do the same for you. All they have against your data is to play on our emotions about the fire department. The emotional approach doesn?’t work for the schools. We?’ve proved that 4 times now and heading for a fifth. People are thinking about their wallets and their ability to keep shelling out. If you can take a stab at reducing the hemorrhaging we are feeling in our wallets, by all means, please do do.
By Simple Guy
|
|
|
Let's stay with Violet Fire Dept
Simple Guy,
I have looked at the geographics of the City and I also have a list of the fire runs over the last year (2005) to show me where the runs are. As the Violet Township Fire Department evolved over time they address some of the issues of where they placed their fire stations and where there runs were coming from.
I really don't think it would be a good idea to break away from the Violet Fire Department other than extract our assets to provide a different form of funding for them.
Most fire and EMS run are along the 256 corridor between Refugee and I-70. For the City to try and reach these areas from the City Firehouse on Lockville Road would more than likely increase response times. In addition with the Meijers store going in down near Diley and US 33 the City Fire would be able to respond sooner that the Refugee Fire House. I would not want to Champion a plan that decreased response times for emergencies.
The other factor here is to provide some tax relief for our taxpayers, that live and own their homes here in Pickerington. Building a new fire house and or an extension of the Police facility would only add to our problems. Clearly an operational contract with Violet Township would be the best move in my judgment at this time.
I am posting here to make sure I get my message out and that it is not twisted by others to support their arguments. Right now I am not sure I can get it into any kind of form to be able to discuss the issue in front of council. The current negotiations seems to be going down a tunnel with no outside input allowed. Hopefully that can be brought forward soon to discuss some of these ideas.
By Ted Hackworth
|
