Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Pickerington council delays annexation action
August 7, 2006

By Rick Palsgrove

Southeast Editor

The ever evolving relationship between the city of Pickerington and Violet Township continues to be a hot topic among government officials.
At Pickerington City Council?’s Aug. 1 meeting, Violet Township trustee Gary Weltlich inquired what the city?’s position is regarding two parcels of land that the township recently rezoned - one on Wright Road and the other on Busey Road.
?“We?’ve offered for the city to come into a joint economic development district (JEDD),?” said Weltlich. ?“What is the status??”
Councilman Jeff Fix, who is holding ongoing conversations with Violet Township regarding economic development issues replied, ?“(We?’re) working on a comprehensive development plan with the township and when it is finalized we will work on JEDDs and other projects, but there?’s no action planned until then.?”
Added Mayor David Shaver, ?“My goal is to see Pickerington enter into JEDDs with the township, including a joint park district.?”
Shaver then addressed what he termed rumors in the community that the city and township were reverting to their past ?“battling ways.?” He stated there is no truth to such speculations.
?“Everything we (the city) do is to cement our relationship with the township,?” said Shaver.
Noting that the mayor is ?“upfront and cooperative,?” Weltlich stated, ?“Thank you for being a good mayor.?”
However, the issue of the city and township working together on development issues came to the forefront when council tabled, by a 4-3 vote, an ordinance to accept the annexation of 316 acres located south of Busey Road and west of Pickerington Road.
Council members Fix, Keith Smith, Heidi Riggs, and Cristie Hammond voted in favor of tabling the annexation, while Brian Wisniewski, Ted Hackworth, and Mike Sabatino opposed the motion.
Hackworth said the ordinance has ?“had a rough road to get here,?” noting that an agreement first had to be made to settle an injunction filed by Violet Township and the village of Canal Winchester against the annexation. With the settlement behind the city, Hackworth was ready to proceed.
However, Fix asked for the ordinance to be tabled because he is representing the city in continuing talks with the township regarding economic development issues. He stated tabling the legislation buys the city more time for discussions.
?“There?’s no hurry to pass this,?” said Fix.
In an interview following the meeting, Fix said ongoing conversations are taking place not only between the city and the township, but also with potential developers, regarding economic development.
?“While these conversations are going on I don?’t think it?’s prudent to proceed (with the annexation) until the conversations come to fruition. This gives us more time,?” said Fix.
But, in an interview after the meeting, Wisniewski said the service committee passed the annexation unanimously.

?“Some council members seem to be having trouble deciding,?” Wisniewski commented.
Wisniewski said there is speculation that the land owners want to back out of the pre-annexation agreement that was put in place by an earlier city council.
?“When I see something in writing, that is signed, that releases the city and assures us we won?’t be sued, then I?’d be willing to drop the annexation,?” said Wisniewski. ?“There?’s been too many spit and handshake agreements in this city. We need to act and move on this.?” Wisniewski questioned why the annexation ordinance had to be held up because of economic development talks between the city and township. There is no agreement, said Wisniewski, that could be reached between the city and Violet Township that could make the annexation go away.

SE Messenger cont.

?“There is no legal basis within the township that releases the city from agreements with private individuals,?” said Wisniewski. Wisniewski added residential development that could take place on the 316 acres would have a negative impact on the growing city. ?“Residential land, which this is, is a detriment to the city,?” said Wisniewski. ?“I?’m not interested in more houses.?”


SERVICE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
THURSDAY, JULY 13, 2006
REGULAR MEETING
7:30 P.M.


8. OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Hackworth stated the Committee had received a draft ordinance regarding acceptance of the 316-acre annexation. He stated this is the result of a lawsuit and an annexation that goes back to 2001. Mrs. Riggs stated Mr. Fix had indicated he would like to have this Committee table this issue so he can have some further conversation with the Township before we move this forward to Council. Mr. Hackworth stated the Township has agreed to the City annexing this property. Mr. Fix stated that by tabling this issue this evening, it would provide him with an opportunity to get some further work done on commercial economic development. Mr. Fix stated he understood the two were not related, however, he would like to see this Committee table this issue. Mr. Hackworth stated moving it out of Committee was not any kind of action other than sending it to Council, so he did not understand how tabling it would do anything. Mr. Fix stated he cannot speak on behalf of the Township, however, it was his belief that our efforts to work cooperatively with them on economic development would be better served at this particular moment if this issue were not sent forward at this time. He stated if it is sent forward from this Committee next month that would allow him the time to try and get some of the other issues regarding development put to bed, or at least put in front of Council. He stated his concern was if this moved forward tonight, some of those efforts may not be able to be brought to fruition. Mr. Hackworth stated he did not understand as the Township has already agreed to not oppose the City from annexing this property. Mrs. Riggs inquired what the impact would be to the City if we put this off for another 30 days. Ms Gilleland stated she has spoken to the landowners and let them know we plan on following through with the annexation, however, she did not give them any timeframe. Mr. Fix stated the law director had indicated there would be no legal impact if we held off on this. Mr. Hackworth stated he did not understand why the Township would be concerned on when we put this ordinance forward. Mrs. Hammond stated she did not see how just moving this on to Council and letting full Council act upon it would influence anything one way or the other. Mr. Hackworth stated he would be willing to move this out of Committee this evening, but not put it on the Council agenda until the first meeting in August. Mrs. Hammond stated she agreed with Mr. Hackworth that there was no reason not to move this forward, but she would agree that it would not be put on Council agenda until the August 1st meeting. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve and forward to Council at the August 1st meeting; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, and Mrs. Riggs voting ?“Yea.?” Motion passed, 3-0.

Do you want more butter?

This stuff of doing City Council business at the Waffle house has got to stop. Clearly the Ladies of The Pickerington City Council have changed their minds between July 13th and August 1st. Maybe they were just making sure their outfits didn't clash. Oh well another day in perfecttown.

My, my

My, my, somebody has his panties in a bunch. Making sexist comments and insinuations of impropriety all at the same time.

But wait, isn't making sexist comments improper? Things that make you go hmmmm.