Pickerington economic agreement battle is on Search
October 9, 2006
By Rick Palsgrove
Southeast Editor
Pickerington Mayor David Shaver approved a request by Councilman Jeff Fix to move discussion of the proposed Pickerington/Violet Township economic development agreement from the finance committee to the service committee.
The action, taken at Pickerington City Council?’s Oct. 3 meeting, means the controversial agreement could be brought before full council for consideration as early as council?’s Oct. 24 meeting.
Fix, who has been negotiating the agreement with Violet Township officials since last winter, said he made the request because he feels the proposal has been delayed in finance committee and that the service committee is a more appropriate place to discuss the agreement because it deals with land issues.
?“Time is of the essence. It?’s imperative we move this forward quickly and have council hold a full debate on it before the public. We need a vigorous, honest, open debate,?” said Fix.
Fix hinted that other government entities could approach Violet Township if the city fails to act.
Council President, and chair of the finance committee, Brian Wisniewski commented that Fix?’s maneuver recalls political moves made by past councils.
?“I thought we were moving away from that to a different kind of community, now we?’re doing the same things,?” said Wisniewski.
Wisniewski added that moving the agreement to the service committee amounted to a ?“dog and pony show?” and accused Fix of doing so because there are votes there to move the issue along. Wisniewski said the issue belongs in the finance committee because it is an ?“economic agreement.?”
?“We?’ve had one discussion of the agreement in finance and now all of sudden you want to circumvent the process,?” Wisniewski told Fix.
?“I can accuse you of the same thing,?” Fix replied, noting that a special finance committee meeting set for Sept. 25 to discuss the issue was cancelled due to a lack of a quorum as Wisniewski and Councilman Ted Hackworth did not attend.
Councilman Michael Sabatino questioned the urgency in which Fix is trying to move the agreement through council.
?“The urgency is self-imposed on your part,?” Sabatino told Fix. ?“It?’s wrong to shop around for a committee for a favorable vote just to get something through.?”
Shaver initially offered a compromise to keep the discussion of the agreement in the finance committee while at the same time placing it on council?’s agenda, but council members were not receptive to the idea.
Law Director Phil Hartmann stated there is nothing legally that prohibits the mayor from moving issues from one committee to another.
Council members on the service committee are Hackworth, Heidi Riggs, and Cristie Hammond.
The next service committee meeting is Oct. 12 at 7:30 p.m. at city hall, 100 Lockville Road.
Proposal pros and cons
Fix has stated the city has a limited commercial tax base made up of mostly retail and office space and that the potential for bigger commercial growth lies in Violet Township.
?“It would enable Pickerington to participate in the commercial development of non-contiguous land, which we would never have gotten to before,?” said Fix previously. ?“The thing we have they (Violet Township) want is a promise not to annex. The thing they have we want is land. If we don?’t do this Pickerington will stagnate.?”
Fix listed positive aspects of the proposal as including: it would enable the development of the viable U.S. Route 33 corridor in the southeast quadrant of the township; create governmental stability which encourages growth; guarantees equal partnership with the township; and decreases the possibility of more residential development.
Wisniewski feels the agreement favors Violet Township.
?“We cannot further stress city residents by having them subsidize other government entities,?” Wisniewski has said.
October 9, 2006
By Rick Palsgrove
Southeast Editor
Pickerington Mayor David Shaver approved a request by Councilman Jeff Fix to move discussion of the proposed Pickerington/Violet Township economic development agreement from the finance committee to the service committee.
The action, taken at Pickerington City Council?’s Oct. 3 meeting, means the controversial agreement could be brought before full council for consideration as early as council?’s Oct. 24 meeting.
Fix, who has been negotiating the agreement with Violet Township officials since last winter, said he made the request because he feels the proposal has been delayed in finance committee and that the service committee is a more appropriate place to discuss the agreement because it deals with land issues.
?“Time is of the essence. It?’s imperative we move this forward quickly and have council hold a full debate on it before the public. We need a vigorous, honest, open debate,?” said Fix.
Fix hinted that other government entities could approach Violet Township if the city fails to act.
Council President, and chair of the finance committee, Brian Wisniewski commented that Fix?’s maneuver recalls political moves made by past councils.
?“I thought we were moving away from that to a different kind of community, now we?’re doing the same things,?” said Wisniewski.
Wisniewski added that moving the agreement to the service committee amounted to a ?“dog and pony show?” and accused Fix of doing so because there are votes there to move the issue along. Wisniewski said the issue belongs in the finance committee because it is an ?“economic agreement.?”
?“We?’ve had one discussion of the agreement in finance and now all of sudden you want to circumvent the process,?” Wisniewski told Fix.
?“I can accuse you of the same thing,?” Fix replied, noting that a special finance committee meeting set for Sept. 25 to discuss the issue was cancelled due to a lack of a quorum as Wisniewski and Councilman Ted Hackworth did not attend.
Councilman Michael Sabatino questioned the urgency in which Fix is trying to move the agreement through council.
?“The urgency is self-imposed on your part,?” Sabatino told Fix. ?“It?’s wrong to shop around for a committee for a favorable vote just to get something through.?”
Shaver initially offered a compromise to keep the discussion of the agreement in the finance committee while at the same time placing it on council?’s agenda, but council members were not receptive to the idea.
Law Director Phil Hartmann stated there is nothing legally that prohibits the mayor from moving issues from one committee to another.
Council members on the service committee are Hackworth, Heidi Riggs, and Cristie Hammond.
The next service committee meeting is Oct. 12 at 7:30 p.m. at city hall, 100 Lockville Road.
Proposal pros and cons
Fix has stated the city has a limited commercial tax base made up of mostly retail and office space and that the potential for bigger commercial growth lies in Violet Township.
?“It would enable Pickerington to participate in the commercial development of non-contiguous land, which we would never have gotten to before,?” said Fix previously. ?“The thing we have they (Violet Township) want is a promise not to annex. The thing they have we want is land. If we don?’t do this Pickerington will stagnate.?”
Fix listed positive aspects of the proposal as including: it would enable the development of the viable U.S. Route 33 corridor in the southeast quadrant of the township; create governmental stability which encourages growth; guarantees equal partnership with the township; and decreases the possibility of more residential development.
Wisniewski feels the agreement favors Violet Township.
?“We cannot further stress city residents by having them subsidize other government entities,?” Wisniewski has said.
