Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

We can go it alone

Yosemite Pam

You are making assumptions and stating what you consider facts that are not facts. Your assumptions are solely based on Jeff Fix's 17 page statement to the left. Did it ever occur to you that Jeff Fix doesn't know what the hell he is talking about? Please before you allow your keyboard to respond please call someone else and get a opposite opinion so you can compare the so called facts.

It fascinates the hell out of me when you people out in the township have tried for years to box the city. Terry I know the city fired you more than one time but it is time to get over it. You are driving this community (Violet and Pickerington) apart. You are going to have to answer for all the stupid zoning policies you have put forth so far.

After all of these years of trying to stop Pickerington from annexation they get all up in arms when someone suggests a paper township.

I will tell you that a group will circulate an initiative early next year to form a paper township. The city has 300 acres of land that can be developed at commercial. The township now has about 45 acres along US 33. The city can save tax dollars by eliminating a useless level of government in the city. I am sure the savings on the legal budget alone will be more than enough to pay for the six needed police officers.

Bascially we are land locked now we will adjust.




By Bill

Agree and Disagree

I both agree and disagree with you.

I agree that city taxpayers should not have to pay for two levels of local government. We don't need Violet Township, not any of us.

But creating another township under the city would just recreate the problem, and would not solve anything. Indeed, it could leave the city landlocked in all directions, and probably would increase the cost paid by city taxpayers for fire protection. There are, after all, economies of scale, even in that.

The city needs Violet Township's land, and still other land to the east, if it is ever going to build a solid, commercial tax base. We need non-retail commercial development to take at least some of the local tax burden off our backs.

A joint economic development agreement with the township would give the city access to the tax revenues thrown off by such development in the township. An even better solution, however, would be to merge the city and the township, and be done with townships once and for all in this community.

This would prevent any further inroads into our community by neighboring municipalities, while enabling us to annex commercially developabile and in neighboring townships to the east and northeast. It would deny builders and developers the ability to play the city and the township off against each other, as they have in the past. It would enable us to plan comprehensively for our community's future. It would assure that all taxpayers in this community share the burden of paying for the local improvements from which we all benefit.

This option, I think, is at least worth seriously considering. But we will need to do that now, or the opportunity will be lost.

By Yosemite Pam

Economies of Scale

There are economies of scale, even in local government, public education, and police and fire protection. If the city and the township were to go it alone, it would cost us more.

We no longer need Violet Township, or any township, in this community. The township needs to merge into the city.

By Yosemite Pam

Careful

''Although I haven't run the numbers on this stuff, the city council and its consultants have run some of them. They have determined that non-retail commercial development is one of the few kinds of development that will generate more tax revenue than expense. ''

You're mixing the growth management study, which is chock full of data, with the econ agreement which has NONE.

Now I see where your protoge, Jeffy Fix, got his style. Pull factoids and quotes from various unrelated sources and put them together for a satisfactory sound byte.