So as I understand the comments so far. The NO on 9 group wants to not annex anymore lands from the township and at the same time they are wanting to enslave the Pickerington City tax payers by not allowing them to exit the township if they so desire and the need exists. They go on to threaten the yes on 9 group with continuous law suits from the township if the city annexes in the future. First that is a false claim. Yes they (Violet Township) can make claims and run the meter up on the lawyer?’s time but entering into these development agreements did not immune the city taxpayers from law suits from the township. I have heard from a number of current members of council that the City is dealing with the mob in trying to negotiate with the township. It is simply one threat after another. They act civil in public to get public support only to change in private with ranting and raving about minor issues with the sole purpose of pushing issues that have very little merit.
The trustees only want the city taxpayer?’s dollars and those dollars to build township infrastructure.
They also want to find a sucker to join with them to help develop the big box out on Refugee. I am sure that is why Rita is opposed and is joining Jeff?’s ill fated thought process.
The facts of the group are that we went to the minority council members to ask for advice and information. We were not abducted kicking and screaming. Some of our group met with Jeff Fix and his credibility was lacking so we took the word of the three minority members. The original group had over 32 people in it. Most gave money to pay for the lawyer the only exception was the three current council members did not pay anything toward the attorney. Our group came up with the referendum and we were all concerned with what could be done by the 4 members of council that would not listen nor would they compromise. Mr. Fix was very stubborn and wouldn?’t consider any other point of view. It seemed like the agreement was more about him than the city. I approached Mr. Hackworth and he said if the vote stays the same the only alternative for the group was to circulate a referendum. The group meet a couple of times and the question was asked of the attorney about what could prevent the council from wearing down the petition carriers with endless changes to the agreement? The attorney came up with the initiative. Other than carrying the initiative charter amendment the three current members of council had nothing to do with the charter amendment. I am not sure they were even at the meeting when it was discussed.
The township offered NOTHING in the agreement they presented to Mr. Fix and the City Council. It was only a promise and they had no consequences against them if they failed to deliver. On the other hand the City had to remain within it current boundaries and not be allowed to annex and deal with anything the township put forth. Those that oppose 9 think that all of this township development stuff is a slam dunk. It is not. They only have firm agreements with Canal Winchester. Pickerington has NEVER been considered a firm partner.
The trustees only want the city taxpayer?’s dollars and those dollars to build township infrastructure.
They also want to find a sucker to join with them to help develop the big box out on Refugee. I am sure that is why Rita is opposed and is joining Jeff?’s ill fated thought process.
The facts of the group are that we went to the minority council members to ask for advice and information. We were not abducted kicking and screaming. Some of our group met with Jeff Fix and his credibility was lacking so we took the word of the three minority members. The original group had over 32 people in it. Most gave money to pay for the lawyer the only exception was the three current council members did not pay anything toward the attorney. Our group came up with the referendum and we were all concerned with what could be done by the 4 members of council that would not listen nor would they compromise. Mr. Fix was very stubborn and wouldn?’t consider any other point of view. It seemed like the agreement was more about him than the city. I approached Mr. Hackworth and he said if the vote stays the same the only alternative for the group was to circulate a referendum. The group meet a couple of times and the question was asked of the attorney about what could prevent the council from wearing down the petition carriers with endless changes to the agreement? The attorney came up with the initiative. Other than carrying the initiative charter amendment the three current members of council had nothing to do with the charter amendment. I am not sure they were even at the meeting when it was discussed.
The township offered NOTHING in the agreement they presented to Mr. Fix and the City Council. It was only a promise and they had no consequences against them if they failed to deliver. On the other hand the City had to remain within it current boundaries and not be allowed to annex and deal with anything the township put forth. Those that oppose 9 think that all of this township development stuff is a slam dunk. It is not. They only have firm agreements with Canal Winchester. Pickerington has NEVER been considered a firm partner.
