Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Hey not one sided!

We don't want to hear either side from the city! We watch you people waste money right and left on attorneys! On engineers. On retreat speakers. With 30 day contract salary increases.
What else is going to be said that hasn't been already here at the 11th hour? New facts? Or spin?
Did the Mayor not pull motions from council agenda because he didn't have the votes? Well, somebody has put pressure of some kind to get a vote to flip. More insider trading.

One side feels this is needed to get their message out. Who ever votes to do this is the loser of the issue and their office.


By It's a waste of tax money!

Nothing ever changes

There appears to be an arrogance coming from the majority of council that says they are all knowing and this group that questions them are ''ONLY A HANDFUL.''

What was PATA stand a few years ago when the city sent out it 16 page glossy ''newsletter'' with complete Bios of all of the members of council some of whom were running for office including the Mayor. Many of the photos in the newsletter were the same photos used in their campaign literature. What about the Violet Voice? Everybody now gets a free pass because we are the good guys.

Shouldn't we all play by the same rules?

For the City to put out a document written by political opponents no matter where you stand on these issues they will be biased to one side or the other. If we then compound that document with statement that are inaccurate or untruthful then it clearly affects the election process in our city and says that citizens in the community will be met with the FULL POWER OF CITY HALL AND YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO FIGHT ISSUES WE (Jeff Fix) OPPOSE.

Jeff where are your ethics of 2001 and your outrage of 2001 are they now all lost because you are now on the inside? Are we reverting back to the good ole days?

By We need to be there

looks like it

and those who did those things in the good old days are gone...

you said...

You said: For the levy supporters using your logic the opposition would have the public money to get their message out where they find so little support other wise.

The idea is that the public hear both sides, not just one. You are assuming everyone agrees with you and will be swayed when that is most likely not the case. The public needs to hear all the facts.