|
|
Yes, I want commercial growth!
Of course I'd like to see more commercial growth in Pickerington. But, I don't understand why imposing the impact fees would chase away these two proposed projects. First of all, did they chose Pickerington or did Pickerington chase them? And, weren't they aware of the impact fees when they planned the projects? And, would fees of less than $20k really kill the project for these developers (that is, chase them away to another locale)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's how you get your rep
The fine folks are from Pickerington and want to be here. Never mind that Canal Pointe is offering an abatement that would probably save them in excess of $100K.
This project went through p and z and I'm sure there were discussions with Mr. Hansley at this time regarding those fees. I'm sure service looked at also. Then it was voted out of finance 4-0 to waive the fees. It'll take about 13 months I understand to recoup the fees through income tax. Council voted 6-1. Then after review I believe the 1 no vote saw the light and had B.W. and J.F. been at the 2nd meeting it would have passed 7-0 unless they would have changed their votes.
So after all these months, why the veto talk now? I feel that the project was allowed pass to the point of no return and now the political posturing has begun. It's shameful.
Pickerington City Hall has reputation. And all this does is confirm it in the commercial developement circles of talk.
If you want to waive fees, as it was discussed at the time they were being voted in, a simple addition that minmum income requirements must be met, and if they aren't, send them an invoice for the amount due. Once again, bad leadership by a weak Mayor. Get the politics out of developement and maybe in 10 years or so, you can rebuild your rep.
By Leadership lacking again
|
|
|
Part of the MILLIONS
First of all I think you should realize that the city has lost numerous NEW business possibilities that decided not to come into Pickerington. The second point is that I believe to get an exemption from the impact fees you must apply to the city and then take it to council.
So from a financial stand point would you rather forgive an impact fee of a one time payment of less than $20,000 in exchange for years of income revenues on a payroll of well over one million dollars? One every one million in payroll taxes that translates to $10,000 to the city per year. Also keep in mind that if the business does well and makes a profit then the city also collects income taxes from the business.
These kinds of developments are money makers for the city because they do not require a lot of police. No shop lifting, no traffic congestion and they normally close around 5 PM.
I am more than willing to forgive the impact fee if we can recoup the money in short order.
By Not sharing with Violet
|
|
|
Veto is a vote
I think given a little time the Mayor should review some of his lectures to Mike Sabatino on ''CONFLICT OF INTEREST.'' Remember Mayor a veto is the same as a vote. Make sure before you use the veto, that you do NOT have any personal business dealings with either of the parties benefiting from the exemptions. Even if it is revenge in your heart to get even, you must abstain.
By Mr. Ethics
|
