Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Lets not forget Continued


Mr. Fix: Mr. Chairman, if I could ask ?– we?’ve got a proposal already before Council. We?’ve got a proposal before Service Committee tonight. I?’m wondering why now we want to go back to a previous version of it.

Mr. Sabatino: We?’re not. We?’re just getting clarification of what?’s in it and what?’s not,

Mr. Fix.

Mr. Fix: Okay.

Mr. Hackworth: Well I have questions for myself, and I?’ve had other people ask me questions, and I think it?’s important since we?’ve got two members of the press here to verify. Now there is another issue that if a Economic Development or a JEDD is presented to the City, they do have 120 days to either accept or pass on the deal. So, I think that?’s the other 120-day issue.

Mrs. Hammond: That?’s the only 120 day issue.

Mr. Hackworth: And, I think the one to opt out is 90 days prior to the ten years.

Mr. Fix: Okay.

Mr. Sabatino: I wasn?’t sure of the days, but I was pretty sure of the fact it was only at ?– once you sign up you?’re in for ten years, ten years, ten years.

Mr. Fix: That?’s correct.

Mr. Hackworth: Well, the reason I bring this up is, number one, is to clarify there is some questions on what was passed at Council. The second thing is, I thought there was a commitment on your part that you were still open to amendments to this.

Mr. Fix: Right, and there were amendments that we discussed in the work session that were a part of that packet, and I think that those certainly should be considered. Those were fairly narrow in scope to reopen the entire discussion of one versus the other, which we?’ve had that discussion several months ago.

Mr. Sabatino: I was under the impression Mr. Fix that your previous statement said that, you know, once it got to Council that it would get full deliberation on three readings, not ?– we?’ve got a first reading and that?’s what we?’re pushing through.

Mr. Fix: Michael, I?’m not trying to push anything through. I?’m trying to understand the need to go back to a version from several months ago that we?’ve already worked through and taken some of the pieces of it and put it into the version that?’s before Council and other pieces of it that are in proposed amendments that have already been before you, so?…

Mr. Sabatino: The whole purpose of having Council deliberations is to discuss it at every opportunity that presents itself, Mr. Fix.

Mr. Fix: Right. Michael. I?’m not trying to squelch the conversation. I?’m trying not to relive the conversation from two months ago.

Mr. Hackworth: So, then, you?’re saying that there?’s no way we?’re going to go back to the staff version or even adopt any of it?’s points?

Mr. Fix: We?’ve already, Ted, if I remember correctly, taken significant parts of the language of the staff document and other pieces of the staff document and implemented it into what is now before Council. So what, that the final version that I proposed and the version that is now before Council are fairly different in language, not in intent or content, but in language, based on the language that was brought to us by the staff.



Rejected by the township and the Pickerington City voters on a Referendum

Do Your Homework

Mr. Hansley supported the Master Economic Development agreement as negotiated with the Township. Ask him. His direct quote to me was ''given the circumstances this is an agreement that would benefit the city.''

Judy Gilleland was asked by Councilman Hackworth to write a version of the MEDA and she presented a version that she said was ''admittedly pro-city - I'm the city manager - you would kill me if I presented anything less.''

The bottom line - again - is that our staff was aware of and to some extent involved in bringing the Master Economic Development Agreement to council. They were not ignored as is being suggested by those less informed.

This sight was much more useful when it was used to debate ideas and policies rather than as a political witch hunt.

You'll notice that all three times now that I've posted here in the past six years I've signed my name. I encourage all posters to stop hiding behind nicknames and come forward for a true, open, honest debate on the issues. Until then this site will lack the credibility that it could have and will continue to be largely disregarded by those in office.

By Jeff Fix

My homework says....

You're as always dealing in half-truths.

Your loyalty is and has always been to Gary Weltlich.

Your rumored ''falling out'' was nothing more than another political ploy.

You aspirations are much higher than the office you pathetically cling to now.

You have betrayed the county Republican Party on which you sit on their Executive Committee.

You are taking Brian Sauer, who could have redeemed himself, with you to the political graveyard.

If Mr. Davis doesn't assure the county party that you will never again be in any official capacity other than your central committee seat, he will be ousted and the party will again go back to Fox.

You are still buddies with Fox so I believe you hatched this plan of endorsing against the party together.

Is it the chairmanship you seek?

What reason do I have to believe that you are really who you say you are?

I signed this Santa. Does that make me Santa? Do you believe I'm Santa?

You will continue to make every attempt to sell this city out to the township.

Unfortunately you now have Mike Sabatino won over to your side or Fox's side or wherever he went.

Good luck in a year and a half. I think you and Mike just signed a letter that spells the end of your time on council.

Bye-bye and Ho-ho-ho!


By Santa

Merry Christmas Santa

I guess this just goes back to my point earlier. This used to be a site of great debate. Now it is full of rediculous postings like the previous one.

Your dramatic overstatement of my abilities to manipulate dozens of people would be flattering were it not so absurd. I guess when you can't argue the facts you just turn to inuendo and idiocy.

Merry Christmas Santa.

By Jeff Fix