|
|
Dear Ted, again
Who on council is a real leader that can as you say ''Do something!!''?
Smith? Absolutely a major disappointment. Wisniewski? Tries, but can't seem to get some of others to understand the numbers as proven in the JEDD data.
Hammond? As council president, doesn't have much ''gravitas'' with other councilpeople.
Sauer? Too driven by campaighn literature to be objective or even say ''Oops!''.
Sanders? Agenda driven by her parks blah-blah and that's out there in la-la land. Not a leader.
Fix? He's alienated himself with his township/JEDD bias.
Sabatino? Everybody hates a watchdog. They make you accountable.
Time to step up and earn your keep, Mayor.
Time for the finance director to provide council on an equitable plan.
By Respect your opion
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is the fairest way
On your point about fairness and that only 30% of the residents will pay the higher taxes. If you look at the people that work here and pay taxes here the figure of those that will pay higher taxes will be nearer to 54% rather than the 30%. Believe it or not a lot of the people that work in the city actually live someplace else. If they work in Pickerington and live in Columbus as an example they won?’t pay higher local taxes because the increased amount to Pickerington will be offset by the 100% credit that Columbus will give them. This holds true for most of the taxpayers living in most of the cities around the outer belt. So the burden you talk about is less than the 30%.
Can you tell me of a city where this is fair? That all of the Citizens of that city pay more just because they live there?
As for me personally, I will see the taxes I pay on the income of my rentals double. Even if I can defer these city income taxes with depreciation and other write offs I will still have to pay that income tax when I sell the properties. Clearly it would be a better deal for me personally to pay an increased property tax gradually versus and increased income tax.
Trying to balance the current budget by resetting the police levy will not bring in enough money to prevent lay offs in the police department next year. The second problem with a property tax is if it isn?’t passed this November the city would not collect any money from it until 2010. The city needs around a $1 million in new revenues and resetting the police levy to 5.5 mils only will bring in around $700,000 per year (very generous estimate). That is not enough to meet the debt service payments of 2009 without lay offs in the police department. The city may be having issues with property tax collections anyway because as we also read in the Dispatch this morning Franklin county is allowing its property appraisal to remain flat this year. Meaning that the 4.3 mils the city collects on inside milage may be hurt this next year thus putting even more pressure on the income tax and the general fund monies.
I believe our society has a long honored principal of ''by majority rule''. Clearly I see the financial abyss ahead and I am willing to pay more to protect the property I have and to protect its value with adequate police protection and good roads to get around on.
Instead of worrying about the 30% or less how about the 70% that currently pay more than the 30% because they happen to work in Columbus or another city that taxes up to 2% of their pay?
This 2% income tax with a 75% credit would have the least impact on our taxpayers. It would also address the revenue problem for many more years than what a property issue would.
Please try again.
By Ted Hackworth
|
|
|
Been there done that
First I believe all of our members of the Pickerington City Council are honorable people. They ran for office to do their part and to help make the decisions for our future. With the exception of Councilmen Wisniewski and Sabatino these members are relatively new. Some (Smith, Hammond, and Fix) have only been in office two years 5 months and the other two (Sanders and Sauer) have been in office 5 months.
Reading the Sunday paper and trying to make a critique of the council?’s decisions is very easy to do. Many times we have the benefit of not knowing what is happening with the details of the city?’s finances. Many times people will criticize council or a member of council because they simply don?’t have all of the facts and in some cases once elected those facts are then presented. Many times it is very hard to accept those facts of council and the city government once you are in office. You quickly begin to understand some of the actions of those that you once criticized prior to your election.
That is not to say that there were many instances in my time in office that I said to myself or aloud, ?“what were they thinking?“?
In the first year in office many of the moving parts of a city budget are very hard to keep track of. When one of the hardest decision they will ever make on council comes up and they find themselves choking on their campaign rhetoric. Their preconceived notions about how much money the city had and what they could do with it if they were in office becomes challenged. They had never ever given a thought to the fact that they would need to get others to agree with their position to make what ever they wanted to do happen.
What I am saying here is that as citizens we can lobby for action. As members of council they must be very careful not to do much arm twisting because those that are having their arms twisted will simply vote nay.
In this day and age I feel that our income tax is the fairest way to pay for city services. I also realize that most larger cities around the outer belt have gone to the 2 % income tax with a 100% credit. This will only affect a minority of the voters and taxpayers in this city. I will be in that minority. What was proposed by the Finance Committee by a 5-1 vote will have the best chance of getting passed by the voters. It will also provide the funding needed in time to save our police force and improve our roads.
Now no matter what is proposed someone will find fault with it. That is the beauty of this is those that find fault and oppose this tax will have the opportunity to vote and see exactly where they stand with those that support the tax increase. We somehow must express this ideal to our council members and get then to allow the citizens and majority rule to determine the fate of any income tax. Clearly the research by the council and staff has provided the basis for this decision buy the voters. I think to block the vote by a couple of members on council doesn?’t serve the people they are pledge to serve. Those hung up on pre-conceived notions and campaign rhetoric should burn the midnight oil to bring themselves up to speed on what is needed to do.
Action is needed!! PLEASE
By Ted Hackworth
|
|
|
It's not the fairest way
I appreciate your input, but equity should be the target. Persoanlly, excluding a major group of residents who live here from paricipating in the stability of the police department doesn't sit well with me.
On another note, there were two committees, an income and expense committee. What were the results of the expense group? We've heard of the cuts in paving and police unless we raise taxes, but what other ideas to save money were introduced.
By Sorrry Ted, but disagree w/ you
|
