Apparently Brian Wisniewski is not answering any questions about the upcoming tax issue on the November ballot.
http://pickerington.wordpress.com/
May 28, 2008
Proposed income tax increase
Filed under: Uncategorized ?— pickerington @ 8:30 pm
This entry is in response to the recent posting on PATA regarding the proposed income tax increase.
http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/public/clubDiscussion.html?nid=79084164&nclubid=68303919&nsupercity=437534213
Talk of a tax increase has been going around city hall ever since I?’ve been on council. Councilman Hackworth tried to get something going with this over 2 years ago but it never received any traction. Three years ago or more I asked the question - when do our expenses exceed our revenue? The City?’s financial director and outside financial adviser worked on this on and off and finally came up with something based on certain factors; debt, income, bonds vs notes, etc. If the variables in those projections come to fruition then mid-2009 is when our expenses exceed our income.
Now in response to the PATA posting:
1. Financial plan - we have various forecasts available based on our capital improvements plan, debt, etc but we don?’t have long-range plans based on what CIP projects are going to be accomplished when and how they?’re going to be funded if that?’s what you?’re asking.
2. 2% needed? - Our finance director asked that at a bare minimum we increase our income taxes by $1M annually. That will pay the debt for Diley road as well as reinstate street paving which has been cut from the budget 2 of the last 3 years. With a increase to 2% from 1% it will generate ~$1.7M/annually. That will give us some cushion to apply towards other debt or tackle some smaller CIP items. The 2% rate is in line with other central OH communities and allows us to remain competitive from an income tax standpoint. This % has nothing to do with the JEDD talks at all.
3. Cuts. Every year the budget is cut down considerably from what the department heads ask for. Police cruisers, dump trucks, additional police and staff, etc have been cut from this years and prior years budgets. A hiring freeze is in place and as attrition occurs the positions are not being filled. We had the opportunity to improve the intersection at Refugee/256 with a considerable State grant but we cut that due to the lack of ability to repay our portion. We eliminated street paving for the 2nd time. We cut the full-time PIO and consultant we had on staff. We?’ve somehow actually reduced our health-care costs this year due to the excellent, hard work of staff. We?’ve moved or cut numerous CIP items. We?’ve brought as much work in-house as we can. The budget is online and is available for anyone to review but it is very bare-bones. A lot of what is in the budget is akin to ?“keeping the lights on?”.
4. Work here/live here/work elsewhere. It is true that this proposed increase is only for those who work in Pickerington, not for the residents who already pay .5% but work outside the city boundaries. I think it is a weak argument stating this is pitting those who live/work here against those who live here/work elsewhere. This proposed increase is no different than any other tax increase. Our school levies have passed/failed by less than 1% at times. If that?’s not ?“pitting neighbor against neighbor?” I don?’t know what is. Taxes aren?’t fair, but they?’re necessary.
We?’re trying to be very conservative in our approach to this proposed income tax increase while still be able to provide services to our citizens. However, it is impossible to predict how far this $1.7M will actually go in this unstable economy. We know we?’ll be able to pay the Diley road debt and be able to reinstate street paving. However, you can?’t find two economists who agree on what the economy will look like in 6 months let alone 5 years.
http://pickerington.wordpress.com/
May 28, 2008
Proposed income tax increase
Filed under: Uncategorized ?— pickerington @ 8:30 pm
This entry is in response to the recent posting on PATA regarding the proposed income tax increase.
http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/public/clubDiscussion.html?nid=79084164&nclubid=68303919&nsupercity=437534213
Talk of a tax increase has been going around city hall ever since I?’ve been on council. Councilman Hackworth tried to get something going with this over 2 years ago but it never received any traction. Three years ago or more I asked the question - when do our expenses exceed our revenue? The City?’s financial director and outside financial adviser worked on this on and off and finally came up with something based on certain factors; debt, income, bonds vs notes, etc. If the variables in those projections come to fruition then mid-2009 is when our expenses exceed our income.
Now in response to the PATA posting:
1. Financial plan - we have various forecasts available based on our capital improvements plan, debt, etc but we don?’t have long-range plans based on what CIP projects are going to be accomplished when and how they?’re going to be funded if that?’s what you?’re asking.
2. 2% needed? - Our finance director asked that at a bare minimum we increase our income taxes by $1M annually. That will pay the debt for Diley road as well as reinstate street paving which has been cut from the budget 2 of the last 3 years. With a increase to 2% from 1% it will generate ~$1.7M/annually. That will give us some cushion to apply towards other debt or tackle some smaller CIP items. The 2% rate is in line with other central OH communities and allows us to remain competitive from an income tax standpoint. This % has nothing to do with the JEDD talks at all.
3. Cuts. Every year the budget is cut down considerably from what the department heads ask for. Police cruisers, dump trucks, additional police and staff, etc have been cut from this years and prior years budgets. A hiring freeze is in place and as attrition occurs the positions are not being filled. We had the opportunity to improve the intersection at Refugee/256 with a considerable State grant but we cut that due to the lack of ability to repay our portion. We eliminated street paving for the 2nd time. We cut the full-time PIO and consultant we had on staff. We?’ve somehow actually reduced our health-care costs this year due to the excellent, hard work of staff. We?’ve moved or cut numerous CIP items. We?’ve brought as much work in-house as we can. The budget is online and is available for anyone to review but it is very bare-bones. A lot of what is in the budget is akin to ?“keeping the lights on?”.
4. Work here/live here/work elsewhere. It is true that this proposed increase is only for those who work in Pickerington, not for the residents who already pay .5% but work outside the city boundaries. I think it is a weak argument stating this is pitting those who live/work here against those who live here/work elsewhere. This proposed increase is no different than any other tax increase. Our school levies have passed/failed by less than 1% at times. If that?’s not ?“pitting neighbor against neighbor?” I don?’t know what is. Taxes aren?’t fair, but they?’re necessary.
We?’re trying to be very conservative in our approach to this proposed income tax increase while still be able to provide services to our citizens. However, it is impossible to predict how far this $1.7M will actually go in this unstable economy. We know we?’ll be able to pay the Diley road debt and be able to reinstate street paving. However, you can?’t find two economists who agree on what the economy will look like in 6 months let alone 5 years.
