Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

A Letter from the Mayor to Violet Township Officials dated 1-16-2001

The City of Pickerington appreciated the opportunity to meet with you during the past growth meetings and we thank you for initiating those meetings. We are interested in continuing discussions with Violet Township and Pickerington Local School District officials regarding opportunities for cooperation. However, at this point in time, since we have received public input, we feel that meetings of smaller committees would be more beneficial to achieving our goals. Additionally, given low attendance, we feel that it is not productive to continue meeting in the established growth meeting format. Therefore, we have elected to not have a meeting on January 21.

The recent survey initiated by township officials seems to show that residents in the unincorporated township area are not interested in pursuing a possible merger, while it is an important agenda item for City of Pickerington residents. While we would have appreciated the opportunity to participate in a joint survey and to provide information to the public about the details of merger, your survey seems to indicate that the residents in unincorporated Violet Township have different priorities on issues than city residents. In regard to the issues identified at prior meetings such as more consistent zoning codes, annexation agreements, and CEDAs and JEDDs, the City is already working to address each of these issues.

As previously discussed, we are committed to removing barriers to annexation and we are currently passing legislation to reimburse the Township on the road and bridge levy, making annexation a win-win situation for the City and the Township. This would especially enable the community to acquire a business park, bringing an increased tax pool and creation of new jobs that will benefit our residents, our schools, and improve our quality of living.

In light of the most recent confusion over our zoning code, I am appointing a special committee to evaluate our zoning code relative to the township zoning code. We are also meeting with representatives of the Pickerington Local School District to discuss ?“make whole?” provisions on future Tax Increment Financing districts.

Since CEDAs and JEDDs are mechanisms created by state statue, we would like to recommend that your township attorney and the city attorney meet to review CEDA and JEDD options. Please contact us to let us know when your attorney is available.

The City of Pickerington has worked to achieve balanced growth in the past and is committed to continuing to do so in the future. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Randall Hughes
Mayor

Cc: Pickerington Local School Board
City of Pickerington Council Members (7)

This concludes the Mayors letter.

Growth Summit's Background

Township elect officials discussed growth summit meetings and CEDA?’s as early as November of 1999 with members of the City Council and PLSD Board at public meetings.

The first Growth Summit meetings were delayed until July 2000. At the first meeting the City Officials came with NO agenda items. Township officials presented the idea of committees (with citizen representation) to address CEDA, JEDD, and other cooperative opportunities.

The second Growth Summit meeting was ?“dominated?” by City Officials, who previously indicated they would not participate, discussing nothing but merging the Township with the City. The City still did not list merger as an agenda item. City Officials scoffed at the idea of citizen committees ?– implying that would accomplish nothing.

The third Growth Summit meeting was a 2-1/2 hour lecture on annexation, merger, CEDA and JEDD conducted by City hired attorney Richard Brahm. Mr. Brahm is the attorney that represents the City in all annexation issues. Mr. Brahm is also the attorney involved with the organization Ohio Coalition for Equitable Annexation (OCEA). This group successfully fought Ohio State House and Senate bills AGAINST reforms in the current annexation laws. The OCEA mailing address was 100 Lockville Road, Pickerington, OH 43147. On December 5, 2000 Pickerington City Council members voted unanimously to approve funds, up to $125,000.00, to the OCEA for the efforts of attorney Brahm regarding annexation legislation. This, of course, was passed as an ?“Emergency Legislation?” issue.

Two weeks later Senate Bill 289 officially died in the House of Representatives ?– being blocked from coming out of committee by then Speaker Davidson.

January 16, 2001- Mayor Hughes officially indicates, in the letter previously posted ?– to discontinue attendance in the ?“Growth Summit?” format ?– and calling off the City?’s previous commitment to host the 4th growth summit meeting.

January 17, 2001 ?– Violet Township Officials formalize an agreement with the Village of Canal Winchester for a CEDA in the area south of Busey Road - North of Rt. 33, between Hill Road and the Franklin County Line. This area is COMPLETELY in the boundaries of the Canal Winchester School District.

January 19, 2001 ?– City Officials respond to questions from, Ray Crumbley ?– Columbus Dispatch reporter, ?“?…. the new proposal came as a surprise to Pickerington officials, City Manager Joyce Bushman said yesterday. ''We did not know anything about a CEDA agreement being negotiated until we got the news release.''
Because the development area will block Pickerington's access to the new Rt. 33 interchange, it could scuttle Pickerington's hopes for a 300- to 500-acre industrial park that would provide tax dollars for Pickerington schools,?” Bushman said.

Hogwash ------ Tax dollars to What School District ??? !!!

January 21,20001 --- NO GROWTH SUMMIT MEETING?…?….