It?’s time to dismiss the HOAX that residents who don?’t live within the corporate limits of Pickerington shouldn?’t be able to express their concerns over the actions of this City?’s governmental decisions.
If the school?’s ballot issues, all the while this Council?’s members race to approve more housing plots, wasn?’t enough to convince you the latest SE Messenger (9-2-02) should leave little doubt. Within the article on page 3 titled ?“Pickerington / County Utilities agreement at standstill?” you?’ve got the proof against the myth.
The thousands of Fairfield County & City of Pickerington Utility users were noted as having to subsidize the potentially illegal ?“pre-annexation agreements?” regarding tap fee reductions by the City Council. There isn?’t a City of Pickerington official, elected or appointed, that can now deny that all area residents are impacted by this government?’s decisions.
So, isn?’t it time to get the whole story out?
Mr. Postage seems to want to continue the lame discussion of the sham so Mr. Postage it?’s time for you to answer for your voting decisions.
You say, ?“We were trying to help them out?” ?– referring to this now shelved City / County agreement. Sure just defies any logic how costing millions of dollars of subsidies from sewer and water tap fees reductions was helping out ANY of this area?’s residents.
Another Postage?’ism. ?“The key element in this thing was the Thorton property. Right now, why should we take in any further? (speaking of the agreement) Why should we share it with them when we can service it??” Another absurdity in the Council President Pro-Tem?’s twisted words. Just how can you service the area when it was clearly in the Canal Winchesters service section of the Pickerington / Canal Winchester?’s sewer & water agreement? Oh, how foolish of me your Law Director wrote a letter voiding that agreement, for which you and the rest of Council now have this City?’s government in court to attempt to defend. Please Mr. Postage, justify the tens of thousands of dollars you have approved for the outside legal counsel of Vores, Salter, Seymour, Pease LLP on the nullification of your contract. Aren?’t these the same legal beagles who have spoken words against the latest citizens petitions to curb you from these giving away?’s that this agreement would have all of us paying for?
And more from the mouth of Mr. Postage regarding the expansion of the current Pickerington sewer plan and the request currently into the Ohio EPA for it?’s approval of this expansion. ?“We have other stuff on the books that is being developed as part of this (wastewater plant) expansion?”. Mr. Postage, please finish that statement, what stuff? Let me just guess since you speak in incomplete sentences and continual rhetoric.
1. Getting all those needed utilities to your Council buddy?’s family property on Long Road.
2. Let?’s double up the plant for all the Diley Road explosion of homes. We wouldn?’t want to have the homes that Lee helped bring about on Kohler?’s & Painter?’s old farms not happen because they couldn?’t get the sewer to flush their toilets.
3. Could the 115 lots at the ?“Parade of Homes?” possibly fill up that 24?” sewer line you?’ve got running out there?
4. And while we?’re figuring out the ?“stuff?”, please don?’t forget the extra apartments and condos that go along with Daryl?’s Police station land donation, they sure must need a lot of flush capacity.
Real elected representatives communicate with their constituents and the community as a whole. Your statements, Mr. Postage, are a continuation of a line of similar hoaxes that just don?’t stand up to the light of reality.
If the school?’s ballot issues, all the while this Council?’s members race to approve more housing plots, wasn?’t enough to convince you the latest SE Messenger (9-2-02) should leave little doubt. Within the article on page 3 titled ?“Pickerington / County Utilities agreement at standstill?” you?’ve got the proof against the myth.
The thousands of Fairfield County & City of Pickerington Utility users were noted as having to subsidize the potentially illegal ?“pre-annexation agreements?” regarding tap fee reductions by the City Council. There isn?’t a City of Pickerington official, elected or appointed, that can now deny that all area residents are impacted by this government?’s decisions.
So, isn?’t it time to get the whole story out?
Mr. Postage seems to want to continue the lame discussion of the sham so Mr. Postage it?’s time for you to answer for your voting decisions.
You say, ?“We were trying to help them out?” ?– referring to this now shelved City / County agreement. Sure just defies any logic how costing millions of dollars of subsidies from sewer and water tap fees reductions was helping out ANY of this area?’s residents.
Another Postage?’ism. ?“The key element in this thing was the Thorton property. Right now, why should we take in any further? (speaking of the agreement) Why should we share it with them when we can service it??” Another absurdity in the Council President Pro-Tem?’s twisted words. Just how can you service the area when it was clearly in the Canal Winchesters service section of the Pickerington / Canal Winchester?’s sewer & water agreement? Oh, how foolish of me your Law Director wrote a letter voiding that agreement, for which you and the rest of Council now have this City?’s government in court to attempt to defend. Please Mr. Postage, justify the tens of thousands of dollars you have approved for the outside legal counsel of Vores, Salter, Seymour, Pease LLP on the nullification of your contract. Aren?’t these the same legal beagles who have spoken words against the latest citizens petitions to curb you from these giving away?’s that this agreement would have all of us paying for?
And more from the mouth of Mr. Postage regarding the expansion of the current Pickerington sewer plan and the request currently into the Ohio EPA for it?’s approval of this expansion. ?“We have other stuff on the books that is being developed as part of this (wastewater plant) expansion?”. Mr. Postage, please finish that statement, what stuff? Let me just guess since you speak in incomplete sentences and continual rhetoric.
1. Getting all those needed utilities to your Council buddy?’s family property on Long Road.
2. Let?’s double up the plant for all the Diley Road explosion of homes. We wouldn?’t want to have the homes that Lee helped bring about on Kohler?’s & Painter?’s old farms not happen because they couldn?’t get the sewer to flush their toilets.
3. Could the 115 lots at the ?“Parade of Homes?” possibly fill up that 24?” sewer line you?’ve got running out there?
4. And while we?’re figuring out the ?“stuff?”, please don?’t forget the extra apartments and condos that go along with Daryl?’s Police station land donation, they sure must need a lot of flush capacity.
Real elected representatives communicate with their constituents and the community as a whole. Your statements, Mr. Postage, are a continuation of a line of similar hoaxes that just don?’t stand up to the light of reality.