Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

The article from The Columbus Dispatch posted on OUR pages of this web site points out some poor fore thought on the part of those residents in Licking county. The folks from Pataskala Ohio wanted to block Columbus from annexing any further into their school district and community. They voted and approved this merger. Now they can't raise enough money to maintain services for the city.


Like Pataskala, the Pickerington Area residents were concerned with further annexation from Columbus and their dumping more high density housing on the Pickerington school district. About a year ago that problem was solved by Canal Winchester annexing the Piefer Farm thus connecting the two incorporated areas. That annexation blocked Columbus from more encroachments into our school district.

Obviously we still have problems without Columbus and that is uncontrolled residential growth. The city residents took a giant step in November by passing the three voter initiatives. Granted these three issues were primitive but they do let everyone including the elected leaders of this community know what is expected of them and how they expect these leaders to accomplish these goals.

The township has made the attempt to reach out once more to the city to talk. They have sent a letter to the City and Mayor Postage to get these growth summit meetings started once more.

Controlling residential growth should be the ultimate goal of these talks. To reach that goal we must start with the little things and work our way down. It has been talked about for a long time and that is common zoning. Developers have played one government entity against the other to get the highest density when trying to get approval for a housing project.

Water and sewer issues have pledged this community for years now, where we have one side of the road serviced by the City while the other side is serviced by the County. We must work out sewer and water district and once we sign those agreements then we must stick with them.

Next we must produce a growth plan for the entire Township and the City. For a long time, I have been aware of a very fine Urban Planning department at Ohio State University. My son got me in touch with the Professor that had a standing in the department. He told me that his students would be willing to do a complete development study of our area for only the cost of their materials. I believe they would make a great UNBIASED group with no financial conflicts of interest. The professor told me the costs would run around $3,000.

If the City of Pickerington is successful in the next year or so to satisfactorily control its residential growth then there will be greater pressure on the Township. I know the Township is working on their growth plan at present and I think they should also be looking at consideration of becoming a Home Rule Township. It would cost the resident more and they would be responsible for their own roads and their own police service. They would however have more control over their own destiny in matters of zoning and annexations.


This would just be the beginning.

CONTINUED

A few more thoughts

Once these two government entities reach the above agreements they must then work on a plan to attract commercial properties into the school district. The township?’s effort in the CEDA area of Canal Winchester has been and will be for a long time a great asset for everyone including the citizens of Pickerington. We already now have a model business park right at our southern borders. We can and should expand that CEDA area into the still available areas of the PLSD. We should open up other areas in the school district and target them now for future business development. There are advantages to us all for these types of developments within the borders of the city and the school district. Income Tax Revenue sharing with the schools is very possible if given a chance within these areas.

One of the failures of the City of Pickerington has been their ANTI-BUSINESS councilmen. Their policies and legislation have been a serious determent to the expansion of any business here in Pickerington. As the Pickerington Area Chamber of Commerce tries to rebuild itself from the abuse it suffered from a few of its members it is now faced with an almost impossible job of building existing businesses and attracting new business to the area. I have shared some of my thoughts with the new PACC president and I hope to see a brand new direction coming from the Chamber soon.

Finally I think we here in the city need to re-think out TIF policies. I was told years ago that this was their official policy in attracting new business into Pickerington. Clearly, this policy has been a failure it continues to load additional debt burden onto the citizens of Pickerington with very little in return. Part of the problem the city now has is that they have spent far too much of their resources in areas that have given the taxpayers very little return for their investments.

It never seems to dawn on our City Government that if I wanted to relocate my business here to Pickerington that I am willing to take a risk. I must find all of the employees, services and cooperation from the local governments. If all the surrounding governments are suing Pickerington because they are doing things underhanded and in some cases illegal, then why would I relocate that business here? If I need a road or other infrastructure then can Pickerington provide it? I believe the answer is no. They must do a TIF just to finance a traffic signal. Clearly any business wanting to relocate must consider Pickerington?’s ability to do anything without using school taxes to finance it.


Tax abatement seems to be dirty words at this city hall. On more than one occasion, members of the Pickerington City Government have stated that these abatements HURT the schools. So if we have a large corporation wanting to move into the area and they say that they must have abatement, then our response should be what is in it for us? Do they widen the road? Do they build other infrastructure? Do they donate a grant to the schools for say computers or other equipments? In any event the amount of their payroll should be considered. Clearly a relative small payroll will make up property taxes in a very short time.

Just some ideas hopefully someone will read them and ACT.