|
|
First, I wish to thank those of you who came to last Tuesday?’s counsel meeting. This is a very crucial time in Pickerington?’s development. The issue is whether we ourselves decide our future and the future of our children or we relinquish the fate of our school system and the community to developers, and builders.
I first wish to explain why I agreed to table the Motion. I was concerned that the motion would not receive a second and that the ordinance would therefore never be voted upon by the council. If a matter is not seconded, then it simply dies. The measure would be defeated without a vote. Doug Parker agreed to second the motion but requested that I allow the matter to be tabled for two weeks to allow for a possible resolution of this matter. I received assurances from Mr. Fox, Mr., Parker and Mr. Maxey that that if an agreement on amendments to this ordinance could not be reached during this time; this ordinance would come off the table and be voted on at the next council meeting. As Mr. Wright has indicated to me in e-mail, he does not agree to this.
I must add that I while I hope that the builders and developers will put forth an effort to assist the community with the problems engendered by uncontrolled growth, I am not optimistic. The display put on by the builders, developers and realtors who spoke on Tuesday night does not give me much hope. They first attempted to intimidate the citizens of this community by bringing crowds of constructions workers and others to the meeting. These individuals stood by the doors and one even felt it was appropriate to sit himself directly in front of my seat at council. I applaud all of you since it is apparent that this not only did not intimidate any of you. In fact, I believe the tactic backfired and only served to increase your resolve. All of you spoke eloquently on behalf of our children and our community.
I am also dismayed by the content of the speeches I heard from the builders and realtors. Not one of them offered any sympathy or suggestions for the problems facing our community. Instead, they either complained about how this community had no right to interfere with what they apparently believe is a God given right to make profits regardless of the harm it causes to this community. Some of them were even so bold as to tell us that we were not ?“special?” and that we should stop complaining about the problems facing our schools. I did not hear a single one of them offer a solution or make an offer to assist our community. In fact, when I suggested that they should consider contributing financially to the community some of the builders lining the walls in the back began to laugh. I will tell them again what I told them that night. If they do not want to be part of our community, they can go to some other town and build homes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Controlled Growth continued
Quite frankly, I expect that they will threaten to not agree to a community authority unless we agree to let them build without restriction. It is true that a community authority could provide additional revenues to the community and schools. This money, however, will come in slowly over time from an increased millage on new homeowners within the area of the authority over a period of years. It can help finance future projects that may become necessary. It is not, however, a solution to the problems caused by rampant growth. As school board member Bruce Rigelman noted at the council meeting, this will not solve the schools problems. Even if could provide funds in the future to build new schools within the area of the authority; it cannot be used for operating expenses and would not come in fast enough or in sufficient amounts to offset the increased expenses caused by the need to rapidly expand services. Given how this money is created and the limitations on its use, it will do us absolutely no good if we remain on schedule to add over a thousand homes (and well over a thousand students) to the school system in the next year alone.
Moreover, since the revenues from the community authority will come primarily from the new homeowners, it is not a measure that will cost the builders a significant amount of money. This burden will be born by the new taxpayers to the community. The builders should agree to the community authority because it is the right thing to do and not use as a stick to coerce us into allowing them free reign over our future.
To solve our problems all of us will need to sacrifice. For the citizens of this community, this means that we will need to vote this May to place an additional tax burden on ourselves. I suspect that many are willing to do this, but feel that the taxpayers are the only ones sharing this burden. The developers have achieved tremendous profits from the marketing of our community. They have used the quality of our school system as the center of their marketing efforts. If anyone doubts this, look at the adds in the newspapers and the signs outside the developments touting ?“Pickerington Schools?”. Having benefited in the past from our community, it is time for them also to make sacrifices. In concrete terms, this means they must accept that we are going to place restrictions on the number of new homes that are being built in this community. We are simply asking for time to develop a rational plan for growth in this community.
As much as it is an imposition on many of you to attend these meetings, I would request that all of you return for the next council meeting to see what, if anything, has been achieved during the two weeks. At the very least you can see the vote on the present ordinance and have another opportunity to express your concerns.
|
|
|
It's their own wallets, first
Mayor Postage recently said he would not appoint anyone to one of the vacant council seats that was suing the City. It's interesting he'll work with the BIA on this community authority when they're openly saying they'll sue over the 2 house per acre density if their lawyers can make the case. How can he trust these guys who openly say they'll sue?
These builders and contractors don't work exclusively in Pickerington. If the market dries up for them here, they can build in other cities. Of course, it'll probably cost them more when they have to pay for their own sewer taps, curbs, traffic lights, attorney fees, etc.
Pickerington messed up big time and let the schools get into such a bind. Continuing to please the builders is going to cost us all. The schools will go into deeper debt, test scores will fall (from all the kids moving in from other districts), the roadways will get even more crowded, we'll need a 3rd fire station, property values will decrease, and the list goes on.
The city must start cleaning up this mess.
|
