Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Call it what it is....

Have to take exception....clearly the new school is more ''upscale'' than the current one. I've seen both, up close, and the differences go beyond just the fact that one is new.

I am sorry that the reference to ''rich school, poor school'' bothers some folks. I am more bothered by the fact that there was obviously no concern for parity between the facilities, or the cost of construction of the new one.

The new facilities, which I am sure the board thought would be their showpiece, have become a constant reminder of the boards poor fiscal management. If they could bury the school and dig it up after the levy passes, they surely would. As others have noted, those who were most responsible for it have all buy vanished from the public eye during the levy discussions.

The bigger point I guess I would like to make is that we've had way too much ''spin'' in this community for a long time. It's way past time for some honesty in this community, regardless of the perceived cost. Just because folks stop saying ''rich school, poor school'', doesn't mean voters won't still be thinking it.

Instead, lets deal with the issues...admit what's happened in the past, and move toward a solution. It's already started...fingers are pointing. Every time a local governing body tries to meet, there are hundreds of citizens hovering over them evaluating every move they make, and while there's a long way to go, it sounds to me like some folks have been quietly informing the BIA that, if it's you or me, I'll save my own skin. I don't want their community authority, or even their $600k, but I sure welcome the fact that they are feeling the heat to the point that they are looking for middle ground.

Pass the citizens moratorium, continue the recall, and dump the spin.

By Spin

Canal Pointe, income tax

Maverick,

I contacted Mr. Stemen about question of the difference in salary of Township located teachers versus City located teachers (buildings where they work) He told me that there is no difference in pay for the teachers based on the taxing district where their school is. They pay the 1% if they teach in the city or live in the city and do not pay the any income tax if they work in a Township located school (unless they live in city limits.) There is nothing in the teacher contract according to him that pays anyone any differently based on school location.

To the best of my knowledge,Canal Pointe is in a Commmunity Reinvestment area (CRA) They give companies located there a tax abatement on 100% of property taxes on new valuation only. I believe this is only for ten years.( it may be longer) In other words the taxes on the land before the buiding existed are still paid. They also require a healthy grant program paid into by these companies given to the Canal schools in order to offset some of the tax abatement. The developer here and the businesses paid for the improvements on the property, water sewer roads other utlities etc. Teh companies receive the benefit of this tax abatement not the developer.

In TIFs, the city makes the improvements to the land for the developer, they install the roads sewer and water etc. They then redirect any property tax money, usually 75% for ten years back to city coffers to pay for the improvements.

This appears to be a boondoggle for developers only. Usually they sell the improved land to the companies who locate there for a lot more money than they bought it for. The companies who locate there still pay all of their taxes, so they get no benefit, the city just siphons off the tax money to pay for the improvements they promised and installed for the developer. These tax monies would normally go to the schools and fire department and increase the tax base on the commercial valuation side. If the payroll in these TIFs goes above one million dollars, the city is required by law to income tax share with the schools.

There is one little loophole here on the income tax share though and Pickerington takes advantage of it. The law allows the city to take some of that required income tax share money and devote it to pay down interest on the bonds or notes they take out to build this infrastructure. This is above and beyond the property tax diversion the city already has . This robs the schools further....taking more money that they desperately need!

In Reyoldsburg on the Taylor Square TIF, the city chose not to take advantage of the loophole and they do not rob the schools of income tax share money even though it is legal. Just because it is legal does not always make it the right thing to do.

TIFs were originally created by law to ''attract'' business or developers to an area. Just look at what TIFs attract here....service businesses and retail which would likely come here anyhow because of the market. In my opinion, TIFs in Pickerington are just another way to financialy benefit developers at the expense of the schools and fire department who desperately need this commercial tax base NOW.

When the city touts their ''fine'' commercial development percentage compared to everyone else, it is a joke... since most of the tax revenue is being diverted to city coffers to pay for this developer boondoggle now and in the future. That is one reason why all this new commercial they boast about has not done a damn thing to help the school financial situation.

Risk factors

Mavrick,

The TIFs here in Pickerington have failed for the most part when looking from a risk stand point of the City taxpayers. I understand that they have either no contracts with these developers or very weak ones. The Downtown bypass is a good example. The city took all of the risk in granting the TIF to build a bypass road that created commercial road frontage for a certain developer. As of this date (since 1997)the developer has not delivered on building businesses along this public road. I understand that now the city tax payers are paying the loan payments on the bypass loan and the road is basically useless to the citizens. That is a very failed project and we should learn form it.

In contrast Canal Winchester and their Canal Pointe project the developers made the improvements and then was granted a tax break. Their development Corporation that the village created bought the land and they now are selling those parcels off to new businesses with total control of the development. The New Holland warehouse donated $55,000 to the Canal schools for computers. The second thing they have done is that when they sell the land that Canal owns they donate $2,000 per acre to the Canal schools.

Yes these abatements do cause the property valuation per pupil to increase without taxation but Canal looked out for the schools with other aggreements that I am sure more than made up for the loss in real estate revenues going to the schools. Never forget that these commerical properties are not adding school age children to the school system.

The $1 million payroll causes Canal to share that income tax with the schools also.