In the ''Our Pages'' there is a link to an article in today's Dispatch titled, ''Builders should pay for growth, mayor says''. As a Columbus resident in the PLSD, I have to say that it's about time! Columbus is plagued with the problems of unrestrained growth - poor schools, high crime, traffic congestion, a City Council that wants to shut the public out of meetings, and the appearance of corruption in granting contracts to campaign donors.
In an interesting turn of events that will be good for Columbus, Mayor Coleman announced the ''pay as we grow'' policy change two weeks after the election. This mayor has accepted tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from builders and developers, and yet is able to see that Columbus cannot sustain the current developer-driven course of growth. Columbus, like Pickerington, has long claimed that city services can keep pace with growth. Because growth is so expensive (see the bottom of ''Our Pages'' under ''Costs of Community Services?…see how much is costs you''), Columbus has finally had to concede that the emperor has no clothes.
Pickerington residents should pay close attention to the fallout from this announcement, and how, exactly, the city plans to make the industry pay. There is much more money to be made in Columbus for builders and developers than in Pickerington, particularly with Columbus' aggressive annexation practices and developer-friendly tax breaks. It will be interesting to see if this gets played out in the courts, as it seems it will in Pickerington.
Do builders and developers feel betrayed by Mayor Coleman, after all the money they have thrown his way with the expectation of receiving favor in return? Does Bill Fannin have friendships on Columbus City Council that will suffer with the filing of a lawsuit, like the friendships that he claims are in jeopardy based on his participation in the lawsuit against Pickerington?
