Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Some follow-up



Dear Iggy,

Sorry for the slow response I?’ve gotten accustom to having a wind down beer following a hard weeks work, at home, each Friday. No computers, no typing, just a mental adjustment period.

I appreciated your football material?…. Yes, the PROS are much different from the minors. And how soon people find out who really pay attention. On a movie front you might enjoy an old ?’72 flick (if you can still rent it) titled ?“The Candidate?”. Here?’s a link to a reviewers viewpoint of the flick --- should it be that you can?’t rent a copy ?…
http://www.dantenet.com/er/ERchives/reviews/c_reviews/candidate.html

check out the line ''What do we do now...?''

Charter 1.

Emergency restrictions: Why wait for Council to adopt it? Initiative the issue. If you want to be ?“fair?” to the newly elected?’s give ?‘um 90 days to create the Ordinance for Charter amendment language. Heck, much of this was in an old citizen Initiative anyway. ?– Likely a good deal was already done in what O?’Brien had to trade away to get some votes from Misters Wright, Parker, and Sabatino on the other Charter changes that had ANOTHER wide margin of public support. If the government can?’t perform then citizen Initiative the matter in the Spring. That?’s perfect time for signature gathering.

Charter 2.

Campaign finance reporting: Just exactly how stupid is the press anyway? If they don?’t do it?…. Do it anyway! If the current (asleep on the front page PATA) won?’t do it use there discussion page. Better yet start up a PATA II blog page. Free webs are a dime a dozen. That information being public ?– and in plain sight - should embarrass anyone that calls itself a community interest information vehicle and that doesn?’t come up with it first.

?… I knew Bob too. He showed us a lot in how to do things that can be repeated by ourselves and others. A cleaver and determined guy, yet he surely didn?’t invent public finance disclosure. I enjoyed the occasions we shared a beer and a chat. The one thing that I respected was he stuck to continually trying to move forward, against repeated obstacles. I also remember him saying that the changes we needed here were numerous and would take a long time to achieve. Unfortunately all he could ever do with campaign finance data was to report much of it after the election. That?’s too late in my mind.

Anyway ?– what I?’m saying is a Pickerington Charter Amendment that requires public finance reporting, in the press, PRIOR TO THE ELECTION. It would be a hoot to see the press OPPOSE such a Charter change, don?’t you think? Heck maybe the lawyers of the papers would take a crack at drafting such an Initiative?….

Charter 3.

Financial tools to expanded tax base: I just replied to this in CEDA vs Charter?… If you want me to expound let me know.


Have a Happy New Year Iggy.

Till ?’06.





By Be real

We are making progress.

In 2002 there were three issues on the ballot. They were 17,18 and 19. Please review to your left in the ''OUR PAGES''.

Issue 17 and 18 were Ordinances.

Issue 19 was a Charter amendment.

All three were citizen initiated.

Issues 17 and 18 dealt with stopping the developer incentives on annexations and the other changed the minimum zoning density for single family homes to 2 lots per acre.

Issue 19 was a Charter amendment to make it harder for council to pass ordinances by emergency (6 votes instead of 5). I believe all three issues passed over whelming.

Last month the city voters approve two more Charter amendments. One was for the City Law Director to help citizens in their efforts to circulate initiatives and referendums by providing a check list of requirements.

The second amendment was to require those appointed to city office to stand for election if they had less than 18 months in remaining in their appointed term. (That I believe would be called the Parker Maxey Rule)

To place any proposed charter amendment on the ballot it requires five votes of council. What was missing the last time out was the amendment to prohibit passing annexation and zoning laws by emergency. Parker, Wright and Sabatino voted against this issue.

I believe you will see that issue surface again this coming year. I believe I recall that Hackworth proposed that amendment in 2002 with a citizen initiated petition and lost at the Ohio Supreme Court in getting the issue on the ballot.

What the city and the school district are suffering from is the fact that the city voters in 2002 could not stop the council from annexing and re-zoning large tracts of land and approving final plats to bury the city in approved building lots. If we are going to change the charter it must be changed to allow the voters to intervene when necessary.

In 2002 we didn't have that right once the council voted in more residential building and passed the ordinances as emergency.

There should also be an effort to fix the loop holes in the City Charter that allowed a corrupt bunch that have recently been ousted to never have the power to return again. There must be more checks and balances that part I will agree on.

As citizens of a democracy we must remain vigil in over seeing the council. We can't sit on our collect thumbs while we have office holders running for office with NO OPPONENTS (see school board and trustees).

I know there are people that are very impatience with the pace of progress here in the community. We now have a New Year and I believe the pace will pick up some. Despite no change in the township and school district I would expect to see some progress on council.

I have three ideas on closing the loop holes in the City Charter. I have talked with at least one council member and I believe there will be some movement in more charter amendments going to the ballot this year. If I don't see movement I will probably start the process for another citizen initiative to get the proposed amendments on the November ballot.


Please note as of 2002 there has been no NEW final plats approved by the Pickerington City Council. The only final plat approvals were in binding contracts that were signed into law before 2002. That is because of the voter revolt that started on this web site.

Reply

Dear Be Real,
I hope to have a happy and prosperous New Year and hope the best for you and yours, too. I also took some time to reflect and rest. I think I was detecting too much anger in my words and needed to cool it some.
On charter changes, if you run a governmental clock, the rules committee would have to be manned by people who want to see change for the residents and not themselves. They would have to meet and prepare to meet in special meetings so get charter changes to council in time for three readings etc. to get it to the Board of Elections by the 75 day prior to the primary election. Given the people not apparently making up the majority of council, waiting until November would be risky. From what I read and heard during the campaigns, there may be some elected officials now beholding to people who would not benefit from this change. There are also elected others who have much different political agendas outside our limits that will sway their decisions so waiting until November or for an initiative would play into their hands nicely. Take into account that one of the candidates, a self-purportedly ?“good guy?” and ?“independent thinker?” who doesn?’t sell coffee had a local developer making campaign calls for him. He has to pay back that favor. Quick action is required to get this to the voters on the primary ballot
As to finance reporting, I don?’t think the PATA people would not allow posting to the discussion area. The issue is, can anyone, or is anyone willing to take the time to piece the information together so the pictures can bee seen? That?’s what I was referring to with Bob. He was able to piece it together. One thing most evident by Bob?’s retirement from this scene is that everyone else, especially PATA has become complacent. Again, where were the PATA folks during this latest campaign? All I saw was that corrupt little republican club pushing their candidate and no one else. They got him on and he owes them for that. But look at the people who had little to no support. I talked to Kramer and he told me that his and O?’Brien?’s entire campaign staff was made up of them, their wives and kids and just a couple of relatives or friends. What we will learn from their finance reports is that they were undoubtedly supported from within this community and no outside support and obligations will be found. That makes an impression on me but obviously not on the voters. On the flip side, I am sure you will see big bucks from Bushman and friends into Wright?’s coffers but what did that get him?
This was an upside down election. You got Smith who had big bucks to spend because obviously his mailers and newspaper ads helped carry it for him. Too bad he deserted his running mates and never offered to help them. Hammond? A complete and utter paradox. No money, no literature, no campaign, no issues ?– no nothing and yet we elected her. Hope she shows something soon and isn?’t just taking up space.

continued...

Reply, Part 2

Tools to expand the tax base?…. Well, the tools the city has now to produce their budget are apparently so complex that not too many councilmen could understand what they were given. When you enter this territory you are faced down by people who are essentially running the financial aspects of this city using stone tablets and chisels and an abacus. They don?’t understand what they need to come up with so everyone is making an informed vote let alone come up with something that you can sell to developers like we think we want to have. From the papers it appears that only Riggs, Shaver and Gilleland understand the budget completely, at least they were the ones making the most noise expressing the most resentment that someone dared challenge them. Of these three amigos, only one has a vote on council. What does that tell you? Was this another budget developed over beers? Can you develop financial tools to expand the tax base over beers? I hope so because it seems a lot of city business is again being handled over beers or something. CEDA or JEDD or whatever, you are still stuck dealing with the three trustees we keep sticking ourselves with. If you never flip the record over, you?’ll never hear a new song.
We flipped the record over in the city and I don?’t think you?’re going to like this song. It is a golden oldie from 1990-2003.