Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

October - December 2002 PATA Newsletter issue 12

Feb 15, 2003

?“Government should not be made an end in itself; it is a means only; - a means to be freely adapted to advance the best interests of the social organism. The State exists for the sake of Society, not Society for the sake of the State.?”
- Woodrow Wilson

Happy New Year to one and all! The Editors of the PATA newsletter hope that all of our readers enjoyed a wonderful holiday and are now looking forward to a prosperous 2003.

Now entering our third year of publication, with over 6,000 readers; we feel that this newsletter has become a viable vehicle for ideas and thoughts about politics and politicians in the greater Pickerington community. The vast majority of the material that we have published over the past couple of years has taken shots at what we feel is the cloud of corruption looming over Pickerington?’s City government. While we will continue to act as the citizen?’s ?“watchdog?”; a wise man once said ?“Don?’t just bring me the problems, bring me some solutions as well.?” So in this issue of the PATA Newsletter we will point out some of the silliness going on in Pickerington, but we will also present you with some ideas on how to fix things. Because, as another wise man once said,
?“Begin inventing your future or accept someone else?’s vision for it.?”

Just for old time?’s sake, let?’s clearly (and briefly) identify the issues.

The rate of residential growth in our community is much too high.
Our schools are being overrun with new students, and they don?’t have the money to keep up.
Our infrastructure (roads, water, sewer systems, etc.) can?’t keep pace with the growth.
Our tax structure is overly dependent upon residential property and income tax, without enough offsetting commercial/industrial taxes.
There appears to be no comprehensive plan involving all of the area?’s governments as to how to manage growth in a way that will address all of these issues.
Pickerington?’s City Government has turned a deaf ear toward its constituents and appears to be holding hands with residential builders.

While the tide seems to be turning (Issues 17, 18, and 19 passed with overwhelming majorities in November and Mayor Randy Hughes resigned in December) there is still a great deal of mess to clean up in dealing with the six issues noted above.

The public has now seen the errors of the course that others have been espousing as a successful plan for Pickerington?’s future. That failed plan has been best expressed by the words of William Goldman (an attorney who self proclaims that he represents 90% of the builder clients in our area as to rezoning and approvals of residential development). During the February 10, 1998 Pickerington Planning and Zoning meeting Mr. Goldman?’s words are quoted below directly from the minutes of that meeting.
?“Mr. Goldman stated he has provided the Commission with an economic fact sheet, however he used the old tax rate of 48.78 it should have been 52.00. If 563 homes are built and they average $175,000 this development will generate over $98,000,000 in property value. If you take 35% of that you then get the taxable base of $34,4583,750 (before you ask, this is the typo in the City?’s document where this was copied word for word) and using the old tax rate which is several mills under this development will generate $1,682,117 in property taxes. The school system gets 64.8% which equals $1,090,011 and the City gets 10.8% which equals $181,339. If they assume the residents in these homes are making $60,000 a year they will generate over 323,780,000 with the school system getting 1% which equals 337,800 and the City receives ?½ % which equals $168,900. This means the school system will generate $1,427,811 and the City will generate $519,139 when you combine the Property Tax and the Income Tax.

Mr. Goldman stated if they have 563 homes they can assume they will generate a ?½ a student per house or 280 students will come out of this finished development. The local contribution to educating children is approximately $2,000 per child, the total price is $5,600 with the rest of the money coming from the state and other sources of revenue. In the community the actual taxing district is responsible for under $2,000. This means it will cost $560,000 of local money to educate these children. The school will generate each and every year $1,427,811 therefore they will net (Yes, he said NET - AS IN A PROFIT MADE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR NEW HOMES) about $800,000 from this development.

Mr. Goldman stated he felt it is no longer true that single family developments could not afford to educate the students which were generated from them. Mr. Goldman stated it is partially true because property values have went up and because there is income tax participation. Mr. Goldman stated they feel this plan represents a mature and wise development for the community and housing must be built within Pickerington. Pickerington must generate more residents who are new and fresh and committed to the growth of the community in a way that their development supports the community. Mr. Goldman stated they fell this development serves that purpose.?”

As these statements were made shortly after a PLSD bond to build the two new Middle Schools and renovate the ?“old Middle School?”, Mr. Goldman then stating, ?“he felt the school district will have enough school buildings because the residents passed a building levy for new schools and now they need more students to fill those new schools.?”


So for those of you that have been here do your concur with this philosophy expressed above..... more homes mean more money for the school district?


Now, PATA has been accused of being ?“Anti-Pickerington?” and ?“Anti-Growth?”. Quite honestly, PATA is neither of those things. It is most humorous that these accusers turn out to be Past City Council members, past Pickerington Planning and Zoning Commission members, PAC Treasurers sponsored by the builders (more on this below), wannabe Council member recruits by the current members, and even Brian Fox?’s sister-in-law. While these people are entitled to express their opinions don?’t they owe it to the rest of the community to be honest? PATA is however, and will always be, ?“Anti-Corruption.?” To back this up a little, here are some excerpts from our December 2000/January 2001 newsletter. We stated our beliefs then and will express them again.

We Believe our Community Needs:

Controlled Residential Growth.

Growth in our Commercial / Industrial Tax Base.

A Comprehensive, Realistic Plan for our Schools.

For the Pickerington Area ?“Smart Growth?” is this combination.

So - let?’s address the issues shall we?

Issue #1 - The rate of residential growth in our community is much too high
Pickerington is now the fastest growing municipality in Central Ohio according to the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission.

In the last five years the voters of Pickerington have been asked repeatedly for more money by various groups. Here is a listing of the ballot issues that you have had to vote on since 1997:

Spring 1997 School operating levy defeated.
Spring 1997 School five-year 5-mill renewal levy passed.
Fall 1997 School $24 million bond issue passed.
Fall 1997 School ?¾ -mill levy passed.
Spring 1999 School operating levy failed.
Fall 1999 ?¼% income tax increase to fund schools failed.
Fall 1999 Pickerington City Police replacemnnt levy passed.
Fall 2000 School $77.5 mill bond passed along with 3 mill operating levy.
Spring 2002 School five-year 5 - mill renewal levy passed.
Spring 2002 Fire Department 3.8 mill operating levy passed.
Fall 2002 School 2.4 mill building bond along with 7.5 mill operating levy failed.


We all know by now that when you build a new home, the taxes paid by that homeowner do not fully cover the cost of community services incurred by that home and the people living in it. So every time a new home pops up without any offsetting commercial/industrial development, your taxes are going to increase, or the level of service you get for your tax dollar is going to decrease. The fact that our community is the fastest growing community in this area is a problem.

The answer:
City Councilman David Shaver has proposed a building moratorium within City Limits. This is a good idea but only if it is agreed to by the Violet Township Trustees. They will tell you that Ohio Law prevents them from putting a moratorium on building, but there are ways to make this happen that comply with the laws of the State of Ohio.

The city and the township need to sit down at a table and work out a mutual growth plan that includes a short-term moratorium on residential growth, with a long-term land use plan that includes common zoning. By doing this the rate of growth in our community will not only be brought under control, it will be well managed in the future.

To the City?’s credit they have had not 1, but 2 moratorium measures passed against less desirable ?“Adult Businesses?”. It?’s past time for the additional proposed moratorium to get residential building rates in line with most community?’s desirers. A building rate of 1.5% per year needs to be pursued as the mechanisms toward reasonable building rates.

The answer: part II

Take action today to support citizen?’s efforts to get referendum issues on the builder?’s demanded hasty plat plans to the ballot.


It was well documented in our last issue how many plat were rammed through during September 2002.

Contact (Citizens Against Rapid Expansion) C.A.R.E. Lisa Reade TheReades@prodigy.net 10416 Wright Rd. NW Canal Winchester, OH 43110-9609
The October 2, 2002 Pickerington Times - Sun gave what appears to be what local officials intend ?“Council Plans to bypass bid at Referendum?”. C.A.R.E. is currently attempting to give the residents an opportunity to decide the fate of almost 1,600 additional housing units that the builders are ram rodding through. Concerned residents of our area understand the implications and support those efforts. Please consider the alternatives to you and your family should these efforts continue to be hampered in returning a democracy to our citizens over the drive of the builder / developer community.

Issue #2 - Our schools are being overrun with new students, and they don?’t have the money to keep up.

Just this past November voters resoundingly rejected the Pickerington School Board?’s plea for more operating money, and more money to build even more schools. Today we are reading about a projected $6 million shortfall in 2004 for our schools and how they may be placed in a ?“Financial Emergency?” situation by the end of this school year. In the coming weeks and months we will hear about how the new schools may not be able to open this next fall; how we may need to consolidate schools, bus routes, etc., or even cut some extra-curricular activities. The point is clear that our school system can?’t keep up with the growth and it?’s only going to get worse as we continue to build more new homes, and continue to forget about building the commercial industrial park that our city leaders have been promising for over a decade now.


The answer:
There is no easy answer. Our current School Board has been put in a very difficult situation by their predecessors and by the other governmental entities in the area. The long-term solution is to better manage the community?’s growth (see all of the other answers). Short-term, a group of concerned area residents has put together some solutions that seem to make sense, and are financially viable. Here are their thoughts:



Issue #3 - Our infrastructure (roads, water, sewer systems, etc.) can?’t keep pace with the growth.

Anyone who has tried to move about our community on a weekday morning - say around 7:30 - can tell you that traffic is quickly becoming a major headache. Anyone who has tried to use the northern end of Rt. 256 on a Saturday can tell you that this headache is becoming a migraine. These are both examples that we can see and feel every day. Something a little more subtle is the pain your wallet will feel as the city of Pickerington continues the process of spending $3.5 million on a new water treatment facility. That?’s $350 for every man, woman, and child living within the city. Basically it?’s going to cost my family another $4/day to take a shower in 2003 because the city keeps building new houses with no offsetting?… (you get the story).

And in 2003 the city is planning to spend another $9 million to build a wastewater treatment facility. That?’s $900 for every person living here. That means it?’s going to cost my family another $10/day to go to the bathroom this year. Isn?’t that ridiculous?

And if you think just because you don?’t live within the city limits you are in good shape, forget it. The city is duplicating the efforts already made by Fairfield County utilities (which is where you get your water and sewer services if you don?’t live within city limits). Basically, you (with all your fellow county residents) are now paying more than you should have for these services because of the actions being taken by city officials.

The answer:
This is going to sound redundant but we need to slow down, take a deep breath, and manage our future better than we have the past.

Water and sewer services drive development. Within our community today there are three main providers of water and sewer service. Fairfield County provides water and sewer service to the majority of the unincorporated lands in the Township that are not on a well system. The City of Pickerington, and the Village of Canal Winchester also provide water and sewer services to properties within their limits as well. Unfortunately, there is competition to run water and sewer lines to different parts of the Township because those who have the lines in place have a good deal of control over the development that will go on for those parcels of land. Today there are parts of our Township that have County water and sewer lines running up one side of the street, while Pickerington water and sewer lines run down the other side of the street. This is a gross misuse of tax dollars. With a joint, long-range strategic plan in place, there would be no duplication of efforts and everyone could have their share. The ultimate winners would be the citizens as their tax dollars (county and city) would be put to the most effective, efficient use possible. The city government needs to stop fighting with its neighbors and start cooperating in an effort to save all of us some tax dollars.


Issue # 4 - Our tax structure is overly dependent upon residential property and income tax, without enough offsetting commercial/industrial taxes.

Once again, here is a very brief summary of how the cost of community services works (again, from previous issues of the PATA newsletter):

Early in the summer of 2000 Fairfield County Officials held a number of public informational meetings regarding area growth. At these meetings copies of facts were available about a Cost of Communities Services (COCS) study conducted by Allen Prindle, a professor in the Economics Department of Otterbein College.

In this study figures for various categories of land use were compared to their taxes generated in the ability to support the various community?’s infrastructures.
(Schools, roads, water & sewer, police, and fire to name a few)

Farmland?’s COCS ranged from $0.05 to $0.17 for every dollar generated in taxes collected.

Commercial/Industrial COCS ranged from $0.27 to $0.51 for every dollar generated in taxes collected.

Residential Development COCS ranged from $1.10 to $1.15 for every tax dollar collected.

This study concludes that growing communities need to balance both commercial/industrial developments with residential development or they will experience higher service expenditures compared to revenue streams.

As you can see, continued additions of residential homes, without the proper balance of commercial and industrial growth as well, will lead to an economic impasse.

The Answer:

The answer that makes the most sense is to strike the proper balance between commercial/industrial development and residential growth. This must be done within our School District boundaries.

Growth is inevitable, and if you asked area residents if they wanted Pickerington to continue to grow, you would get a favorable response from a vast majority. Well-planned growth will provide area residents with a strong value for their land in that services provided will be of high quality, and reasonable cost. Unplanned growth will unfortunately lead to the opposite, lower land values based on higher taxes and mediocre services. Violet Township and the City of Pickerington are at a crossroads as we enter the New Year. There has been much talk about merger, annexations, and other growth options. The unfortunate fact is that there is currently ZERO cooperation between the City Council and Township Trustees with respect to the growth of the Pickerington area. While ?“turf wars?” are an ongoing issue between the City and the Township, growth in Pickerington is going on with out a clear long-term vision that is balanced between residential, commercial, and industrial growth. Without this balance, EVERYONE LOSES.

Alternative Forms to Annexation or Merger for Economic Development and Cooperation

CEDA
A CEDA is a Cooperative Economic Development Agreement between two governmental entities (in this case the Township and the City).

JEDD
A JEDD is a joint Economic Development District (again between the City and the Township).

These alternatives are truly the way to make progress happen in the Pickerington area. Yet these two potential solutions appear to be the last resort for Council.

Issue #5 - There appears to be no comprehensive plan involving all of the area?’s governments as to how to manage growth in a way that will address all of these issues.

Most of you were here back in the summer of 2000 when the Township called for a ?“Growth Summit?”. City officials at first agreed to a series of public meetings, which quickly turned into the city seeking a merger with the Township. In January of 2001 - after these meetings had fallen apart - Mayor Hughes sent a letter to the Violet Township trustees. In this letter the Mayor said, ?“I am appointing a special committee to evaluate our zoning code relative to the township zoning code. We are also meeting with representatives of the Pickerington Local School District to discuss ?‘make whole?’ provisions on future Tax Increment Financing districts.?” So that was supposed to be the big result of the last set of growth summit meetings. By the way - neither of these things came to fruition and the disparity of growth between the city and township has now grown to epic proportions. In the mean time, Violet Township Trustees in 2001 agreed to a Cooperative Economic Development Agreement with Canal Winchester in which everyone benefits from the commercial growth generated within the boundaries of this agreement. Pickerington was invited to join and declined. Isn?’t it abundantly evident which group is not playing nice with all the others? Remember that kid growing up who had the best toys and he knew it? Remember how he would make you play his way or he would take his toys and go home? Remember how much you despised that kid for being such a brat? Do you imagine that?’s how Violet Township, Fairfield County, and Canal Winchester all feel about Pickerington? They do!

The answer:
What needs to happen now is that the leaders of the various governments need to get together and pound out a plan in which everyone (including first and foremost the taxpayer) wins. This is way over-simplified but it is also basic common sense. Cooperation and partnership will be the cornerstones of the future of this community if it is to remain a great place to live and work.

Issue #6 - Pickerington?’s City Government has turned a deaf ear toward its constituents and appears to be holding hands with residential builders while they continue to bully critics.

City Council, the Mayor, and city manager Joyce Bushman all fought hard against the passage of Issues 17, 18, and 19 this past fall. Mayor Hughes wrote passionately in the papers and (illegally) on the City?’s web site against these citizen-led initiatives. When the initiatives passed by an extremely wide margin, Mayor Hughes resigned and the rest of council has been wringing their hands, not sure what to do.

In their pleas against these issues, the Mayor and city manager cited a number of reasons as to why they were a bad idea. Much of the same thought processes were summed up in a flyer that was sent around to city residents that was published by a group called ?“Citizens Protecting Pickerington?”. This group?’s Treasurer was Mike Kasson, a Pickerington resident.

The opening paragraph of Mr. Kasson?’s flier to the areas voters began .. ?“As a concerned citizen of Pickerington, I am asking you to vote against Issue 17 on Election Day. Issue 17 is illegal, retroactive and exclusionary. It WILL NOT slow down the growth of our community. Those that claim it will are simply not giving you the facts.?”

For those that have forgotten Issue 17 dealt with zoning densities toward more aligning City Zoning with Township residential zoning. Issue 17 passed at the ballot by just over 77%. As the Treasurer of the Citizens Protecting Pickerington PAC, Mr. Kasson did not file a pre-election receipts and expenditures report, however he did file these reports post election.

Who funded this ?“Citizen?’s?” PAC?

The Fairfield County Board of Elections reports that the sole contributor to this PAC was the BIA (Building Industry Association) of homebuilders out of Columbus, Ohio. The BIA to this ?“supposed?” Citizen?’s PAC supplied $1,500.00. It was the sole listed income source to this PAC.

Let?’s take a look at some BIA information from their website:

http://www.biahomebuilders.com/legislative.htm (the source of the below information)

BIA'S COMPETITIVE HOUSING & PRO-GROWTH AGENDA

The Building Industry Association of Central Ohio is the only trade association that is focused on promoting and protecting the viability of the local, private sector, residential housing industry. Whether it is through our government advocacy activities, networking programs or marketing of the region's premier homebuilders at the Parade of Homes, the BIA uniquely serves the housing industry.

Build PAC - The BIA?’s PAC reached another one-year fundraising record with over $100,000 raised. This money was used to support pro-growth candidates in Columbus, Hilliard, Dublin, Reynoldsburg, Delaware County, Pataskala, Orange Township, Liberty Township, Violet Township, Etna Township and The Ohio General Assembly. The BIA?’s PAC contributed $11,000 to the OHBA PAC. The Build-PAC, in combination with our lobbying agenda makes the BIA a political force in central Ohio.
(The information contained in the website did not include ?‘which?’ pro-growth candidates within Violet Township?’s elected races, School District, or Township were ?“supported?” however, PATA has previously identified past elected candidates who were supported by the BIA in City races.)

So, Mayor Randy and Ms. Bushman were taking ?“their?” arguments to the people and those arguments were directly in line with those supported by the Building Industry Association. This is just one of hundreds of examples of our city government holding hands with developers. Can you say ?“pre-annexation agreement?”? Can you say ?“Reduced / No tap fees?”? Can you say ?“Higher density subdivisions??” Would you rather have folks in office representing your interests, or those of the BIA?

The Answer
Throw the bums out!

Pass local government election law reform (like Dublin). Candidates and PAC?’s MUST file pre-election contributions, printed in the local newspapers prior to the election. Reform contributors of candidates to those who do NOT gain from contracts or other business with the city.

Any candidate worth the public?’s trust should have nothing to hide with such a pre-election disclosure.

Pickerington area residents deserve to be represented by people who will serve only their interests, who will listen, who have common sense, and integrity. Those people are out there and will be on the ballot. They are here today ready and willing to serve today toward the citizens interests. All of us need to do our homework this fall before going to the voting booth and if we can?’t wait for the abuses to continue take action to rest our community back from the special interests. No one deserves to be duped by clever PAC names, thousands of dollars of candidate contributions hidden by today?’s practices and City?’s Rules Committee (Fox, Maxey, & Parker) not correcting local campaign finance disclosures.


Summary
So these are some potential solutions to the issues facing our community. These are not issues that are unique to Pickerington, nor are they earth-shattering. But they are important to the future our Pickerington and to each of us who reside in this area. A summary of the answers is pretty simple (told in phrases that you would use with your children):

Stop fighting - all of you!
Shake hands and make up.
Figure out a way to make it work for everyone - can?’t you just cooperate?



PATA maintains a volume of material available to concerned residents. Our website provides additional documents and facts of importance between Newsletters.
Jeff Fix Newsletter Editor
Bob Harding Contact Person

http:/www.neighborhoodlink.com/org/pata
PATA (Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance)We appreciate your assistance and continue to strive to provide you the important facts that impact this
entire area?’s citizens. PATA?’s efforts continue through your donations -
100% citizen financed, zero tax dollars, zero developer
influences.
P.O. Box 518
Pickerington, OH 43147 Email: pickeringtontaxpayers@hotmail.com

(614) 755-2464

2002 Quotes to remember -


?“Wake up people?” - then Councilman Lou Postage

?“We were elected to handle things the way we want to handle to handle them?” - Councilman Doug Parker

?“We have a very well planned, very balanced approach to development.?” - City Manager Joyce Bushman

?“..citizens have the right to control what happens in Pickerington, even if they make the wrong decisions.?”
- Councilman Brian Fox

?“Enrollment numbers for the Pickerington Local School District show the largest single year growth ever.?”
- Interim Superintendent Lew Stemen