Blog about Pickerington

November 21, 2008

Response to critic

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 7:35 pm

 

This is in response to the anonymous posting on PATA.

 

http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/public/clubDiscussion.html?nid=746124097&nclubid=68303919&nsupercity=437534213

 

#1 – I clearly stated why I’m against outsourcing the Income tax department but I’ll repeat myself in case I wasn’t clear.  I’ve been involved with MANY outsourcing companies and contracts in my professional life.  I have YET to experience the level of customer service or proposed savings that were promised.  If you do anything outside of every i that is dotted and every t that is crossed in the contract it starts costing you extra and I don’t view this outsourcing opportunity any differently.  RITA also requests we keep a tax administrator onsite, employed by the city to “make sure they’re doing things right”.  I’m SORRY but if you need us to keep someone employed to make sure you’re doing your job correctly then I have even less reason to believe this is going to deliver as proposed.  And if it did happen to work it would probably be because of the staff person we’d keep who’d kill herself to keep the customers happy and RITA in line.  I have many stories that I can share about RITA but I have enough experiences on my own with outsourcing that gives me reason to believe the projected savings will be far less than anticipated.

 

#2.  Outsourcing of the Police Department.  So it makes sense to pay for a multi-million dollar police station while we outsource our police officers to Fairfield County?  The citizens supported the PD years ago when the levy was put on the ballot and that came with certain expectations – ie.  We’d have our own PD, not paying for a nice police station to have County officers manning.  I’d like to see the documentation as to where I actually said I’d never make cuts from the Police Department as was stated on PATA.  If some tax issue isn’t passed in 2009 I do believe cuts will need to be made in the police department if there isn’t normal attrition.  How many and how deep I have no speculation about at this time.  But I do not believe it will be necessary to the scale of disbanding the entire department.

 

My Comments from May – Prior to the 2009 budget being prepared.

 

“2% needed? – Our finance director asked that at a bare minimum we increase our income taxes by $1M annually. That will pay the debt for Diley road as well as reinstate street paving which has been cut from the budget 2 of the last 3 years. With a increase to 2% from 1% it will generate ~$1.7M/annually. That will give us some cushion to apply towards other debt or tackle some smaller CIP items. 

 

We’re trying to be very conservative in our approach to this proposed income tax increase while still be able to provide services to our citizens.   However, it is impossible to predict how far this $1.7M will actually go in this unstable economy.  We know we’ll be able to pay the Diley road debt and be able to reinstate street paving. “

 

 Today:

 

After the expense subcommittee went through their process and staff prepared the 2009 budget it was clear I was wrong and the $1M was not even close to maintaining current levels of service, reinstating street paving and paying for our debt.

 

New debt from Diley Road       - $725,000/yr

Road paving                             - $800,000/yr for first few years, then scaled back

Police                                       - $300,000 in salaries/benes alone – no new officers

 

This is simply 3 categories and doesn’t address the many other departments or issues facing our city.

 

We have a balanced budget for 2009 with the cuts staff recommended and we’ve approved in Finance Committee.  Clearly we have to address the 2010 budget and plan for another tax levy, further cuts, or some other measures and we need to address that now. 

 

There are more than 2 options available to us as the PATA poster suggested and we’ll be meeting Dec 10th to start planning for 2010.  This is an open meeting to the public so feel free to come and express your opinions.

 

- Brian

November 20, 2008

Outsourcing – rumors and fact

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 2:04 pm

Rumor:

Recently a rumor quickly engulfed city hall in that someone was looking to outsource the Pickerington Police Department to the Fairfield County Sheriff.  While the source of the rumor remains in question the reality is there is no support from council, or staff, to outsource this to some outside entity.  Paying for a new police station and outsourcing our department doesn’t even come close to making sense to me. I’ve said for years the one thing standing between us and Columbus is our officers.  We’re definitely not in a financial situation where we’re going to be expanding our Police department but we’re not even close to reaching the point where we need to be thinking about such drastic measures as outsourcing them. If we ever get to the situation where we do have to outsource our Police Department then I believe Pickerington will have already become an undesirable place to live. 

Fact:

There is mixed support from council as to whether to outsource our Income Tax department to R.I.T.A.  RITA is a regional entity that was formed to manage income taxes from municipalities. The supposed savings from RITA are in the range of ~$50K a year.  While that sounds good on paper the reality is there have been communities that have left RITA and the two major underlying themes as to why they left were; 

1. It cost more than what they were led to believe and

2. Customer Service.    Marysville was a community that had their own income tax department.  They went to RITA and in the following election RITA actually became an election topic because of what the residents felt was unacceptable customer service.  Marysville dumped RITA and brought their services back in house.

I have had many, many experiences with outsourcing of services and have yet to see the promises (savings and others) and powerpoint presentations come remotely close to what is actually delivered.  I do not believe the “efficiencies” and such that are being touted by RITA will ever come to fruition and am therefore strongly opposed to this proposal.

- Brian

November 7, 2008

Issue 14 and next steps

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 6:08 pm

As everyone is well aware issue 14 (Income tax issue) failed by a wide margin.  Currently staff is working through a version of the budget to present to council.  Once that is presented we’ll have more information about where we will be making the initial cuts.

- Brian

October 26, 2008

Mayor’s Corner – Traffic woes at the freeway

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickmayor @ 6:15 pm
Tags:

Time for one of those “put up or shut up” moments on my part. While campaigning and times thereafter, I said the elected body of any entity should never consider themselves smarter than those they represent and when appropriate, come out and ask constituent help in finding answers.

For those of you that caught the article in the Eastside Messenger, you read my comments on one facet of the situation in the general area of I-70 and SR 256. This is an area shared by many. It is the city’s sole access to the freeway but adjacent areas like Columbus and Violet Township share it and share our pain. So what should we do about it? The State is studying the area right now looking for answers to deal with the traffic that will be generated by development behind the Holiday Inn Express (Side note – this is very desirable commercial development for our city.) and the opening of the new Target store north of the freeway.  The State is also studying the Adaptive Control System (ACS) that we have installed on our lights along 256 and continue to complete Phase 2. They think that including all lights under their control might be a plausible improvement. This will include all lights up 256 to Slate Run in Reynoldsburg, if I heard our engineers correctly. This move would place all lights feeding the 256/I-70 interchange under the control of software and not humans.

Back to shared pain. The city is responsible for plowing most of the area in question. ODOT shares some of it, Columbus a little and Violet some. Violet has no traffic lights in the area, ODOT has 4 under their control and some sort of combination of Reynoldsburg and ODOT those north of I-70. ODOT controlled lights are programmed manually in our city and I can’t really speak to those north of I-70. What we seem to have is a combination of human and software control and they are not playing well together.

This situation has come to light under numerous scenarios in the past. Early in my term on Council, as a member of the Service Committee we worked with ODOT to see the improvements near the interchange that mostly resulted in more lanes. At that time, we agreed to let ODOT take control of some of the city lights so that they could program them to allow a smooth flow of cars onto the freeway in the morning and off it in the evening. The caveat in the agreement was that we could take control of those lights back whenever we wanted. A question I am often asked is shall we take them back now?

Much of this came to light (no pun intended) again after the city safety committee directed the city manager to install a no turn on red during restricted hours sign on southbound 256 at Tussing Road. This directive has generated more discussion in the last couple of weeks that our Issue 14 has. It is apparently within the purview of the committee, under our city code, to direct staff to install signage like this. I believe the directive was in an attempt to curb bad behavior of motorists we have all seen each and every time we are near the freeway. In this case, motorists are making the right on red in the afternoon/evening rush hour and blocking northbound motorists trying to turn left onto Tussing and thus stranding them in the intersection and causing danger and more congestion.

I presume the committee thought that if the southbound traffic was held by the no turn on red sign it would allow the intersection to be clear enough to not strand northbound motorists in the intersection. What committee apparently did not know was that ODOT was studying the intersection aiming to make other changes that would also have an effect on the actions caused by installing this sign. The sign has been removed pending further study by ODOT.

During this arduous process we heard from a Columbus resident in the Tussing area speaking on behalf of what I have previously called the greater Pickerington community. They reminded us that we cannot fail to take into account the several thousand residents living along our borders and sharing our roads. While I have only heard from a few township residents, the general consensus is that we should always keep them in our thoughts when making decisions on our shared roadways.

Anyway, I am really starting to ramble. Let me go back to my opening statement. What can we do to improve the traffic situation at the freeway?

·         We can stop turns on red anywhere we can substantiate the decision with a traffic study or accident data, etc.

·         We can take control of the lights back from ODOT, but we cannot afford to add them to the ACS anytime soon. If we wait to see if ODOT is going to add them to our ACS it will be about a year before we have an answer, as they face the same money challenges the city does.

·         We can ask all of you to contact your state elected officials to begin the far east freeway improvements they now don’t plan to address for at least another 10 years.

·         We can just sit by and do nothing and let people fend for themselves. You know, sort of the survival of the fittest in driving in and out of our city. Don’t laugh, doing nothing is almost always an option if doing something only causes a problem to shift to another area.

·         We cannot legislate against bad decisions by motorists always seemingly in a hurry.

And also we can do what I am putting into practice here. We can ask you what you think we should do. You all have to navigate this treacherous area once or more a day like the rest of us. You all have opinions on what would make things better. Time to tell me – I am listening. If your comments are well thought out and easy to understand, I will submit them to our traffic engineers for input. I will also let our safety and service committees know what you propose as I feel that any actions in this area merit eyes on of both committees.

So with that being said, I will open up the floor to comments and suggestions. I have not received any comments on any of my other posts and might not here either, but at least I did what I said I would and asked.

Respectfully,

Mitch O’Brien

October 1, 2008

Mayor’s Corner Issue 13 – Natural Gas Aggregation

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickmayor @ 8:03 pm

Another issue on the ballot this November for the city is Issue 13 which deals with the aggregation of natural gas.

Ø  What is this?  This is a plan that will allow the city to contract with a single source provider of natural gas. It allows the city to negotiate a price for all participants in the program. Because of the usually high number of participants, a lower price is usually achieved.

Ø  What isn’t this? This is not a mandatory program. The ballot language specifies that this is an “opt out” program. In other words, if passed by a majority of the voters, any resident has the option to opt out of the program and continue services they currently have. Many suppliers of natural gas have you sign a term contract which in many cases is two years. You would not be forced to get out of that contract and the option to join the city’s supplier at the end of your contract is always open.

If approved and a contract is awarded to a supplier, the contract vehicle will specify that members can opt out after every two years.

More information will soon be available on the city website (www.pickerington.net) Public hearings at council will be scheduled and aggregation will be a topic on the council agendas in the near future. Notices of those hearings and the council agendas will also be available on the city website.

I feel that offering this option to you is important. Any opportunity we have, as elected officials, to offer you the choice of lower costs with no degradation in service is something we should do. There is no risk of affecting anyone’s freedom of choice in this proposal. You will have ample time and opportunity to review all documentation throughout the process and make your own choices.

I can only hope that elected officials throughout our area consider looking at an aggregation program for their residents. It is important that we all have as many options as possible to choose from when making important decisions for our families.

Respectfully,

Mitch O’Brien

Mayor of Pickerington

September 28, 2008

Mayor’s Corner – Regionalism

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickmayor @ 3:35 pm

Regionalism is a term that arose only a few years ago in Central Ohio. It refers to approaching solutions to problems from a view larger than just you.  I talked about regionalism in my campaign to attempt to reach out to neighbors that more than likely have the same issues as we do. I said we don’t need to work in a vacuum. I also said we don’t need to pretend we are more innovative than neighbors but should instead rely on them to learn how they address issues and when practical, join them in solving issues.

So far I have had success in pursuing a regional approach to several of our issues. Mayor Ebert of Canal Winchester took office when I did and is also a first term Mayor. I met him when we were both invited to join the Fairfield County Mayors Association. We came to accord that we share a lot of common issues and we should work together at solving them. During January and February of this year, Mayor Ebert jokingly commented to me that I had invited him to attend more meetings in Pickerington than he had been invited to in Canal. One issue facing both of us is the improvements to Diley Road. We had commissioned our Diley Road Corridor Study and were ready for an IPR (in-process review). I invited him, his development staff, Violet Township and their development staff and our own Planning and Zoning members and others to not just come and hear what we were doing but participate in the process.

Since our development plans for the Diley Road corridor affect more than just our city, I thought it would first be good to share what we learned with others impacted by the area and also seek input from them from either plans they were looking at or, in Canal’s case, lessons learned in the development of the Diley Road area in Canal. Pickerington and Canal agreed that the most beneficial development along the Pickerington stretch of Diley would be office type development rather than any type of retail. The reason is simple – Canal has invested in retail development further south in the corridor and Pickerington has invested in retail north of Diley along SR 256. We felt that further retail type development on Diley would create unnecessary competition for both of the established retail areas. Not to say that we will not accept any retail development in the corridor, just that we will be extremely cautious to not create redundancies to already existing developments in Pickerington or Canal. Something that we agreed on was to never overlook the opportunities that exist with niche development.

So, to that end, taking a regional approach to a local issue resulted in the corridor study moving forward with that perspective. We are in the hopes of having that study completed in the near future and ready for public comment and then adoption by council.

Another regional approach this administration has taken is in traffic and roadway improvements. I asked for a meeting with the City of Columbus Public Services Director. Our City Manager and Engineers joined me in meeting with Mr. Mark Kelsey and his staff to discuss our concerns along refugee Road west of Hill and Tussing. Additionally, we were wanted to discuss Hines Road. Now you might ask why the Mayor of Pickerington is meeting with Columbus to discuss Columbus Residents and their roads. The answer is simple. Whether the people living in the Refugee/Tussing/Hines area are Pickerington residents or not I consider them part of the greater Pickerington community. They may have a different zip code, but they share our schools, roads and shop and work in our community. Pickerington residents should also feel close to them because we share their roads and that was the crux of the meeting.

Another important factor in requesting the meeting is that Pickerington has made numerous improvements to our traffic control technology and we are beginning to see the rewards in more effective movement of traffic north and south along 256. However, all we do can never see its full potential until we are able to get relief from the State in improvements to the I-70 corridor. I addressed this with Mr. Kelsey, as he is a former executive at ODOT and he said that the I-70 Far East Corridor also concerned Columbus. I told him that since we made improvements to our north/south flow, we now needed to address east/west flow and that’s where we got on their roads. I told him we needed to offer our residents alternatives to our only freeway interchange and he understood.

Mr. Kelsey is relatively new to the job and didn’t know that the high density development is occurring at our shared border on Refugee Road. He reiterated Mayor Coleman’s “Pay as You Grow” policy and since he didn’t know about the development he couldn’t ascertain that the developers were contributing towards the obvious traffic impact they were causing. We hope to hear good news back on that soon.

We were pleased to hear that Columbus plans to repave Tussing Road from Brice road to their limit along our shared border next year. We found that there are minor pieces between the Columbus limits and the Pickerington limits owned by the county or us and we will work with Columbus to assure that all the road is done. While a full scale widening is not in the plan right now, they will be looking at other improvements they can make as part of this repaving project. We asked if they would consider a traffic light at Tussing Elementary. They agreed to study the location to see if one is warranted. We asked if turn lanes could be included in the project to help optimize flow and again they agreed to study critical intersections to see if they were warranted.

The only sad news from the meeting is that the engineering study for the Hines Road/Refugee intersection was unfunded from the approved project list with recent budget cutbacks in Columbus. The study costs in the neighborhood of $600,000 due to the large-scale impact a realignment will cause. It’s much more than some pavement and striping out there. In order to make an intersection at a safe distance from the railroad tracks, work would have to begin quite far up Hines to accommodate the stream that also runs there. Right now, there is no anticipated date for a return to the funded list for this study.

Another interesting thing we found out from the meeting is that the Public Services Department relies heavily on data derived from their 311 system when it comes to programming for projects. For more information on the 311 system, I recommend looking at Columbus’ website. The short non-technical version is that 311 is a tool for residents to state their concerns. The system essentially creates a push pin an on a map. From there they track concerns/complaints and address them. There were less than seven complaints from the whole area from their city limits to Brice Road and from Tussing south to Refugee. So our being there voicing concerns was not substantiated by concerns raised by their residents. I have since been in contact with Civic Associations in the Park Place area to spread the word on 311 and the reliance Columbus has on it.

Lastly, we are still in talks with Violet Township and Canal Winchester regarding the JEDD Agreement that has been in the works for more than a year. I am pleased to say that Violet Township, as the driving force behind the agreement, has worked diligently to address all the concerns raised by the city and our residents during our public hearings. We anticipate having a version before council in October for discussions in preparation for a vote on joining the agreement.

So here are just a few issues I have approached from a regionalism perspective. I am pleased to report that both staff and council have reacted positively to this direction and continue to explore regional prospects. In the future I foresee some sort of regional approach to a Joint Parks District. As you may or may not realize, a Joint Parks district is funded by a levy assessed to property taxes. Given the financial challenges I brought up in my first posting, we are not ready to go down any other tax roads at this time. Initial brainstorming has been occurring on our Parks Board and while the District idea is not dead, it is on hold for now.

Respectfully,

Mitch O’Brien

Mayor of Pickerington

September 27, 2008

Mayor’s Corner

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickmayor @ 10:51 pm

I would first like to thank our host Brian for giving me some space on this website. I had thought of perhaps starting my own but this one seems to be working quite well.

I wanted to tell you some of the great things that have been happening in our city since I took office. First and most important is that we hired a new City Manager. As stated in the press, Tim Hansley brings over 35 years of experience in public administration. His broad-based background and experiences have been instrumental in each and every aspect of the city’s successes this year. Trust me when I say that there is no “Mayor 101” after you get sworn in. As I learned after I was appointed to council, it is a trial by fire learning experience. You can’t imagine how lucky I am to have had Tim on board and willing to step in and take the lead in the daily operations of this city while counseling me in the finer points of being Mayor. I didn’t know Tim all that well before taking office but within the first couple of weeks of my term, Tim and I attended a quarterly meeting of Central Ohio Mayors and Managers sponsored by Mayor Coleman. Nearly all Central Ohio communities were represented. Each and every representative from our neighboring communities took the time to meet me and tell me how lucky I was to have Tim. They all have had him or wanted him for some position in their community. That, to me, was like conducting a City Manager search and interviews in less than 3 hours. Having participated in the last City Manager search in Pickerington, I can tell you that it was a laborious and time consuming endeavor. I am also fortunate that council unanimously supported me in hiring Tim and that set a tone of cooperation among the elected officials that carries through today.

I have been very fortunate so far in how this new council and Mayor have synergized and put past differences behind us to continuously look forward and not backward. I am thankful at the professionalism and respect that we have acquired as a group. We do not always agree on each and every issue nor will we or should we. Without differences of opinion, I would have a really boring job and we can never learn if we don’t hear more than one side of any story. While we do not always agree, we have treated each other with respect, courtesy and dignity. Gone are the tensions, antagonism and disrespect of the past. Gone is the apparent “us versus them” mentality when it comes to debate and voting and most importantly how we present ourselves to the media. Gone is the apparent majority on every issue. Our voting record proves that.

This council is facing issues seldom faced before. As reported in the media and elsewhere in this blog, an almost certain deficit and proposing an income tax increase is a new matter. And again, the decision to move forward with Issue 14 was not unanimous. More on council voted to move forward the combination of a tax proposal and tax credit adjustment than voted against it. Two councilmen voted against it. Those two earned my respect in their stand. They presented their cases thoughtfully, logically and respectfully. In the end, although outvoted, they nonetheless join together with the group in looking forward with what is best for the city. Whether Issue 14 is accepted by the voters or turned down, I am lucky to have seven people willing to face the challenges of the voters’ decision.

Budget season is usually a rather stressful time. We schedule plenty of meetings to thoroughly review each facet of preparation for the upcoming year. Many of us give up a lot of personal time from October until the budget is adopted to assure that we work with staff to turn over every rock to accomplish as much as possible for our residents going forward. This year that stress is multiplied with Issue 14. While we are confident that the proposal we moved forward to the ballot, while certainly no panacea of solutions, is a fair and sensible approach. However, there will be those who fear voting for any new tax given the fiscal uncertainty we now face from a global perspective. We hope to be able to explain in a personalized manner how voting yes or no affects you. We also hope that when you hear people speaking out against Issue 14 and it raises questions in your mind that you contact city staff or the elected officials with your questions.

Further evidence of the commitment of council to work together in facing the fiscal challenges facing the city include is the landmark action of having all seven members sit on the Finance Committee. Ongoing exposure to the fiscal challenges makes for a much more learned council during budget preparation and results in far less surprises in the fall. Additionally, two new subcommittees were formed to meet and deal with financial matters. The Income and Expense subcommittees of Finance worked long hours in seeking avenues for cost savings and additional sustainable sources of income. The constructive products of these meetings will play a factor in next year’s budget regardless of the outcome of Issue 14. It demonstrates due diligence on the part of council and the seriousness they place on being stewards of the public money.

Another demonstration of the unity of this council is the campaign for Issue 14. We decided as a group to let the city staff run the campaign. Our concerns in the participation of the elected officials were that residents would feel we were politicizing the issue or that we had personal or political motives behind our position on the issue. Nothing could be further from the truth; however, by allowing staff to run the campaign, you will hear the facts and figures that the staff deals with each and every day in a totally nonpolitical manner. You will hear about our debt, the programs that we have not been able to fund, the missed opportunities for grants from the State, statistics from our Police Department showing how increasingly difficult it is to serve and protect this city with diminishing resources. What you won’t hear are political perspectives on how or why we accumulated the debt, whether it was a good idea or not, no political perspectives on why certain programs went unfunded while others remained funded, and so on. How we got numbers approaching $30M in debt is inconsequential at this point. It is there and that is a fact we have to deal with. Same with the rest. We can’t stand here and look backward. We are charged with dealing with the present and trusted to deal with the future.

So all that being said, you can see that the stress of this budget season is multiplied by “If Issue 14 passes” or “If Issue 14 fails.”

More about the fantastic year this has been so far will follow. Being a part-time Mayor with full-time duties there and having another full-time job and being a full-time parent and husband leaves little time for posting here all at once. I plan to highlight more of 2008 and share some of what my focus will be in 2009 including the 09 election when we have 4 council seats up. I also plan to do a reality check on things I said during my campaign, what residents told me and how we are listening and planning to deal with them. I will spotlight some of the fantastic responses we have had to my reenergized Volunteers in Pickerington program making sure I give credit where credit is due and some of the direction that will be taking. 

It has been a year where a lot has been both accomplished and started. No man is an island so I will never let you think I did anything alone. Council and staff have rallied to meet my challenges. Members of the community have also stood up to be counted. I want to acknowledge them so you can see what community involvement reaps when sown and properly tended.

I also want to talk about Issues 13 & 24 and what they mean to our city.

Until then, I look forward to your responses. I will get to them as quickly as time permits so I ask your patience. Remember that unlike other blogs out there, this one is moderated. You post, it is reviewed, and if it doesn’t contain personal attacks or other acrimony, it will be posted. I won’t just only post responses that agree with me. Apparently we cannot mandate that you put your name to your posting but we hope you do. Certainly you can appreciate that putting your name to your posting gives it much more credence than anonymous postings.

Respectfully,

Mitch O’Brien

June 4, 2008

Income tax issue

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 2:59 pm

Last night the income tax issue was on council’s agenda for the first reading and after much political posturing and debate the issue died 3-3.  Therefore as it stands now there will not be an income tax issue on the November ballot.

However a special finance committee meeting was called for 6/11 so who knows what will happen next.  I guess we’re supposed to accomplish in 1 meeting what we couldn’t accomplish in weeks of debate during the Finance Income subcommittee and Finance committee meetings.

I wish I did, but I don’t know what comes next other than to plan for deep cuts to be able to meet our basic financial obligations.  I would have preferred the voters make the decision about whether they would support the income tax increase, or if not, thereby supporting cuts in our general fund category. However it appears council didn’t have the backbone to allow the voters to make that decision.

- Brian

May 28, 2008

Proposed income tax increase

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 8:30 pm

This entry is in response to the recent posting on PATA regarding the proposed income tax increase.

http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/public/clubDiscussion.html?nid=79084164&nclubid=68303919&nsupercity=437534213

Talk of a tax increase has been going around city hall ever since I’ve been on council. Councilman Hackworth tried to get something going with this over 2 years ago but it never received any traction. Three years ago or more I asked the question – when do our expenses exceed our revenue? The City’s financial director and outside financial adviser worked on this on and off and finally came up with something based on certain factors; debt, income, bonds vs notes, etc.  If the variables in those projections come to fruition then mid-2009 is when our expenses exceed our income.

Now in response to the PATA posting:

1. Financial plan – we have various forecasts available based on our capital improvements plan, debt, etc but we don’t have long-range plans based on what CIP projects are going to be accomplished when and how they’re going to be funded if that’s what you’re asking.

2. 2% needed? – Our finance director asked that at a bare minimum we increase our income taxes by $1M annually. That will pay the debt for Diley road as well as reinstate street paving which has been cut from the budget 2 of the last 3 years. With a increase to 2% from 1% it will generate ~$1.7M/annually. That will give us some cushion to apply towards other debt or tackle some smaller CIP items.  The 2% rate is in line with other central OH communities and allows us to remain competitive from an income tax standpoint.  This % has nothing to do with the JEDD talks at all.

3.  Cuts.  Every year the budget is cut down considerably from what the department heads ask for.  Police cruisers, dump trucks, additional police and staff, etc have been cut from this years and prior years budgets.  A hiring freeze is in place and as attrition occurs the positions are not being filled.  We had the opportunity to improve the intersection at Refugee/256 with a considerable State grant but we cut that due to the lack of ability to repay our portion.  We eliminated street paving for the 2nd time.  We cut the full-time PIO and consultant we had on staff.  We’ve somehow actually reduced our health-care costs this year due to the excellent, hard work of staff.  We’ve moved or cut numerous CIP items.  We’ve brought as much work in-house as we can.  The budget is online and is available for anyone to review but it is very bare-bones.  A lot of what is in the budget is akin to “keeping the lights on”.

4. Work here/live here/work elsewhere.   It is true that this proposed increase is only for those who work in Pickerington, not for the residents who already pay .5% but work outside the city boundaries.  I think it is a  weak argument stating this is pitting those who live/work here against those who live here/work elsewhere.  This proposed increase is no different than any other tax increase.  Our school levies have passed/failed by less than 1% at times.  If that’s not “pitting neighbor against neighbor” I don’t know what is.  Taxes aren’t fair, but they’re necessary.

We’re trying to be very conservative in our approach to this proposed income tax increase while still be able to provide services to our citizens.   However, it is impossible to predict how far this $1.7M will actually go in this unstable economy.  We know we’ll be able to pay the Diley road debt and be able to reinstate street paving.  However, you can’t find two economists who agree on what the economy will look like in 6 months let alone 5 years.

Tell me what our economy will look like, what the price of steel and oil will be, and what inflation and interest rates will be in 5 years and I’ll provide an estimate as to how long this tax increase will last.  However, as things are now any financial projections wouldn’t be worth the paper they’re printed on.

- Brian

Back in business

Filed under: Uncategorized — pickerington @ 4:45 pm

I’ve decided to go a new route with my blog and use the freebie from WordPress. oraclebrian.com will soon be dead as I do not have the time to maintain the site as well as write a blog and actually work.

Therefore I’m going to give this a shot and see how it all works out.

Before anyone asks – I prefer to control my own blog vs writing on PATA regularly (Pickerington discussion board) as it’s using archaic technology and doesn’t give me the ability to write as I like.  With that said here goes.

- Brian

Blog at WordPress.com.