Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

I must really be on a roll here. I seldom post more than twice a year and here I am posting twice in the same day.


Pet peeve number 2. On tonight's council agenda is this:


ORDINANCE 2004-43, ?“AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO WAIVE THE CITY?’S FEES, WHICH WOULD BE DUE BY THE PICKERINGTON LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, FOR THE REPAIR/REPLACEMENT OF THE ROOF ON THE RIDGEVIEW JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL,?” First Reading, Wright.


Wait a minute! Didn't I just read in one of the local rags a couple of weeks ago that this roof was being funded by the money we already are being charged for the Taj Mahals up on Refugee Rd.? So follow my logic here. We paid for it once. Now we're being asked to waive the fee. So that is sort of like paying twice isn't it? We take the money from our wallet and pay the schools. The schools then don't pay the required fees and instead hold that money. Then they have the grapefruits to ask the city to take a hit in their already limited building department budget? How dare they? How the heck do they think that we pay the salaries?


They overcharge us for their palaces and then don't want to pay a simple fee like everyone else has to. Let me ask this - did the trustees waive all fees for the construction of the palaces? You know they didn't! Why should the city?


Well, let me introduce this ordinance:


ORDINANCE 2004-43-A, ?“AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE PLSD TO WAIVE THE SCHOOL?’S FEES, WHICH WOULD BE DUE BY THE PICKERINGTON LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENTS AND PARENTS )WHO ARE EMPLOYED BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON), FOR THE COST OF LUNCHES** FOR THE REMAINDER OF THEIR EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE.?”


You think the schools would go for that? You think it's possible to take this cooperation crap a little too far??


**You can substitute cost of supplies, cost of Pay to Play or whatever fits your needs best here.



By Sick of all the whining

Fees were waived

the sewer and water tap fees were waived by Faifield County for the new schools. This has been a standard practice in most cases, stop your whining.

School did pay tap fees

First the second poster here on this site is putting out false information. The county utilities did charge the schools full price for sewer and water tap fees. The problem with the ordinance before council is that it is anyone of the those Trojan Horses. Clearly it sound like a wonderful deal to forgive the school building inspection fee of $6,000 plus. However the city only has 32% of the student attending the PLSD. WHY SHOULD THE MINORITY OF THE TAXPAYERS PICK UP COSTS DUE THE OTHER 68%?

Clearly the issue 18 passed in November of 2002 referred to all of these fees. That initiative was motivated by the whole sale give away of fees and capacity not just the sewer and water tap fees ad Mr. Mapes would have us all believe. How does the city now say they are broke and at the same time say they must raise tap fees yet can without fore thought give away $6,500????



By Taxpayer

I agree with Taxpayer

A call to the county sewer/water can verify that sewer/water capacity fees were paid for the new schools.

Also, as the ''writer'' of the initiative petition, Issue 18 on the ballot, it stated the following:
Elimination, abatement, reduction or deferral of any fees or assessments and/or costs of installation of sewer or water lines will not be granted for any property currently in the City of Pickerington, or is being annexed to the City of Pickerington, or at any time thereafter.

The petition did not speak only of sewer/water costs but also of any fees normally charged. Pickerington was forgiving other fees in their pre-annexation agreements, such as storm water, park and building fees.

While it might be a ''good cause'' to forgive fees for the school, it is not legal to do so.