CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

COUNCIL WORK SESSION

OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

6:00 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mayor Shaver opened the work session at 6:00 P.M., with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, Mr.Wisniewski, and Mayor Shaver present. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Tim Hansley, Phil Hartmann, Rick Palsgrove, Dave Dozer, Carol Carter, Sean Casey, and others.

2. Mayor Shaver stated he would apologize in advance as he will have to leave at 6:30 P.M. in order to attend an awards banquet for his daughters. Mayor Shaver stated prior to discussing the proposed Master Economic Development Agreement (Attachment 1 to these minutes), Mr. Fix had a power point presentation he would like to present this evening, and he would like to hold all questions until Mr. Fix completed his presentation and then have discussion on the agreement.

Mr. Fix gave a power point presentation (Attachment 2 to these minutes). Mr. Fix stated he would conclude by suggesting Council have full and open discussion and answer any questions anyone has, and then move it to Council for final debate and voting.

Mr. Wisniewski stated he questioned if Pickerington needed economic development. He stated if the City is currently 35 percent commercial and 65 percent residential so on a ratio perspective we are doing a lot better as a City. Mr. Fix stated we were doing better, but questioned if we were doing good enough. Mr. Wisniewski stated Mr. Fix was referring to medical centers and offices being developed in the next 25 years, and the portion of that that would affect our school district is next to nothing. Mr. Wisniewski stated that because the city’s borders are what they are now, it does not mean they will stay that way. Mr. Wisniewski stated we are developing out lots at Kroger and we are working on building more offices off of S.R. 256, all of which are within the school district so we have projects in the works right now to bring this more into a 50-50 balance. Mr. Fix stated the boundaries of his information are the school district boundaries, but the information includes all different kinds of taxes, not just property taxes. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would need to see the supporting documentation to understand what these taxes were. Mr. Fix stated the point is that every resident he has spoken to in the past year regarding economic development recognizes that our commercial tax base is way to low. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, however, we are in the process of working on that. Mr. Fix stated he is pleased that we are doing all the things we are doing, but he did not think that would get us where we want to go. Mr. Wisniewski stated the majority of the development that was identified in the presentation, very little of it will do anything to lower our school taxes. Mr. Fix stated that may or may not be the case, but hopefully the positive side effect of economic development between Violet Township and the City is that the schools are helped. Mr. Hackworth stated he understood there was some thinking in the Township that the interchange will be at Allen Road and he did not think it would be. He stated further without the ability to annex he did not know how we would divert traffic around Pickerington. Mr. Hackworth stated he would not be in favor of building roads in the Township. Mr. Fix stated we may, down the road as development happens, be asked to work on infrastructure and we may not be. Mr. Hackworth stated he felt we should know where we are heading before we start down the path.

Mrs. Hammond stated that perhaps we are making more of this agreement than is necessary. She stated this is an agreement saying we agree to have agreements, but each parcel of land will be dealt with individually. She stated this does not set anything firmly, and it is entirely possible that some of the parcels will be developed and we will not have to contribute anything except the income tax. She continued it is possible we may have to contribute more on some of them, because it is dependant upon the developer and what kind of deal is worked out. Mrs. Hammond stated she has been led to believe by some of the Trustees that if we do not come to some kind of decision soon, they will forget about us and move on with other entities; that they would like to work with us, there have been developers who have approached them about projects and because we have sort of a hostile attitude they have walked away. Mrs. Hammond stated she felt we needed to look at this in more simplistic terms, see what staff has suggested, and see if we can move on from there. Mr. Wisniewski stated his point is there is a lot of speculation based in this and some of it is that economic development is going to happen. He stated that may occur, but some of these parcels may develop residentially. He continued that for economic development that may or may never occur, we are giving up certain rights right now, one of them being the right to annex. Mr. Wisniewski stated he is not in favor of hostile annexation or aggressive annexation policies, and he is not saying we should start looking at what we can annex. He continued he felt we should maintain the ability to do so because we do not know what may or may not occur in the future. Mr. Fix stated this agreement allows us to annex commercial properties, it does not allow us to annex residential properties. Mr. Wisniewski stated it allows us to annex commercial properties where we are going to share with the Township and it seemed the Township would be dictating the terms of what the development would be.

Mr. Wisniewski requested Mr. Fix provided Council with his documentation because there seems to be significant differences. Mr. Fix stated we are all making conjectures as to what may happen in the future, and Council’s job is to protect the best interests of the City and its residents. Mr. Fix stated when you look at the first two opportunities to continue to do what we are doing commercially, that we don’t get where we want, then if we go on a case by case basis we are not going to get where we want, and that is why he felt this agreement was so important. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would agree to disagree on that.

Mr. Sabatino stated he felt it would be safe to assume that if we signed this agreement for 30 years, and he doubted our income tax would remain at one percent for the next 30 years, then he was not exactly sure how that would interface with the desire of having residential properties, but it would have an impact as far as an increased income tax rate. He stated that way why he felt we did not need to give up our right to control our own destiny in terms of annexation. He stated if it was bad for us to have residential development, it should be just as bad for the Township. Mr. Sabatino further stated he did not see the Township in any other agreements with any other entity, other than Pickerington, that has been other than one on one deals, and that is what this should be. Mr. Sabatino stated he agreed with Mrs. Hammond that you have to look at each deal. Mr. Fix stated as he understood Mr. Sabatino he was suggesting our income tax would increase soon. Mr. Sabatino stated he has stated it was safe to assume our income tax would increase within the next 30 years. Mr. Sabatino further stated he did not understand why we should give away 50 percent of our income tax when thus far the best was 22 percent that someone else gave away, and that was just for a particular project. Mr. Fix stated that is the point, it was just for a particular project, and in talking about a comprehensive agreement we would be included in everything they do. Mr. Fix stated there are a lot more viable properties outside the borders of the City of Pickerington, where we would be included in JEDDs than we would include in annexations.

Mr. Wisniewski stated if we are willing to not conform our boundaries for 30 years, and everything stays within the Township, and we are giving them the road and bridge levies where they are maintaining the roads, then why was that in there. Mrs. Hammond stated Service Committee had requested staff look over this agreement and make some recommendations. She stated she would like to hear what staff had to say about it. Mr. Wisniewski stated he was willing to hear staff’s recommendations, however, this agreement is not something they were involved with and they had no input into this. Mr. Wisniewski stated further staff is aware of how important this is to everyone and he felt they might be put in a bad situation. Mrs. Riggs stated several residents were at Service Committee and they questioned since we have all of the experience of the development director and City Manager why were they not involved. Mr. Wisniewski stated he was willing to hear what staff had to say, but he also understood all of the political factors involved.

Ms Gilleland stated everyone makes a very valid point, and it is true that staff’s points are based on what might happen in the future. She stated she believed it is easier to make incremental changes in smaller steps and in a more moderate approach, rather than groundbreaking legislation. She stated if we are interested in a development agreement on which Council may be able to reach consensus there are a couple of points she and Mr. Hansley had talked about. Ms Gilleland stated rather than agreeing not to annex at all, agree to not annex territory within the JEDD. She stated if the City does annex, provide for the road and bridge levy to the Township and if we want to consider a small portion of income tax that would be fine as well. Mr. Wisniewski clarified Ms Gilleland meant that if a JEDD were formed, it is typical for the municipality to agree to not annex that territory. Ms Gilleland stated she would refer to this agreement as a development agreement, which is very different from a JEDD agreement because that is a very complex document that will involve a great deal of negotiation. Mr. Hartmann stated the Township would give up any rights to object to the annexation too. Ms Gilleland stated if we are truly going to work with the Township on development, that means the City and the Township staff will be working together to bring development to the area, whether it is inside or outside the City, we may have staff time invested in the unincorporated area and they may have staff time invested in property that we may annex. Ms Gilleland stated she felt the concept was good, and everyone agreed it was important for the community that we work together on development; there were just a few minor details in terms of how we get there. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if she were recommending we give up our ability to annex noncommercial land, and Ms Gilleland responded that if we were looking for a more moderate version of the agreement that Council will be able to gain consensus on, she would recommend, just based on the discussion she has heard, that we agree to not annex areas that we form JEDDs in and that any area that we annex that is contiguous to the City, we share a minimal amount of income tax revenue with the Township and provide for the road and bridge levy. Mr. Wisniewski inquired what a minimal amount of income tax would be and Ms Gilleland stated five to ten percent. Mr. Fix stated if that is what it will take for Council to come together, to cut down on the annexed properties and to come down on the percentage, then let’s do it. Mr. Wisniewski stated he thought what Ms Gilleland was saying is that we do not give up our right to annex. Mr. Fix stated he understood what she was saying, and as the City Manager, annexation is the primary tool that she has and he would naturally expect her to not want to give that up. He stated he understands that, he just does not agree with it.

Mr. Hackworth stated there are a lot of situations where developing single family homes might be to our advantage in the future, and he did not know if anyone had looked at the Violet Township development plan. He stated the fact was that all that property down along 33 that they are talking about making a business park is going to be totally off set, tax wise, by all the parcels between here and 33 developing into single family homes. He continued that even if we invest money down there to develop commercially, it would be off set by their own plan. Mr. Wisniewski stated one of the major sticking points with him was the amount of income tax we would provide, and another was the annexation issue. He stated if someone could tell him why that was such a sticking point for the Township, then he was willing to talk about it. He continued, however, if there was no good reason behind it that didn’t fly with him. Mr. Fix stated he would not try to speak for the Township Trustees, and he would encourage council members to speak to any one of them.

3. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Wisniewski stated he would close the work session at this time as Council’s regular meeting would convene in five minutes. The work closed at 7:25 P.M., October 24, 2006.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

__________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk

ATTEST:

________________________________________

Brian Wisniewski, President Pro Tempore