When it comes to the increased tax burden of annexed businesses as potentially costing the jobs of New Albany workers, he's against it. When it comes to the financial burden to New Albany workers posed by plans to toll bridges, he's for it. Next time, the coin will be flipped again, and we'll see which side it lands.
Is One Southern Indiana's headquarters a part of the proposed annexation area? If so, I'm surprised the organization didn't send an intern for symbolic self-immolation.
Annexation fight begins: With one vote remaining, New Albany City Council hears other side of annexation story, by Daniel Suddeath (Tribune).
On second reading, the New Albany City Council approved, by a 5 to 4 count, incorporating about 219 acres of land near the Interstate 265 interchange along Charlestown Road.
Realtors, attorneys and proprietors pleaded with the council to vote down the annexation during a public hearing before the ballot was taken.
14 comments:
This was one of the most bizarre council gatherings that I have seen.
When they voted on the amendment to take out 4 residential properties on Payne-Koehler DC and SP voted no. Even if they don’t think annexation is right shouldn’t they take care of the "brothers and sisters" as SP stated, and remove them if annexation does occur?
But no, same ole dog and pony show, “We care about the people!”… “but I’m going to vote no because I don’t agree with the whole thing.”
Does anyone honestly think the England administration is going to stop at the movie theater? We all know he has been salivating over the thousands of homes and the tax dollars they represent for years. Don't bite off more than you can choose Doug.
Everyone wants the benefits of New Albany but doesn't want to pay for it. I was annexed in 2000. Was I thrilled? No, but I realized that where I lived, in reality, was there because of New Albany. So I didn't even try to fight it.
Man, I need to stop bragging on Kevin. That is ridiculous.
Hey Kevin, those businesses depend a lot on the population of New Albany for customers. Maybe since they are using "us" they should pay for it. Sound familiar?
I wonder if anyone has considered deannexing parts of the city?
Jeff, that very point was brought up to me by the woman sitting beside me last night.
It would be interesting see what the numbers look like.
Let me speak for a second in broad generalizations. Residents closer to Budd Road consider themselves to be more rural. They see less crime so they care less about police (or fee/taxes to fund police). They don't walk anywhere so they don't care about sidewalks or revitalization (or fees/taxes to fund same). All they want is police, fire and a road and they're unahppy when asked to pay for much else. I would like to see the deannexation numbers for these areas because their concerns are very different than the concerns of the rest of New Albany.
We could also deconsolidate the school system.
Or more people from New Albany could run for School Board.
Deconsolidation would make the school board 100% New Albany residents, regardless of electioneering.
Corporate welfare is the only translation worthy of Spencer Harmon's tea bag platitudes last nigh on behalf of Meijers and Great Escape. None of those businesses would be out there making money as going concerns unless New Albany did the TIF, upgraded the roads, put in the infrastructure to make the development possible. No private dollars there. Now that they're up and running, isn't it time to chip in, and get rated fire protection, police and EMS to boot? That the tax rates are significantly lower than what Clarksville and Jeffersonville charge makes council naysayers seem like posturing fools.
The only thing wrong with the current annexation plan is that it doesn't go far enough. I understand that it would be more difficult to annex the residential portions of the fringe area but the process should have started parallel to the current annexation.
I would agree that these businesses receive the benefit of New Albany residents and they need to pay there fair share.
I work downtown and live in Cobblers Crossing. I would have no objection to annexation. I feel an ethical commitment to the city and would love to be able to participate in the election of City Council and the Major. They do impact my life a great deal and I want a say in the process.
Post a Comment