Board candidates reject Easton deal

YOUR SCHOOLS /

The “Yes We Can” slate of Columbus school board candidates, Democratic challengers who say they want to remove big money from local politics, say they strongly oppose tax breaks for Easton granted by the City Council.

While the school board so far has been officially silent, one of the three Democratic incumbents on the ballot in May has said he also opposes the tax breaks.

The board was left out of negotiations giving 100 percent, 10-year propertytax abatements for new

residential development at and around Easton, even though the schools stand to lose tens of millions in future revenue growth. District officials were informed of the abatement this month. Discussions between Easton’s developers and the city had started this past summer.

“I do think a strong message should have been communicated that we don’t support this,” said Erin Upchurch, one of the Yes We Can slate of three school board candidates, noting that taxpayers just approved an 18 percent property-tax increase in November to support the district. “As a parent and a taxpayer, I would absolutely love to hear the board stand up and say: We do not support this deal.”

“I think we need to speak out every time a deal happens that will negatively impact the funding and stability of our schools, especially when that burden is transferred to our community,” Amy Harkins, another Yes We Can candidate, said in an email.

“Our families are continually asked to pick up the tab while wealthy developers receive tax abatements,” she said. “The school board needs a voice when these deals are proposed, and they need to stand up and speak out for the best interests of our students and our community.”

“It just becomes what I consider corporate welfare,” said Abby Vaile, also on the Yes We Can slate. “I don’t think huge corporations should be asking for huge handouts of money that affect our school system financing.”

Dominic Paretti is the only one of three incumbent Democrats up for re-election to criticize the deal. He said the school board needs to be at the table as tax breaks are negotiated in the future.

These negotiations were kept so quiet that Paretti, an aide to Democratic lawmakers at the Statehouse, didn’t know about the eleventh-hour law change that state lawmakers added to an omnibus bill to allow the developers to reimburse themselves out of a tax-increment finance fund

at Easton — property-tax money already set aside for roads, sewers and other amenities at Easton — for $4.25 million the developers plan to send the city for use in the Linden neighborhood.

“That’s the scary thing,” Paretti said. “I work in the Statehouse and I didn’t know about that little thing that got slipped in there.”

But board Vice President Michael Cole, also one of the incumbent Democrats up for re-election this spring, said it would have been a “kneejerk reaction” for the board to vote to criticize the tax break.

“I don’t want to be a finger-pointer,” Cole said. “I want to be somebody who brings solutions to the table.” A board resolution “hollering at the mayor, that’s not going to solve anything.”

Moving forward, Cole said, the board needs to be at the table as tax breaks that affect district finances are brokered. He looks forward to having a “stronger conversation” about that with the city, he said, “so that we’re all on the same page.”

Ramona Reyes, the third

incumbent on the spring ballot, didn’t return a telephone call.

The two Republicanendorsed candidates are split on the abatements, with one for it and the other against it.

Zach Amos said he’s against any abatement that doesn’t compensate the district for lost revenue.

“I’m pretty upset about it,” Amos said. “It’s money that could be going toward improving facilities, hiring better teachers. I know a lot of those kids can’t even afford school supplies.”

But Republican Seth Golding supports the abatements, saying they will stimulate jobs and increase the overall tax base, “a good trade-off.”

“The No. 1 problem with the schools is the economic plight,” Golding said. “Anything that can be traded off to help the community and hopefully the children is hopefully a good thing. So I think it’s a win-win.”

The eight candidates for school board are on the May primary ballot, in a nonpartisan field race that will whittle the field to six candidates for three seats in the November election.

The Dispatch reported last week that the developers approached the city last summer with a plan for a 100 percent abatement on residential property. Their proposal included temporarily changing state law to allow the developers to be reimbursed for channeling development money from Easton to Linden. District officials weren’t told of the proposal until three weeks ago.

The city points to projections that show the district could receive an additional $70 million in property taxes over the next 37 years from the new development as the 10-year abatements taper off. Still, the district wouldn’t get anything for the first decade, while the city takes in millions of dollars from new income-tax receipts at Easton.

Upchurch said the district shouldn’t have to wait 37 years for that money.

“That’s a whole lifetime,” Upchurch said. “We’ve got kids who are in school now. We’ve got kids who are struggling now.”