What is Most Important to you in this City Council Election?
BWF Contributor, Matt Gregory
Matt is a Worthington resident, the past president of Building Worthington’s Future, and a commercial real estate broker.
In the upcoming Worthington City Council election, the spectrum of issues and concerns that shape our community's future is as diverse as the opinions of the people who call it home. While the fate of the former UMCH property is undoubtedly a focal point, our collective interests extend far beyond a single parcel of land. The City of Worthington faces complex questions about city finances, housing, pools, and more. This blog navigates through these issues, armed with facts and a commitment to civil discourse, as we work towards finding common ground.
Whether you are passionate about development or harbor reservations, I hope this lays the groundwork for future conversations where all voices can be heard and solutions explored, resulting in a future shaped by the very residents who cherish it. Together, let’s embark on a path that seeks to bridge gaps, dispel misconceptions, and encourage thoughtful dialogue for the betterment of Worthington – a place we all wish to see prosper and evolve.
THE FORMER UMCH SITE
Edit Image
Image Source: Dispatch.com
Some individuals may understandably be concerned about the fate of the former UMCH property, fearing the potential changes and impact on our community. It's crucial, however, to navigate these discussions armed with a clear understanding of the facts and the many forces that shape our region’s development:
1. The property is currently under litigation, with no proposal for Council to vote on.
2. Once the lawsuit is over, if another proposal for the site is ever presented by Lifestyle Communities (LC) or anyone else and approved, it will be subject to both referendum and our design standards.
3. LC is not funding any active city council person or candidate. If they were, it would be public knowledge and an obvious conflict of interest, possibly requiring recusal on a future vote
4. No candidate has announced support for the current LC proposal nor provided any indication that they will support a proposal similar to those previously proposed by LC. The consensus among the candidates (who have been wrongly criticized as “in favor” of the development) is to foster open conversations with property owners and facilitate productive public meetings to shape future proposals that align with the desires of our entire community.
5. The property’s current zoning as S-1 Special Use dates back to when it was occupied by UMCH. This zoning designation offers limited permitted uses. However, the possibility of rezoning exists through a public process should the community express such a desire.
Candidates supporting form-based zoning don’t intend for open zoning on the property but aim to establish a defined form and function that all stakeholders can embrace. Any development would still be subject to public scrutiny, approval by the Architectural Review Board, and the preservation of residents’ decision-making power. Form-based zoning is one of many potential creative options, contingent on future council vetting.
6. Comprising less than 8% of our overall population, members of two community organizations residing in close proximity to the former UMCH property hold a very specific vision for the site. Their proposal for a community commons may appear exciting and transformative at first glance. However, it is likely to have the opposite effect, as it could further impede progress on the property due to the inability to financially support such a plan, as outlined in the section on Income Tax Revenue below. (The figure of 8% was determined by dividing the 1,200 members of the two community organizations by a figure of 15,000 which represents the total population of Worthington)
CITY FINANCES
Edit Image
Another critical topic being talked about is the city’s current financial situation. While the perception may be that Worthington enjoys financial strength, it's essential to delve deeper into what this truly signifies:
1. We have a healthy amount of funds in our reserves. However, most of these funds must remain as reserves. Maintaining a minimum reserve balance of 35% of our annual operating budget is required by our city policy. This currently means we need to leave at least $10,000,000 in our reserve balance to comply.
2. We have a AAA Bond rating, which allows us to borrow funds at good rates but is not indicative of how much we can borrow.
3. We are operating at a narrowly thin margin of annual revenue compared to expenses. Worthington is anticipated to be operating at a loss by 2024 due to flat revenue and increasing expenses.
4. This delicate cash flow situation significantly compromises our ability to make substantial cash outlays when needed, hindering our capacity to address key initiatives and projects.
5. The only way to improve this situation is to either raise taxes or generate more income tax revenue. No candidate favors raising taxes, but all want to generate more income tax revenue.
INCOME TAX REVENUE
Edit Image
Moving forward, the conversation naturally gravitates toward a fundamental question: how can we boost our income tax revenue? On the surface, it may seem as simple as constructing more office spaces to draw in businesses and, in turn, their employees. However, several overlooked factors merit consideration:
1. It is expensive to build office space. Construction costs and interest rates are the highest in 20 years. According to the Associated Builders and Contractors: “All construction types and materials remain significantly more expensive than they were in February 2020, with the overall cost of construction 37.7% higher now than at the start of the pandemic.”
2. It is extremely difficult to finance an office development without subsidizing it by other uses, primarily multi-family because it generates more income than office space. Because of supply and demand (meaning abundant availability and slower lease-up time), as well as construction costs, office rental income alone often isn’t enough to qualify for financing.
3. Office users today seek dynamic mixed-use developments that offer a myriad of amenities within walking distance, all designed to attract a talented workforce. This trend is evident in the success of developments throughout central Ohio. This does not necessarily dictate that Worthington must emulate the model of Bridge Park.
4. Office employers are drawn to communities with a diverse population that provides access to a wide range of potential employees, fostering a vibrant office culture.
5. Parks and walking trails are considered an amenity to office developments but are not as high of priorities as a restaurant, hotel, gym, and entertainment. Green space needs to be proportional to the surrounding area and in line with per capita calculations.
6. If the goal is to increase income tax revenue through expanded office space, it is essential to consider incorporating multi-family properties to help offset the expenses associated with commercial space construction, as mentioned in point 2 above. Achieving the proper equilibrium between these uses is the key to financial success.
For all of these reasons mentioned above, offering the High Street frontage of the former UMCH property solely for office use will likely not result in increased income tax revenue. The City needs to be mindful of creating additional isolated office products that are not embraced by companies looking for space in today’s market
HOUSING
Edit Image
How about housing? Considering the unquestionable growth, this is one of the most important topics in Central Ohio. Worthington is currently conducting a housing study to help our community identify and understand our needs. This study will help inform our decision-making in the future. It’s a complex topic and one that will be hard to solve. It is a very sensitive topic in our community, and any candidate/campaign should present only factual information, not untruths. Here are some facts that everyone should know:
1. No candidate is proposing that the former UMCH site can solve all of our housing issues.
2. A new comprehensive master plan can help lay the groundwork for where new housing could be permitted and what is acceptable density and land usage. Input should be received from all community stakeholders and also needs to take market conditions into account.
3. Worthington is currently conducting a housing study to help our community understand our needs and help inform decision-making going forward, as we do NOT currently have many available sites appropriately zoned for housing.
4. No candidate is suggesting that LC is an affordable housing developer, however, it is common for developers to seek joint ventures with other companies with complimentary offerings.
5. The CIC received offers from three local affordable housing developers in response to the RFP for Wilson Bridge Rd. The CIC ultimately selected a proposal for commercial development, which was in line with its mission, but did welcome future collaboration to learn how our community can better partner with the affordable housing developers at the completion of our housing study.
6. It is essential for the city and its residents to start having conversations on what is acceptable density. When the number of units is discussed for different sites, it is essential to consider the number per acre. For example, Granby Place is 16 units per acre, Stafford Village is 28 units per acre, and the Heights is 73 units per acre. These conversations are central to our understanding and planning for housing in Worthington.
POOLS
Edit Image
Image Source: yelp.com
Shifting the focus to another cherished facet of our community, the topic of pools ignites a sense of nostalgia and enjoyment. Ideally, this should be a non-issue – after all, who doesn't love a good pool day? Many neighboring communities have successfully maintained city-funded swimming pools, prompting the question of why we seem unable to bear this financial responsibility.
The answer, at its core, is straightforward. Over the past half-century, our city has experienced a notable absence of significant new development. This stagnation has resulted in relatively flat revenue growth, while virtually every neighboring community has witnessed exponential expansion in their tax bases. The outcome of such divergent paths is evident in the budget constraints we face today.
To illustrate the impact in practical terms, let's consider an example. If we had seen $500 million in commercial development between the years of 2000 and 2010, this would have resulted in approximately $150 million in real estate taxes from 2010 to 2020 and another $30 million in income taxes. A substantial portion of these real estate taxes would have supported our schools and substantially alleviated the need for such a substantial levy as the one recently passed to rebuild our high schools, while the income taxes could have supported city infrastructure, such as the pool.
This perspective highlights the profound effect that a growing income tax base and increased real estate tax base can have on our city's financial capacity, enabling us to provide and maintain amenities like community pools. It underscores the importance of strategic planning and growth in ensuring a vibrant and sustainable future for our beloved Worthington.
THE GOLDEN RULE
Edit Image
Beyond all these issues affecting our city, the unfortunate side of politics is rearing its ugly head. Multiple candidates are attempting to discredit their opponents by spreading false narratives that are unfounded with no basis except to induce fear. They are also presenting false dilemma fallacies by misrepresenting an issue while offering only two options (when more exist) or by presenting the options as mutually exclusive (when they are not).
There are candidates under attack who are genuine, good-hearted people with integrity. They will not stoop to the same level as their opponents, so we as a community must see through all the noise. No candidate is running to benefit outside interests, nor do they have a vision to turn Worthington into a place none of us will recognize. As residents, we do not have to agree on how to solve every issue, but hopefully, we can agree that Worthington is a place where we respect each other despite our differences.
Amidst our differences, all candidates and interest groups must communicate their true intentions. Those who discuss development should invest the time in understanding the underlying principles that render a project feasible in today's economic landscape. Whether intentional or unintentional, our collective actions and decisions over the past decade have impeded the economic progress and inclusivity of our community.
Building Worthington’s Future has weathered unjust and divisive criticism from rival candidates and various interest groups that falsely undermine the organization's credibility. In response to these unwarranted allegations, the leaders of BWF recognized the importance of addressing these concerns with honesty and respect. The individuals involved in this organization are residents and business owners from within both the city of Worthington and the school district. They have a sincere dedication to the well-being of the community and employ their expertise for authentic and constructive purposes. They are steadfast in their beliefs about what is best for Worthington and have consistently demonstrated their dedication to our community.
The City is at a crossroads, facing decisions about the path we want to forge. Are we content with maintaining the status quo, risking financial stability and continued exclusivity? Or are we prepared to acknowledge and embrace the changes necessary to promote a positive future and financial security? There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but it is time for us to acknowledge that our collective actions to date have contributed to the challenges we face.
There are clearly many important topics facing our city. The question is, who is the type of person you would like to lead our community through these tough issues? It is impossible to predict every issue that our community will encounter over the next four years, but selecting candidates who possess the right character, are open to dialog, and actively listening provides confidence they will be great leaders no matter the situation. Leaders who are open-minded, follow public policy, and foster collaboration with the purpose of building consensus and inclusiveness are what our community needs.
As we enter the final stretch of this election period, it is our hope that both the candidates and residents can engage in civil discourse and remember the golden rule: to treat others as we wish to be treated. This timeless principle guides us in building a better Worthington together
