This morning (Feb. 25) I attended the annual meeting of the Oil Region Alliance as a representative of the city.
(I think I was the only Democrat there, which is not unusual for Venango County.)
Of course, the ORA was also in this morning’s paper with the announcement that the county intended to close this morning on the purchase of the West Unit from the Alliance. The deal has come under a great deal of criticism, as does the ORA on a somewhat regular basis.
Frankly, most of the criticism is not constructive and much of it unwarranted if not simply specious. My personal opinion is that more of the non-constructive criticism has to do with personalities and politics than the work of the economic development agency and that is not good for the county and our future.
I was not privy to the details when ORA purchased the West Unit and in turn leased it to the county, nor am I privy to all the background and details of the current deal selling the West Unit to the county.
My understanding is that the previous board of commissioners asked the ORA to structure a package to obtain the West Unit so that the county could centralize all its human service agencies. The county thought it would be able to cover the lease costs through state reimbursements, avoid the burden of owning the building and in turn the ORA would have an income stream.
However, circumstances changed with the decrease in state reimbursements and the county found the state funds would no longer cover the lease costs. It then determined it would be better to own the building. The ORA struck a deal to sell the West Unit to the county. The deal gives the ORA $1 million for the buy out of the county’s lease. A lot is being made of that, claiming it is a bad deal for county taxpayers.
But is it? As I understand it, the county still saves money in the long term, and just as importantly the ORA is left with some money to undertake economic development.
How exactly are we to do economic development if we are unwilling to pay for it? To me, the county deals, both the original one and this one, sound like a win-win – maybe not perfect, but better than anything else I’ve heard.
I understand there can be differing views of the deal between the county and the ORA, and of the agency itself.
Still, I’ve not heard the critics suggest a better way of funding economic development or any specifics of how to do a better job. I have heard a lot of potshots claiming the ORA is a failure. That’s not constructive criticism, but rather meaningless chatter.
The absolute most BS criticism I’ve heard was from a local businessman who said – and I paraphrase – “our unemployment has gone up under the ORA’s watch.” We are in the midst of the worst economic times since the Great Depression; just what would one expect?
ORA officials can point and did this morning to a number of very specific successes over the past year. Among them: Conair and WS Packaging (formerly Seneca Printing). Both companies could have been lost, but were kept here and are growing. They need to be given some credit for what they have done and continue to do.
I’m not beyond criticizing the ORA. I believe the leadership has too often been tone deaf and unable to grasp how some things they do individually or as an agency will be perceived and what the implications of that will be. High on my list of examples is ORA executives making personal political contributions to local candidates. That is bound to create political enemies. More importantly, the agency must strive to be absolutely politically neutral and perceptions play a huge role in that.
I have a real fear that the critics of the ORA/County deal will never let it go, that they won’t be able to say we lost, but let’s move on. That does not seem to be the way things are done in Venango County and we pay a price for that. (Think of the never ending threats of lawsuits whenever a decision is reached that some people don’t like)
The ORA is not perfect, but it is the economic development agency we have. Let’s work to strengthen it, not destroy it. If we criticize, let’s have workable suggestions for improvement in hand. We need everyone’s help.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Two Down
Well, here we are in 2010. I have completed my first two years on council.
I think everyone would agree that 2009 was a daunting year. We dealt with the retirement of long-time city manager Tom Rockovich and found Ryan Egleston to replace him. I think we did well.
Council faced a huge budget deficit largely as a result of a 30 percent increase in health insurance costs as it began development of the 2010 budget, and Ryan was thrown into it on his first day on the job. Cuts were made – some only delaying the inevitable such as paving – and taxes were raised to balance the budget. It was something no one wanted to do, but it was what had to be done – at least that’s my take.
Obviously the state of the economy impacts our community just as it does elsewhere. That no doubt will make 2010 equally as troubling from an economic perspective.
We must try to find additional operating efficiencies and perhaps all new ways of delivering services and doing business. Success in that endeavor is not guaranteed. There are no magic wands or pixie dust, nor a pot of gold to be found. I’ve said only half in jest that perhaps the best thing would be to put a line item in the budget of $104 dedicated to the purchase of a Powerball tickets every Wednesday and Saturday.
Still, I firmly believe the city is moving forward. The Main Street Program is advancing rapidly. The Waterways study will be wrapping up. The Arts Revitalization has succeeded in bringing people to Oil City and promises to have much more success. There are many other examples.
It will be an interesting, difficult and exciting time for our two new councilmen, Bill Moon and Venice Lewis, as it will for all of us on council.
I think everyone would agree that 2009 was a daunting year. We dealt with the retirement of long-time city manager Tom Rockovich and found Ryan Egleston to replace him. I think we did well.
Council faced a huge budget deficit largely as a result of a 30 percent increase in health insurance costs as it began development of the 2010 budget, and Ryan was thrown into it on his first day on the job. Cuts were made – some only delaying the inevitable such as paving – and taxes were raised to balance the budget. It was something no one wanted to do, but it was what had to be done – at least that’s my take.
Obviously the state of the economy impacts our community just as it does elsewhere. That no doubt will make 2010 equally as troubling from an economic perspective.
We must try to find additional operating efficiencies and perhaps all new ways of delivering services and doing business. Success in that endeavor is not guaranteed. There are no magic wands or pixie dust, nor a pot of gold to be found. I’ve said only half in jest that perhaps the best thing would be to put a line item in the budget of $104 dedicated to the purchase of a Powerball tickets every Wednesday and Saturday.
Still, I firmly believe the city is moving forward. The Main Street Program is advancing rapidly. The Waterways study will be wrapping up. The Arts Revitalization has succeeded in bringing people to Oil City and promises to have much more success. There are many other examples.
It will be an interesting, difficult and exciting time for our two new councilmen, Bill Moon and Venice Lewis, as it will for all of us on council.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
The 2010 Budget -- Take 2
After council’s budget directives to City Manager Ryan Eggleston on Monday, I’m not sure where we are going with the 2010 budget.
The city manager came to the Monday meeting with a pared down budget/tax proposal as requested by city council at its Nov 23 meeting.
Largely as a result of a 34 percent increase in health insurance costs, the city’s 2010 expenses were greatly inflated even as some revenues dropped. To maintain the status quo required a 1.5-mill hike in real estate taxes. On first reading council approved the budget and accompanying tax hike on a 4-to-1vote. However, council also directed the manager to try to cut costs and pare down the tax increase.
By negotiating some savings in health and other insurance costs Ryan got the tax hike down to 1.25 mills and then gave council two additional options. Cut the money for paving in half, bringing the tax hike needed to balance the budget down to 1 mill and the second option was to do that and not fill a vacancy in the police ranks, which would bring the tax increase to .8 mills.
The majority of council held out for a no-tax-hike budget. So Monday night council on second reading approved a no-tax-hike budget by decreasing the budget’s bottom line. How to achieve that was left up to the city manager.
I went along and voted for it to keep the budget process on schedule. I voiced my concerns, but not as forcefully as I should have. (A long-time friend made the latter comment to me after the meeting and I’ve been reflecting on it ever since).
I know that every member of council is troubled and sincere in believing the position they have taken is best for the city.
I think there are worst things than a tax increase. Among them the further decline of the services and conditions of the city. I fear that will be the outcome if we insist on a no-tax-increase budget –we just dig a deeper hole. Certainly I hope someone finds a magic wand and brings about an easy way to cut costs the necessary additional $232,000, but that is not my expectation.
To me, the mandated no-tax-hike approach we are using is reactionary. We don’t know what the real consequences are since the cuts are not fully vetted, nor can they be over the next three weeks. There is no strategic planning to the process. The lack of strategic planning has long been a weakness of city government.
Any cuts that force a fundamental restructuring, and it is likely some would, are also unfair to the new city manager. We need to give him the opportunity to see how the city operates and make his own recommendations for the long-term. Four weeks on the job does not allow for that.
Councilman Neil McElwee has a good point about our real estate tax rate putting us at a competitive disadvantage, especially against the neighboring townships. Raising our taxes will only make that worse.
Still, if our core services and the conditions of the city continue to decline are we not also becoming less competitive?
I don’t know what I will or will not accept at next Monday’s council meeting either in terms of cuts or tax increase. Right now, I’m favoring a tax increase over further cuts. Right now, that is the minority opinion on council, but things change.
The city manager came to the Monday meeting with a pared down budget/tax proposal as requested by city council at its Nov 23 meeting.
Largely as a result of a 34 percent increase in health insurance costs, the city’s 2010 expenses were greatly inflated even as some revenues dropped. To maintain the status quo required a 1.5-mill hike in real estate taxes. On first reading council approved the budget and accompanying tax hike on a 4-to-1vote. However, council also directed the manager to try to cut costs and pare down the tax increase.
By negotiating some savings in health and other insurance costs Ryan got the tax hike down to 1.25 mills and then gave council two additional options. Cut the money for paving in half, bringing the tax hike needed to balance the budget down to 1 mill and the second option was to do that and not fill a vacancy in the police ranks, which would bring the tax increase to .8 mills.
The majority of council held out for a no-tax-hike budget. So Monday night council on second reading approved a no-tax-hike budget by decreasing the budget’s bottom line. How to achieve that was left up to the city manager.
I went along and voted for it to keep the budget process on schedule. I voiced my concerns, but not as forcefully as I should have. (A long-time friend made the latter comment to me after the meeting and I’ve been reflecting on it ever since).
I know that every member of council is troubled and sincere in believing the position they have taken is best for the city.
I think there are worst things than a tax increase. Among them the further decline of the services and conditions of the city. I fear that will be the outcome if we insist on a no-tax-increase budget –we just dig a deeper hole. Certainly I hope someone finds a magic wand and brings about an easy way to cut costs the necessary additional $232,000, but that is not my expectation.
To me, the mandated no-tax-hike approach we are using is reactionary. We don’t know what the real consequences are since the cuts are not fully vetted, nor can they be over the next three weeks. There is no strategic planning to the process. The lack of strategic planning has long been a weakness of city government.
Any cuts that force a fundamental restructuring, and it is likely some would, are also unfair to the new city manager. We need to give him the opportunity to see how the city operates and make his own recommendations for the long-term. Four weeks on the job does not allow for that.
Councilman Neil McElwee has a good point about our real estate tax rate putting us at a competitive disadvantage, especially against the neighboring townships. Raising our taxes will only make that worse.
Still, if our core services and the conditions of the city continue to decline are we not also becoming less competitive?
I don’t know what I will or will not accept at next Monday’s council meeting either in terms of cuts or tax increase. Right now, I’m favoring a tax increase over further cuts. Right now, that is the minority opinion on council, but things change.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
The 2010 Budget -- Take 1
I suspect everyone is acquainted with the budget/tax issue facing the city.
On first reading, the 2010 budget required a 1.5-mill increase in property taxes, which was approved on a 4-1 vote. That amounts to an increase of $72 a year for the owner of the average residential property in the city.
(The median residential property value in the city is $48,000. Each mill is one-tenth of a cent. To find how much a 1.5- mill real estate tax increase would come to on any specific property, multiply the assessed value by .0015.)
The 2010 budget-buster is an increase of about 34 percent, or roughly $250,000, in health insurance premiums. The city is also seeing a slight drop in revenues from both real estate taxes due to a decline is assessment value and from the Local Services Tax, the $52 charged everyone who works in the city.
The proposed 2010 budget as given initial approval does nothing more than marginally maintain the current level of city services and activities. The 1.5-increase in real estate taxes balanced it on first reading as is required by law.
Everyone on council found the budget and tax increase troubling. And I can tell you with certainty that no one on council relishes the prospect of a tax increase. First of all it affects each of us just as it does every other property owner and to a person we have a deep understanding of the financial difficulties faced by many of our citizens. Secondly, I’m reasonably sure no one on council looks forward to the anger and criticism that will be directed at them if there is a tax increase.
I suspect each of us has different thoughts and approaches to dealing with the budget challenge. We will need to find a consensus, or at least a majority will.
It is easy to say “cut costs,” but it is much harder laying out a reasoned and successful way to do that.
My best guess is we might have some success in doing a bit of paring here and there and with the help of the city’s workforce be able to reduce our expenditures a bit and the amount of any tax increase, but unless we significantly reduce services there is no option but a tax increase. Already many of the long-term needs of the city are not being met, with street paving high on that list.
People live in the city for the services and amenities we offer – certainly I do. But as Councilman Neil McElwee pointed out our real estate tax rates can make us less competitive in attracting new residents and businesses. It is the space between the rock and the hard place.
Furthermore, I think we owe it to our new city manager to provide him a “status quo” budget and operations so that he can fully evaluate how we are doing things and come up with his own long-term strategic recommendations. Moving rashly now to cut costs would now fully allow him that opportunity.
Although I’m personally committed to maintaining our services and amenities, that does not mean I’m opposed to finding ways to do that more efficiently and less expensively.
Unfortunately, our financial inability to undertake major capital investments makes it that much harder. If we had a lot of capital money, there are quite a few things that could be done to improve efficiencies and lower long-term operating costs.
Beneath all our local budget woes, which are identical to cities across the state, are structural issues that can only be addressed by the state legislature. I don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.
On first reading, the 2010 budget required a 1.5-mill increase in property taxes, which was approved on a 4-1 vote. That amounts to an increase of $72 a year for the owner of the average residential property in the city.
(The median residential property value in the city is $48,000. Each mill is one-tenth of a cent. To find how much a 1.5- mill real estate tax increase would come to on any specific property, multiply the assessed value by .0015.)
The 2010 budget-buster is an increase of about 34 percent, or roughly $250,000, in health insurance premiums. The city is also seeing a slight drop in revenues from both real estate taxes due to a decline is assessment value and from the Local Services Tax, the $52 charged everyone who works in the city.
The proposed 2010 budget as given initial approval does nothing more than marginally maintain the current level of city services and activities. The 1.5-increase in real estate taxes balanced it on first reading as is required by law.
Everyone on council found the budget and tax increase troubling. And I can tell you with certainty that no one on council relishes the prospect of a tax increase. First of all it affects each of us just as it does every other property owner and to a person we have a deep understanding of the financial difficulties faced by many of our citizens. Secondly, I’m reasonably sure no one on council looks forward to the anger and criticism that will be directed at them if there is a tax increase.
I suspect each of us has different thoughts and approaches to dealing with the budget challenge. We will need to find a consensus, or at least a majority will.
It is easy to say “cut costs,” but it is much harder laying out a reasoned and successful way to do that.
My best guess is we might have some success in doing a bit of paring here and there and with the help of the city’s workforce be able to reduce our expenditures a bit and the amount of any tax increase, but unless we significantly reduce services there is no option but a tax increase. Already many of the long-term needs of the city are not being met, with street paving high on that list.
People live in the city for the services and amenities we offer – certainly I do. But as Councilman Neil McElwee pointed out our real estate tax rates can make us less competitive in attracting new residents and businesses. It is the space between the rock and the hard place.
Furthermore, I think we owe it to our new city manager to provide him a “status quo” budget and operations so that he can fully evaluate how we are doing things and come up with his own long-term strategic recommendations. Moving rashly now to cut costs would now fully allow him that opportunity.
Although I’m personally committed to maintaining our services and amenities, that does not mean I’m opposed to finding ways to do that more efficiently and less expensively.
Unfortunately, our financial inability to undertake major capital investments makes it that much harder. If we had a lot of capital money, there are quite a few things that could be done to improve efficiencies and lower long-term operating costs.
Beneath all our local budget woes, which are identical to cities across the state, are structural issues that can only be addressed by the state legislature. I don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.
Monday, October 26, 2009
The Election
What a low-key election cycle this is and yet we have an important three-way race for the two available seats on Oil City Council.
I know and like all three of the candidates: Charles T. “Chad” Rosen; Venice Lewis and William P. “Bill” Moon.
I consider all three friends. Bill is my neighbor, and you couldn’t ask for a better neighbor. I’ve known Chad most of his life, coached him in high school and of course I serve with him on council where he is filling an unexpired term. I’ve often enjoyed Venice’s company. He personifies energetic.
Oil City couldn’t go wrong with any of them.
Still, I’m sure each has some very different views on issues facing the city and differences in approach. I’m not sure if anyone knows exactly what they might be.
It is unfortunate that there has not been a candidates forum and media profiles to help draw out the differences so that voters have more to go on.
Personally, I believe moderated candidate forums with appropriate media coverage are one of the best approaches.
Each of the candidates is working hard. Voters will have to do some work as well to ensure that the ballots they cast reflect their personal beliefs in the future of the city.
I know and like all three of the candidates: Charles T. “Chad” Rosen; Venice Lewis and William P. “Bill” Moon.
I consider all three friends. Bill is my neighbor, and you couldn’t ask for a better neighbor. I’ve known Chad most of his life, coached him in high school and of course I serve with him on council where he is filling an unexpired term. I’ve often enjoyed Venice’s company. He personifies energetic.
Oil City couldn’t go wrong with any of them.
Still, I’m sure each has some very different views on issues facing the city and differences in approach. I’m not sure if anyone knows exactly what they might be.
It is unfortunate that there has not been a candidates forum and media profiles to help draw out the differences so that voters have more to go on.
Personally, I believe moderated candidate forums with appropriate media coverage are one of the best approaches.
Each of the candidates is working hard. Voters will have to do some work as well to ensure that the ballots they cast reflect their personal beliefs in the future of the city.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Welcome Our New City Manager
This morning (Tuesday, Oct. 13) council had the pleasant duty of announcing that Ryan Eggleston was our selection as new city manager. The appropriate motion was made and passed to officially appoint Ryan and the necessary paperwork signed.
Ryan is to start Nov. 9th. He is enthusiastic about coming to Oil City. In part, it was his enthusiasm that made him stand out among the candidates.
I know much of his background and the details of the search will be outlined in the local news media, but I did want to at least touch on them.
Ryan comes to Oil City from Greenville, where he has served as manager of the borough for the past four years where. Greenville, a financially stressed community, presented a number of challenges. By all accounts, Ryan met them head-on and admirably. He gained a reputation as a fiscally responsible, innovative and technologically savvy leader. Those are talents and skills we need here in Oil City.
Everyone on council put a great deal of time and effort into the search for a new manager. I’m personally so glad we chose to obtain the services of Peter Marshall to help us work through the process and find the very best candidate for Oil City.
In my mind, Peter’s assistance was invaluable.
As for the process of applying, applicants initially submitted their resumes to Peter, who screened them and then presented council with those he felt most qualified. From that pool and in consultation with Peter six candidates were selected for interviews by council and evaluation by city department heads.
Following the interviews, council invited Ryan and another candidate back for a second interview and a tour of the city accompanied by city administrators and council. The tour allowed us to get a much better feel for the candidates and them for us. We wanted to be sure whomever we selected would be a good fit for Oil City. Ryan fit.
Ryan is going to face a lot of challenges here. I think he is up to them all, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy.
I hope everyone welcomes Ryan, his wife Julia and their 18-month-old son Connor with the same enthusiasm he is showing for Oil City.
Ryan is to start Nov. 9th. He is enthusiastic about coming to Oil City. In part, it was his enthusiasm that made him stand out among the candidates.
I know much of his background and the details of the search will be outlined in the local news media, but I did want to at least touch on them.
Ryan comes to Oil City from Greenville, where he has served as manager of the borough for the past four years where. Greenville, a financially stressed community, presented a number of challenges. By all accounts, Ryan met them head-on and admirably. He gained a reputation as a fiscally responsible, innovative and technologically savvy leader. Those are talents and skills we need here in Oil City.
Everyone on council put a great deal of time and effort into the search for a new manager. I’m personally so glad we chose to obtain the services of Peter Marshall to help us work through the process and find the very best candidate for Oil City.
In my mind, Peter’s assistance was invaluable.
As for the process of applying, applicants initially submitted their resumes to Peter, who screened them and then presented council with those he felt most qualified. From that pool and in consultation with Peter six candidates were selected for interviews by council and evaluation by city department heads.
Following the interviews, council invited Ryan and another candidate back for a second interview and a tour of the city accompanied by city administrators and council. The tour allowed us to get a much better feel for the candidates and them for us. We wanted to be sure whomever we selected would be a good fit for Oil City. Ryan fit.
Ryan is going to face a lot of challenges here. I think he is up to them all, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy.
I hope everyone welcomes Ryan, his wife Julia and their 18-month-old son Connor with the same enthusiasm he is showing for Oil City.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
On this wet Sunday morning it’s a good time for me to touch on a number of things that have been on my mind. I guess these are my Sunday morning random thoughts
REBUILD OIL CITY
First, there is an interesting new blog -- Rebuild Oil City (http://rebuildoilcity.blogspot.com/) – by Scott Smail. I urge everyone to click over, take a look and join in the conversation.
Blogs about local issues can be important tools for community involvement and innovation. Certainly that appears to be the spirit behind Scott’s blog. Scott and I have our share of disagreements, but no one can question his desire to better Oil City.
MAIN STREET
The Oil City Main Street Program continues to move forward.
Two months ago the Mission and Vision statements were completed and approved. They are posted at the bottom of this blog.
Another huge step will be taken this week with the filing of the Oil City Profile, a pre-application requirement of the state Department of Community and Economic Development. Dozens of people put hours into gathering the information necessary to submit the profile. John Phillips of the Oil Region Alliance had the task of pulling it all together and keeping everyone on track. I didn’t envy him, but he got it done.
In addition, the subcommittees are embarking on their individual planning journeys. Each is required to develop a one-year and five year plan outlining their goals and objectives and how they intend to reach them. It is an involved process that in the end will guide the rebirth of our downtown. The subcommittees expect to have their one-year plan in place by January.
THE STATE BUDGET
Disappointed and frustrated with our legislature is putting it mildly.
Under the pending budget deal the state is going to tax bingo and small games of chance that support so many of our area’s nonprofits and community organizations, including providing funding for the Venango County’s Humane Society’s spay and neuter program. The state is going to impose the 6 percent sales tax on performing arts shows – read Barrow Theater productions and the Oil City Arts Council’s musical performances in the Transit. But, the state is NOT going to tax cigars and smokeless tobacco. I sure don’t understand how small games of chance and performing arts represent more discretionary spending that the use of the tobacco products.
The budget deal calls for forcing the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources to lease tens of thousands of acres of state forest lands for oil and gas development, notably Marcellus shale gas development. Leasing state lands is nothing new for DCNR, but it is done carefully and prudently. Forcing the lease of so much land to balance the state budget really limits the care that can be taken. The budget deal also ends the 55-year-old Oil and Gas Lease Fund where money from leased state land was placed and used to maintain our state parks and other environmental projects and instead dumps it into the General Fund.
Missing from the budget deal is any severance tax on Marcellus Shale or other oil and gas development, despite the fact severance taxes are in place in nearly every other oil and gas producing state.
I have yet to discern what the state budget means for many state programs important to the future of Oil City. The details are not yet out there, but the rumors do not sound good. It appears some of those programs are lost or severely reduced, and in many other cases, the costs for services are being pushed down to the county and local level. Let’s hope the rumors are wrong.
Times are tough and the legislature faced real problems, but I think we deserved better.
THE PROMISED OC MAIN STREET MISSION AND VISION
Oil City Main Street Mission and Vision
Mission:
The Oil City Main Street mission is to make Oil City’s downtown business district aesthetically pleasing and economically viable, providing a foundation for the healthy growth and success of current and future businesses for the benefit of current and future residents. Our downtown will become the regional destination for visitors to enjoy the arts, recreation and entertainment by leveraging our rich heritage and natural resources.
Vision:
OUR VISION is a community where we all work in concert to make Oil City a desirable place to work, live and visit. A Main Street community that has:
· A main street district with restored historic architecture and attractive streetscapes
· Scenic waterways, walking and bike trails that will provide river access and opportunities for recreation;
· A vibrant artist community that supports art and cultural in a visitor friendly venue;
· Downtown niche businesses that offer unique and enjoyable retail, restaurant and accommodation experiences;
· Professional services that support the wellbeing and vitality of our citizens and local economy;
· Quaint and affordable residential apartments and town homes in the upper stories of downtown buildings;
· Connections to the emerging technology that will enhance opportunities and allow our businesses to be responsive to changing markets and customer needs and
· Academic and research programs provided by Clarion University - Venango Campus, Dubois Business College, the Venango Technology Center and the Oil City School District that will augment the skill sets and knowledge needed to grow our local economy and connect us to world markets.
The ambiance of our downtown will shine, known for its rich history, vibrant arts and culture and spectacular natural assets of river and hills. The dynamic businesses located in our downtown will thrive in an environment that connects history, culture, emerging technology and human assets in our own unique way.
REBUILD OIL CITY
First, there is an interesting new blog -- Rebuild Oil City (http://rebuildoilcity.blogspot.com/) – by Scott Smail. I urge everyone to click over, take a look and join in the conversation.
Blogs about local issues can be important tools for community involvement and innovation. Certainly that appears to be the spirit behind Scott’s blog. Scott and I have our share of disagreements, but no one can question his desire to better Oil City.
MAIN STREET
The Oil City Main Street Program continues to move forward.
Two months ago the Mission and Vision statements were completed and approved. They are posted at the bottom of this blog.
Another huge step will be taken this week with the filing of the Oil City Profile, a pre-application requirement of the state Department of Community and Economic Development. Dozens of people put hours into gathering the information necessary to submit the profile. John Phillips of the Oil Region Alliance had the task of pulling it all together and keeping everyone on track. I didn’t envy him, but he got it done.
In addition, the subcommittees are embarking on their individual planning journeys. Each is required to develop a one-year and five year plan outlining their goals and objectives and how they intend to reach them. It is an involved process that in the end will guide the rebirth of our downtown. The subcommittees expect to have their one-year plan in place by January.
THE STATE BUDGET
Disappointed and frustrated with our legislature is putting it mildly.
Under the pending budget deal the state is going to tax bingo and small games of chance that support so many of our area’s nonprofits and community organizations, including providing funding for the Venango County’s Humane Society’s spay and neuter program. The state is going to impose the 6 percent sales tax on performing arts shows – read Barrow Theater productions and the Oil City Arts Council’s musical performances in the Transit. But, the state is NOT going to tax cigars and smokeless tobacco. I sure don’t understand how small games of chance and performing arts represent more discretionary spending that the use of the tobacco products.
The budget deal calls for forcing the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources to lease tens of thousands of acres of state forest lands for oil and gas development, notably Marcellus shale gas development. Leasing state lands is nothing new for DCNR, but it is done carefully and prudently. Forcing the lease of so much land to balance the state budget really limits the care that can be taken. The budget deal also ends the 55-year-old Oil and Gas Lease Fund where money from leased state land was placed and used to maintain our state parks and other environmental projects and instead dumps it into the General Fund.
Missing from the budget deal is any severance tax on Marcellus Shale or other oil and gas development, despite the fact severance taxes are in place in nearly every other oil and gas producing state.
I have yet to discern what the state budget means for many state programs important to the future of Oil City. The details are not yet out there, but the rumors do not sound good. It appears some of those programs are lost or severely reduced, and in many other cases, the costs for services are being pushed down to the county and local level. Let’s hope the rumors are wrong.
Times are tough and the legislature faced real problems, but I think we deserved better.
THE PROMISED OC MAIN STREET MISSION AND VISION
Oil City Main Street Mission and Vision
Mission:
The Oil City Main Street mission is to make Oil City’s downtown business district aesthetically pleasing and economically viable, providing a foundation for the healthy growth and success of current and future businesses for the benefit of current and future residents. Our downtown will become the regional destination for visitors to enjoy the arts, recreation and entertainment by leveraging our rich heritage and natural resources.
Vision:
OUR VISION is a community where we all work in concert to make Oil City a desirable place to work, live and visit. A Main Street community that has:
· A main street district with restored historic architecture and attractive streetscapes
· Scenic waterways, walking and bike trails that will provide river access and opportunities for recreation;
· A vibrant artist community that supports art and cultural in a visitor friendly venue;
· Downtown niche businesses that offer unique and enjoyable retail, restaurant and accommodation experiences;
· Professional services that support the wellbeing and vitality of our citizens and local economy;
· Quaint and affordable residential apartments and town homes in the upper stories of downtown buildings;
· Connections to the emerging technology that will enhance opportunities and allow our businesses to be responsive to changing markets and customer needs and
· Academic and research programs provided by Clarion University - Venango Campus, Dubois Business College, the Venango Technology Center and the Oil City School District that will augment the skill sets and knowledge needed to grow our local economy and connect us to world markets.
The ambiance of our downtown will shine, known for its rich history, vibrant arts and culture and spectacular natural assets of river and hills. The dynamic businesses located in our downtown will thrive in an environment that connects history, culture, emerging technology and human assets in our own unique way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)