Residents in the city of Delaware will have the chance to zote on funding a new recreational center which would be built on South Houk Road between William Street (St. Rte. 37) and Pittsburgh Avenue.
The Citizens to Promote Recreation have launched a Web site to promote the intiative which will be owned by the City, run by the YMCA and have joint space with the proposed National Guard Armory.
The Recreation Center will cost the “avearge” Delaware family $77 per year in city income tax according to the organization’s Web site.
To pay for the facility, the Delaware income tax rate would be raised from 1.4% to 1.55%, which is a 0.15% increase in the rate until paid (expected to be within 20 years)*. For a family with a household income of $75,000, the new rate would cost approximately $112 additional per year. According to the most recent census information available, the median household income in Delaware is $51,422, which means the average Delaware household would pay approximately $77 additional per year. *Once debt is paid, the income tax will roll back to 1.4%. (Source: Delaware Recreation Center Web site)
Whether you support this bill or not get out and vote on August 5!
Photograph by Ahmed Ikleel and used via permission of Flickr.
Similar Posts:
- Santa, Line 1 … Paging Santa
- Delaware Home Sales, Prices Dip in September
- Delaware Ohio Real Estate: The First Quarter
Sadie Lynn is the Boxer of Toby Boyce, a REALTOR with Keller Williams Consultants Realty, and Mrs. Toby. Sadie has been hearing more than she can take about real estate and Delaware since Toby became an agent in July. So, she decided to take into her own hands and created this site to share her new knowledge. Enjoy, my take on Delaware, Ohio and real estate as a general. 
Sign-Up For Up-To-The-Minute Updates on Central Ohio Foreclosures
Find Your Next Home!
Sign Up Today and Be in Drawing for A Gift Card!
Do You Have a Real Estate Question? Ask Toby!
I totally support this issue. I would rather have my money going to the Delaware YMCA than another city’s YMCA or a gym outside Delaware. A membership to the YMCA (broken down into monthly payments) is less than the average monthly cable bill!
Plus this issue will raise money that is used to improve existing facilites in Delaware (light lighting the fields at Mingo).
Christine,
It is a good cause, we’ll see how the city reacts on August 5.
Having a recreation center is a very good idea.
HOWEVER, I am NOT convinced that this particular conception of building one is such a good idea.
Firstly, look at YMCAs around central Ohio, then look at independent community centers (Westerville, Dublin) (you can easily find info on all of this online; or stop in one of them). To me, it seems that the independent city rec centers are much nicer than the Ys.
Next, look at the cost. The independent cities’ rec centers were/are also funded by tax levies. That is reasonable. They also pay a membership fee. The interesting thing is: Look at what that fee is!
If the Delaware rec center levy is passed and it is built as planned, I could go to Westerville’s beautiful center and pay less there as a non-resident than I would to go to the Delaware one as a resident! That is ridiculous.
Therefore, to me, this simply doesn’t add up.
I want more amenities and features, and an overall nicer facility, for less. That can and has been done–look at our neighbors. Of course, for a comparison on the opposite side, look at Powell/Liberty Twp rec center. Do they really get what they’re paying for?
Additionally, with a city owned and operated center, all fees paid to the center go to the center operating costs/city. With a Y, they go to the Y for its operating costs or whatever else. Why not circle our money back to ourselves, keeping it in the city, with a city-owned and operated facility?
You decide, Delaware. The Westerville/Dublin-style, or the Powell/Y style?
A rec center is a great idea! But that doesn’t mean we just have to take whatever plan gets thrown at us. I say, we send them back to the drawing board…let them come up with a couple other ideas for comparison.
We should get the best center that we can, and at the best price possible for it. I don’t believe this current proposal fits either of those, and that is why I do not support it.
Whether or not you choose to support it, at least think about this; if you want a say in it, vote.
Those other communities chose to approve a higher tax amount so that the tax covers some of the operating costs and then the residents who use it pay a lower fee than in our model of operation. So their non-users pay for the construction AND part of the operating cost. We also do not have affluence to generate those funds without a much higher tax.
We considered doing all that and decided that passing a construction levy would be hard enough and that users should bear the operating cost.
Good response above.
Well, here we are on Aug. 5th, voting day!…
There remain multiple points that could be discussed on this topic; I believe a discourse on them could be very interesting and worthwhile.
But that didn’t/won’t happen.
However, it IS voting day. Generally, it seems that people don’t really think beyond maybe a second-grade level on most issues…rec center, education, seniors, MRDD, presidents…they just vote. (yes, there is certainly a little bit of a joke in there, but maybe not that funny of one)
When it comes to thinking and planning, I can be a bit of an idealist…why not, when considering ideas, be an idealist? When it comes to action, like voting, my pragmatism trumps that idealism in most cases.
Rec Center = good. Therefore, I’m going to vote for it.
(haha…see 2 paragraphs above)