Key Vote Highlights

I sponsored the resolution which ended the ban on Chain Link fences in New Albany. My first attempt at removing the ban was within my first year in office in 2020. That resolution failed by a 6-3 vote. (R-20-13, 19 Nov 2020)

I made some changes in the verbiage based on the previous setback in 2020 and reintroduced in 2022. With the support of a very active community we were able to get the job done and make this critical change. The vote this time around was unanimous. (R-22-06, 7 July 2022)

We were successful in getting a Safe Haven Baby Box approved and installed at our New Firehouse On Charlestown Road

I say "we" because there are many people to thank for this. I simply wrote the ordinance and did some groundwork behind the scenes. There is no way in my mind that this would have passed without the written and official approval by our local Firefighters Union. I have to thank the generous private donor who is paying for the install of the device. I have to thank the people in our city who came to the meetings, wrote in , and called in support of this. It truly could not have been done without everyone. 

I hope the box never has to be used but I am so happy it is there if it is needed. 

(A-21-02, 7 June 2021)

If you know me, you would know that I believe we should all being paying less in taxes. I love the idea of keeping more of my money in my pockets. So you would think that I am 100% for tax abatements. However, the abatement playing field is not level. Massive companies that are not local are the businesses that typically get the breaks. Then politicians that approve these abatements can say they brought X amount of jobs when they run for reelection. Meanwhile, our local small business owners and citizens do not receive the same breaks and are on the hook to make up the difference. 

Not all tax abatements are created equal. I have been known to say "No" to tax abatements every now and again. When a tax abatement comes before my desk there are some key questions that I ask.

If this is a new company coming to New Albany

1. How many new employees and what is the average salary?

2. Will you make every attempt to hire people who live in New Albany?

3. Are Business and Project Financials and Timelines available and accurate?

4. What type of business?

If this is an existing company I ask these additional questions

1. Is this your first tax abatement?

2. Is your expansion due to natural growth and consumer demand?

3. What do you give back to the community? Are you a good neighbor?

A very simple test is to ask "Will this growth happen if there is no incentives?" If the growth is due to consumer demand and the business has to expand to produce and make money I will not be in favor of an abatement.

This vote was difficult to make. I am a supporter of our police and I want them to have everything they need to do their jobs. 

However, there were several things wrong with the proposal brought before the council.

1. The city council police committee met for over a year and never kept the council up to date on their meetings. I had no idea they were even meeting. I along with other members were unable to make any suggestions or address any concerns regarding the project throughout the year. 

2. After all of the meetings they came before the council with one and only one option. No other alternatives were discussed. They would not entertain looking into these other options we brought up. Could we use existing space like Ekin Ave Substation for training to save money? Could the PD Admin come to our brand new city hall to save money? What if we stay with the county? What if we lease? These are all questions we should be asking and we were provided with no answers. 

3. They are using an unorthodox way of paying for it by utilizing Sewer Fees. What is even more disturbing is the Mayor, Chief, and fellow council members are pushing a narrative that  this almost 18 million dollar building after fees will come at at no increase to the tax payers. This is absolutely false. The 1 million dollars per year from the Sewer fund could be 1 million dollars a year in cost reduction. If the city could decrease fees and chooses not to that is in essence an increase. 

4. The Chief stated we would get more training and services but could not elaborate on what those services actually were. 

The way the Police Station was proposed may have truly been the only option but because they did not look alternate uses and ways to fund I was not able to vote in favor. 

(G-23-01, 5 Jan 2023)

This change was brought before the council in November of 2020. I voted against this expansion for several reasons. 

1. The area in New Albany up for expansion was already seeing private growth and investment (Cattleman's, Dunkin Donuts, New Waffle house, etc.) without TIF.
2. This reasoning behind the expansion is to use money for a 2 million dollar intersection which is absolutely needed. However, putting it on a TIF for decades is not the way to do this. We have excess budget items, this is a project that needs to be budgeted. 
3. TIF takes money away from our school districts by freezing property tax revenues in TIF zones. This directly effects NAFCS negatively at a time when we just had a School Referendum on the ballot. I care about our teachers and our public education and felt this would be inappropriate. 
4. TIF and Redevelopment is notorious for lack of transparency and spending oversight. 

(R-20-12, 2 Nov 2020)

 I was the lone "No" on a Resolution to give Mayor the ability to bypass procedures and formalities required by law during COVID-19 Pandemic in New Albany. This type of legislation should be used in the event of natural disaster when government processes and infrastructure have been completely devastated and rendered inoperable.

It is critical that there are checks and balances provided by the various elected branches and appointed boards and committees in our city. Handing over complete control to the executive body is reckless and has potential to negatively impact the people we serve. I found this measure to be a completely unnecessary power grab when the city council had the ability to meet virtually via Zoom during the pandemic.

(R-20-01, 27 March 2020)