Year: 2023

The following is a long read and incorporates information from other Columbia Spy articles but is an attempt to understand some of the borough’s finances over the past few years.

As things stand now, Columbia Borough is potentially in debt $20 million due to the actions of current and previous councils. Here are the basic figures:

Currently, the borough owes over $9 million for the McGinness Innovation Park and $11 million for payment of a series of general obligation bonds (municipal bond) taken out in 2016 for capital projects and payment of debt.

To be fair, the borough has not received the remainder of the RACP grant approved by the state for the Market House renovation and for parking solutions. The amount is in the neighborhood of $1 million.

At the October 24, 2023 borough council meeting, Borough Manager Mark Stivers said the municipal tax rate will stay at 8 mills for 2024, but Council President Heather Zink stated that council can’t say that definitively, because the budget hasn’t been finalized. (The plan is for council to vote to adopt the budget at the first voting meeting in December, according to Zink.)

That’s the short version. Here’s the long version:

The McGinness Property 

Columbia Borough closed on the purchase of the 58-acre McGinness property on 8/20/21.

The estimate to develop the tract as of summer 2022 was $12 million, according to BizNewsPA (7/20/22). Columbia initially paid $1.5 million to purchase the property. The total of those two figures is $13.5 million.

The borough received a $1 million DCED grant from the state. Deduct that from the $13.5 million above to get $12.5 million.

Columbia Borough was also approved for a “Business In Our Sights” (BIOS) $3,350,000 grant (rounded off) in 2022. So deduct that from the $12.5 million to get $9,150,000. That’s the total amount the borough will owe. That amount includes the $5.4 million loan that was approved, since we have to pay that back, most likely with interest (see below).

These figures could vary somewhat, but unless the borough somehow secures yet another grant, $9 million is a good “ballpark ” figure. Officials hope that leasing or selling parcels (or possibly the whole property) will generate revenue. If that can be done, the $9 million figure would certainly be mitigated – or, ideally, eliminated. The latest estimate for completion of the project is six years.

[On a side note, according to LNP: “Columbia Borough Council publicly received the results of its 2021 audit with a warning. The independent accountant who presented the report noted the municipality consistently is reducing its cash position by spending down its capital fund. However, Columbia officials mentioned unique circumstances they say mitigates the decline.

More info: The borough’s cash assets were $2.9 million at the end of 2021, down $1.8 million since 2020. This result continues a four-year trend of declining cash balances, said Michael L. Reiner, CPA with Sager, Swisher & Co. “That is concerning,” Reiner told council members. The borough’s capital fund pays for projects that could include buildings and roads. A separate general fund pays for running the municipality.”] 

This information is included here only to note a trend. In essence, the borough currently has little or nothing in its capital fund to contribute towards the cost of the project, so a property tax hike seems inevitable, if not this year, then the next. (As stated above, Stivers says it won’t happen for 2024; Zink says it is not definitive.) Last October, Council President Heather Zink said at a council meeting (10/20/22) that property taxes are going to go up. So, it’s inevitable, but who knows when it will happen?

In addition, since the borough bought the airfield, it no longer receives tax revenue from that property and will eventually owe taxes to the school district once the property is “developed.” If the property isn’t sold then, it will become a tax burden for the borough.

Over the past two years, the borough has already spent well over a quarter of a million on testing and maintenance of the property, as well as asbestos abatement and demolition of the forner McGinness home – just to get the project started.

Regarding the $5.4 million loan the borough received from the state, it has 5 years to pay it back. Specifically, Columbia will need to reimburse the state about $158,000 for every acre sold (LNP 3/5/22). After five years, the state will amortize the loan over 15 years and charge 3% interest. The most recent timeline for project completion, according to borough officials (as of a few months ago) is about 6 years.

Note: The borough did receive ARPA funds, some of which were used for project costs, instead of towards infrastructure, housing, etc.

Another item to note is that a grant for DR1 Group, a drone company looking to develop an aerial-technology business at the property, was denied. The grant application was recently resubmitted, but a decision is not expected until next year.

In sum, this project could be costly for a long time. 

The Municipal Bond

The current financial crunch dates back to 2016 when council, with Kelly Murphy as president, voted to approve a series of general obligation bonds totaling $9.8 million to pay off debt and for capital projects. Unfortunately, the debt has been draining borough coffers ever since, leading Stivers to admit at the 2022 meeting, “We’ve been borrowing money to pay the bond” and describing it as an “albatross.”

Stivers asked council to consider a “16-year plan” to pay off the debt. As an option, Zink suggested a special tax levy, which could entail raising taxes 1.5 mills to make annual payments of $691,000 for 16 years. ($691,000 multiplied by 16 equals $11,056,000.) Currently, no plan has been enacted. Bizarrely, Stivers said council has been “blessed” with the opportunity to solve this problem. The relevant part of the discussion can be heard HERE at 1:14:30.

A budget meeting scheduled for November 16 has been canceled. The budget will now be discussed at the November 9 work session.

Moving the Highway Department
There are other issues: a hoped-for sale of the sewer plant and borough sheds, as well as the former firehouse on Front Street. The plant and the firehouse properties are currently being leased out,  and the sheds are still being used by the borough. The borough hopes the sale of these properties will help pay for the move of the highway department to the former Columbia Reduction Company at Ridge Avenue and 11th Street. The borough wants to move the highway department there at a cost of $1.35 million for the building plus an additional $2 million for cleanup and renovation of the property. The sewer plant and firehouse were expected to be sold by September of this year but so far haven’t sold.

The borough is also looking at selling off another asset: 26 acres of the borough farm to be put up for bid.

To sum up, there are many issues in play and a lot that taxpayers could be on the hook for. Unfortunately,  borough officials have hung their hopes on a multitude of ifs and maybes that could keep taxpayers in debt for decades.

Nov 6th, 2023 

On 11/05/23 at approx. 5:15 a.m. Police responded to Stover’s News on North Third St. for a report of a retail theft that had just occurred. Three masked individuals entered the store together and all fled after grabbing an entire display case of disposable vapes. Pictures are of the suspects. 

Anyone with information about this retail theft is encouraged to contact the Columbia Borough Police Department by submitting a tip or by phone at 717-684-7735 

Location 24 North Third Street Columbia, PA 17512 

Date Nov 5, 2023

See photos at link below:

Sourced via CRIMEWATCH®: https://lancaster.crimewatchpa.com/columbiapd/10552/cases/retail-theft-investigation?fbclid=IwAR3-pJfPDqTOHxqZz65BU2Pp-EPSZs8Wt7LaW0B5nDouv7i0wvGUdJqzaOA

The estate of Gene C. Douglas Jr. conveyed property on a public road to Austin M. Douglas for $1.

Mary Ann Kramer conveyed property on a public road to Kenneth Kneisley and Wilma Kneisley for $315,000.

Abigail A. Benner, Abigail A. Buttorff and Daniel J. Buttorff conveyed property on Perry Street to Alex H. Mowery for $190,500.

So, why won’t I vote for Columbia Borough Council candidate Kelly Murphy? Because of what he did. This is his track record when he was on council previously:

• He raised taxes in 2018 when it was unnecessary to do so. That is, he voted to levy a 21.2% TAX HIKE on taxpayers!
• He voted to implement the infamous REVOLVING LOAN FUND that loaned taxpayer money to private business. (The courts later found that the borough administered the fund improperly.)
• He didn’t repeal his tax hike and the Revolving Loan Fund despite being petitioned to do so by taxpayers. He ignored a petition signed by 1,162 borough taxpayers!
• He refused to meet with residents when they requested a meeting to discuss repealing the Revolving Loan Fund.
• He voted to purchase $347,000 of unnecessary street lights for a state road. (A grant for the lights fell through, and they were never used and have been sitting at the borough sheds for the past several years.)
• He considered giving a $650,000 grant (taxpayer money!) to a developer.
• He took out a municipal bond (2016) for $9.8 million that we’re still on the hook for. It’s now at $11 million! The borough might need to implement a special tax levy to pay it off. Taxpayers will need to pay $691,000 a year for 16 years. The tax levy will require an increase of 1-½ mills. That equals a tax hike of almost 19% !
• He voted to purchase the money-losing trolley.
• He abolished the borough’s Municipal Authority and liquidated its funds.

True, he didn’t do all these things alone, but he did do them. In addition, Kelly hasn’t attended any budget meetings so far this year, so how interested is he in Columbia’s future?

Based on his record, Kelly Murphy has been careless with taxpayer’s money. In 2018, right before he raised taxes, he was even scolded by former borough manager Rebecca Denlinger for overspending and then planning to raise taxes. She asked, “…was part of the plan to say, okay when we run out of fund balance, we’re just gonna hike taxes a whole bunch…?”

Here’s an audio clip: LINK

Is Kelly Murphy worth your vote? Just look at his record and decide for yourself. As for me, the answer is a resounding “NO”!

Angel kneeling at Mount Bethel

Unique grave marker

Cliff Logan, Jr. of AE Balloon Fights sailed over Columbia on Saturday afternoon.

This nearby Mylar balloon didn’t fare as well.

Vote on November 7.

Hate has no home here.

CCAT: Columbia Cat Action Team

Recycle your butt here.

At Dr. Kepple’s former office on the 500 block of Chestnut Street.

At dusk

Hey, that’s a lot of hay!

(Or is it straw?)

The DAC

Diagonal

South 2nd Street roadwork

Colorful clouds

Do not disturb.

You’ll see many of these around town.

Straight on through

Fast and loose with the truth or just inaccurate? A recent Crimson 5 flyer suggests that an article about a tax hike appeared on a Columbia Spy post on 6/19 of this year. In fact, the article appeared on May 28, 2019. True, a tax hike was approved on June 20, 2019 (by two current Crimson candidates), so in that respect 6/19 could be considered correct, but in essence, they’re touting their own tax hike.

The Crimson 5 (formerly Crimson 6) Columbia School Board candidates are complaining about school taxes, but the last tax hike was in 2019, during the tenure of current Crimson candidates Cole Knighton and Fred Thomas when they served on the board. In fact, Knighton was Finance chair at the time, and Thomas seconded the motion and both voted for the tax hike, according to minutes of the June 20, 2019 Columbia School Board meeting.

There’s also been speculation within the community that the purpose of the Crimson 5 is to bring back former Columbia School Superintendent Tom Strickler, who is now CFOO of the Elizabethtown School District. This theory is partially supported by Knighton’s sudden resignation a few years ago, in protest of the board not renewing Strickler’s contract. Knighton is now the de facto leader of the Crimsons.

One wonders if Knighton’s only goal is Strickler’s reinstatement. He hasn’t seemed too interested in serving on the board otherwise. For example, his attendance record was abysmal – only 40% – according to a recent post by the Columbia School Board Candidates for Continued Growth.

Reportedly, only two of the Crimson candidates have attended any school board meetings this year – and only sparsely at that.

So how interested are they in serving our school district if they don’t even show up? How could they know and understand recent issues?

Currently, our school district is moving in a positive direction: Taxes are stable, while attendance and test scores have risen. So, why would the Crimson group want to disrupt this forward momentum, unless they have an agenda, which apparently they do.

Columbia voters would do well to keep the current momentum going by voting for a board that’s already brought success: Sandy Duncan, Sonya Duncan, Kathleen Hohenadel, Charles Leader, Lauren VonStetten – and Sharon Lintner.

At last night’s Columbia Borough School Board meeting, School Board Director Kathleen Hohenadel responded to recent public remarks by borough council members criticizing the school district.

Hohenadel said she was disheartened by the comments from council members, which she described as “an abuse of their public position.” Hohenadel challenged council to reinstate combined meetings with the school board and work together to find solutions.

The last joint meeting between council and the school board was in the spring of 2021.

In October of that year, Columbia Mayor Leo Lutz wrote a scathing letter to LNP critical of the board. Several council members have since made public comments criticizing the board.

Here’s the text of Hohenadel’s statement:

“I was disheartened by the comments made by members of Borough Council at a recent public meeting. Their swipes and jabs at the School District were not productive, did not foster good working relations, and were an abuse of their public position.

I challenge the members of Borough Council to reinstate the combined meetings of these two governmental bodies. Even though we both represent the same constituents, Council members decided those meetings were not productive. Yet, the very issues they grandstanded about could have some solutions that take a partnership of these two entities. It is easy to make derogatory comments about a group of people when you aren’t looking them in the face. I propose the much more difficult route of sitting down together to find solutions, of working collaboratively without the bluster and political positioning.”

Fire Chief Scott Ryno and volunteer firefighters from the Columbia Borough Fire Department thanked the Columbia School Board Thursday evening for passing a tax credit program that benefits firefighters and their families.

The board voted recently to adopt a “Volunteer Firefighters Tax Credit Program” with the goal of encouraging membership and service in the community’s volunteer fire company.

Lancaster Distilleries, 230 N. Fourth St., Columbia, opening, Oct. 26. Pass. The restroom does not have a covered waste receptacle for sanitary napkins. Food facility does not employ a certified food employee as required. The food facility has 90 days to enroll an employee in a state-recognized food safety course for managers.

Attachments can be found using the links HERE.