" Alderman want more information before voting to consolidate accounts"
Please click on the header to be directed to a story by Burke Wasson in this weeks Call. Some very interesting information here.
By the way Mr. Tim Trueblood has a letter to the editor you might want to review also.
Tom Ford
No.201
By the way Mr. Tim Trueblood has a letter to the editor you might want to review also.
Tom Ford
No.201
posted by Crestwood Independent at 19:06
47 Comments:
Good for him! I'm glad Trueblood signs his name when he states his opinion - unlike most on this blog. Hard to argue with his letter - since all it does is quote the mayor and city administrator's own words about how they wish they could get around the constitution. Shame on them. I just hope there will enough citizens that can help pay for the lawsuit that will need to be filed when the city violates the constitution by signing those loan papers.
According to the Charter:
"If at any time during the fiscal year it appears probable to the City Administrator that the revenues available will be insufficient to meet the amount appropriated, it shall be reported to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen without delay. The City Administrator shall indicate the estimated amount of the deficit and any remedial action taken, and recommend further steps to be implemented. The board of Aldermen shall then take such further action as it deems necessary to prevent any deficit, and for that purpose it may by ordinance reduce appropriations."
So what is the estimated amount of the deficit? It does not say percentages above/below budget.
Where is the recommendations by the CA to prevent any deficit? Combining cash from all funds to decrease the amount of interest paid for the line of credit? That is using restricted funds for the use of a line of credit.
Prior to the current mayor, the BOA knew what they were faced with and wanted Prop 1. The current mayor was against this type of borrowering. Now what? Where's the plan if Prop 1 was not right?
Where is Roy's plan? He spent an entire campaign claiming to have a plan, then he tells us he isn't a 'numbers' guy. How could he have had a plan if doesn't understand the numbers?
It is extremely worrisome that these two appear to not have a handle on the finances, and the solutions they are offering are inadquate.
I agree with the blogger that said let's get rid of these two and let the Board of Aldermen find someone capable of doing the job.
"I agree with the blogger that said let's get rid of these two and let the Board of Aldermen find someone capable of doing the job.
10:39 AM, August 17, 2006 "
In case you forget blogger, the people elect the mayor, unless you would like to change that.
"Good for him! I'm glad Trueblood signs his name when he states his opinion - unlike most on this blog."
False. I have never seen Trueblood sign his name to anything on this blog.
11:51 AM You are absolutely right. The voters by recall can get rid of the mayor anytime.
That and they can recall aldermen, like Kelleher for example.
Anyone know if the mayor has bothered to read the Missouri Constitution? I tend to doubt it because the numbers might be confusing to him.
Anyone know if former Mayor Fagan bothered to read Missouri's Sunshine Law?
10:39 am 8/17 Who do you have in mind to take their place? Maybe God! Outside of God and a miracle, there is nobody I feel can help. Of course, we can always get Mr. Greer and Fagan to come back; things were so much better when he was around!!!!
This article and their comments are just another example of many to come where people get a kick out of making jokes. But what happens is many of us "play" into their remarks and then we end up as bad as they are. I don't think that is such a good idea.
I don't know if the budget can be fixed to suit everyone. I don't know if we are better or worse off now than before, but I do know that you can't make things right overnight when things have been going down hill for years with nobody watching and some people doing a lousy job.
I will see how things play out in the next month or so; in the meantime, what good does it do to battle the issues and hit below the belt about people. I didn't see the other administrations before this one, win any awards for getting things right and do right by the citizens either!
AMEN!
Sorry! Amen! Only one cap - didn't mean to shout.
I think expectations were set during the mayor's campaign. People are looking for a solution. The mayor was against Prop 1 because that was not the right solution. So....expectations were set to see solutions provided. To date, pay as you go is not cutting it.
Having the Ways and Means committee meeting in August? Then trying to hurry the recommendations? Especially since no actual financials have been provided. Please. Give me a break.
The GO BONDS would have paid all the debt to the banks. We would still have the ownership to City Hall. By this Oct. we will have to pay off our loans to the bank or go to the voters and ask for an extension on the debt package. I will never forget Roy in the debate saying one of the reasons he was against the GO Bonds was he didnt trust any politician with the $6 million the bouds would have proved if passed, "hell' I wouldn't trust my self with $6 million!" A lot of the people there laughed at his average man humor style. But now we read and hear where he admits he doesnt understand the budget and anything over 1 page is too long, you have to wonder if he was joking back then.
I need some enlightenment (among other things), so therefore, I have a question:
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a GO Bond?
I hope our Mayor has read what Claire McCaskill said about the danger of having all our eggs in one basket. This whole situation seems to get more complicated all the time. What to do, what to do? I feel like the faster I go, the behinder I get. I see lots of opinions but no solutions.
I hope this helps. If there are any costs involved, I don't know. This is taken from Investopedia.com
"A municipal bond backed by the credit and "taxing power" of the issuing jurisdiction rather than the revenue from a given project.
General obligation bonds are issued with the belief that a municipality will be able to repay its debt obligation through taxation or revenue from projects. No assets are used as collateral."
Advantage: we get the funds we need.
Dis-advantage: Out of town investers get tax brakes, and interest, Crestwood get's, well the fund's, so it's not a great idea if you ask me.
Tom Ford
Thank you both for your answers. Would there be costs involved with GO Bonds?
GO bonds are paid for by an increase in the property tax, that the voters approve when they approve the selling of GO Bonds. In this case the increase had a sunset of 10 years.
The bonds are not paid off by sales tax dollars, so the major $ stream for the city, it's sales tax, is not damaged. The schools are not effected as there is no change in their tax dollars.
With property values going up the Bonds could have been paid off sooner than 10 years, vs. a declining sales tax flow which may have caused a problem with bond payments.
Frank Spinner said before the Board when the Police Station funding was being discussed that GO Bond method makes the most sense for any City in our position. Frank was right.
Anyone can buy the bonds, not just "out of towners" so the tax break is not limited to a small group of people.
Crestwood gets the $ without having to take out any loans, the cash is in hand. Frank Spinner was right.
Thanks for your input!
oster at 11:53 am - you seem to have a deficit in reading comprehension. The original post at 8:53 did NOT say trueblood signs his name on this blog, or even whether he posts to this blog, but rather HE SIGNE HIS NAME BY WRITING A LETTER TO THE EDITOR. duh.
Here's a definition of bonds - they are a LEGAL means for cities to carry debt and they are authorized by the citizens. As opposed to the debt our mayor wants to renew this fall that is not, according to our attorney, legal and that has not been authorized by voters. that's why the city administrator said the state constitution is an impediment to doing what he wants to do.
The interest rate on the current bank loans is now significantly higher than the interest rate would of been on Prop 1 GO bonds. It looks like Crestwood taxpayers are going to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars more in interest over the life of the bank loans than would have been the case with Prop 1 GO Bonds. Think about it.
Poster from 6:29 PM, August 17, 2006
I stand by what I wrote.
Trueblood has never signed anything on this blog. Furthermore, your statement compared him to most participants on this blog. You did not specify newspaper, you only specified blog.
I don't suffer from any deficit. Your writing suffers from a deficit of clarity.
Alderman Roby's desire to have an auditor hired to give an opinion on the comingling of city funds by the use of one checking account is a commendable thought but an unecessary waste of taxpayer dollars. The checking accounts in question were mostly established during the Forensic Audits and the State Audit. The State Auditors surely would have recommended that one checking acoount rather than several be used if that was appropriate.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't BOTH the State Audit and the forensic audit from BSW recommend the separate checking accounts?
When is the next meeting? I want to attend and ask the elected people some of these questions to their face. How do you do that?
Bottom line is this - the mayor and city administrator want to make the accounting more hidden, more secret. that's what happens if you mix capital funds with general funds into one account. if the mayor admits he doesn't understanding the accounting where the balance is right there for each type of tax money, how is he going to understand some kind of back office accounting that claims un-mix expenses/income from one slush fund? you know the old saying - follow the money. they want to make it harder for citizens to see whether capital funds are really being spent for what we voted for them to be spent on. plain and simple. and he has manipulated some people to such levels of hatred that they will go along with anything he supports and others oppose - no questions asked anymore. there has to be some kind of state oversight of this to stop this money grab.
No mixing of funds and establish a citizens financial advisory board.
Arguements for and against?
We already have the monies separated but have not been provided any financials: only percentages.
Crestwood citizens need to see the fund balances of all the major funds on paper. This should be provided to the citizens and the BOA. Period.
A citizens financial advisory board would not be a bad idea if it was just overseeing one fund. Asking to dig into the entire budget seems too much to ask for a volunteer.
It seems to me the issue of the single checking account is being pushed on the BOA.
Politics will be an issue here. I am sure he has contacted particular BOA members to ensure that his "plan" goes through. Seen it before on the current mayor's watch. I am sure he means well but....
Crestwood's CA stated in the article: "The problem we're facing right now is because of the $2 million of short-term borrowing, we've in essence used up all our cash in our three funds and we had to borrow $2 million for operating purposes. We have no cash and therefore we have a negative $2 million."
So those percentages meant really nothing.
The Capital Improvement Fund was projected to a positive $1 million balance at the end of 2005. Where did that money go if the fund balance is zero? Last year several Capital Improvements were not implemented that were budgeted. (ie. police vehicles, communication equipment, accounting software)
Why have we not been provided with end of year (2005) actual fund balances? This is August of 2006.
In fact no actual financials have been provided in the year 2006 and the mayor and the CA want the BOA to approve the blending of checking accounts? It doesn't seem right to me.
Alderman Miguel's comment in the article about moving slowly is exactly how all of last year went. I agree picking up pennies here and there does add up but not to the tune of over a $2 million dollars!
I have read through this entire site 3 times. It is obvious the answers are hard to come by. But surprise, once again it seems politics is rearing its ugly head. How truly sad that there are those out there who rather than be an asset chose the low road on a blog where they don't sign their name. Between ideas and explanations and suggestions, laid out by the concerned and caring bloggers, someone wants very very badly to crucify the Mayor and C/A. This matter is very complicated. I would imagine the Board feels swamped. I think they would probably like to get all the right ducks in a row and do the right thing. Each has a voice, each wants to make sure we are on the right path. Each is probably more than aware that working together is going to produce more than being divisive. I hope they have the tenacity to ignor all the naysayers and accusers and hatemongers because these attributes have no place in the decisions that face them.
I, too, am trying to wade through all the response. I praise the good ideas and suggestions and am open to them all. But then, to get through it all, I was exposed to some idiots idea of fair play. That being to turn every breath taken by those chosen to lead our city into a death knoll for Crestwood.
Please reconsider your deficit thinking and join the rest of us in coming to terms with the right way to handle our bank account. Surely you can pull from some lighter place than the one you are in now.
To the comment "Please reconsider your deficit thinking and join the rest of us in coming to terms with the right way to handle our bank account."
I did not drink the kool-aid the mayor was serving. Sorry
I prefer tea.
8:53 am 8/17 So you are glad that Trueblood signs his name when he states his opinion. Try putting an opinion opposite his on his website. He only puts things on it that do not go against what he thinks. That's why he scrutinizes all comments. Then he gets to pick the ones that don't state an opposing opinion. Therefore, there is no debate and nothing on it but what he picks. That's real democratic.
5:23 PM 8/22 Suggest that you check the comments on Trueblood's Crestwood Political Review blog again and then retract your false criticism.
5:23, 8/22
Blogger, surely this can't be true what you said about Trueblood cherry picking what he allows on his site. This is easily the most pathetic thing I have ever heard of, if true. Surely the man could dig up a little integrity, since he does not seem to be able to live with his deamons since leaving office. He has become a crybaby and bottom feeder and is only hurting himself.
Blogger at 9:59 am 8/23. I have tried putting things on Trueblood's Blog ever since the first day it was up. It's not false criticism and an apology is not necessary. 2 comments made it out of 8 on his blog. My comments were critical but not overbearing. I asked questions and gave my opinions, nicely. They never got published. So, I just made up my mind to forget trying it.
Trueblood can do as he so desires with his blog. This is what I have discovered about it, and if you disagree so be it.
Trueblood doesn't seem to have a problem with critical remarks he makes in the newspapers about the mayor and others. But he can't seem to have enough patience to take criticism of himself and the administration he was part of, even when it is done in taste!
2:32 PM 8/23 "2 comments made it out of 8 on his blog. My comments were critical..." Then you say "he can't seem to have enough patience to take criticism" Seems your comments must usually be personally critical of Trueblood and often irrelevant to the topic being discussed.
Blogger at 2:50 8/23 There you go again, breaking up my sentences.
Have it your way!! Just giving my views. I shouldn't be taken to the woodshed for stating them. I'm not on a witness stand so cut the cross examination!
Mr. Trueblood manages to get his point across either in the newspaper or on his blog. I was just trying to get mine point across. I don't want to argue over it!
Forgive me for trying!
To 5:23, 8/22 blogger. It's true, just log on his site, comment, and wait for him to decide if he will allow it. Some post's will be "allowed" to look "fair", but that's the way liberals do things.
if you dont like what is being said on this or any other blog, you can either quit reading it or start you own one with your own rules.
That is correct, if we don't like what we read on a site we can start or move to another. But this one on a daily basis makes me realize how very smart many are and how stupid are others. By now I have identified the stupid ones, none of which are a surprise. This site is free entretainment and along the way somewhat factual. As for the man being complimented for signing his name, well the CALL does not publish a letter unless it is signed by the writer. I have not gone onto his blog site, but it sounds like a onesided washout which does not print anything not advantageous to the site editor. I don't happen to like this kind of democracy. To want and need this kind of control is downright scarry. But not unfamiliar in this case.
"By now I have identified the stupid ones, none of which are a surprise."
I find that comment very interesting. Can't imagine how you can identify individuals posting. You must be very gifted.
Post a Comment
<< Home