"Crestwood officials formulating RFP to secure tax-exempt financing pact"
Please click on the header for a story by Mr. Burke Wasson of the Suncrest Call. What with our notes coming due on October 31, 2006, this is a very timely subject.
Tom Ford
No. 223
Tom Ford
No. 223
posted by Crestwood Independent at 17:55
48 Comments:
Let the Spin begin!
Is this the Mayor's plan we were all bring asked to support?
Yup and you didn't even know what you were voting for - bonds! I thought the majority of the comments on this site were against any type of bonds! There ya go, there's the plan!
Instead of getting further in debt, let's merge with Sunset Hills and move on to better times!
In the article C/A Myers says, "... the commitment that they established when they voted for Prop S. We recognize there's some public-trust issues here ..." AMEN!!!! What an understatement. There was no mention in the newspapers or by the city government itself that voters were approving the issuance of bonds or bond-like obligations. Each voter would have had to be a sly lawyer to find that authority in the Prop S ballot language.
The mayor said AFTER the election that the voters had authorized long-term debt when they voted for Prop S. Betcha most voters didn't realize that they were authorizing that either. As the mayor's plan unfolds, we learn more and more about the mayor's character.
If Prop S authorized the city to issue long-term debt, how much long-term debt was authorized? Anyone know?
How much? Well I guess the $2mil + the $1.5Mil (line of credit)
My questions is, if it takes longer to pay off the debt than the alloted time voted in, then what? Oh, I guess another line of credit or loan. Good thing Crestwood did not ask for more than they absoluted needed!
Don't bond issues have to pass by 4/7's ? Did Prop S pass by that much? I'd sure like to give that citizen's committee a piece of my mind for not telling us we were authorizing bonds!
We were not authorizing bonds, this is a shell game City Hall is playing.
You who have been supporting this mayor 100% no matter what you have been told have been taken. Enjoy!
This is from a reader who asked me to "inform you" RE the Prop. S program.
"WILL you please explain to those making remarks on the BLOG, that if they
would read ORDINANCE # 3958 dated JAN, 17, 2006 it would help prevent
the mis-statements being made. In addition, the RESOLUTION was made.
What we voted on has nothing to do with the Bonds now being discussed now,
..CORRECT ?"
Tom Ford
And the spin continues.
Somebody explain to the readers of this blog what Mr Myers means when he talks about taxexempt. He means taking the increase in our property tax that we just passed and using it to pay for BONDS (like the wastefull GO BONDS that every body hates) that a bank will sell in exchange for a large sum of cash to pay off our debt. That is what is going on at City Hall and they will get away with it if we dont stop them
The city attorney wrote the ballot language for Prop S. If there is a problem with Prop S, why not ask him? He is at the board meetings 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of each month. There is a resident Q&A period.
To me the buck stops at the desk of the city attorney. If he is unsure, then he should get counsel. If I recall, it passed because residents were promised that the funds would be for debt retirement only.(3.5 M Dollar LOC) the City Attorney knew this.
A sizeable committee held pro Prop S meetings at Ms Char Braun's home with good attendance. There quite a bit of advertising put out which said "Vote for Prop S." Believe there were yard signs, as well.The people in attendance at these meetings who worked hard to get Prop S passed should be able to let you know the finer points, and why they were supporting this issue.
Why would you want to blame the BOA or the Mayor? Our city officials are our neighbors and friends, they are not JP Morgan; they depend on the city attorney to formulate ballots which express our needs.
Your deep need to blame the wrong parties simply won't float.
Mayor's spin is in full damage control mode. It's a thing of beauty!
Now its the City Attornys fault if Prop S property tax is used to pay for bonds not the Mayor's. Nice!
Yeah - the Prop S Committee never once said in any of those meetings that the vote would authorize bonds. Why didn't they tell us the truth?
Did prop S pass by a 4/7 majority? Isn't that what you need to pass a bond issue?
Folks we have to work hard to stop this bond issue nonsense once and for all. If they were a bad idea before, they're a bad idea now. Weren't there a couple of financial consultants that advised the mayor in detail why bonds were not a good deal? Let's get that info out there again and stop this craziness.
"Weren't there a couple of financial consultants that advised the mayor in detail why bonds were not a good deal?"
Oh, I guess the pre-mayor meetings with the "financial consultants" lead the mayor down the wrong street!
So we should trust everything a financial consultant, or any other consultant for that matter, says?
What is President of the Alderman Miguels take on all of this? I recall the Mayor saying that Alderman Miguel was the smartest man he had ever met when is came to understanding money matters. What does he think?
Ord. 3958 DTD. 1/17/06. copy and paste to your browser.
http://www.ci.crestwood.mo.us/docs/agendas_minutes/boa/2006_01_17/ordinance%203958%20calling%20for%20a%20tax%20rate%20issue%20on%20april%202006%20ballot.pdf
Tom Ford
thanks for posting that document, Tom. It certainly does not mention anything about bonds! we can stop it based on that ordinance!
I think the financial advisor you are thinking of was Frank Spinner. I heard him speak at length about his opposition to bonds. Does anyone have his telephone number? Someone should get him to come to the next board meeting.
I have Mr. Spinners phone number, and I will call and ask him to attend the next BOA meeting.
Tom Ford
Think the next time you order any Pizza!
For the "black Helo fans amoung us."
http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf
Tom Ford
So these are the concerns (correct me if I'm wrong):
*The city is converting Prop S revenue to bonds? although nothing was mentioned in the ordinance or ballot language to do so?
*Crestwood won't know the interest rate until the RFPs come in and the paperwork is signed?
*What are the fees and associated costs of these bonds?
*Is this being done in response to those who say Crestwood will be in violation of the state constitution? Or is this being done to get the city the best deal financially? Or a combination of both?
Hopefully, the city will have some answers to these questions.
7:22 blogger, by golly, I think you have it nailed!
I am not sure why it's being done, but I sure wish we al knew. Lord knows I am trying hard to believe we know what we are doing, but sometimes, I wonder.
Tom Ford
At this point in time, it sounds like a 2nd and 3rd opinion is needed, from professionals (who have no dog in the fight). The correct tools are needed to chose the right direction and as importantly to eliminate the wrong decision and make it possible for the blame and/or praise be shared by a board asking the right questions and coming up with the right answers.
Did you can Mr. Spinner and is he coming to next BOA meeting?
Bonds or COPS or whatever make little or no sense at this point in the economic cycle unless SW Bank is pulling the plug which is just what they may be doing.
12:38 blogger, I did call Mr. Spinner, And he will attempt to make the meeting.
Tom Ford
About pulling the plug ... did the city not have some sort of protection regarding this? Where is our City Attorney when we need him?
Our City Attorney said last year that we should not count on being able to do after 10/2006 with loan/debt that we were doing at the time. He felt it was a one year deal at best. Read the minutes from that time.
What protection would you expect from our Attorney in dealing with the type of loans we have? As was said then by some of the aldermen, the state constitution does not allow for a city to be in debt long term. The only legal way out per the law is a GO Bond issue which takes 4/7's voter approval.
Voters turned down GO Bond, no one believed the City Attorney or a few of the aldermen who begged the Board and mayor to put a bond issue on the ballot to end our debt and guess what? It's a year latter and what they said would happen may be happening.
The Bank is not REQUIRED to keep lending us money, they are a business and if they feel the risk is to high or there are legal issues re: the loans, they can demand full payment.
All of this was talked about from July of last year through Jan'06,its in the minutes if you want to read them.
Thank you for the information. Presumably then, the entire board was privvy to this info and shares the responsibility of making the right decisions having asked the right questions. Hopefully, with some coaching from the City Attorney. This is not finger pointinig time. It is time to get the ducks in a row.
The next BOA meeting (not 9/27,) is when we will see thr Prop."S" V Bond sales discussed!
I have been told that the "experts" are working on it.
Tom Ford
So, was Proposition S illegal?
Was Proposition S enough money to pay off the short-term debt?
What is our total debt?
Does anyone know the grand total of our debt for the city of Crestwood?
Is the main reason for these bonds for THF purchase of Crestwood Pool for $850,000?
I don't think that's the main reason, but I bet it's part of the reason.
If you change to bonds, well the funds become "fungible", you can move them around to where you want to. Need to move a little cash to THF to help with the $850,000.00, well? Would that be considered? I don't know, but it could be.
We must count on Aldermen Miguel, Neider, Roby, Breeding, and whoever else will look into this ill-advised plan to change to bonds, and stop it in it's tracks.
Tom Ford
Tom,
what is your take on COPS instead of bonds?
What's yours?
I dont know what trhey aRE so i asking Tom what he thinks about them or if they are the same as bonds, I have no take, what's your?
C.O.P.S. stands for "Certificate of participation securities" In short it means that out of town folks profit from the bonds, as they are interest free, and the holder expects to profit from them.
I thought we all voted for a "pay as you go" tax increase, not bonds?
I guess the "ballot language got in the way.
Tom Ford
I know of one way we could stop the bonds. it's been used before in Crestwood to stop unpopular board decisions.
Has anyone been monitoring the spending of Whitecliff park?
It sure would be easy to pass $850,000 to THF with a little asphalt!
Business as usual in Crestwood!
How many invoices were issued for the same street work in Crestwood?
Have you talked to Alderman Miguel? Is he still against bonds?
Why do messages one is looking for disappear so soon? Pls just archieve the ones put on to lighten up so soon. We just read them once and enjoy and they take up too much room.
2:27 blogger, they won't now. There will be 15 posts to the main page before they go to the archive.
Tom Ford
Post a Comment
<< Home