Crestwood Board of Alderman meeting, February 10, 2009
PLEASE CLICK ON THE HEADER TO BE DIRECTED TO THE SITE. I notice that for three years we have been paying the judge and P/A more than the ordnance allows( see memo, judge and prosecutor salaries,) Now were in motion to remedy that little gaff (and don't try to hang this one on Tina Flowers either!)
Why with the best and brightest OUR money can buy was this ever allowed to happen? The City attorney is paid to check on these little items, so what happened? Oh wait, HE IS the P/A.
Gentlemen, you anguish over your loss of prop 1 (72% defeat,) you plan to ask us for MORE MONEY, and yet you had no idea that this was going on since 2005? Where was the ordanance then, how did this go through witout one, and why did you let it?
Well the next time you ask that question, ask yourself just how many more holes in the bucket like this one there are?
ACCOUNTABILITY, DUE DILIGENCE, FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, These are the items I want on the very short list, and right now! And I would bet your constituents want it also.
Tom Ford
NO. 593
Why with the best and brightest OUR money can buy was this ever allowed to happen? The City attorney is paid to check on these little items, so what happened? Oh wait, HE IS the P/A.
Gentlemen, you anguish over your loss of prop 1 (72% defeat,) you plan to ask us for MORE MONEY, and yet you had no idea that this was going on since 2005? Where was the ordanance then, how did this go through witout one, and why did you let it?
Well the next time you ask that question, ask yourself just how many more holes in the bucket like this one there are?
ACCOUNTABILITY, DUE DILIGENCE, FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, These are the items I want on the very short list, and right now! And I would bet your constituents want it also.
Tom Ford
NO. 593
posted by Crestwood Independent at 14:43
17 Comments:
Tom,
Simply unbelievable.
Roy who wanted to put an end to all of this, let it go on for 4 years in which he went over our budget with a fine tooth comb as a member of the Ways and Means Committee. Maybe their meeting should be held on Saturdays like it used to be so citizens who work can attend. Sorry if that means his honor can't go to his country estate on the weekends, but this is a time for him to put the city's needs over his personal wants.
12:52 PM blogger: Well since Roy has publicly stated that he is the City! I agree, time to change "your Honor!"
This will be great watching the boys do a Porky Pig interpretation (abada, abada abada) on why this was just an over site.
Well on the National level we have heard of the "Axis of evil," but I never thought we would see an "Axis of incompetence," (minus two Alderman ) such as we seem to have here.
Tom Ford
Margret Thatcher has hit the nail on the head with this one, and it applies to Crestwood as well (with minor modifications!)
"The problem with socialism, is that you eventually run out of other people's money"
Margaret Thatcher"
Just exchange "socialism" with "tax increase," and there you have it.
Tom Ford
Monday, February 9, 2009
How Government Created the Financial Crisis
WALL STREET JOURNAL - FEBRUARY 9, 2009
Research shows the failure to rescue Lehman did not trigger the fall panic.
By JOHN B. TAYLOR
Many are calling for a 9/11-type commission to investigate the financial crisis. Any such investigation should not rule out government itself as a major culprit. My research shows that government actions and interventions -- not any inherent failure or instability of the private economy -- caused, prolonged and dramatically worsened the crisis.
The classic explanation of financial crises is that they are caused by excesses -- frequently monetary excesses -- which lead to a boom and an inevitable bust. This crisis was no different: A housing boom followed by a bust led to defaults, the implosion of mortgages and mortgage-related securities at financial institutions, and resulting financial turmoil.
Monetary excesses were the main cause of the boom. The Fed held its target interest rate, especially in 2003-2005, well below known monetary guidelines that say what good policy should be based on historical experience. Keeping interest rates on the track that worked well in the past two decades, rather than keeping rates so low, would have prevented the boom and the bust. Researchers at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have provided corroborating evidence from other countries: The greater the degree of monetary excess in a country, the larger was the housing boom.
The effects of the boom and bust were amplified by several complicating factors including the use of subprime and adjustable-rate mortgages, which led to excessive risk taking. There is also evidence the excessive risk taking was encouraged by the excessively low interest rates. Delinquency rates and foreclosure rates are inversely related to housing price inflation. These rates declined rapidly during the years housing prices rose rapidly, likely throwing mortgage underwriting programs off track and misleading many people.
Adjustable-rate, subprime and other mortgages were packed into mortgage-backed securities of great complexity. Rating agencies underestimated the risk of these securities, either because of a lack of competition, poor accountability, or most likely the inherent difficulty in assessing risk due to the complexity.
Other government actions were at play: The government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were encouraged to expand and buy mortgage-backed securities, including those formed with the risky subprime mortgages.
Government action also helped prolong the crisis. Consider that the financial crisis became acute on Aug. 9 and 10, 2007, when money-market interest rates rose dramatically. Interest rate spreads, such as the difference between three-month and overnight interbank loans, jumped to unprecedented levels.
Diagnosing the reason for this sudden increase was essential for determining what type of policy response was appropriate. If liquidity was the problem, then providing more liquidity by making borrowing easier at the Federal Reserve discount window, or opening new windows or facilities, would be appropriate. But if counterparty risk was behind the sudden rise in money-market interest rates, then a direct focus on the quality and transparency of the bank's balance sheets would be appropriate.
Early on, policy makers misdiagnosed the crisis as one of liquidity, and prescribed the wrong treatment.
To provide more liquidity, the Fed created the Term Auction Facility (TAF) in December 2007. Its main aim was to reduce interest rate spreads in the money markets and increase the flow of credit. But the TAF did not seem to make much difference. If the reason for the spread was counterparty risk as distinct from liquidity, this is not surprising.
Another early policy response was the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, passed in February. The major part of this package was to send cash totaling over $100 billion to individuals and families so they would have more to spend and thus jump-start consumption and the economy. But people spent little if anything of the temporary rebate (as predicted by Milton Friedman's permanent income theory, which holds that temporary as distinct from permanent increases in income do not lead to significant increases in consumption). Consumption was not jump-started.
A third policy response was the very sharp reduction in the target federal-funds rate to 2% in April 2008 from 5.25% in August 2007. This was sharper than monetary guidelines such as my own Taylor Rule would prescribe. The most noticeable effect of this rate cut was a sharp depreciation of the dollar and a large increase in oil prices. After the start of the crisis, oil prices doubled to over $140 in July 2008, before plummeting back down as expectations of world economic growth declined. But by then the damage of the high oil prices had been done.
After a year of such mistaken prescriptions, the crisis suddenly worsened in September and October 2008. We experienced a serious credit crunch, seriously weakening an economy already suffering from the lingering impact of the oil price hike and housing bust.
Many have argued that the reason for this bad turn was the government's decision not to prevent the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers over the weekend of Sept. 13 and 14. A study of this event suggests that the answer is more complicated and lay elsewhere.
While interest rate spreads increased slightly on Monday, Sept. 15, they stayed in the range observed during the previous year, and remained in that range through the rest of the week. On Friday, Sept. 19, the Treasury announced a rescue package, though not its size or the details. Over the weekend the package was put together, and on Tuesday, Sept. 23, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson testified before the Senate Banking Committee.
They introduced the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), saying that it would be $700 billion in size. A short draft of legislation was provided, with no mention of oversight and few restrictions on the use of the funds.
The two men were questioned intensely and the reaction was quite negative, judging by the large volume of critical mail received by many members of Congress. It was following this testimony that one really begins to see the crisis deepening and interest rate spreads widening.
The realization by the public that the government's intervention plan had not been fully thought through, and the official story that the economy was tanking, likely led to the panic seen in the next few weeks. And this was likely amplified by the ad hoc decisions to support some financial institutions and not others and unclear, seemingly fear-based explanations of programs to address the crisis. What was the rationale for intervening with Bear Stearns, then not with Lehman, and then again with AIG? What would guide the operations of the TARP?
It did not have to be this way. To prevent misguided actions in the future, it is urgent that we return to sound principles of monetary policy, basing government interventions on clearly stated diagnoses and predictable frameworks for government actions.
Massive responses with little explanation will probably make things worse. That is the lesson from this crisis so far.
Mr. Taylor, a professor of economics at Stanford and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, is the author of "Getting Off Track: How Government Actions and Interventions Caused, Prolonged and Worsened the Financial Crisis," published later this month by Hoover Press.
Borrowed from the "Truth spot," and right on the money!
And now we send the arsonist to put out the fire he started! Brilliant!
Tom Ford
Lots of blame to go around about the state of the American Economy. Easy to jump to conclusions. Premature at best. But watching the greatest nation in the world tread water while China eats our lunch - well this can sour an attitude but quick.
Generally speaking, if concerned, have you all contacted your Senator and Rep. with your ideas: taxes, incompetance, etc.? The list is very very long. What is your input beyond choosing sides? Are you one of the "I've Got Mine?" Are you sitting pretty, concerned or hurting? Does the road ahead look peachy dandy to you? Do you think what this CITY, NATION in actuality needs tax cuts right now?
This economy restructuring is beginning to resemble one big predictable bi-partisan rooster fight - business as usual. Monkey business. The "Let them eat cake" vs the "Please, sir can you spare a dime?" In the meantime, Rome burns. How proud should America claim to be with all this hostile chatter? This pouring over the economy package with fangs; grandstanding and self supplicating is so classy, so typical of late. Ah sportsmanship. Imagine how the world views America and its bias, loggerheads, name callers, bitterness, politics and now its total lack of regard for the inherited state of the union, the blame game, the photo ops. Hey, suck it up, it is what it is, for now. We have a change of guard and a faltering country. How does your 401K look? When did it go blanko? Sure wish we had had all this discussion, debate and confrontation and input and agonizing prior to waging war. Wow! imagine that!
At any rate, surprise, this is not sent by a socialist (what nonsense) or a red or blue party goer. It is sent by an American watching the irony of seeing our country afraid of China et al, amazed about the propaganda about what would happen internationally if we insist on efforts to "buy American" or if we insist(no kidding)that CEO's suck it up and tow the lin; that banks fork over to the little guys, or wondering how we could not help but falter with all this pandering and politics and divisiveness as usual. As bloody usual.
Be careful what you wish for. Sooner or later pending legislation regarding the economy, which some couch economy and political experts seem to have have determined a train wreck, could visit you or someone in your family at which time you might do more than revisit Japan in the 90's or the U.S. in the depression, and then reconsider the we are invincible idea We are not! Time for change, well, could be. Draining the pond failed.
Whose idea or ordinance was it to put the code person into the Sapp. house little house? I mean what is going on here? Does this include maintenance, utilities, and salary, etc? When did this kind of thing start?
All these new people running for the BOA, of course, good, but are any of them pretty well versed in economics and municipal things? And why is Ald. Roby not running? Every time we start all over with all new members it just gets worse, as if it could do that now, but can this blog offer some insights into the current list of candidates and be specific not partial. (by ward) Thanks.
"How does your 401K look? When did it go blanko? "
Right after the Dems tanked the housing industry, which they blamed the former President.
5:39 PM Feb 10
"This kind of thing" has been going on for quite some time. Thanks to apathy and a lack of oversight it continues to this day.
I know two of the aldermanic candidates who will be on the April ballot. Both of them have budgeting experience, know their finances inside and out, and are prepared to address the challenges Crestwood faces.
In what ward do you live?
Martha Duchild
11:54
And who might those two individuals be? In addition, to having financial experience do they also have a magic wand and a pouch full of magic dust to sprinkle over our city? Because I happen to think it doesn't take a financial genius to create a miracle. Maybe the two people you know should run for state Senate or House of Representative where the big mistakes are being made.
2:53 PM blogger:Your comment reminds me of the old slogan, "Where the big stores are!"
Well, they aren't here anymore, and there is a reason.
Sorry but we need the simple "walking around sense" here in Crestwood, and we need it now!
Magic wand? Well no, just do the cut's I presented at Tuesday nights meeting, and Presto change o, were back in the black!
Tom Ford
Boy This coffee tastes good.
I'm sorry I didn't know you proposed cuts at the Board of Alderman meeting. Did you clear these cuts with the other 11,000 plus citizens in Crestwood or don't they matter? And sir, if you have all the answers why for the city's sake didn't you run for Alderman so you could implement your own cuts?
I'm glad your coffee tastes good.
Mr. Ford's cuts were presented at the board meeting, a public meeting, last Tuesday night. He has also posted them on this blog. Now, are all 11,000 citizens of this town aware of his proposal? I'm sure no, but he has made an effort to make them public.
Does a resident have to be an alderman to present a proposal to the board? Did Tom say he had all the answers?
I hope you continue to enjoy your coffee.
7:36 AM blogger: Well, had you been in town long enough, or had you paid attention to the City you would know I did run for Alderman.
Did I run them by anyone? No, I did not, but now you will have a chance to have your say (like it or not) on what goes, and what stays, because we can't do both!
By the way, when did you run for anything, and if you did, what and where?
Tom Ford
"just do the cut's I presented at Tuesday nights meeting, and Presto change o, were back in the black!"
....obviously at the expense of the city workers, right? So the residents don't have to fork out a dime in making things better?
I hear two things here.
1.) Retain our services.
2.) Slash, cut, snip!
You cannot have both.
How would cutting Sappington House cut into our services?
If just some of the cuts are made, no city workers have to be laid off.
The residents fork out enough dimes. The city is here to serve the residents, not the other way around. Residents stepped up in 2000 for parks and storm water, 2002 for fire, 2006 for Prop S.
109:23 PM blogger: If you really read the proposed cost reductions you will find that "at the expense of employees" is not the mantra.
In fact, even the animal control officer can be worked into County animal control when we offer the shelter at Whit Cliff.
I did this for a reason, and that was to have ALL Crestwood residents stop and think about what we REALLY NEED, not what we "want!"
The facts are stark and staring us right in the face. Crestwood Courts is DEAD, retail sales are slowing down, consumer confidence is in the tank, and we like so many others MUST ADJUST!
Call your Alderman, tell them what you are willing to pay for, and what your not, help them make these decisions.
It's simple, the ship has a 30 degree list to port, and unless we counter flood, she surly will sink! Now you can go on rearranging the deck chairs if you wish, but I hope you will come up with some VALID cut's on you own and communicate them to your Alderman.
Your turn to help, will you do it?
Tom Ford
"It's simple, the ship has a 30 degree list to port, and unless we counter flood, she surly will sink! Now you can go on rearranging the deck chairs if you wish,..."
On those big grey ships we were on, we just moved all the deck chairs to the starboard side, and put the big guys in them.
Post a Comment
<< Home