IRBust - Part 3

UNNECESSARY SPENDING CONTINUES UNCHECKED

Let’s face it. Something had to give in terms of expenditures, even before the newly discovered loans popped up. But, instead of getting feedback from the public and making a priority list of spending cuts, the first target on the radar screen appears to, once again, be cutting IRB’s police protection. There is serious talk of cutting one officer, while plans for the redevelopment of Chic-a-Si Park move full speed ahead. This commission is talking fountains and bocce ball courts (part involves a grant; part does not!) out of the same mouths uttering “cut a cop.”

Ironically, Chic-a-Si Park happens to be located squarely in the center of the area on which the USF Study is focused. Yet, it appears that waiting for the study results to develop the chunk of land most vital to this area's vitality isn’t in the cards, so how important is this study anyway? There has never been one suggestion by the commission that the City exercise its cancellation clause in the USF contract and return the balance of the funds to the City during this financial crisis. Instead, the discussion centers on reducing our police protection and possibly even alternatively contracting with Indian Shores Police Department instead of the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office as a cost-saving measure.

The commission also voted unanimously to assume full responsibility for the operation of the IRB Library just as this financial crisis unfolded, would you believe? Tomorrow’s posting deals with that issue more in depth.

IRBust - Part 2

WAR WHOOP TO FIRE FINANCE DIRECTOR SCHLESS

At Tuesday night’s meeting, Commission Valery made a motion to fire Marty Schless from his position as IRB Finance Director. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wollin, but ultimately did not get enough votes to carry the day. The commission has been criticized from every angle for not cutting Schless loose.

There are at least two problems with giving Marty the heave-ho—at least RIGHT NOW. First, the termination motion, made and seconded by Valery and Wollin last Tuesday, did not follow proper procedure. The motion was made at the very end of the commission meeting, under “Commissioner Comments”—where motions of this nature are NOT permitted. Was this lynching “reserved” until the end of the meeting, and not added as an agenda item, in hopes that most of the public would have already exited the auditorium, offering no opportunity for citizen feedback?

Fortunately, some of the last mohicans in the audience were two former mayors who both pointed out the procedural defect in the Valery/Wollin motion, telling the group that a charter officer’s firing must be an agenda-ed item in order to fly.

Secondly, why would anyone interested in finding out what really happened give even one minute’s thought to firing the only guy who knows where the bodies are buried? Like him or not, Schless can shed enough light on this matter so that the hard questions can be asked and sufficiently answered. Is attempting to fire Marty a means of keeping a lid on the who/what/where/why/when of how nearly a million dollars in unauthorized loans made their way from our pot of general operating tax dollars into two enterprise funds that should--by their nature--be self-supporting? Is it easier to avoid setting the record straight if Marty isn’t around?

Obviously, someone had enough confidence in Marty Schless to hire him as our CFO in the not-so-distant past, so why the change of heart now? Complaints of his lack of governmental accounting experience have been voiced. That was a known fact when Schless was hired, so why take issue with that now?

“He should have known” is about the best reason anyone has come up with so far for firing him. Many of us would actually like to hear what Marty—himself—has to say. But, will we be given that opportunity? Judging by the increasing volume of the war cries to terminate him, probably not. And when he cleans out his desk, he takes with him essential information in determining how IRB got into this precarious financial position in the first place and what steps must be taken so we never find ourselves here again.

IRBust - Part 1

(This posting is Part 1 of 10 regarding the IRB Financial Crisis. Be sure to visit IRBeHEARD over the next 10 days for our daily posting as more information becomes available.)

Some of the most important things I learned about myself, I learned when I was broke. As I look back, the more “bail” money I had in the bank, the stupider I got. During the start-up years of my business, I barely slept nights worrying about making the granddaddy of all mistakes, which would have effectively put me out of business before the ink on the incorporation papers was dry; “screw up” funds were simply not available.

Will being nearly broke have the same effect on our local government in IRB?

What has the current commission done since becoming the FIRST and ONLY commission to be blessed/cursed with the good/bad fortune of learning that unauthorized loans from our general operating tax monies have been falsely inflating the balances in our Sewer and Solid Waste Funds--for years?

CPA HIRED WITHOUT GENERAL PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE
Concerned commission meeting attendees were not aware that CPA Robert Garner was “on board,” until his findings were made public on June 24th. Many citizens just thought their "on the record" comments and the entire issue were being ignored. Since no “Garner funds” were appropriated at budget time, did the commission approve a budget amendment for this expense? Were they required to? Consider please that this commission approved a $1,500 “Protect the Sea Oat” sign budget amendment earlier this year. And, allegedly, Mr. Garner’s bill exceeds the sea oat sign amount, which begs the question: Were these two unbudgeted items treated alike in terms of commission approvals? If not, why?

Since Garner’s report in in direct conflict with reports by all previous auditors, etc., is anyone aware of his qualifications? What if he’s wrong (one can always hope!) and the cast of a thousand accountants who noodled before him are correct? While it was probably a wise move to hire Mr. Garner, the secrecy with which he was engaged is more than a little troubling. Why all the secrecy? Or, am I just misinformed again?

Nancy Obarski

Beach Trail/IRB

(IRBeHEARD will report the answers to some of the questions above, once the documents from a pending public records request are received, so STAY TUNED.)