IRB Has Nothing on NASDAQ
Alleged improprieties by a former NASDAQ CEO have many screaming for more transparency on Wall Street. Even the most educated, financially savvy folks in our country don’t understand much of Wall Street’s inner-workings and have attributed this latest scandal to this lack of understanding.
Sound familiar? Isn’t that basically the same thing that caused the controversy over the unauthorized Sewer & Solid Waste Fund loans here in IRB? Had there been proper transparency in the financials, several things would have happened differently.
Firstly, the existence of the loans that no one claims to have authorized would have presumably surfaced much sooner. It’s improbable to think that any commission--the present one or any in the past--would have chosen to ignore the fact that our city was going upside down into the seven-figure range without speaking up. Multiple accounts collapsed into one, the absence of paper trails, no “visible” separation of the enterprise funds from IRB’s general operating kitty, a complete disregard for charter requirements…these are just a few of the “systems”—or lack thereof—that contributed to our current financial quagmire.
Secondly, there wouldn’t be such a high level of mistrust among some residents. This undercurrent admittedly existed prior to the “outing” of the loans but has increased exponentially since. And, our current commission, who unknowingly “signed up” for the task of fixing this mess, hasn’t done much to alleviate this community skepticism. Citizens approach the microphone at nearly every commission meeting and ask intuitive questions. Some have even been known to lose their cool in exasperation only to be chastised for the outburst.
Alleged improprieties by a former NASDAQ CEO have many screaming for more transparency on Wall Street. Even the most educated, financially savvy folks in our country don’t understand much of Wall Street’s inner-workings and have attributed this latest scandal to this lack of understanding.
Sound familiar? Isn’t that basically the same thing that caused the controversy over the unauthorized Sewer & Solid Waste Fund loans here in IRB? Had there been proper transparency in the financials, several things would have happened differently.
Firstly, the existence of the loans that no one claims to have authorized would have presumably surfaced much sooner. It’s improbable to think that any commission--the present one or any in the past--would have chosen to ignore the fact that our city was going upside down into the seven-figure range without speaking up. Multiple accounts collapsed into one, the absence of paper trails, no “visible” separation of the enterprise funds from IRB’s general operating kitty, a complete disregard for charter requirements…these are just a few of the “systems”—or lack thereof—that contributed to our current financial quagmire.
Secondly, there wouldn’t be such a high level of mistrust among some residents. This undercurrent admittedly existed prior to the “outing” of the loans but has increased exponentially since. And, our current commission, who unknowingly “signed up” for the task of fixing this mess, hasn’t done much to alleviate this community skepticism. Citizens approach the microphone at nearly every commission meeting and ask intuitive questions. Some have even been known to lose their cool in exasperation only to be chastised for the outburst.
Citizen queries are rarely met with plausible answers and almost never result in a commissioner saying: “Hey…he (or she’s) right…what about that?” Figures still don’t jive. Answers to pointed questions are sketchy at best. What is most disconcerting is that no new systems—at least in view of the public—have been put into place to keep another “million dollar oops” from recurring. This, too, is a NASDAQ re-run; NASDAQ has seen many an impropriety since it was founded in the mid-60s, primarily as a result of a failure to provide more transparency and learn from past mistakes.
Wouldn’t one think that the commission would be insisting on MORE control over city finances? What has transpired is exactly the opposite. The commission, over nearly every citizen’s and former mayor’s objections, has insisted that our March ballot include a potentially disastrous referendum. If passed, it would result in the Finance Director no longer being directly accountable to the City Commission. As it stands now, IRB’s CFO serves at the pleasure of the commission with dual reporting responsibilities to the City Manager AND to the commission. If the proposed charter amendment passes, the City Manager would become the point man--sort of a “go-between”--between the Finance Director and the commission.
Why would our commission want to put an extra layer of management between themselves and our CFO…especially after the problems that have come to light over the last year? Why would this commission, with the exception of Commissioner Torres, endorse a system with less checks and balances instead of insisting on more? Are they possibly concerned about their own liability for decisions made regarding these loans and the goal is to “shield” themselves by making the City Manager the responsible party?
Wouldn’t one think that the commission would be insisting on MORE control over city finances? What has transpired is exactly the opposite. The commission, over nearly every citizen’s and former mayor’s objections, has insisted that our March ballot include a potentially disastrous referendum. If passed, it would result in the Finance Director no longer being directly accountable to the City Commission. As it stands now, IRB’s CFO serves at the pleasure of the commission with dual reporting responsibilities to the City Manager AND to the commission. If the proposed charter amendment passes, the City Manager would become the point man--sort of a “go-between”--between the Finance Director and the commission.
Why would our commission want to put an extra layer of management between themselves and our CFO…especially after the problems that have come to light over the last year? Why would this commission, with the exception of Commissioner Torres, endorse a system with less checks and balances instead of insisting on more? Are they possibly concerned about their own liability for decisions made regarding these loans and the goal is to “shield” themselves by making the City Manager the responsible party?
This potential change to our City Charter is even scarier when you stop to realize that they have no idea who will occupy the City Manager’s chair. If recent history is any indication, our Finance Director may be reporting to a revolving door. This proposed charter change is almost as puzzling as when this commission voted NOT to continue seeing monthly check registers after the infamous Grieshaber check was issued in error. When the situation demanded more scrutiny, they insisted on less.
Now that the “unauthorized loan horse” has left the stable, the commission’s answer is to sell the farm instead of repairing the hole.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
Now that the “unauthorized loan horse” has left the stable, the commission’s answer is to sell the farm instead of repairing the hole.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
No comments:
Post a Comment