Selective Enforcement
When Commissioner Wollin admitted her confusion over the budgeting process, many, including me, applauded her candor. I’ll admit it…I couldn’t follow the process myself, and even watched an M.I.T. grad struggle to make heads or tails of it.
Even so, Wollin’s recent reference to the IRB City Charter requirement that the commission receive monthly financials was interesting. Even when the commission was getting regular monthly reports in keeping with the charter, the data was misleading…so what good was it anyway?
And, just where was Wollin’s “allegiance” to the charter when she and others voted to force our residents to repay nearly $1 million in loans, apparently made without the commission approval—or anyone else’s for that matter? These loans are the force behind the recent sewer and garbage rate increases that many residents, especially those with multi-family units, are outraged over.
Even now that the commission is painfully aware of the existence of these loans, they have failed—even refused—to take a vote to sanction them as required by the City Charter, yet they had no problem voting to make us repay them:
City Charter-Section 10.5 (c)
Authorization for loans: If the city commission should deem it wise and appropriate, they may authorize the city manager to effect a loan or loans from any source under such terms and provisions as the city commission may authorize, pledging the credit of the city for such purpose or purposes.
When this subject comes up, the commission generally prefers to refer to these unauthorized “transfers” as “due to’s/due from’s” insisting that they aren’t loans. IF THEY AREN’T LOANS, THEN WHY ARE WE REPAYING THEM?
It’s interesting how the city charter is selectively referenced--out of two sides of the mouth--and only when it best suits certain agendas. At other times, less convenient, the charter gets shoved in a dark and dusty corner at City Hall.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)
When Commissioner Wollin admitted her confusion over the budgeting process, many, including me, applauded her candor. I’ll admit it…I couldn’t follow the process myself, and even watched an M.I.T. grad struggle to make heads or tails of it.
Even so, Wollin’s recent reference to the IRB City Charter requirement that the commission receive monthly financials was interesting. Even when the commission was getting regular monthly reports in keeping with the charter, the data was misleading…so what good was it anyway?
And, just where was Wollin’s “allegiance” to the charter when she and others voted to force our residents to repay nearly $1 million in loans, apparently made without the commission approval—or anyone else’s for that matter? These loans are the force behind the recent sewer and garbage rate increases that many residents, especially those with multi-family units, are outraged over.
Even now that the commission is painfully aware of the existence of these loans, they have failed—even refused—to take a vote to sanction them as required by the City Charter, yet they had no problem voting to make us repay them:
City Charter-Section 10.5 (c)
Authorization for loans: If the city commission should deem it wise and appropriate, they may authorize the city manager to effect a loan or loans from any source under such terms and provisions as the city commission may authorize, pledging the credit of the city for such purpose or purposes.
When this subject comes up, the commission generally prefers to refer to these unauthorized “transfers” as “due to’s/due from’s” insisting that they aren’t loans. IF THEY AREN’T LOANS, THEN WHY ARE WE REPAYING THEM?
It’s interesting how the city charter is selectively referenced--out of two sides of the mouth--and only when it best suits certain agendas. At other times, less convenient, the charter gets shoved in a dark and dusty corner at City Hall.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)
4 comments:
Victor is right. What can we do? Only 3 running. The rumor around town is that Cookie Kennedy asked Phil Hannah to run. They are very close. Who is he?
Don House is also running. I understand he is very active in meetings.
And then there is Terry Wollin.
The results of this election will reshape this city for decades. We can only hope for the best.
Change.
RB asked Phil Hannah to run, it was in the paper. Yes Cookie is very close to him as well as Dan Torres. We can always start a write in candidate campaign.
I'm sure these are just honest mistakes.
The only honest mistake was electing Wollin!
Post a Comment