Juggling the Facts
I must take issue with an alleged “myth debunking” election e-mail circulated on Tuesday by City Commissioner Terry Wollin. In the e-mail, she states that the $1 million, which all of us are being forced to repay through increased sewer and garbage rates, are “transfers”--NOT loans. If they aren’t loans, then what are we repaying? If they were transfers, why do they need to be repaid? And why did this incumbent commissioner, who is juggling just as fast as she possibly can, refer to them as “loans” at "Meet the Candidates"?
In Wollin’s own cyber words, “Transfers do not need to be authorized as loans do.” One has to wonder what city’s charter she’s looking at because ours says that the city commission has the authority for transfers AND for loans:
Section 10.5. (b) Transfer of funds: The city commission shall have the authority, whenever it is deemed necessary, to increase or decrease any particular fund contained in said budget, other than the reserve established in section 10.5(a)(1) above.
Also, in an e-mail from former City Treasurer Marty Schless to Interim City Manager Danny Taylor dated June 11, 2008, Schless says the following: “Any transfers between departments or funds are requested by the City Manager and approved by the City Commission.”
And if that’s not evidence enough, here’s what the high-priced consultant Wollin brags about hiring had to say on the subject: “A transfer is also a budgetary transaction that normally requires a Budget Amendment if not approved in the Original Adopted Budget.” And, a budget amendment is something that--guess what--requires commission approval. NO APPROVAL HAS EVER BEEN GIVEN. Not then. Not now. Never...despite repeated requests by citizens for the commission do so. If Wollin retains her seat on the City Commission come Tuesday, I hope that each and every one of you shows up at the next commission meeting and demands that the commission take a vote to either approve the loans or reverse their decision that the amount be repaid since, according to Wollin, they weren't loans in the first place.
Wollin has all these facts right at her fingertips so why does she choose to ignore them even going to so far as to blatantly broadcast statements that the record clearly doesn't support? She must be counting on the fact that most IRB residents haven’t followed this financial fiasco as closely as some who attend commission meetings regularly, which is probably a good gamble.
Wollin, as our voice in our local government over the last two years, should have been standing up for US, demanding answers and insisting that something like this never happen again. Instead, she sends out an e-mail justifying the city’s irresponsible actions hoping for semantics to bail her out and make everything right. That’s not representation; that’s being sold down the river.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
I must take issue with an alleged “myth debunking” election e-mail circulated on Tuesday by City Commissioner Terry Wollin. In the e-mail, she states that the $1 million, which all of us are being forced to repay through increased sewer and garbage rates, are “transfers”--NOT loans. If they aren’t loans, then what are we repaying? If they were transfers, why do they need to be repaid? And why did this incumbent commissioner, who is juggling just as fast as she possibly can, refer to them as “loans” at "Meet the Candidates"?
In Wollin’s own cyber words, “Transfers do not need to be authorized as loans do.” One has to wonder what city’s charter she’s looking at because ours says that the city commission has the authority for transfers AND for loans:
Section 10.5. (b) Transfer of funds: The city commission shall have the authority, whenever it is deemed necessary, to increase or decrease any particular fund contained in said budget, other than the reserve established in section 10.5(a)(1) above.
Also, in an e-mail from former City Treasurer Marty Schless to Interim City Manager Danny Taylor dated June 11, 2008, Schless says the following: “Any transfers between departments or funds are requested by the City Manager and approved by the City Commission.”
And if that’s not evidence enough, here’s what the high-priced consultant Wollin brags about hiring had to say on the subject: “A transfer is also a budgetary transaction that normally requires a Budget Amendment if not approved in the Original Adopted Budget.” And, a budget amendment is something that--guess what--requires commission approval. NO APPROVAL HAS EVER BEEN GIVEN. Not then. Not now. Never...despite repeated requests by citizens for the commission do so. If Wollin retains her seat on the City Commission come Tuesday, I hope that each and every one of you shows up at the next commission meeting and demands that the commission take a vote to either approve the loans or reverse their decision that the amount be repaid since, according to Wollin, they weren't loans in the first place.
Wollin has all these facts right at her fingertips so why does she choose to ignore them even going to so far as to blatantly broadcast statements that the record clearly doesn't support? She must be counting on the fact that most IRB residents haven’t followed this financial fiasco as closely as some who attend commission meetings regularly, which is probably a good gamble.
Wollin, as our voice in our local government over the last two years, should have been standing up for US, demanding answers and insisting that something like this never happen again. Instead, she sends out an e-mail justifying the city’s irresponsible actions hoping for semantics to bail her out and make everything right. That’s not representation; that’s being sold down the river.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
1 comment:
Can someone please post her emails? Are they public record, can we request them at city hall since she is an incumbent? I would like to read her shim-sham of a statement.
Post a Comment