Salem electors at the annual town meeting Tuesday night gave their unanimous support to issuing $10.6 million in 20-year bonds to pay for the combination Highway Department/fire station that is being constructed along Highway C in Trevor.
The project has been underway since last year and was initially financed by short-term construction loans, which are due this October, said Todd Naves, a financing consultant to the town.
The Town Board only has authority to finance over 10 years, Naves explained. To finance over 20 years, it needed approval from electors.
Those present voted 58 to 0 (see comments) 53 to 0 in favor of the bonds, said Chairman Linda Valentine.
After the annual meeting, the board held a special meeting and approved the sale of the bonds, also by a unanimous vote.
minor correction… 53 to 0…
still a unanimous vote by those voting…
Chairman Valentine is correct that the electors’ vote was “…a unanimous vote by those voting…”. I did not vote either way on this matter, though I did participate in all of the other votes that were put forth at last night’s meeting.
I was disappointed that we did not have more citizens show up for this meeting.
However, I was far more disturbed that according to Jim Valentine’s calculations, that the Town of Salem portion of our property taxes for 2011 are likely TO INCREASE BY 39%.
Mr. Valentine subsequently made a motion that the town board start working on next year’s budget earlier than in October. Though “advisory”, a majority of the electors present (including myself) voted in support of his motion.
TWO BOARD MEMBERS VOTED AGAINST THIS MOTION: DIANN TESAR AND JOE MEIER. Mr. Meier is the one who said at the 2009 annual meeting that he himself was considering selling his place and moving away due to our ever-increasing tax burden. He said that publically.
Remember, all board members were voting like the rest of us. As electors. Everyone had the right to vote according to their conscience. I do respect that.
However, the public would do well to ask Diann Tesar and Joe Meier WHY they would vote AGAINST the idea of getting an early start on next year’s budget process.
ESPECIALLY IF THE TOWN PORTION OF OUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE DESTINED TO GO UP 39% AS JIM VALENTINE’S CALCULATIONS FORECAST!
Also, please do remember that our taxes for the various other tax bodies are likely to increase as well. I am in the Salem Grade School tax district, and you just know that once that they can legally come back for more tax money from us that our grade school taxes will be increasing as well. (Lost a million dollars due to losing some one-hundred students due to open enrollment.)
I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IN THESE DIFFICULT ECONOMIC TIMES, AT LEAST FOR THOSE OF US ON “MAIN STREET AMERICA”, THAT OUR VARIOUS TAX BODIES HAVE A DUTY TO START THEIR BUDGET PROCESSES AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.
Furthermore, TRANSPARENCY is crucial. During last night’s annual meeting, Jim Valentine again pointed out how Mr. Casey’s budget numbers did not add up. Too bad no one videotaped that presentation by Mr. Valentine. It could be on “You Tube”.
PERHAPS WE NEED A THIRD PARTY AUDIT DONE OF THE TOWN OF SALEM’S ENTIRE BOOKS, SO WE CAN ALL SEE JUST EXACTLY WHERE EVERY PENNY IS GOING IN PRECISE DETAIL; AND EXACTLY WHERE SUCH FUNDING COMES FROM IN AN EQUALLY PRECISE AND DOCUMENTED WAY.
One last point. Mr. Casey admitted that the Town of Salem FAILED TO GET ANY SO-CALLED FEDERAL STIMULUS MONEY. In fact, he hasn’t gotten the Town of Salem ANY GRANTS to my knowledge!
Thank you.
Dr. Brad Smith
I attended both meetings Monday and Tuesday. I asked the question to Pat Casey about the status of the “Grant money”. The answer should have been made public during Monday nights meeting where Pat Casey made his report concerning the Combo Building. Chief Slover and Pat Casey found out about the Denial of the funds Monday before the meeting took place. Why is it that the question concerning the Grant money had to be made? When was it going to be made public? Would the voters have supported the construction of the Combo building in the first place if we knew there was to be NO GRANT MONEY. We were told many times that there was a “very good” chance of getting the money. Did this influence the support of that project? There was never a mention before of the the $18 million dollar price tag (includes interest) for that building, as told to us by Todd Naves. The financial expert. We were told $10.7 million. But what about cost overruns, change orders, mistakes, ACTS of GOD, Deep well that collapsed, pump house, etc. Those are part of the “out the door” price. We heard soo many times that this is a good time to build. The question is this, Who is it a good time to build for? Dr. Smith is correct. Transparency is crucial and a must. John C.
Can anyone tell me exactly what is Jim Valentine’s background in government accounting and auditing?
Salemthics asks on Westofthei…… Can anyone tell me exactly what is Jim alentine’s background in government accounting and auditng?
+++++++++++++++
To which I ask:
Can anyone tell me exactly what is Pat O’connell’s background in government accounting and auditing?
Can anyone tell me exactly what is Denny Faber’s background in government accounting and auditing?
Can anyone tell me exactly what is Joe Meier’s background in government accounting and auditing?
Don’t Bother. I can tell it isnt much if any. I could and you could tell by just sitting at a workshop on the budget. Actually Salemthics has been able to TELL that for many years. Little if any questions or comments at meetings from any of them except for their favorite projects. Oh, except for the one by Joe Meier to tell everyone that THIS WAST THE BEST BUDGET WE HAVE EVER HAD! But no comments about specifics on the budgets from him – Were there ever? Again, he has deflected his lack of involvement to giving an inappropriate compliment.
Well, excuse me but I do think that we had/have more than qualified people to compile such a budget in the past with the appropriate software and could have produced such a document. And, I think that that document would have had the notes that would make the document a stand alone document that oculd be viewed by anyone now and in the future and everyone would then have known what was being budgeted and why. I also think that since it WAS the first budget presented in this way…(presentation is the only thing that was different) that notes that showed the changes from what was presented by the department heads and eventually shown in the workshop budget would have been appropriate. And the blending of accounts and creation of new accounts could easily have been annotated.
As I have said elsewhere (and Salemethics has read it) the figures presented by valentine may be off a bit and the town may juimp and say OH THAT IS A FEE not part of the levy but the fact remains, the request for the clarity on the budget and what is and is not included in the levy was made several times and it was touched upon again at the annual meeting. The infor failed to be placed on the official budget detail. The Budget Policy that was approved on Monday but which will have more conversation and another agenda presence in May (remember Pat said he needed it for the Bond Rating process and we could reconsider it… And remember that only one Supervisor contributed a single word to that policy) will be brought forward again. The version that I presented included a schedule of activities that we all know will occur EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Everyone who participates in the budgeting process would then know the schedule – of their deliverable, of the dependency of others on their work and the meetings that would be needed for electors, board members and legally required postings. TO not have such a WEEKLY schedule that is reoccurring each and every year is just not good planning. To have a schedule that SLIPS like it did last year with a presentation void of notes is outright cheating the electors of reasonable time to review and discuss the figures and use of their money and produces a false sense that the levy is the only thing that is at stake. It isnt. THe levy and the FEES are what are at stake. As we know and salemETHICS also knows, the fees contribute a great amount to the over all taxes the citizens pay. Pretending that the quaterly fees is not a tax is puttiing ones head in the sand.
What doesnt salemthics CALL jim valentine. I am certain, absolutely certaiin. that salemethics knows the number.
Can anyone tell me exactly what is Salemthics background in government accounting and auditing? No, dont answer. I already know the extent. And I am pleased with the knowledge to date and the intitiative to excell.
Oh yes, the TELL is plain. I might even SEE and SPEAK to salemthics today…
Hi Everyone,
I would like to clarify some of my comments that I made during regarding the Town Budget.
2010 – We, the taxpayers, voted to increase the Tax Levy 1.9% for 2010. However, the Town took 5.4% from the quarterly fess we pay for utilities. Apparently it is legal, but, in my opinion it is immoral. They skirted the law that says the Town can only increase our taxes by 3% by using our monthy utility fees. So our Town taxes went up 7.3%. When you pay your utility bill this month bear in mind that it is not all going to utilities.
The TA says it was reimbursement for expenses incurred, and paid for by the Town. However, the Town Budget clearly says “Transfer from” instead of “Reimbursement of”. Also the dollar amounts seem to be funny looking. Did the Town actually use exactly $100,000 in services for the Storm water Utility, or are we in the business of rounding? Secondly, can the Town explain how the Storm Water Utility actually used services from the Capital Equipment budget????
I’m sorry but I can’t believe the story the TA is giving on this one. The facts presented to the taxpayer do not match the words from his mouth.
Regarding 2011… I was only trying to say that we have the potential for a fiscal crisis coming in 2011. My numbers are accurate but they are not the whole picture. I am simply asking that the Town to start looking at the Budget now so they can start planning. If we can see all of the numbers for the budget far enough in advance we will have enough time to address all of the issues. Last year the TA presented a “balanced” budget (with a 11.56% tax increase). Thank goodness the state only allows a maximum of 3%. Why didn’t the TA know this? We only had a little over a month to get it down to 1.9%. I just want to give the board enough time to really study the Budget. remember the Town Board voted 4-1 to accept the 2010 Budget.
Personally, I can’t understand why anyone on the Town Board would vote against this. It seems like a no brainer. Valentine, O’Connell, and Faber voted in favor of this. However, this is only advisory and now the Town must direct the TA to proceed. I think the Town people passed my motion 33-23 or something like that. I’m not saying the Town will project a 39% Tax Levy increase(they can’t). I was just trying to show the affect of the upcoming changes that we KNOW ABOUT. But, we do need to keep an eye on the fees to see if the TA tries to use them again. If we have all of this excess money in our Utility Funds maybe the Town Board should lower our quarterly fees.
I’m sorry, I’m old school… Utility fees should go towards utilities. Real estate taxes should go towards town services, and schools and libraries….
Regarding the grant… I feel we have no chance at getting any grant money from the Fed Gov as long as their is a Dem in the White House and Paul Ryan is our representative, and it is as simple as that.
As far as my knowledge and expertise in govenment accounting… you better hope I have a lot. Because if I don’t know anything about Budgets, and I can catch these sneaky deals, the Town ought to be very embarrassed. And… you are going to have to get better at covering their tracks.
The Town of Salem Special Meeting Minutes for August 3, 2009 are available online at … http://townofsalem.net/vertical/Sites/%7BFD43A93D-1DA7-4F52-8644-C09DA66C3401%7D/uploads/%7B9B1611A5-4FEC-4CF7-BA95-D603EF726F67%7D.PDF
Those public records contain a July 29, 2009 letter from the hired-not-elected-not-appointed-out-of-state-residing Administrator or town has. It explains how the bids packages were divided into five phases. IMPORTANTLY, the page dated July 31, 2009 on the top righthand corner, explains how “the Town will use a less formal value engineering approach to reduce costs with suitable substitutes for specific eqipment and materials.”
I wonder how well THAT concept is working out for us?
The reason town taxpayers STILL DO NOT KNOW THE COST of the WELL STATION after the driller ate the cost of drilling their first borehole out-of-plumb (straightness) is because WE ARE STILL waiting to see if that company can “restore” their second well borehole with a sleeve at an ADDITIONAL cost of $166,500 cost, NOT include the additional costs for a second pump test and a second water testing process.
When the town does finally get Production Well #1 completed, bids on the well station project requiring four contractors will have to go out. PLUS, there are yet-to-be-known costs for the two chamber reservior which may or may not have to be made longer, and, the still unkown costs for town engineer’s recommended Chlorimination Water Disinfection and Treatment System for removing undesirable chemicals, materials, and biological contaminants from the raw water.
This is being recommended because recent studies done by UW, USGS, and other in-state entities found viruses are detectable in the deep aquifer once thought to have been protected by a shale layer some call an aquitard, that has cracks and low water yield. But Urban Sprawl and large withdrawl rates from the deep aquifer has helped to suck viruses and who knows what else deeper down through this shale layer, which may also be part of the collapsed material that might be found in our second now third attempt at making Production Well #1 usable for the Salem Town Municipal Services Building locally known as the Combo Bld.
Here’s a simple explantation of what our new water treatment will do…
“The use of chloramine is becoming more common as a disinfectant. Although chloramine is not as strong an oxidant, it does provide a longer-lasting residual than free chlorine and it won’t form THMs or haloacetic acids. It is possible to convert chlorine to chloramine by adding ammonia to the water after addition of chlorine. The chlorine and ammonia react to form chloramine. Water distribution systems disinfected with chloramines may experience nitrification, as ammonia is used a nutrient for bacterial growth, with nitrates being generated as a by-product.” (This is toxic to fish and those with kidney disease on dialysis by the way….)
Should Taxpayers NOW insist on carrying out the advisory motion that carried of last year’s 2009 Annual meeting directing the Town of Salem to hold a binding referendum prior to the construction of any public works projects costing $20 million dollars, in part or in whole? YES!!!!
Just remember town electors, Supervisor Patrick O’Connell was absolutely incorrect when at the regular town board meeting May 11,2009 he said, “None of our projects have ever come close to that amount.”
Read item#2 on page 2 of 8 under Citizen Initiated Business of that Public Record available online at ….http://www.townofsalem.net/vertical/Sites/%7BFD43A93D-1DA7-4F52-8644-C09DA66C3401%7D/uploads/%7BEE45D629-2253-4ED9-B505-57699DC53C9A%7D.PDF
Mmmm, why so defensive over a simple question? Why the attack on Mr. Faber, Mr. Meier, and Mr. O’Connell over a simple question? No one questioned figures, budget and whatever else that is being rambled about. Only asked about Jim Valentine’s background in governemnt accounting and auditing.
As a tax payer, I believe I have the right to ask questions to be able to make an informed decision about what I’m being told. Especially when it’s coming from the Town Chairman and her husband. How do we, as taxpayers, know if what Jim Valentine (or you for that matter) is saying has any basis. I want to know more about the person who is telling me there is something wrong with the financials of our town before I decide.
Chris Gustafson questioned Mr. Casey’s education, experience and expounded on the importance of certain degrees. I look at what I’m being told here and elsewhere and trying do my own homework. Isn’t this what you tell people to do, Mrs. Valentine?
Offensive questions require defensive answers.
True, yours COULD have been a basic, ALL I WANT TO KNOW is kind of question. But then if you wanted that kind of view point of the question to be transmitted, you would put out your name… and of course, you could just give him a call and not use a public forum to do something that a telephone call could achieve.. I dont think you made the telephone call….. Didn’t, did ya?
Have you no interest in the questions I raised then about Mr Faber, Mr Meier and Mr Oconnell? But then, we all know the answers and we have seen the actions. I dont quite see why my questions of the three is considered an attack but YOUR question of a private citizen wasnt? the questions were exactly the same? So tell us, why is miine an attack but yours isnt? HUMMMMMM….
About rambling… When people dont want others to know about things they are usually tight lipped, coy, willing to let things die a silent death.. on the other hand, some ramblings serve to educate, give another point of view and provide some knowledge, put light on the sugbject, start people thinking and asking.. …Dont you think we have had a silent board long enough?
Where there is knowledge there is no fear… Yeap, i do talk a lot.. I am very passionate and involved – as you well know….. and more people here and elsewhere know more about me and what i stand for than those who just manage to find the time to attend a monthly meeting but barely find the time to flip thru their their packets. as we discuss the issues at those meetings… What do you wish, a person willing to listen and learn, toss some ideas out, then get the feedback or one that does nothing? I know what I want and as a voter, I am not getting it.. are you?
Not to worry, 2010 will end soon enough and there certainly will not be the $800,000 safety net that the fire department provided last year.. In fact we will only have a little over 14% of the budget available (by plan) to apply forward – that is, if we spend wisely…. And likely this time around, the highway department will be the ones coming to the rescue – and the roadways will suffer instead…….
It is tru that the town takes 13-14% of the money in our tax bill. And the schools take anywhere from 50 to 54%. Does that small figure comparison mean that we should not have a good and appropriate budget?
Workshops this year should be very interesting.. Hope you are there to watch and participate in…Others of us WILL watch the involvement of the board members in the budget process, their participation in the questions and answers, as well as the documentation on the document itself… Of course, we will hear nothing constructive ffrom one for the entire meeting but at the end a prommotional THIS IS A FINE BUDGET and THIS WAS SUCH A GOOD JOB! comment to deflect from his utter lack of interest and involvement.
How is that working for you? for me?
So here, another ‘ramble’ and one that should give some readers a little direction to look. Before I ran for office, I attended just about every board meeitng for 6 years (as Salemethics well knows) … and just about every parks and every P&Z and a whole lot of meetings outside of our town but relating to the town. People readinig should realize that I am speaking from experience, not supposition. And everyone knows the author…
I can answer that one, as an outsider viewing the volly being fired back and forth. Salemethics – you asked the question about Mr. Valentine’s background in government accounting and audit. The question may be valid, but the intent behind the question is obvious, even to someone like me who has not been an active participant in the debate. What you DIDN’T say speaks just as loudly as the question you did ask. I think the questions that were asked in response (various town board member’s background, your backgroun) are just as valid.
I would encourage you to come out from behind the shroud of anonymity and take an active part in the discussion instead of hiding. Let’s all be adult about this and have a meaningful exchange. After all, Mr. Valentine does not hide his questions or intent, no more than do the board members. I may not agree with all they say and do, but I do applaud them for being willing to stand up, be identified and take a public stand.
“Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.”
This quote is often invoked to mock those who were too vision-impaired to foresee the rise of our whole information-linked society, and now those who voiced their concern about our town’s future fiscal wellbeing.
When our newly hired fulltime town administrator was first introduced to the public by the five elected town board members, a few of them breathed a sigh of relief as it was explained he’d be overseeing the day-to-day operations of the town and would prepare a balanced budget. One supervisor admitted that in the past the board was always having to take money from Peter to pay Paul. With the new combo building project near ready to break-ground, these few might have felt too overwhelmed for the board to be able to accomplish all this wrinkle-free.
Surely, now we are smarter and more self-aware, better able to see the limitations, and more important, better able to make clear-eyed forecasts with an “experienced” person at the helm carrying such burden!
At one meeting, the town administrator made it clear he intended to “bill” any of his time spent on handling stormwater complaints. Before any of us had to pay the new SWUD fees, The town did have to pay the stormwater engineer about $22,000 to use the easiest and cheapest of 12 methods to come up with equitable ERUs. Then, he had to familiarize himself with the use of the WINSLAMM sediment loading computer model program required for submitting the town’s MS4 permit data to DNR. Plus, the town had to purchase a $32,000 software program to add the ERU fees to our sewer utility post card bills. Maybe it did cost $46,000 to train office staff on the use this software and to iron out the related wrinkles. Maybe this sounds like a reasonable explanation as to why $100,000 of paid stormwater fees were transferred into a town account comprised of taxes used to pay for capital expenditures. While this analogy here may be speculative on my part, form does follows function, and new forms always make use of what came before, since the present always builds on the past.
The collective imagination and knowledge of all the taxpayers worried about theirs’ and the town’s fiscal wellbeing is too much for any one person to presume to understand. But what some people still don’t seem to get, is that we are now paying an ADDITIONAL $92,600 in salary plus insurance benefits per year to project this town’s budgetary needs, using the same OLD SCHOOL HABITS we’ve been paying $45,000 plus stipends and mileage to have five elected town board members do. Having a balanced budget still remains within their realm of responsibilities.
What bears asking now is whether hiring the town administrator was a value-added benefit to the taxpayers or could the board have the same results by contracting to “share” an administrator with another municipality or by hiring a part-time town manager?
Would that be better? Who knows. The exploration of other viable options by the town board were not made widely public prior to them stripping such a big and costly decision from the taxpayers, so not surprisingly, being vocal and showing displeasure at the polls next year is all the electors can do.
In Dr. Smith’s post, he claims our taxes could go up 39% according to calculations forcast by Jim Valentine. He also states that Jim Valentine pointed out that Casey’s budget figures don’t add up. Then Jim Valentine states that transfers between funds is immoral, the numbers don’t add up, and that the facts from Mr. Casey’s mouth don’t match the dollar amounts.
I’m trying to find out how much truth there is to these words.
If a person is trying to find out what is wrong with the engine in their car, they wouldn’t go to a medical doctor. They would go to a qualified mechanic. So here we have Jim Valentine giving tax payers this information and his opinion, but is he the mechanic or is he the medical doctor? I do my homework before making my decisions.
My homework includes finding out whether the person giving me this information is in a position to know or just putting a bad taste in my mouth. I asked what kind of experience does Jim Valentine have. I asked a simple question which has nothing to do with the town board, but Mrs. Valentine has turned it into something else. I would bet that other tax payers are wondering the same thing. All this crap being thrown to the tax payers, who do we believe? I wonder I would have to call when others may like to know too.
I wonder why I would have to call when others may like to know too.
You have to call because YOU asked.
YOU had the interest.
Are YOU representing others now? That you are asking for OTHERS? hummmm
If you say you have a bad taste in your mouth, then I suggest you do some research and clear the taste..
If you find that this elector is correct, then you know how to act.
If he is in error, you will be able to advise us all with the facts that you found…and you will be able to authoritatively discuss the issues and I will welcome you to the workshops on the budget to explain and teach…
Your input will be most welcomed…You ‘elbows’ will be welcomed at the table….
To do the reseach, you wiill have to do some real work…
You will have to seek and find…
So, to start,
make a call into the town and get a copy of the town budget…
and get a copy of the auditors report (maybe one from last year too) and
get a copy of the 1st quarter 2010 report.
And then get a copy of the first example of the budget policy tho that will not define clearly what is in the levy and what is in the fee schedules…
It was approved in haste on Monday.. I can send you my notes, but you will have to ask me for them…
and then study..
Oh,
and you should have a copy of last year’s budget too and maybe the copies of the budget for each of the workshops…
so you can see all the changes and the movement of monies…
and you could for a copy of the detail for the fire department last year and the year before…so you can see how they planned accruals for equipment only to have it removed to fullfill the fund balance for 2010.
And maybe you could take a look at the schedule for the new building loan and the bonds…
And you could ask for the contracts that the town has outstanding where we receive revenue…. like with village of paddock lake and brighton…
And you could ask for copies of contracts we have with the administrator and the chief…and copies of the union agreements….
so you can see where all the figures come from and if they are accurately recorded in the budget….
You have enough comments from people on a multitude of items to point you in the right direction towards the areas where there is some need of investigation and where you can do your own homework with the information from the town – aka the source of the material for the budget…
The homework is not of the mechanic or the doctor.
It is in the details of the budget itself….(but you know that…)
In addition, you could look at the vouchers each month that will build up for the 2nd quarter..
If you cant tell what the items are on the voucher,
that is an example of insufficient information…
There isnt any ‘crap – your word – being thrown to the tax payers…
The info being discussed is the information that is available from the town and the indicator that some additional information should be but isnt availalble by those who have looked for it in the budget material…….
There are individual thoughts based on nformation released by the town and controlled by the town…
Get it and use the comments you have heard and investigate to your own level of acceptance…
Keep a running list of those things that you have questions about…
and try to get the answers…
After your own indepth review YOU will find the truth that meets with your own approval…
I will give you another pointer for an area to check out……
there is a planned 14.9% fund balance in 2010.. (like planned left over $$$ on the budget..(but you knew that..).
That will represent substantually less than the 1.5million$ that Supervisor Fabor has rightly bragged about for many years… ..
I think the 14.9% it adds up to about $764494… . You can check me on that… It is in the budget details you will get from the town….
That figure is hardly the brag of 1.5 million… It is less than half of the brag…
For years, TOS has had a fund balance % that was greater than 14.9 and at the very time when we should not have gone below 15% we did exactly that.. And YES, I DID SAY THAT I DIDNT WANT TO GO BELOW 15% at more than one budget workshop… but we did anyway and board members bought into it… … WHy you ask was I concerned about 15%? Well, I did a little homework and found that a 15% fund balance is the lowest amount that MOODYs will consider in a bond rating. And now, we are limited to S&P for our bond rating instead of being able to get a Moodys rate. SO for the sake of .1% we shot ourselves n the foot…….
Now, discussing this a tad more, this 764,494 is just about the 800,000 that the fire department gave to the general fund from their fire/ems accrual account.. In 2011’s budget, we will not have the ‘newfound’ 800,000 of the fire/ems budget and THERE IN is the problem…
Where will the dollars come from? Keep a watch on how the fund balance will be achieved in 2011. The fire department will not have another 800,000 to transfer to the general fund this time around… (but you knew that…) So where will an amount like $800,000 come from?
Of course, you could just calll pat casey and you could get a sit down but, I suggest you do your homework; know what is a fee and what contributes to the fund/levy and take good and accurate notes.
As I mentioned in a comment earlier, likely at the end of 2010, the highway department will be the ones coming to the rescue of the entire town… Watch how the $300,000 in the highway department budget is used… And consider how accruals for large, and expensive and necessary roadway projects are not being planned for….
I would LOVE IT if you proved me wrong… I think that every elector would love it if you proved that the budget is accurate and we will be in a good position at the end of the year going into 2011…. Truly, I would LOVE it if you proved me wrong, but I just dont see where we will have a substantial fund balance for some time. I dont see how we will have appropriate accruals on highway projects like short road, or on large pieces of equipment that highway will need inside the next 8 to 10 years…
your call hasnt been received yet… but of course, you havent called…
Salemethics makes some good & valid points from time to time, and knows from my former comments posted here and elsewhere, that I tend to site sources of where I get my information from such as:various state and federal government departments, profit and non-profit speciality associations, and those that represent various professions such as the ICMA, “the professional and educational association for appointed local government administrators throughout the world” …”Leaders at the Core of Better Communities”…where our town administrator’s been a member for 23 years, more or less, according to what I found surfing … http://icma.org.
I wish Salemethics would backed up what she/he says too from a reliable “independent-outside” source rather than directing others to “just ask” this or that person who works for the town. May be that person needs to be guarded with what is said, for whatever reasons, including that which must be kept confidential, for liability purposes, or because it does not fall within a public record. I don’t want to be put on hold, told to leave a message, or hear about what the state makes the town do.
I want Big Brother Government’s name, phone number, and website link of those responsible for enforcing what the town must do. If the state says the town must do, or can do, something a certain way- refer me to the proper state department and maybe statute chapter/s and section/s. I have “values” and like why the courts do not allow hearsay and follow the “Rules of Evidence.”
I’ve been accused of talking over people’s heads, of needing to dummy it down, posting too many references, and now my opinions are based on “fragments of facts”?
I’m a visual person meaning I like to read. So please, paint me a bigger picture so I can appreciate what it is you think I’ve gotten wrong. If you think I’m misinterpreting a definition by all means, straighten me out and site your source so I can be on the same page too. I know, “you can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.” So help me out, what other relevant factual information am I missing? At least give me some useable worthwhile links, because unlike some others, I can careless what your real name is, but I do try to guess who you are too!