In case you were not able to attend this month's meeting, here are some highlights.
First of all, the consent agenda had a money transfer from the General Fund to the Sewer Fund of $100,000. By adding this item to the Consent agenda, rather than the regular agenda, when the council brings up the approval of the consent agenda, very rarely is there ever any discussion on any of the items listed. This makes this money transfer almost invisible to the general public. This transfer is in addition to the transfer last month on the December 13th, 2010, consent agenda when $79,000 was transferred from the General Fund to the Sewer Fund, which had a note next to it that it was for the SunTrust loan payment.
Also on the Consent Agenda, there were several reports approved for November and December 2010, such as the Building Report, Code Enforcement Report, Financial Statements, Library Report, and Sheriff's Office Report. It sure would be nice if the city would post these on their web site for the public to easily access, instead of having to make a public records request to view them. Even the section for the Sheriff's Office Reports on Polk City's web site has not be updated with the most recent reports since June 2009. The other reports do not even have a link that we were able to find anywhere on the website. Why not?
During the discussion of re-appointing Vice Mayor Block as Acting City Manager for yet another 30 Days, Councilman Kimsey brought up that he would like to see a change in this position, even over the possible next 3-4 months it may take to recruit a new City Manager. He recommended that City Clerk, Patrica Jackson, fill this role during this time frame. Before Councilman Kimsey's suggestion could be brought up, the motion to approve Ms. Block had already been put on the table and had been seconded, so the Mayor required a vote on this first. Not surprisingly, the motion to extend Ms. Block's dual role was approved for another 30 days with a vote of 4-1, so Mr. Kimsey will have to wait another 30 days to bring this up again.
The Memorandum of Understanding for Intergovernmental Cooperation with the City of Lakeland was approved unanimously by the council. This was something that came up during the DCA meeting on November 8th, 2010, to approve the changes needed to let developers build on the large parcel of land located on SR33 across from the new Fountain Park subdivision and BP Station at the intersection of Mt. Olive Road. The City of Lakeland had sent a representative to the November 8th meeting to voice how the City of Lakeland had not been notified anywhere along this approval process, despite the fact that these planned changes are being made adjacent to their city limits. The City of Lakeland's main concern was the impact of the increased traffic and congestion, mainly commercial truck traffic, on the roads in that area and the wear and tear on these roads, which could make a substantial impact on Lakeland's expenses to maintain and expand these roads servicing this area. Interim Attorney Tom Cloud stated that following this November DCA meeting, the City of Lakeland was clearly intending to file a lawsuit against Polk City unless immediate action was taken to resolve their concerns. This mutual agreement between the two cities to keep each other informed on these type of issues will hopefully avoid any future litigation for similar issues.
The new ad for the City Manager position is planned to run in two free statewide publications targeted at current Municipality and County Employees. The submission deadline for the copy on these ads is 1/11/11 for the February edition of these publications. Initially, Ms. Block recommended to opt not to advertise in an additional nationwide publication due to a cost of $300 for the ad. Ms. Block's inexperience in placing employment ads is not aiding in her judgement, since even many local ads can easily run close to that price range. Even the Mayor questioned this decision motivated by saving the small dollar amount, and asked if she had considered the possible desirable nationwide demographics she would not be reaching by choosing to not place this ad for this executive level position. By her response, she had obviously not done her homework. The discussion moved on without a definitive agreement about the placing of the nationwide ad.
Pam Lawson, the City's Financial Administrator, requested that an additional Bank Account be opened to simplify the process of utility revenue collection by the new utility management company, Woodard & Curran. W&C is planned to take over the utility management function effective 1/12/11. Ms. Lawson stated that once the revenues are placed in this new account, it would make it easier for her to transfer the needed revenues into whichever account needed funding, whether it be the Water Fund, Sewer Fund, or General Fund. Currently as these revenues come in they are automatically split up by their corresponding amounts into the proper designated funds. As seen over the last few months, the city has needed to funnel substantially more revenue into the Sewer Fund than what is normally allocated to that fund. With this new accounting process, the allocations previously set for each fund will essentially be thrown out the window.
As part of the utility transition process over to Woodard & Curran, W&C sent a recent notice to the city informing them that an additional $14,937 "Transition Charge" would now be required in addition to the already agreed upon signed contract for services. Ms. Block stated that this recent charge was levied due to the unexpected complexity of getting the billing, metering, and computer systems up to the standards needed to make the transition. Ms. Block seemed reluctant, yet very willing to pay the additional charge without question or negotiation to avoid hard feelings with the new sub-contracted company. The Mayor had issues with this additional charge since in most cases, the burden of investigating these type of issues should have been considered by W&D PRIOR to bidding the job and agreeing on a contract. Council agreed to side-table paying this fee until further discussions/negotiations could be made with W&D on the issue.
Patricia Jackson has placed an order to get new lettering so the signage outside City Hall can be updated to reflect the new Monday meeting dates and time. Currently, it still states that the regular meeting date and time is on Tuesday at 7:30 PM and has been causing confusion with the public.
Councilwoman Adorno suggested that instead of charging the current rental fees, $414 in-city/$467.50 outside-city, for the newly remodeled City Activity Center, the city should consider lowering them to encourage more usage and revenue for the city. Ms. Adorno stated that currently the high fees seem to be discouraging any rentals, leaving the facility sitting unused, despite the city spending considerable money to get it updated. Currently, 1/2 of the rental fee would be held as a security deposit to be returned following the rental, if the facility is left in good condition. After a long discussion, council agreed that the fees would be lowered to $100 in-city/$150 outside-city with an additional $200 security deposit required, which may be returned if the facility is left in good condition. This $107 in-city/$83.75 outside-city fee reduction will hopefully encourage additional rentals instead of local residents seeking out other facilities for functions such as birthday parties, weddings, and other social events and also generate much needed revenue for the city.
Councilman Blethen brought up the issue that during a recent planning board meeting, members had agreed to make changes to the current ordinances allowing mobile homes to be replaced with mobile homes if they are damaged or were condemned. The way the code is currently written, reflecting changes made during the previous administration, any mobile home which had been damaged or even left without utility services for a specific amount of time would be condemned, and would need to be replaced with another more permanent structure before the city would allow anyone to reside on the property. This was an effort to force the city to clean up it's appearance. Unfortunately, these code changes had the result of many of the poorest residents paying a very high price and being driven from their homes. Councilman Blethen said that the wording of these ordinance changes is still in the works, but this change will take place in the near future.
An additional Utility Report will be provided on a monthly basis from W&C providing their findings and explanations of where money is being spent. The first report should be available next month.
Councilman Kimsey expressed ongoing concerns about how the Utility Department was charging seemingly excessive high fees for non-payment ($50), and reconnection ($50), as well as late fees ($5), making it even more difficult for customers who are already having difficulties affording their utilities. Mr. Kimsey stated that Auburndale doesn't even have a non-payment fee. He stated that the main purpose of these fees was to generate revenue for the city with little concern for the residents' ability to afford them. According to Pam Lawson, these fees generate an average of $6,000 for the city on a monthly basis. Ms. Lawson did state that the first time a customer is charged the non-payment fee, she has been given authority to waive it. Each month on the 6th, the non-payment fee will be charged unless the account has been paid in full. Utility services will be cut off on either the Tuesday or Wednesday following the 6th. No grace period is permitted, nor is a cut off notice given to customers. The only option is for customers to arrange for a payment plan prior to the due date, if the customer is unable to make their payment. If the customer waits until after the due date, no payment plans will be made. This policy seems pretty unforgiving considering Auburndale allows for a rolling 3 month grace period which results in almost no utility service cut offs.
The way current city ordinances are written, new utility accounts require an inflated "high risk" deposit on both high risk individuals who may have left unpaid balances on previous accounts, as well as properties where a prior account had been left with an unpaid balance. This unfair practice has resulted in landlords bearing the burden of having properties were a prior tenant has left an unpaid balance and now any new tenant, regardless of their past credit or payment history, is required to submit the "high risk" utility deposit of over $400, when their typical utility bill may run close to an average of $50 to $150 per month depending on if they have sewer service or not. Mr. Kimsey felt is was not fair for these individuals to have to come up with more than 3 months of typical utility bills just to open a new account in these situations. The city obviously wants to make sure that the compounded high fees and interest will be covered by making the deposits so high. Unfortunately, this is making it next to impossible for landlords to attract tenants when this has occurred because other local utility companies charge significantly lower deposits and apply their high-risk labels in a more fair manner. How can landlords possibly control how their tenants choose to handle the payments of their individual utility bills? It is not legal in the state of Florida to hold the property owner responsible for balances left on tenant utility accounts.
Temporarily, Ms. Lawson has been authorized to charge the standard deposits on properties labeled as "high risk" for new accounts unless the individual opening the account has poor payment history, despite the ordinance stating otherwise. Ms. Block stated that over the next couple months the city's utility ordinances will be reviewed with the assistance of Woodard & Curran, as well as GAI Consultants of Orlando, the utility consulting firm hired to perform the utility study for the city at a cost of $43,000 back on November 15th, 2010. For this reason, she did not feel it would be productive to continue further discussion on this topic at this time without the expertise of these parties in on the conversation. Hopefully, the WAC & SAC, water & sewer access fees, legality will also be addressed during these upcoming ordinance reviews.
During the public comment segment, a few issues which had been addressed to council and the city attorney at previous meetings, and had since been left unanswered, were brought up again:
Attorney Tom Cloud stated that he had contacted an acquaintance whom had been involved in the Cedar Grove city dissolution in 2008. According to his information, the county had acquired the remaining debt left when the city dissolved. Cedar Grove was a similarly sized small city in the panhandle of Florida, but had significantly lower debt than Polk City when it dissolved, but their debt was still substantial considering the population ratio. See additional info in this earlier blog post Cedar Grove, Florida - Case Study.
The Mayor addressed the reason why a Town Hall meeting type forum where the public can have an open question and answer session about their concerns has not been planned, although it had been promised. He stated that he has attempted to contact County Officials to get some discussions going about what might occur if Polk City dissolves, but the County has not been willing to work with the city due to the ongoing mediation process/possible future lawsuit over the Mt. Olive Utility situation. The Mayor stated that he would still be willing to have a town hall meeting as long as the dissolution of the city was not a topic of discussion, since no further factual information has been available and it would all be speculation.
One of the roads near downtown was recently closed to local traffic and has remain closed. The church adjacent to this road petitioned the county to close this road and voluntarily annexed themselves into the city limits. This way the city would permit them to close this road and purchase the property where the road currently exists. The church plans to use this property for other purposes.
The next regularly scheduled city council meeting is planned for February 14th, 2011, at 7:00 PM.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Saturday, January 8, 2011
City Council Meeting Agenda - January 10, 2011 - 7:00 PM
Just a reminder that the next City Council meeting is next week Monday, January 10, 2011 at 7:00 PM. Here is a link to the meeting's agenda City Council Meeting Agenda - January 10, 2011.
It's great to see the public getting so involved in the city's council meetings, and we trust that it will continue in the new year. Hope to see many of you on Monday night.
It's great to see the public getting so involved in the city's council meetings, and we trust that it will continue in the new year. Hope to see many of you on Monday night.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Ledger Article: "Polk City Begins Manager Search"
Here is the link to The Ledger article Polk City Begins Manager Search which was printed in Tuesday's paper, following Monday's City Council workshop. In this article, the author, Kevin Bouffard, seems to imply that City Council decided that a "bachelor's degree, preferably in public or business administration", would be required. To the contrary, Council decided they would prefer job applicants with this degree, but would not require it as a minimum qualification, even though Mr. Simmons of Kissimmee, a member of the Florida Chapter of Range Riders, urged the council to limit the search to candidates with at least a bachelor's degree in public or business administration.
It was decided by council to keep the salary and benefits open or negotiable. The annual salary for the previous City Manager, Cory Carrier, was $72,000 plus generous benefits. As you might remember, her severance package included a monthly payment of over $9,000 for the last six months of her contract, which was the equivalence of her monthly salary and benefit package. That comes to a total of over $108,000 annually. That is a very aggressive compensation package and hopefully the new contract for the next City Manager will mirror the downsized role that this new manager will have. Quite a few of the responsibilities of our past City Manager have now been outsourced.
It was decided by council to keep the salary and benefits open or negotiable. The annual salary for the previous City Manager, Cory Carrier, was $72,000 plus generous benefits. As you might remember, her severance package included a monthly payment of over $9,000 for the last six months of her contract, which was the equivalence of her monthly salary and benefit package. That comes to a total of over $108,000 annually. That is a very aggressive compensation package and hopefully the new contract for the next City Manager will mirror the downsized role that this new manager will have. Quite a few of the responsibilities of our past City Manager have now been outsourced.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Hiring a City Manager & the City Charter
When it comes to effectively recruiting, screening, and hiring employees, I can personally speak from experience*. Please see the footnote on this article to see my Human Resources background.
At the City Council Workshop on January 3rd, 2011, Mayor Joe LaCascia and the rest of the Council showed how inexperienced they are in this very important aspect, even with obvious "on the spot coaching" throughout the meeting from Interim City Attorney Tom Cloud. Wisely, they contacted Range Riders, a retired group of volunteer former City and County Managers to assist in the search for a new City Manager. Hopefully, this was not done for appearances only. Mr. Dick Simmons, a Range Rider, gave a very good presentation to the council about what they can expect from the process and made several suggestions to effectively recruit for this position. Mr. Simmons helped recruit for two of the city's former City Managers, and has worked in the past in several Central Florida cities both big and small. He is very aware of what skill sets, as well as special experience, running a city in this area will require. Mr. Simmons offered some wise recommendations of what needs to be included in the job description and recruitment ad when finding a candidate who will be successful and last in their new position. Sample ads were also provided, but seemed to be ignored. Mr. Simmons and Mr. Mark Durbin, also a Range Rider, will assist in screening the candidates and also provide recommended interview questions that the council should ask each candidate. They also strongly advised that a thorough background check be done on any candidates they are considering. A time frame of 3-4 months was estimated to find a replacement, if all goes as planned. With this in mind, this process should have been started months earlier as previously recommended by Councilman Kimsey.
Hopefully, council will sharpen their listening skills quite a bit better than they demonstrated in last night's meeting. Many times when Mr. Simmons did a good job of clarifying questions the council had, the Mayor attempted to restate his understanding of what was just said, and stated almost the exact opposite of the point Mr. Simmons was trying to make. Understandably, Mr. Simmons looked a little frustrated on more than one occasion. Prior to the meeting, the Mayor had attempted to do his homework, prepared some questions, and quoted some wording that he thought should be included in an effective recruitment ad. In his insistence on sticking to his "Recruiting for Dummies" notes, many important points Mr. Simmons made clearly went over the Mayor and Vice Mayor's heads.
A recommendation made by both the Interim City Attorney, Tom Cloud, and the Range Riders of REQUIRING a bachelor's degree in either Business Administration or Public Administration seemed to just be brushed aside. In addition to the Financial/Accounting aspect of a degree like this, additional required learning in aspects of marketing, management, economics, and personnel management is just as important. Instead, the council concluded that this BS degree would simply be "preferred" but not required, if the candidate has equivalent professional experience. Is the council qualified to determine the professional experience equivalency of a BS degree in these fields? Interview questions can only reveal so much and anyone can falsify or embellish on a resume. All throughout the discussed list of job requirements for qualified candidates, the council "dumbed down" or lowered the recommendations from the Range Riders. Understandably, the city will not be able to afford a razor sharp city manager with a long track record of strong experience, not to mention it may be tougher than usual to hire a qualified candidate considering the challenges Polk City is currently facing, but they seem to have lowered the requirements for the job considerably across the board. Are they truly seeking a qualified City Manager or simply an Assistant City Manager?
To the knowledgeable public, it sure appeared that the required job experience and educational requirements were being reduced to parallel what the existing City Clerk, Patricia Jackson, has to offer, instead of sticking to the recommendations from the Range Riders and the City Attorney. Here is a link to some information we found on Patricia Jackson's previous short terms as City Manager in both Mulberry and Eagle Lake. Who is running Polk City? If Ms. Jackson was such a wonderful City Manager, why would she have been fired from Eagle Lake and then accepted a much lesser position of City Clerk in a small city like Polk City in late 2008? She might be a great City Clerk, but that doesn't automatically qualify her to be City Manager. If this is the plan the Mayor and Vice Mayor have in mind, this move will simply guarantee continuation of the same complete control the Mayor and Vice Mayor currently have.
Even the strongly recommended requirement of having the City Manager currently live within city limits, or be required to move to live within city limits within one year of accepting the position, was softened to be a "negotiable" time limit to meet this requirement. Is this "negotiable" time frame similar to the seemingly never-ending "temporary" Interim City Manager/Council Member dual roll which will have lasted close to a year if this hiring process goes quickly? Even the Mayor had concerns about where in the city the perspective City Manager might live, considering most of the city falls into two classifications: Taxed beyond affordability, i.e. Mt. Olive & Sandy Pointe, or the poverty stricken numbered streets areas. What does this say about how the city is currently being run?
There was no mention during discussions about requiring the applicants to complete a standardized Application for Employment. Are these applicants being scrutinized simply on the information included in their resumes? How does that work with the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) requirements that each applicant be considered on equal ground when professional resume writers are skilled in conveniently omitting information that is not as favorable, such as periods of unemployment between jobs or short tenures. A classic example of this creative resume writing is listing only the years of employment instead of specific dates of employment. An individual could say that they were employed from 2008-2009 at company XYZ, when in reality they were hired in December of 2008 and were fired by January, 2009. Typically only standard applications will reveal these vital omissions. Applications will also provide much more detailed information on salary ranges and contact information, used when background checked are performed. Many times during these checks, former employers will not reveal any information other than job title, dates of employment, and possibly salary information. A thorough investigation of previous employment should not be limited to the somewhat vague information provided by most HR Departments. Direct contact with direct supervisors will sometimes reveal a more complete picture of past performance. This contact information can many times be obtained from standard applications, when a resume would usually not provide that much detail. Applications typically have a standard clause that disqualifies the applicant if the applicant intentionally falsifies their experience or educational background. This is another safeguard that the city should strongly consider to avoid potential legal disputes. The use of standardized applications for all qualified candidates will also make it much easier for the city to defend itself in the case that there is an EEOC claim filed against them on the basis of discrimination. Since no opportunities for public comments or questions were allowed at the workshop, these important issues were never brought up.
The second part of the workshop, "Review of the City Charter", City Charter of Polk City was a complete waste of time if you have access to the internet. The focus was on Article III, C-7 "Town Council", and Article V, C-21 "Administration", dealing with duties and responsibilities. When this topic was brought up as an item of discussion at this workshop, one would expect that there were parts within the existing charter that council members felt needed to be improved or changed. For instance, placing limits on the length of time an individual can serve in dual roles of Interim City Manager and Council person. Or, possibly putting it in black and white that it is required that the City Manager be must live within city limits so they too can enjoy the fruits of their labor. Instead, Councilwoman Adorno requested that the Mayor read to the audience of approximately 20 people specific sections of the City Charter word for word. Even the Interim City Attorney, Mr. Cloud, rolled his eyes at the request. I guess he didn't mind too much considering he's getting paid very generously for his time.
*My most relevant experience is that I have worked for several years for Nokia Mobile Phones, North America as a Human Resources Assistant, as well as working for the former Colonial BancGroup, N.A.. as a Human Resources Director for 4+ years running one of their two Operations Centers with a staff of approximately 120 people. I also have a BS degree, double majoring in both Marketing and Management. At Nokia, I recruited nationwide for many positions that were highly coveted in the industry. The ads were run blind, intentionally not revealing the company name, and yet many times would produce thousands of resumes and hundreds of qualified candidates. At Colonial, I was responsible for everything from recruiting and staffing entry level positions to top level executives, payroll, benefits, personnel relations, etc., with no HR staff besides myself.
Lisa B. Shifflett
At the City Council Workshop on January 3rd, 2011, Mayor Joe LaCascia and the rest of the Council showed how inexperienced they are in this very important aspect, even with obvious "on the spot coaching" throughout the meeting from Interim City Attorney Tom Cloud. Wisely, they contacted Range Riders, a retired group of volunteer former City and County Managers to assist in the search for a new City Manager. Hopefully, this was not done for appearances only. Mr. Dick Simmons, a Range Rider, gave a very good presentation to the council about what they can expect from the process and made several suggestions to effectively recruit for this position. Mr. Simmons helped recruit for two of the city's former City Managers, and has worked in the past in several Central Florida cities both big and small. He is very aware of what skill sets, as well as special experience, running a city in this area will require. Mr. Simmons offered some wise recommendations of what needs to be included in the job description and recruitment ad when finding a candidate who will be successful and last in their new position. Sample ads were also provided, but seemed to be ignored. Mr. Simmons and Mr. Mark Durbin, also a Range Rider, will assist in screening the candidates and also provide recommended interview questions that the council should ask each candidate. They also strongly advised that a thorough background check be done on any candidates they are considering. A time frame of 3-4 months was estimated to find a replacement, if all goes as planned. With this in mind, this process should have been started months earlier as previously recommended by Councilman Kimsey.
Hopefully, council will sharpen their listening skills quite a bit better than they demonstrated in last night's meeting. Many times when Mr. Simmons did a good job of clarifying questions the council had, the Mayor attempted to restate his understanding of what was just said, and stated almost the exact opposite of the point Mr. Simmons was trying to make. Understandably, Mr. Simmons looked a little frustrated on more than one occasion. Prior to the meeting, the Mayor had attempted to do his homework, prepared some questions, and quoted some wording that he thought should be included in an effective recruitment ad. In his insistence on sticking to his "Recruiting for Dummies" notes, many important points Mr. Simmons made clearly went over the Mayor and Vice Mayor's heads.
A recommendation made by both the Interim City Attorney, Tom Cloud, and the Range Riders of REQUIRING a bachelor's degree in either Business Administration or Public Administration seemed to just be brushed aside. In addition to the Financial/Accounting aspect of a degree like this, additional required learning in aspects of marketing, management, economics, and personnel management is just as important. Instead, the council concluded that this BS degree would simply be "preferred" but not required, if the candidate has equivalent professional experience. Is the council qualified to determine the professional experience equivalency of a BS degree in these fields? Interview questions can only reveal so much and anyone can falsify or embellish on a resume. All throughout the discussed list of job requirements for qualified candidates, the council "dumbed down" or lowered the recommendations from the Range Riders. Understandably, the city will not be able to afford a razor sharp city manager with a long track record of strong experience, not to mention it may be tougher than usual to hire a qualified candidate considering the challenges Polk City is currently facing, but they seem to have lowered the requirements for the job considerably across the board. Are they truly seeking a qualified City Manager or simply an Assistant City Manager?
To the knowledgeable public, it sure appeared that the required job experience and educational requirements were being reduced to parallel what the existing City Clerk, Patricia Jackson, has to offer, instead of sticking to the recommendations from the Range Riders and the City Attorney. Here is a link to some information we found on Patricia Jackson's previous short terms as City Manager in both Mulberry and Eagle Lake. Who is running Polk City? If Ms. Jackson was such a wonderful City Manager, why would she have been fired from Eagle Lake and then accepted a much lesser position of City Clerk in a small city like Polk City in late 2008? She might be a great City Clerk, but that doesn't automatically qualify her to be City Manager. If this is the plan the Mayor and Vice Mayor have in mind, this move will simply guarantee continuation of the same complete control the Mayor and Vice Mayor currently have.
Even the strongly recommended requirement of having the City Manager currently live within city limits, or be required to move to live within city limits within one year of accepting the position, was softened to be a "negotiable" time limit to meet this requirement. Is this "negotiable" time frame similar to the seemingly never-ending "temporary" Interim City Manager/Council Member dual roll which will have lasted close to a year if this hiring process goes quickly? Even the Mayor had concerns about where in the city the perspective City Manager might live, considering most of the city falls into two classifications: Taxed beyond affordability, i.e. Mt. Olive & Sandy Pointe, or the poverty stricken numbered streets areas. What does this say about how the city is currently being run?
There was no mention during discussions about requiring the applicants to complete a standardized Application for Employment. Are these applicants being scrutinized simply on the information included in their resumes? How does that work with the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) requirements that each applicant be considered on equal ground when professional resume writers are skilled in conveniently omitting information that is not as favorable, such as periods of unemployment between jobs or short tenures. A classic example of this creative resume writing is listing only the years of employment instead of specific dates of employment. An individual could say that they were employed from 2008-2009 at company XYZ, when in reality they were hired in December of 2008 and were fired by January, 2009. Typically only standard applications will reveal these vital omissions. Applications will also provide much more detailed information on salary ranges and contact information, used when background checked are performed. Many times during these checks, former employers will not reveal any information other than job title, dates of employment, and possibly salary information. A thorough investigation of previous employment should not be limited to the somewhat vague information provided by most HR Departments. Direct contact with direct supervisors will sometimes reveal a more complete picture of past performance. This contact information can many times be obtained from standard applications, when a resume would usually not provide that much detail. Applications typically have a standard clause that disqualifies the applicant if the applicant intentionally falsifies their experience or educational background. This is another safeguard that the city should strongly consider to avoid potential legal disputes. The use of standardized applications for all qualified candidates will also make it much easier for the city to defend itself in the case that there is an EEOC claim filed against them on the basis of discrimination. Since no opportunities for public comments or questions were allowed at the workshop, these important issues were never brought up.
The second part of the workshop, "Review of the City Charter", City Charter of Polk City was a complete waste of time if you have access to the internet. The focus was on Article III, C-7 "Town Council", and Article V, C-21 "Administration", dealing with duties and responsibilities. When this topic was brought up as an item of discussion at this workshop, one would expect that there were parts within the existing charter that council members felt needed to be improved or changed. For instance, placing limits on the length of time an individual can serve in dual roles of Interim City Manager and Council person. Or, possibly putting it in black and white that it is required that the City Manager be must live within city limits so they too can enjoy the fruits of their labor. Instead, Councilwoman Adorno requested that the Mayor read to the audience of approximately 20 people specific sections of the City Charter word for word. Even the Interim City Attorney, Mr. Cloud, rolled his eyes at the request. I guess he didn't mind too much considering he's getting paid very generously for his time.
*My most relevant experience is that I have worked for several years for Nokia Mobile Phones, North America as a Human Resources Assistant, as well as working for the former Colonial BancGroup, N.A.. as a Human Resources Director for 4+ years running one of their two Operations Centers with a staff of approximately 120 people. I also have a BS degree, double majoring in both Marketing and Management. At Nokia, I recruited nationwide for many positions that were highly coveted in the industry. The ads were run blind, intentionally not revealing the company name, and yet many times would produce thousands of resumes and hundreds of qualified candidates. At Colonial, I was responsible for everything from recruiting and staffing entry level positions to top level executives, payroll, benefits, personnel relations, etc., with no HR staff besides myself.
Lisa B. Shifflett
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Very Timely Article Posted In LakelandLocal.com
As this year, 2010, comes to a close, this is a great time to reflect on where we've been and where we are going. Many of us take this time to reflect on what mistakes we have made in the past and maybe think about a New Year's resolution that will be an attempt to better our lives. It is also a good time to think about what the City of Polk City is doing for its citizens, and at what cost? Do the benefits of its existence outweigh the costs, or do the costs of running this city outweigh the benefits of keeping it? It is a fact that Polk City does not take in enough revenue to pay for all its expenses and debt. If it is counting on grants to balance the budget, that is not a balanced budget. This city cannot operate on a daily basis without the extra income it receives from County residents in the form of extremely inflated water and sewer rates. This alone is a BIG RED FLAG!!! This small city of approximately 1700 residents has a budget of over $3.8 Million Dollars. Think of all the overhead that could be eliminated if the city were to dissolve.
Here is a very timely article written by Al Whittle of http://www.lakelandlocal.com/ titled: How Many Cities Can We Afford?
We would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone for your continued support and will look forward to a brand new year with hope of a better future. During the past year we have already accomplished quite a few goals, but there is more work to be done. We will continue to keep the public informed with your help.
Best wishes for a HAPPY AND HEALTHY NEW YEAR!!!
Here is a very timely article written by Al Whittle of http://www.lakelandlocal.com/ titled: How Many Cities Can We Afford?
We would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone for your continued support and will look forward to a brand new year with hope of a better future. During the past year we have already accomplished quite a few goals, but there is more work to be done. We will continue to keep the public informed with your help.
Best wishes for a HAPPY AND HEALTHY NEW YEAR!!!
Thursday, December 23, 2010
New Letter from DEP to City dated December 21, 2010
Letter from DEP to City Dated December 21, 2010
It appears the city has fixed some items that were out of compliance for the Cardinal Hill Wastewater Treatment Plant, but the groundwater tests in the area near the plant are still not in compliance with the DEP's standards. This is very concerning, considering many, if not all, of the homes in that area are on wells for their drinking water.
It appears the city has fixed some items that were out of compliance for the Cardinal Hill Wastewater Treatment Plant, but the groundwater tests in the area near the plant are still not in compliance with the DEP's standards. This is very concerning, considering many, if not all, of the homes in that area are on wells for their drinking water.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Violation of Meter Reading Frequency - Amended
To see if this 43-day billing cycle was just a one-time occurrence, it was necessary to review past billing cycles. Polk City Utilities started recording the meter reading dates on their bills on June, 2009. Prior to that date, the bills just showed the first and last date of the month as the coverage of the meter reading period. Since June, 2009, there have been 3 instances where the meter readings extended over the 31 days of the month. The first time was on the October, 2009 bill when the previous reading was on 8/27/09 and the next reading was on 10/05/09, thus covering a 39 day period on that bill. There was no meter reading in December, 2009, and the January, 2010 bill reflected a reading from 11/25/09 to 1/05/10, creating a 41-day billing cycle. The most recent extended billing cycle was with our last bill with a reading on 10/26/10 and on 12/07/10, covering a 42-day span. During these three billing cycles, all residents paid a higher utility bill, not only caused by the extended usage period, but more importantly, due to them being bumped into the higher usage bracket.
Here is a complete listing of the reading dates since the city started posting them on their bills:
4/29/09 - 6/02/09 = 34 days 3/02/10 - 3/31/10 = 30 days
6/02/09 - 6/29/09 = 27 days 3/31/10 - 4/29/10 = 30 days
6/29/09 - 7/29/09 = 30 days 4/29/10 - 5/26/10 = 27 days
7/29/09 - 8/27/09 = 29 days 5/26/10 - 6/29/10 = 34 days
8/27/09 - 10/05/09 = 39 days 6/29/10 - 7/28/10 = 29 days
10/05/09 - 11/03/09 = 29 days 7/28/10 - 8/26/10 = 29 days
11/03/09 - 11/25/09 = 22 days 8/26/10 - 9/28/10 = 32 days
11/25/09 - 1/05/10 = 41 days 9/28/10- 10/26/10 = 28 days
1/05/10 - 2/02/10 = 27 days 10/26/10 - 12/07/10 = 42 days
2/02/10 - 3/02/10 = 28 days
Polk City's financial state drastically deteriorated during 2009 when it became apparent that over $531,000 in overdue impact fees from 2007 & 2008 were never paid to the County, and these funds were misappropriated. There seems to be a direct correlation between the financial distress level of the city, these "extended billing cycles" and the penalty phase of the utility bills. During the month of October, the county sends out the Advalorem Tax Bills to all the property owners, which are payable beginning with the month of November. Polk City does not receive it's portion of this revenue from the county until the 15th of the following month after these bills are paid.
Prior to and including the bills dated 02/10/2009, one month grace period was extended to the utility customers to pay their bills in full without a $5.00 late penalty being added. On the back of the bill it states: "In accordance with Ordinance 1140: A late fee will be assessed to all accounts not paid in full by the 10th of the month. (Sec. 74-257) Delinquent accounts are subject to a reconnect fee and may be disconnected without notice."
On the next month's bill dated 3/10/2009, only 15 days are allowed before the $5.00 late fee is added. But the notice on the back of the bill continues to refer to the same Ordinance 1140, with a late fee being assessed to all accounts not paid in full by the 10th of the month. Someone must have brought this to their attention, and finally on the utility bill dated 4/10/2009, the notice on the back of the bill quotes a new "Ordinance 1246: A late fee will be assessed to all accounts not paid in full by 2PM on the 25th of the month. (sec. 74-257) Delinquent accounts subject to disconnection will be charged a service charge/nonpayment fee of $50 and will be disconnected without notice. This fee applies to the account prior to the disconnection of the utility service. (Sec. 74-261) In all cases where water has been disconnected, a reconnect fee of $50 will apply. (Sec. 74-255) Monthly bills must be paid in full by the due date to avoid disconnection of service and/or service charges."
This new change in due dates has also created a heavy burden on all the residents on fixed incomes and receiving Social Security checks who need to budget their income. The February 10, 2009 utility bill was the last bill that allowed 30 days for payment in full without a penalty, by March 10, 2009. Then the March 10, 2009 bill arrives and that bill had a due date of March 25th, allowing only 15 days before a $5.00 penalty is enforced. That created a "double payment" cycle during that month for the Seniors and others on fixed incomes, and many faced late fees and disconnection fees during that time. This new due date was never properly advertised in advance, so residents could prepare for this drastic change.
Obviously the city has been getting creative and sneaky for quite some time in generating extra revenue that they are not entitled to, and possibly breaking the law by doing so.
Here is a complete listing of the reading dates since the city started posting them on their bills:
4/29/09 - 6/02/09 = 34 days 3/02/10 - 3/31/10 = 30 days
6/02/09 - 6/29/09 = 27 days 3/31/10 - 4/29/10 = 30 days
6/29/09 - 7/29/09 = 30 days 4/29/10 - 5/26/10 = 27 days
7/29/09 - 8/27/09 = 29 days 5/26/10 - 6/29/10 = 34 days
8/27/09 - 10/05/09 = 39 days 6/29/10 - 7/28/10 = 29 days
10/05/09 - 11/03/09 = 29 days 7/28/10 - 8/26/10 = 29 days
11/03/09 - 11/25/09 = 22 days 8/26/10 - 9/28/10 = 32 days
11/25/09 - 1/05/10 = 41 days 9/28/10- 10/26/10 = 28 days
1/05/10 - 2/02/10 = 27 days 10/26/10 - 12/07/10 = 42 days
2/02/10 - 3/02/10 = 28 days
Polk City's financial state drastically deteriorated during 2009 when it became apparent that over $531,000 in overdue impact fees from 2007 & 2008 were never paid to the County, and these funds were misappropriated. There seems to be a direct correlation between the financial distress level of the city, these "extended billing cycles" and the penalty phase of the utility bills. During the month of October, the county sends out the Advalorem Tax Bills to all the property owners, which are payable beginning with the month of November. Polk City does not receive it's portion of this revenue from the county until the 15th of the following month after these bills are paid.
Prior to and including the bills dated 02/10/2009, one month grace period was extended to the utility customers to pay their bills in full without a $5.00 late penalty being added. On the back of the bill it states: "In accordance with Ordinance 1140: A late fee will be assessed to all accounts not paid in full by the 10th of the month. (Sec. 74-257) Delinquent accounts are subject to a reconnect fee and may be disconnected without notice."
On the next month's bill dated 3/10/2009, only 15 days are allowed before the $5.00 late fee is added. But the notice on the back of the bill continues to refer to the same Ordinance 1140, with a late fee being assessed to all accounts not paid in full by the 10th of the month. Someone must have brought this to their attention, and finally on the utility bill dated 4/10/2009, the notice on the back of the bill quotes a new "Ordinance 1246: A late fee will be assessed to all accounts not paid in full by 2PM on the 25th of the month. (sec. 74-257) Delinquent accounts subject to disconnection will be charged a service charge/nonpayment fee of $50 and will be disconnected without notice. This fee applies to the account prior to the disconnection of the utility service. (Sec. 74-261) In all cases where water has been disconnected, a reconnect fee of $50 will apply. (Sec. 74-255) Monthly bills must be paid in full by the due date to avoid disconnection of service and/or service charges."
This new change in due dates has also created a heavy burden on all the residents on fixed incomes and receiving Social Security checks who need to budget their income. The February 10, 2009 utility bill was the last bill that allowed 30 days for payment in full without a penalty, by March 10, 2009. Then the March 10, 2009 bill arrives and that bill had a due date of March 25th, allowing only 15 days before a $5.00 penalty is enforced. That created a "double payment" cycle during that month for the Seniors and others on fixed incomes, and many faced late fees and disconnection fees during that time. This new due date was never properly advertised in advance, so residents could prepare for this drastic change.
Obviously the city has been getting creative and sneaky for quite some time in generating extra revenue that they are not entitled to, and possibly breaking the law by doing so.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Violaltion in Frequency of Meter Readings for Utilities
After receiving this month's utility bill dated 12/09/10, I was puzzled by the higher than normal usage, until I noticed the reading dates of the previous month and this month. My previous meter reading was done on 10/26/10 and the next meter reading was done on 12/07/10. That covers a period of 43 days. There was no meter reading performed during the whole month of November.
The State of Florida has a very detailed set of rules in place which can be read in the following link: Florida Administrative Weekly & Florida Administrative Code Chapters 25 - 30 contain detailed rules and regulations which a municipality must follow in their day-to-day operations of their water and waste water utilities department. In other words, THIS IS THEIR "UTILITY OPERATIONS BIBLE". For example:
25-30.261 Meter Readings.
(1) The utility shall read its service meters at regular intervals and, insofar as practicable within regularly scheduled work days, on the corresponding day of each meter reading period.
(2) The utility shall read the register of each meter in the same units that the utility uses for billing purposes, except that a water meter may register in gallons or in cubic feet.
(3) The service meters shall be marked to indicate the units measured by that meter.
(4) The meter shall be marked with any constant or multiplier that the utility uses to determine the amount of service used by a customer.Specific Authority 350.127(2), 367.121 FS. Law Implemented 367.111, 367.121 FS. History–Amended 9-12-74, Formerly 25-10.95, 25-10.095, Amended 11-10-86
The city is clearly in violation of the above quoted Chapter 25-30.261 (1)
By not reading the meter at regular intervals, it will greatly fluctuate the usage per billing cycle. This December, 2010 bill covers a period of 43 days, or 6 weeks. That is equal to 1 1/2 months usage, instead of 4 weeks or 1 month's usage. By extending the meter reading over a longer period of time, it dramatically increases the usage for that month, and will bump many users into the higher "Rate per 1,000 Gallons Block". For example, if a customer has an average usage of 4000 - 5000 gallons per month, it will bump this customer into the Block 2 usage with the extra gallons over 6,000, which is billed at $5.23 per 1,000 gallons, instead of the Block 1 usage rate of $2.62 per 1,000 gallons. If this occurs several times per year, it will dramatically increase the revenue for the city, especially from the water and sewer customers. For the county residents using city water and sewer it is compounded even further with the extra 25% added to their bill.
The city is already over-billing with their practice of rounding off the total gallons used to the next 1,000 gallons figure. When our meter was read on 12/07/10, we saw the meter reader taking the reading on our water meter. We immediately wrote down the reading ourselves, which was 24,560. Our bill showed the meter reading at 25,000, therefore we were over-billed by 440 gallons. Sure, it will balance out next month, but, every month, the city is getting paid in advance for thousands of gallons not yet used.
Below is my actual utility bill with name, address & account number blanked out for privacy purposes.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Polk City, County At Financial Impasse
It was a very short meeting at the Lakeland City Hall between representatives of Polk County and Polk City. In exactly 10 minutes is was established that there is no room for negotiations on the part of the County, and that Polk City will be facing an long, expensive legal battle against the county. Here is a link to The Ledger article: Polk City, County At Financial Impasse One note regarding the article, it fails to mention the 12% utility increase that was implemented in November, 2009, only 6 months prior to the 50% increase voted on at the June 8, 2010 City Council meeting, with an effective date of July 9, 2010. But the city couldn't wait that long to get the extra income, therefore started applying the 50% increase to the water and sewer usage beginning on May 26, 2010 on forward, even before the resolution was even signed!!!
The public better brace themselves for more creative ways for the city to increase their revenue to pay for this upcoming legal battle with the county.
The public better brace themselves for more creative ways for the city to increase their revenue to pay for this upcoming legal battle with the county.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Today's Public Notice Meeting in Lakeland at 3:00 PM
We have confirmed that this meeting WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. Seating may be limited, but it sounded like they were doing their best to accommodate the expected crowd volume. See the previous post for details and location Public Notice Meeting December 17th at 3:00 PM
Please try to attend, if at all possible! This should be a very good meeting.
Please try to attend, if at all possible! This should be a very good meeting.
Water Pumped vs. Water Billed Data Visualized
In the newsletter inserted in the 12/10/10 water bill, Polk City made a weak attempt at damage control concerning the disturbing information revealed by a public records request comparing gallons of water billed to Polk City Utility customers versus actual gallons pumped out of the ground during the same time period by the utility company. Details can be seen in a previous post Magnitude of Polk City Utility Overbilling Revealed.
The newsletter "In the News" section states, "Water usage from Polk City Wells - It has been reported that Polk City wells are not correctly registering the number of gallons pumped correctly. Frank Sanderson, Polk City's Interim Utilities Director, has been on top of this issue since before it was reported. There are several reasons this may be occurring and we are working to resolve the issue. The following action has already been taken:
* The flowmeters at the wells have been recalibrated
* The original design of the placement of the flowmeters is being evaluated.
Individual meters on customer properties are correct."
"Meter readings - Polk City Utilities found an error in the programming of approximately 20 water meters out of approximately 2000 water meters that caused a higher reading than normal. The software has been updated and the meters now read correctly."
Using the data from the public records request that covers billing cycle 6/10/09 through 11/10/10, anyone can clearly see that those excuses don't even start to explain the discrepancies. Please keep in mind that this data and graph reflects the GALLONS billed and pumped, not the price per gallon charged. The only semi-consistent trend is the total gallons pumped figures. Referring to the chart below, you can see that the gallons pumped decreased slightly following the first recent rate increase in Resolution 2009-07 with an effective date of October 24th, 2009, then again the gallons pumped dropped slightly again following the most recent rate increase in Resolution 2010 - 01 with an effective date of July 9th, 2010.
On the other hand, the gallons of water billed seems to have absolutely no logical correlation to the gallons pumped out of the ground. The outrageous spike on the July 10, 2009, billing cycle might have a closer correlation cash flow, or lack of, in the city's bank accounts. There was a mention in the September 2, 2009 Budget Workshop Minutes about an ongoing computer conversion, which may have played a roll, but how many of these bills were actually corrected? At least of our neighbors had a 10,000 gallon overage in their reading that billing cycle and had to fight for at least 6 weeks over their bill and suffered a water shut off, before the issue was finally resolved. This was also the same time the city posted a notice by the window of the utility department that if you come in with an attitude, they can refuse to serve you. How coincidental!
Logic would stand to reason that during the colder months when the snow-birds come back in town from the North, that there would be a noticeable increase in both the gallons pumped and the gallons billed. That doesn't seem to effect the data very much. During the colder months of November, 2009, through February, 2010, gallons billed averages at or below the gallons pumped. Could this also have a correlation to the city's cash flow? This is also the same time frame when the Ad Valorem Taxes start flowing in every year easing up on the city's tight financial situation, so if there is some creative billing going on, that would be the time of year when those extra funds from the utilities are not as vital to the over all cash flow.
Another area of the gallons billed that appears to have a closer correlation to the city's cash flow instead of the gallons billed is the time following the February 2010 billing cycle. This is around the same time when the former City Manager Cory Carrier really took notice to the dire situation of the city's financial state as evident in the February 9, 2010 City Council Meeting Minutes. Per the minutes, Ms. Carrier stated, "money is not coming in as expected. We are still working on the $100,000 that was taken out of this year’s budget, and we are “barely squeaking by.” City Manager Carrier advised she has laid off two employees and is looking at other city operations to see where we can make cuts."
In the March 9, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes, The city received the petition for contraction from Fantasy of Flight for approximately 300 acres. The next month, the gallons billed increased yet again out of proportion with the gallons pumped, maybe in anticipation of the legal bills.
In the April 6, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes, the 2008 Financial Audit findings were announced by the Auditor, Mike Brynjulfson. Per the minutes, Mr. Brynjulfson stated, "Statement of Net Assets in the Water and Sewer Funds – the City met a condition of financial emergency (unreserved balance in the General Fund is a negative $101,392 and the Enterprise Funds (w/s) is a negative $173,888)" The following month, the gallons billed took another steep increase, yet again out of proportion with the gallons pumped. Also that month, in the April 20, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes, under the leadership of the new Mayor, Joe LaCascia, "Mayor LaCascia advised he would be asking for 50% increase in rates in order to get revenue in as quick as possible." This steep gallons billed increase trend takes a steeper increase each month following until the July 10, 2010 billing cycle, where it hits a slight plateau. This dramatic increase occurred despite, the gallons pumped begins to slowly drop after the May 10, 2010 billing cycle after the rate increase was applied to the water usage in the water bills, despite the July 9th effective date.
Another major "Ahh-Hah" moment comes into play when you read this additional quote from the April 20, 2010 City Council Workshop Minutes above. On page 2, bullet point number 10 states, "Mayor LaCascia and Pam Lawson then discussed the revenue/expense projections, which show General Fund will have a deficit in July, Sewer Fund will have a deficit in April, and the Water Fund will not have a deficit. By the report it shows the water fund will carry the other two funds until September (copy is attached)." This is the same month where the gallons billed peaks, when there is no obvious change in the gallons pumped.
Starting after the August 10, 2010, billing cycle, a steep decrease in gallons billed occurred with no major drop in gallons pumped at the wells. August 2010, is when the Polk City Utility customers were fed up and finally starting to get involved due to the awareness our blog had created. At city meetings around this time, on numerous occasions, Vice Mayor, Trudy Block, makes references to seeing a light at the end of the tunnel, being at the cusp of a financial shift in the city which will result in financial relief for the citizens, etc., etc. Could this be because they were manually manipulating the billing numbers because the natives were getting a little too restless for their liking?
How are the actual meter reading numbers entered into the billing system???? How much human interaction is coming into this equation? Are there any checks and balances built into this process to make sure that these numbers are accurate? Is the same person who is handling the cash flow for the city the same person controlling the revenue coming in from the utility bills? Who is rounding the meter readings to the next 1,000 gallon increment when the meter readings appear to be by the gallon in some months, when other months the figures are all rounded? How many customers are unfairly being bumped into a higher rate bracket due to this rounding practice? Inquiring minds want to know!!!!
The newsletter "In the News" section states, "Water usage from Polk City Wells - It has been reported that Polk City wells are not correctly registering the number of gallons pumped correctly. Frank Sanderson, Polk City's Interim Utilities Director, has been on top of this issue since before it was reported. There are several reasons this may be occurring and we are working to resolve the issue. The following action has already been taken:
* The flowmeters at the wells have been recalibrated
* The original design of the placement of the flowmeters is being evaluated.
Individual meters on customer properties are correct."
"Meter readings - Polk City Utilities found an error in the programming of approximately 20 water meters out of approximately 2000 water meters that caused a higher reading than normal. The software has been updated and the meters now read correctly."
Using the data from the public records request that covers billing cycle 6/10/09 through 11/10/10, anyone can clearly see that those excuses don't even start to explain the discrepancies. Please keep in mind that this data and graph reflects the GALLONS billed and pumped, not the price per gallon charged. The only semi-consistent trend is the total gallons pumped figures. Referring to the chart below, you can see that the gallons pumped decreased slightly following the first recent rate increase in Resolution 2009-07 with an effective date of October 24th, 2009, then again the gallons pumped dropped slightly again following the most recent rate increase in Resolution 2010 - 01 with an effective date of July 9th, 2010.
On the other hand, the gallons of water billed seems to have absolutely no logical correlation to the gallons pumped out of the ground. The outrageous spike on the July 10, 2009, billing cycle might have a closer correlation cash flow, or lack of, in the city's bank accounts. There was a mention in the September 2, 2009 Budget Workshop Minutes about an ongoing computer conversion, which may have played a roll, but how many of these bills were actually corrected? At least of our neighbors had a 10,000 gallon overage in their reading that billing cycle and had to fight for at least 6 weeks over their bill and suffered a water shut off, before the issue was finally resolved. This was also the same time the city posted a notice by the window of the utility department that if you come in with an attitude, they can refuse to serve you. How coincidental!
Logic would stand to reason that during the colder months when the snow-birds come back in town from the North, that there would be a noticeable increase in both the gallons pumped and the gallons billed. That doesn't seem to effect the data very much. During the colder months of November, 2009, through February, 2010, gallons billed averages at or below the gallons pumped. Could this also have a correlation to the city's cash flow? This is also the same time frame when the Ad Valorem Taxes start flowing in every year easing up on the city's tight financial situation, so if there is some creative billing going on, that would be the time of year when those extra funds from the utilities are not as vital to the over all cash flow.
Another area of the gallons billed that appears to have a closer correlation to the city's cash flow instead of the gallons billed is the time following the February 2010 billing cycle. This is around the same time when the former City Manager Cory Carrier really took notice to the dire situation of the city's financial state as evident in the February 9, 2010 City Council Meeting Minutes. Per the minutes, Ms. Carrier stated, "money is not coming in as expected. We are still working on the $100,000 that was taken out of this year’s budget, and we are “barely squeaking by.” City Manager Carrier advised she has laid off two employees and is looking at other city operations to see where we can make cuts."
In the March 9, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes, The city received the petition for contraction from Fantasy of Flight for approximately 300 acres. The next month, the gallons billed increased yet again out of proportion with the gallons pumped, maybe in anticipation of the legal bills.
In the April 6, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes, the 2008 Financial Audit findings were announced by the Auditor, Mike Brynjulfson. Per the minutes, Mr. Brynjulfson stated, "Statement of Net Assets in the Water and Sewer Funds – the City met a condition of financial emergency (unreserved balance in the General Fund is a negative $101,392 and the Enterprise Funds (w/s) is a negative $173,888)" The following month, the gallons billed took another steep increase, yet again out of proportion with the gallons pumped. Also that month, in the April 20, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes, under the leadership of the new Mayor, Joe LaCascia, "Mayor LaCascia advised he would be asking for 50% increase in rates in order to get revenue in as quick as possible." This steep gallons billed increase trend takes a steeper increase each month following until the July 10, 2010 billing cycle, where it hits a slight plateau. This dramatic increase occurred despite, the gallons pumped begins to slowly drop after the May 10, 2010 billing cycle after the rate increase was applied to the water usage in the water bills, despite the July 9th effective date.
Another major "Ahh-Hah" moment comes into play when you read this additional quote from the April 20, 2010 City Council Workshop Minutes above. On page 2, bullet point number 10 states, "Mayor LaCascia and Pam Lawson then discussed the revenue/expense projections, which show General Fund will have a deficit in July, Sewer Fund will have a deficit in April, and the Water Fund will not have a deficit. By the report it shows the water fund will carry the other two funds until September (copy is attached)." This is the same month where the gallons billed peaks, when there is no obvious change in the gallons pumped.
Starting after the August 10, 2010, billing cycle, a steep decrease in gallons billed occurred with no major drop in gallons pumped at the wells. August 2010, is when the Polk City Utility customers were fed up and finally starting to get involved due to the awareness our blog had created. At city meetings around this time, on numerous occasions, Vice Mayor, Trudy Block, makes references to seeing a light at the end of the tunnel, being at the cusp of a financial shift in the city which will result in financial relief for the citizens, etc., etc. Could this be because they were manually manipulating the billing numbers because the natives were getting a little too restless for their liking?
How are the actual meter reading numbers entered into the billing system???? How much human interaction is coming into this equation? Are there any checks and balances built into this process to make sure that these numbers are accurate? Is the same person who is handling the cash flow for the city the same person controlling the revenue coming in from the utility bills? Who is rounding the meter readings to the next 1,000 gallon increment when the meter readings appear to be by the gallon in some months, when other months the figures are all rounded? How many customers are unfairly being bumped into a higher rate bracket due to this rounding practice? Inquiring minds want to know!!!!
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Florida Elections Commission Complaint
In my mail yesterday, December 16th, 2010, I found a thick envelope with an official looking seal from the Florida Elections Commission. Upon opening it, I found out that our City Vice Mayor/Acting City Manager Trudy Block is on a witch hunt.
Ms. Block, with the obvious help of our City Clerk, Patricia Jackson, and Temporary City Attorney, Tom Cloud, filed a formal complaint with the Florida Elections Commission naming myself personally in violation of election law. In the response letter from the FEC, the Executive Director, Ms. Rossanna Catalano, states that Ms. Block's accusations are not based on facts and therefore deemed this complaint as legally insufficient. Here is a link to the complete 14 page document that I received: FEC Complaint Just like I had informed Ms. Jackson when she had contacted me previously, I and the others working together do not meet the legal definition of a Political Action Committee and therefore are not required to do anything the city is claiming we need to. I know the city would love to have a "hit list" of the people, besides myself, to target, but why should people be in fear of sticking up for their rights to be informed, have an opinion about how the city government spends their hard earned tax dollars, and demand proper representation from their public officials? The many accusations in this complaint are outright lies and they know it. Other points brought up, there is no legal standing for them to be prohibited. Many of the possibilities you say we stated as "facts," we are still waiting on answers to many of those questions to be researched further. We never made promises we couldn't keep, unlike the Mayor. Mayor LaCascia has yet to follow up on his promise about working together with us and the County Officials to get those questions I posed to the former County Manager, Michael Herr, answered. We simply wanted other possible solutions to the city's financial crisis to be explored and researched further as an alternate solution to the plans the city already had in mind. I understand that it must be frustrating for city officials to have their dirty laundry aired out for everyone to see. If city officials were more open about what is going on and were more trustworthy, there would be no need for what this blog does. This blog is a way for the public to keep informed and voice their opinions and it doesn't cost anyone a dime!
By the timing of Ms. Block's filing with the FEC, my guess is that the loan with BB&T was denied and she was so ticked off, she felt the need to retaliate, regardless of the facts! How petty! And for your information, Ms. Block, I did send a confidentiality waiver to Ms. Patsy Rushing via Fax this morning, so I am not violating any Florida Statutes!! Instead of focusing your energy on trying to keep the public in the dark and causing problems for the individuals trying to keep the public informed, maybe you should focus your frustrations and energy on something more productive like getting the city out of it's financial hole and stop spending the hard earned tax payers money for the attorney you love to hide behind because you are not qualified to run this city properly.
The public has yet to receive any information regarding the status of the BB&T loan application, but in previous meetings in November, Ms. Block stated that this information would be forthcoming at the December Council Meeting, which it was not. Maybe this is why Ms. Block could not even provide me the courtesy of eye contact when I addressed the council on another issue at the December meeting. One word of advice, Ms. Block, you should not attempt to play poker. We assume this loan was denied, and rightfully so. You were trying to add additional millions to the already astronomical high city debt of this tiny city. If this is the case, we applaud BB&T for making a viable decision based on the high risk facts and not your rosy glasses perspective on the city's current financial situation.
Obviously, the information we are sending out to the public must not be that far from the truth or you would not see me as a credible threat enough to target me personally. What are you so worried about? City Officials always complained about the lack of public participation and interest. Now that we are more active and taking an active role in our futures, this is how you choose to respond? Seems a little contradictory. Maybe there is more to uncover that is not so on the up-and-up that the city does not want to reveal. Maybe the city is attempting to be proactive and shut us up. The little newsletters in the utility bills are obviously being used as a strategic attempt to discredit the facts that we have been uncovering. The topics mentioned mirror our blog to a tee. I'm honored that you feel our blog is worthy of taking your precious time to read it.
Mr. Mayor, you had questioned at a previous meeting, why didn't so many people put their names on their comments on the blog and preferred to leave them signed as anonymous? I had brought up the possibility that maybe they feared retaliation, and you blew that possibility off as nonsense. I was verbally attacked by Council Woman Adorno for even insinuating the possibility of this occurring. Obviously, those individuals fears are not so far off, are they?!! The city is looking to get revenge since they have not been able to easily push through their agendas, as hoped. Is the city running out of options? An animal can get pretty feisty and nasty when driven into a corner with little options to get out.
Lisa B. Shifflett
Ms. Block, with the obvious help of our City Clerk, Patricia Jackson, and Temporary City Attorney, Tom Cloud, filed a formal complaint with the Florida Elections Commission naming myself personally in violation of election law. In the response letter from the FEC, the Executive Director, Ms. Rossanna Catalano, states that Ms. Block's accusations are not based on facts and therefore deemed this complaint as legally insufficient. Here is a link to the complete 14 page document that I received: FEC Complaint Just like I had informed Ms. Jackson when she had contacted me previously, I and the others working together do not meet the legal definition of a Political Action Committee and therefore are not required to do anything the city is claiming we need to. I know the city would love to have a "hit list" of the people, besides myself, to target, but why should people be in fear of sticking up for their rights to be informed, have an opinion about how the city government spends their hard earned tax dollars, and demand proper representation from their public officials? The many accusations in this complaint are outright lies and they know it. Other points brought up, there is no legal standing for them to be prohibited. Many of the possibilities you say we stated as "facts," we are still waiting on answers to many of those questions to be researched further. We never made promises we couldn't keep, unlike the Mayor. Mayor LaCascia has yet to follow up on his promise about working together with us and the County Officials to get those questions I posed to the former County Manager, Michael Herr, answered. We simply wanted other possible solutions to the city's financial crisis to be explored and researched further as an alternate solution to the plans the city already had in mind. I understand that it must be frustrating for city officials to have their dirty laundry aired out for everyone to see. If city officials were more open about what is going on and were more trustworthy, there would be no need for what this blog does. This blog is a way for the public to keep informed and voice their opinions and it doesn't cost anyone a dime!
By the timing of Ms. Block's filing with the FEC, my guess is that the loan with BB&T was denied and she was so ticked off, she felt the need to retaliate, regardless of the facts! How petty! And for your information, Ms. Block, I did send a confidentiality waiver to Ms. Patsy Rushing via Fax this morning, so I am not violating any Florida Statutes!! Instead of focusing your energy on trying to keep the public in the dark and causing problems for the individuals trying to keep the public informed, maybe you should focus your frustrations and energy on something more productive like getting the city out of it's financial hole and stop spending the hard earned tax payers money for the attorney you love to hide behind because you are not qualified to run this city properly.
The public has yet to receive any information regarding the status of the BB&T loan application, but in previous meetings in November, Ms. Block stated that this information would be forthcoming at the December Council Meeting, which it was not. Maybe this is why Ms. Block could not even provide me the courtesy of eye contact when I addressed the council on another issue at the December meeting. One word of advice, Ms. Block, you should not attempt to play poker. We assume this loan was denied, and rightfully so. You were trying to add additional millions to the already astronomical high city debt of this tiny city. If this is the case, we applaud BB&T for making a viable decision based on the high risk facts and not your rosy glasses perspective on the city's current financial situation.
Obviously, the information we are sending out to the public must not be that far from the truth or you would not see me as a credible threat enough to target me personally. What are you so worried about? City Officials always complained about the lack of public participation and interest. Now that we are more active and taking an active role in our futures, this is how you choose to respond? Seems a little contradictory. Maybe there is more to uncover that is not so on the up-and-up that the city does not want to reveal. Maybe the city is attempting to be proactive and shut us up. The little newsletters in the utility bills are obviously being used as a strategic attempt to discredit the facts that we have been uncovering. The topics mentioned mirror our blog to a tee. I'm honored that you feel our blog is worthy of taking your precious time to read it.
Mr. Mayor, you had questioned at a previous meeting, why didn't so many people put their names on their comments on the blog and preferred to leave them signed as anonymous? I had brought up the possibility that maybe they feared retaliation, and you blew that possibility off as nonsense. I was verbally attacked by Council Woman Adorno for even insinuating the possibility of this occurring. Obviously, those individuals fears are not so far off, are they?!! The city is looking to get revenge since they have not been able to easily push through their agendas, as hoped. Is the city running out of options? An animal can get pretty feisty and nasty when driven into a corner with little options to get out.
Lisa B. Shifflett
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Water Rate Increase Effective Date Discrepancy
We received this letter from a very concerned citizen who lives in Polk County but receives utility services from Polk City.
Subject: For Concerned Citizens - Water rate effective dates
|
Public Notice Meeting December 17th at 3:00 PM
Ledger, The
12/09/2010
Miscellaneous Notices
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the County Manager of Polk County, Florida, and the City Manager of Polk City, Florida, will hold a conflict assessment meeting pursuant to Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, on Friday, December 17, 2010, at 3:00 p.m., or soon thereafter as may be heard in the Office of the City Attorney of the City of Lakeland, located at 228 S. Massachusetts Ave., Lakeland, Fl.
DATED THIS 2nd day of December 2010.
December 8, 2010;L1749
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the County Manager of Polk County, Florida, and the City Manager of Polk City, Florida, will hold a conflict assessment meeting pursuant to Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, on Friday, December 17, 2010, at 3:00 p.m., or soon thereafter as may be heard in the Office of the City Attorney of the City of Lakeland, located at 228 S. Massachusetts Ave., Lakeland, Fl.
DATED THIS 2nd day of December 2010.
December 8, 2010;L1749
Thursday, December 9, 2010
City Council Meeting Agenda for December 13th, 2010
Here's a link to the agenda for Monday night's meeting at 7:00 PM. Please try to attend.
December 13th, 2010, City Council Meeting Agenda
December 13th, 2010, City Council Meeting Agenda
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Sewage Drives Polk City Family From Home
This article appeared in The Ledger on Saturday, December 4, 2010. Sewage Drives Polk City Family From Home and speaks volumes as to the sewer problems and repairs that Polk City is facing. Will these problems continue to plague our city residents until, possibly, Polk City Officials can eventually obtain grant money to pay for extensive repair and replacement of the old pipes? There is no money in the present city budget that will pay for these expensive repairs. Even under the newly signed contract with Woodard and Curran, only $500.00 is allotted for each repair, and the balance is additional expense for the city. Not a great way to start out the new fiscal year. Which fund will be depleted to pay for this "unplanned" expense?
In February, 2011, the third payment in the amount of $174,386.00 is due to the County on the Mt. Olive Spray Field loan, and let's not forget the outstanding debt of $531,199 for impact fees that Polk City collected in 2007 and 2008 but did not forward to the county. According to The Ledger article dated November 4, 2010, the city has budgeted $150,530 in the 2010-11 budget to make a partial payment of the impact-fee debt, but Polk County is demanding PAYMENT IN FULL. It doesn't sound like Polk City residents can expect a reduction in utility rates and fees or a lower milleage rate anytime in the near future!
In February, 2011, the third payment in the amount of $174,386.00 is due to the County on the Mt. Olive Spray Field loan, and let's not forget the outstanding debt of $531,199 for impact fees that Polk City collected in 2007 and 2008 but did not forward to the county. According to The Ledger article dated November 4, 2010, the city has budgeted $150,530 in the 2010-11 budget to make a partial payment of the impact-fee debt, but Polk County is demanding PAYMENT IN FULL. It doesn't sound like Polk City residents can expect a reduction in utility rates and fees or a lower milleage rate anytime in the near future!
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Stacking the Deck for the State and the County Mediation?
Even though it might seem it has been relatively quiet between the city and the county for the time being, things are working in the background. We have heard through the grapevine that the county has notified the state about the city's financial state of emergency. If this rumor is true, this state statute 218.503 would apply:
(1) Local governmental entities,... shall be subject to review and oversight by the Governor,... as appropriate, when any one of the following conditions occurs:
(a) Failure within the same fiscal year in which due to pay short-term loans or failure to make bond debt service or other long-term debt payments when due, as a result of a lack of funds.
(b) Failure to pay uncontested claims from creditors within 90 days after the claim is presented, as a result of a lack of funds.
(c) Failure to transfer at the appropriate time, due to lack of funds:
1. Taxes withheld on the income of employees; or
2. Employer and employee contributions for:
a. Federal social security; or
b. Any pension, retirement, or benefit plan of an employee.
(d) Failure for one pay period to pay, due to lack of funds:
1. Wages and salaries owed to employees; or
2. Retirement benefits owed to former employees.
(e) An unreserved or total fund balance or retained earnings deficit, or unrestricted or total net assets deficit, as reported on the balance sheet or statement of net assets on the general purpose or fund financial statements, for which sufficient resources of the local governmental entity,... as reported on the balance sheet or statement of net assets on the general purpose or fund financial statements, are not available to cover the deficit. Resources available to cover reported deficits include net assets that are not otherwise restricted by federal, state, or local laws, bond covenants, contractual agreements, or other legal constraints. Fixed or capital assets, the disposal of which would impair the ability of a local governmental entity,... to carry out its functions, are not considered resources available to cover reported deficits.
(3) Upon notification that one or more of the conditions in subsection (1) have occurred or will occur if action is not taken to assist the local governmental entity or ... the Governor or his or her designee shall contact the local governmental entity ... to determine what actions have been taken by the local governmental entity ... to resolve or prevent the condition.
With this in mind, the county appears to have made the right move because these conditions surely exist or will in the very near future. Once the state of emergency is officially declared by the State, then this section of the statute applies:
If state assistance is needed, the local governmental entity ... is considered to be in a state of financial emergency. The Governor ... has the authority to implement measures as set forth in ss. 218.50-218.504 to assist the local governmental entity... in resolving the financial emergency. Such measures may include, but are not limited to:
(a) Requiring approval of the local governmental entity’s budget by the Governor ....
(b) Authorizing a state loan to a local governmental entity and providing for repayment of same.
(c) Prohibiting a local governmental entity ... from issuing bonds, notes, certificates of indebtedness, or any other form of debt until such time as it is no longer subject to this section.
(d) Making such inspections and reviews of records, information, reports, and assets of the local governmental entity.... The appropriate local officials shall cooperate in such inspections and reviews.
(e) Consulting with officials and auditors of the local governmental entity ... and the appropriate state officials regarding any steps necessary to bring the books of account, accounting systems, financial procedures, and reports into compliance with state requirements.
(f) Providing technical assistance to the local governmental entity ...
(g)1. Establishing a financial emergency board to oversee the activities of the local governmental entity .... If a financial emergency board is established for a local governmental entity, the Governor shall appoint board members and select a chair. ...The financial emergency board shall adopt such rules as are necessary for conducting board business. The board may:
a. Make such reviews of records, reports, and assets of the local governmental entity ... as are needed.
b. Consult with officials and auditors of the local governmental entity ... and the appropriate state officials regarding any steps necessary to bring the books of account, accounting systems, financial procedures, and reports of the local governmental entity ... into compliance with state requirements.
c. Review the operations, management, efficiency, productivity, and financing of functions and operations of the local governmental entity ....
2. The recommendations and reports made by the financial emergency board must be submitted to the Governor for local governmental entities ... for appropriate action.
(h) Requiring and approving a plan, to be prepared by officials of the local governmental entity ... in consultation with the appropriate state officials, prescribing actions that will cause the local governmental entity ... to no longer be subject to this section. The plan must include, but need not be limited to:
1. Provision for payment in full of obligations outlined in subsection (1), designated as priority items, that are currently due or will come due.
2. Establishment of priority budgeting or zero-based budgeting in order to eliminate items that are not affordable.
3. The prohibition of a level of operations which can be sustained only with nonrecurring revenues.
Is this why there was such a push for this $43,000 utility study by GAI? Ms. Block asked if this study would provide a, "5 year pro forma," during the discussions about going forward with the GAI study. By definition, pro forma accounting is a statement of the company's financial activities while excluding "unusual and nonrecurring transactions" when stating how much money the company actually made. This may be one of the requirements the state is asking for as part of the plan they need to present to show how the city plans to get out of the hole.
As far as Outsourcing is concerned, obviously the utilities were not being run as efficiently as they could and are the main area of concern causing the financial heartburn for the city. If the city calls in these so called "experts" to fix all the problems, the state will again be presented with more "facts" to show that the city has a master plan to handle the debt. On paper, it might look like it is a much better solution, but in reality with fees for each "incident" over $500 cost, things will more than likely add up much quicker than the city anticipates.
Sources inform us that just over this weekend, sewers were backing up and flooding homes near the intersection of Golden Gate and Damascus. Under the new contract with Woodard & Curran, how much would this cost the city each incident? This sounds like it happens quite often in some parts of town. Woodard & Curran tried to imply that with all the repairs done to the system already, what type of major problems would the city run into? What could be left to need repair? Obviously, Woodard & Curran did not do a thorough study of Mt. Olive Utility System if the County estimates there is approximately $3-4 Million dollars in repairs needed.
According to the grapevine, Woodard & Curran were the preferred choice even before the meeting took place to present their proposals at the Monday, November 29th Special City Council Meeting. This company has worked with both Mr. Cloud and GAI in the past out of Orlando, so how they heard about Polk City is no mystery. The City Officials gave Woodard & Curran a much warmer reception than the FGUA team. Even the TV monitors for slide presentations MAGICALLY started working for the Woodard & Curran presentation, when just minutes before they showed nothing but snow for the FGUA presentation. Rumor has it that Woodard & Curran were so confident they would get the contract that they even approached Mr. Frank Sanderson (the $1,700 week consultant currently working for FGUA) regarding employment with their company a week BEFORE this meeting.
Mr. Cloud surely has been quite involved in running the city lately, proving how incompetent our current Interim City Manager really is. How much do you think this tab has added up to by now? That first $10,000 must be running out soon.
(1) Local governmental entities,... shall be subject to review and oversight by the Governor,... as appropriate, when any one of the following conditions occurs:
(a) Failure within the same fiscal year in which due to pay short-term loans or failure to make bond debt service or other long-term debt payments when due, as a result of a lack of funds.
(b) Failure to pay uncontested claims from creditors within 90 days after the claim is presented, as a result of a lack of funds.
(c) Failure to transfer at the appropriate time, due to lack of funds:
1. Taxes withheld on the income of employees; or
2. Employer and employee contributions for:
a. Federal social security; or
b. Any pension, retirement, or benefit plan of an employee.
(d) Failure for one pay period to pay, due to lack of funds:
1. Wages and salaries owed to employees; or
2. Retirement benefits owed to former employees.
(e) An unreserved or total fund balance or retained earnings deficit, or unrestricted or total net assets deficit, as reported on the balance sheet or statement of net assets on the general purpose or fund financial statements, for which sufficient resources of the local governmental entity,... as reported on the balance sheet or statement of net assets on the general purpose or fund financial statements, are not available to cover the deficit. Resources available to cover reported deficits include net assets that are not otherwise restricted by federal, state, or local laws, bond covenants, contractual agreements, or other legal constraints. Fixed or capital assets, the disposal of which would impair the ability of a local governmental entity,... to carry out its functions, are not considered resources available to cover reported deficits.
(3) Upon notification that one or more of the conditions in subsection (1) have occurred or will occur if action is not taken to assist the local governmental entity or ... the Governor or his or her designee shall contact the local governmental entity ... to determine what actions have been taken by the local governmental entity ... to resolve or prevent the condition.
With this in mind, the county appears to have made the right move because these conditions surely exist or will in the very near future. Once the state of emergency is officially declared by the State, then this section of the statute applies:
If state assistance is needed, the local governmental entity ... is considered to be in a state of financial emergency. The Governor ... has the authority to implement measures as set forth in ss. 218.50-218.504 to assist the local governmental entity... in resolving the financial emergency. Such measures may include, but are not limited to:
(a) Requiring approval of the local governmental entity’s budget by the Governor ....
(b) Authorizing a state loan to a local governmental entity and providing for repayment of same.
(c) Prohibiting a local governmental entity ... from issuing bonds, notes, certificates of indebtedness, or any other form of debt until such time as it is no longer subject to this section.
(d) Making such inspections and reviews of records, information, reports, and assets of the local governmental entity.... The appropriate local officials shall cooperate in such inspections and reviews.
(e) Consulting with officials and auditors of the local governmental entity ... and the appropriate state officials regarding any steps necessary to bring the books of account, accounting systems, financial procedures, and reports into compliance with state requirements.
(f) Providing technical assistance to the local governmental entity ...
(g)1. Establishing a financial emergency board to oversee the activities of the local governmental entity .... If a financial emergency board is established for a local governmental entity, the Governor shall appoint board members and select a chair. ...The financial emergency board shall adopt such rules as are necessary for conducting board business. The board may:
a. Make such reviews of records, reports, and assets of the local governmental entity ... as are needed.
b. Consult with officials and auditors of the local governmental entity ... and the appropriate state officials regarding any steps necessary to bring the books of account, accounting systems, financial procedures, and reports of the local governmental entity ... into compliance with state requirements.
c. Review the operations, management, efficiency, productivity, and financing of functions and operations of the local governmental entity ....
2. The recommendations and reports made by the financial emergency board must be submitted to the Governor for local governmental entities ... for appropriate action.
(h) Requiring and approving a plan, to be prepared by officials of the local governmental entity ... in consultation with the appropriate state officials, prescribing actions that will cause the local governmental entity ... to no longer be subject to this section. The plan must include, but need not be limited to:
1. Provision for payment in full of obligations outlined in subsection (1), designated as priority items, that are currently due or will come due.
2. Establishment of priority budgeting or zero-based budgeting in order to eliminate items that are not affordable.
3. The prohibition of a level of operations which can be sustained only with nonrecurring revenues.
Is this why there was such a push for this $43,000 utility study by GAI? Ms. Block asked if this study would provide a, "5 year pro forma," during the discussions about going forward with the GAI study. By definition, pro forma accounting is a statement of the company's financial activities while excluding "unusual and nonrecurring transactions" when stating how much money the company actually made. This may be one of the requirements the state is asking for as part of the plan they need to present to show how the city plans to get out of the hole.
As far as Outsourcing is concerned, obviously the utilities were not being run as efficiently as they could and are the main area of concern causing the financial heartburn for the city. If the city calls in these so called "experts" to fix all the problems, the state will again be presented with more "facts" to show that the city has a master plan to handle the debt. On paper, it might look like it is a much better solution, but in reality with fees for each "incident" over $500 cost, things will more than likely add up much quicker than the city anticipates.
Sources inform us that just over this weekend, sewers were backing up and flooding homes near the intersection of Golden Gate and Damascus. Under the new contract with Woodard & Curran, how much would this cost the city each incident? This sounds like it happens quite often in some parts of town. Woodard & Curran tried to imply that with all the repairs done to the system already, what type of major problems would the city run into? What could be left to need repair? Obviously, Woodard & Curran did not do a thorough study of Mt. Olive Utility System if the County estimates there is approximately $3-4 Million dollars in repairs needed.
According to the grapevine, Woodard & Curran were the preferred choice even before the meeting took place to present their proposals at the Monday, November 29th Special City Council Meeting. This company has worked with both Mr. Cloud and GAI in the past out of Orlando, so how they heard about Polk City is no mystery. The City Officials gave Woodard & Curran a much warmer reception than the FGUA team. Even the TV monitors for slide presentations MAGICALLY started working for the Woodard & Curran presentation, when just minutes before they showed nothing but snow for the FGUA presentation. Rumor has it that Woodard & Curran were so confident they would get the contract that they even approached Mr. Frank Sanderson (the $1,700 week consultant currently working for FGUA) regarding employment with their company a week BEFORE this meeting.
Mr. Cloud surely has been quite involved in running the city lately, proving how incompetent our current Interim City Manager really is. How much do you think this tab has added up to by now? That first $10,000 must be running out soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)