There was a feeble effort at tonight's (actually last night's now) meeting by Ms. Scott-Jones to point out that the City would be reimbursed for sidewalk, curb, and gutter work performed by property owners. Now I don’t presume to speak for Mr. Deadman (and I certainly don't speak for Ms. Scott-Jones), but this did not address the points that he was calling into question, if I understood him correctly.

It appeared to me that he was pointing out the “old shell game” type movement of money that results in what I (and perhaps Mr. Lyons?) refer to as money being “tucked away in some of our other accounts” to be readily pulled out when needed for a pet project or when council gets themselves in a bind.

First, I (nor, presumably, Mr. Deadman) was not able to discern when this contract went out for bids, but we do know from Mr. Duritsch’s memo that bids from the five contractors were submitted on May 21, 2010.

Your guess is not correct. Budgets for the following years are prepared by staff during the last half of the preceeding years and presented to council for their approval during the fourth quarter for approval prior to Dec. 31.

Tuesday night you people are going to see another razzle-dazzle with city funds within our “complicated” accounting system.

This looks like another opportunity for some of our money to get “tucked away” into one of their “other funds”.

Ordinance No. O2010-37 (Legislative Item 5) deals with sidewalk, curb and gutter repairs and supposedly awards a contract “not to exceed $478,906.45” for this work.

I found the following in the Staff Report, dated May 24, 2010 provided to support this legislation, with items in red copied and pasted exactly:

“City Council passed Resolution of Necessity R2010-08 on April 20, 2010, requiring owners to repair defective concrete.”

“The property owners have until May 31, 2010 to obtain a permit to complete their work under a private contract and”

“all work must be complete by June 14, 2010.”

“After this date, the City will include all remaining repair work into this contract with Silverhawke Construction.”

“All of the concrete repair work is assessed to the property owners; therefore, there is no financial impact to the City.”

“$150,000 is budgeted in the Special Assessment Fund (873) for this project.”

“The remaining $328,906.45 will need to be appropriated to this fund”

“Bids were submitted by 5 contractors for the project on May 21, 2010.”

If“All of the concrete repair work is assessed to the property owners; therefore, there is no financial impact to the City.” then why was $150,000 budgeted in the Special Assessment Fund (873) for this project and why will the remaining $328,906.45 will need to be appropriated?

What happens when the assessments, billed and collected by the County along with property taxes, are paid to the city? Where does the money go? Where have such funds gone for all of these previous complicated but award-winning years?

How did staff have any idea as to the quantities for the contractors to base their HALF MILLION DOLLAR bids on? After all, the bids were submitted BEFORE the property owners had to pull permits, and the time allowed for property owners to finish the work does not expire until JUNE 14.

Certainly at least a few property owners will either hire a contractor or do the work themselves during these difficult economic times if they think they can save a few bucks. What fund do the savings from this Silverhawke contract end up in? (Or does someone in a Historic District just get a new driveway?)

As usual, something stinks, and if you people on Middletown USA don’t raise the flag, no one will do anything about it.

Then again, they’ll probably only “put it in escrow” for a couple of weeks, cut out somebody’s $5K kickback, and talk about how great it was that THEY caught it, like they did with the Central/Vail/Diver boondoggle.