Infrastructure Funds
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown City Government
Forum Name: City Council
Forum Description: Discuss individual members and council as a legislative body.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1564
Printed Date: Apr 29 2024 at 6:21am
Topic: Infrastructure Funds
Posted By: Pacman
Subject: Infrastructure Funds
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 3:12pm
|
Can someone explain the jist of what happened to the infrastructure funds in Middletown? Was an ordinance passed to allow the funds to be moved to the General Fund and why and what is the ordinance?
My question comes from this part of a post under another topic.
"Roads- why not take this acrimony and start with a plan of action, like getting the ordinance of waste that began the nightmare in Middletown, where infrastructure funds could be given to McNeil and Perry Thatcher?"
|
Replies:
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 4:29pm
|
In 1986 or 1987, the city of Middletown took a vote to the public (which was aprroved) by voters to allow for what was intended to be a short term fix to budegt problems, the movement of dedicated funds out of the required ordinance and law for $$$ allocated and set aside for infratstructure, to be used in the general fund. Hence, the city of Middletown could use the funds anyway they desired.
Unfortunately, when the voters did that, the city went wild; they spend the money that should have been used for roads and infrastrure, and used it wastefully elsewhere. Since that period on or about 1987, the city nor council made any attempt to reverse this short term fix passed by voters intended only to be short term (avoid cutting city employees) in 1987, and thus, the outcome of the miserable roads that are cracked and ruined which the city doesn't care about.
The latest benefactor of this disgraceful and terribly harmful action to property owners was The Atrium, which received about $5Mm in funds for roads, to pay for ther land. To date, no effort has been made by council, by citizens, and by city hall to reverse the ordinnace, and put back in place, the requirement maintain roads and infrastructure. As a consequence, they aren't and won't be.
 |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 4:36pm
| Thank you accuro, do you know how much money we are talking about each year? |
Posted By: lrisner
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 6:18pm
|
From Middletown's Master Plan: Middletown has a very good system of streets and highways connecting the City internally and to the greater region. The two major issues with this network are lack of proper maintenance and having one interstate interchange. On two different occasions fairly recently (1996 and 2004) a “street levy” was placed before the voters for an increase in Income Tax specifically for streets but each levy was defeated. The community needs to understand the relationship between proper roadway maintenance and costs. Deferred maintenance costs more money in the long run as costs go up exponentially the longer roads are allowed to degrade...... They Italicized portion (the italicizing is my doing...that is way there is no Quotation marks) says it all. They will NOT fix the Roads UNTIL we do want they want and pay more Taxes! That was the Plan, use the Infrastructure Money for their "ideas" and let the Roads go to pot. When the Roads were bad enough (9 years and no maintenance) to generate Complaints they would just add a Levey to the Ballot. I say NO! and will even if we all end up driving on gravel Streets! |
Posted By: Paul Nagy
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 6:27pm
|
Pacman,
In 1987 the amount that had been proposed by Sonny Hill and agreed upon and later diverted by council was $870,00 a year for road paving. I believe my memory is correct about that number. Council should return to that program immediately and it would do a great deal to solve many of the city's problems.
Paul nagy
|
Posted By: lrisner
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 6:35pm
Adjusted for Inflation, of course! |
Paul Nagy wrote:Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 8:30pm
| Pacman, I'm sure Paul has it correct. I don't recall the language of the ordinance as to what % was set aside for the roads. Of course, the city's constant tactic is to let the roads be left untouched thinking the citizens will pass another levey. I lay odds it will be 60-40 the 1.75% tax increase will be defeated and reset at 1.5% if not lower (which the voters should demand). The council and city has really blown the maintenance, the problem is so huge now, it was forecast it would take I believe 37 years to repave the orad with a 2.25% tax rate. Middletown and its leadership has killed itself and pulled down the citizens with it. Its an aggregate effect now, when new residents to be look at the roads, the decay, the lack of effort to take care of infrastructure, they simply turn and go to another community. Unfortunately, city hall doesn't understand that. This would be an excellent initiative for a city council member to embrace and run on in the fall. And the voices of the citizens knowing this occurred 22 years ago, are still silent. Staggering isn't it! |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 13 2009 at 8:54pm
|
Irisner that is about $26,862,122.00 adjusted for inflation of course, between 1987 and 2009. I agree with all that is said. The first step is to get the Infrastucture Funds back where they belong and then look for some additonal funds in the Ivory Tower downtown if that means cuts in employees so be it. Enough of the City being run for the benefit of 400-500 people at the expense of 51,000 residents.
It is time for the citizens to start petitioning for ballot initiatives for change because it isn't going to come from the Admin or the Council and if they won't do it then we must.
|
Posted By: lrisner
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 9:13am
|
$26,862,122.00....wow! I will admit that I never dreamed it be that much, but it does show the Problem. We probably need that much! |
Posted By: Nick_Kidd
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 11:10am
|
I believe that all of the above statements are correct about the income tax funds. But everyone seems to have forgotten about the Auto & Gas Fund. It is the fund that the State returns to Middletown from license tag fees and gas taxes. These millions of dollars a year can ONLY be used for three things.
1. Street repair
2. Traffic signals (street red lights NOT Airport signals)
3. Grounds (mowing and repair of road shoulders and medians NOT mowing all of the parks, the airport and all other mowing on city property in Middletown)
Also one mill of our property taxes can ONLY be used for street repair. This was NOT part of the income tax moneys that were redirected.
This is the money I have been asking about for years, especially since Middletown didn't repair a pothole for over twenty years. Unless this money has been misappropriated there should be over $100,000,000.00 in the street fund or we are owed an explanation of were it was spent.
Next is the sewer charge that was put on 30-35 years ago to separate the storm water and sanitary sewers downtown. This was in addition to the existing sewer charges for maintaining, repairing and expanding the sewer system. This was an enterprise fund to pay for a ten year, $75 million project. This money could ONLY be used for sewer separation. Now 30-35 years later, none of the sewers have been separated and the city claims that there is no money to do the job without again charging the citizens. Since sewer charges have been increased in percentages of the whole, we now pay about four time as much as when it started. Even without the increases and using 30 years, there should be $225,000,000 in the fund unless once again the money has been misappropriated. ------------- Government is not the answer to problems, government is the problem. |
Posted By: Smokey Burgess
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 12:02pm
|
NICK -
A suddenly, recently retired City of Middletown department head told me last summer that the money for her new position would be paid from the Enterprise Fund until the end of 2008. She also told me that IF this fact ever became known by people outside of City Hall that it would be the problem of two very high ranking senior staff.
I cannot verify the above as I was removed from access to budgetary information and all other duties as part of the so-called Departmental Reorganization beginning late last July. Inquiring minds need to demand an accounting of the facts that were told to me.
Nelson Self
|
Posted By: Smokey Burgess
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 12:08pm
|
NICK -
By the way, at least one City Council member running for re-election was advised by me last fall of the alleged use of Enterprise Funds for non-eligible personnel purposes. I wonder what they would have to say about this?
Nelson Self
|
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 12:46pm
|
I thinmk pacman and Mr. Kidd (and Mr. Self) made some excellent points. Firstly, Pacman was spot on, and a brilliant depiction: the city works for 400-500 not 51,000, how eloquent and sadly, true. Mr. Kidd illuminated some other aspects of funding that has been reallocated. If I understand this correctly, then, is gas, the lights, and mowing funds may be/ have been reallocated outside the legal ordinance? Well, lets think through this logically. It would be easy I believe for Clark, Schaeffer, and Hackett to account for funds, but would they not also have to know the state laws for appropriation? In other words, as certifed accountants, they would have to know under Ohio law, funding for the items Mr. Kidd stated would have to be accounted for as an asset or cahsflow in on the balance sheet that matches Street Repair/ Infrastructure. If not, they'd bear the same consequence as Accenture/ Andersen Consulting in the Enron shell game. I'm not implying that, as I am just trying to make sense of an assumption I'm reading. Therefore, would it not make sense to contact C,S, & H as have them address the questions as they did the auidt, did they properly account for the funds taken in from the state to the city, which would show under the street heading? If I understood Mr. Kidd correctly, the ordinances for these services did not change, whereas the street ordinance did change in 1987, correct? And if they did not change, there is a suggestion over 22 years, money could have been diverted out of the fund in spite of state guidelines and city ordinances into the general fund or enterprise fund that is the big pot? Maybe I have this wrong, but if correct, it would appear on first blush, CS&H should be contacted to affirm the proper accounting was made based upon their knowledge of state law and city ordinances. If city council didn't even know they authroized Section 8 vouchers, I doubt if they would have any idea, funds were moved from an asset that was reqwuired by law into another area such as the GF or EF. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 14 2009 at 5:29pm
|
Accoro I'm not sure it is the job of the accounting firm to know all the state laws regarding these funds.First this change of law would go before council and passed.
Then it would be the job of the City Manager and head of the finance department to make changes to the books to transfer and set up these new accounts. PERIOD! This sounds so simply and yet when you call City Hall and question any of the accounting they simply tell you they don't know where the funds are or when the account was change... |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 15 2009 at 6:59am
| Vivian- How can the accounting office downtown not know where funds are or when money is transacted from one fund to another? Actually, this is another way to tell inquiring minds that they don't want to reveal their secretive money handling "magic" for the city's finances. Isn't it time we "encouraged" an independent audit of the city books by the state or the federal folks? Perhaps a phone call or official request on the theme- "we have reason to believe that we have financial corruption in this city". How about it Smokey? Is it worth doing? The city keeps telling us that the books are correct and it is confirmed by the local accounting firm they hire, but what about a real in-depth audit by a group with no local ties to Middletown? There has been alot of "money movement" to various "funds" over the years that the financial folks either can't explain or won't share with the general public. That "General Fund" seems to be a cesspool of mystery money in/money out that no one in the general public can monitor and follow. Questions from some of our posters here about that General Fund have gone unanswered or are answered by "evasive comments". |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 15 2009 at 7:08am
|
Worse yet, they have a history of "finding" upwards of $300,000 when the really need it, "tucked away in some of our other accounts." Yet, no one on Council or in the Manager's office even bother to question finance about it!!! If you recall, they pulled this when they ran the income tax bluff and nearly had to lay off the Fire Department, as well as other times.
(And, yes, the QOUTES are accurate!!) ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 15 2009 at 8:52am
|
Mike do you know what the ordinance is that related to Middletown Infrastructure Funds? Did they just change the ordinance or did they repeal it altogether and it has been removed from the books? |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 15 2009 at 5:06pm
|
I don't know. This happened while I was gone. I seem to recall hearing about a referendum, but don't trust my memory on this, it doesn't make sense. Maybe it was a "survey". ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 15 2009 at 5:14pm
| Clark, Shaeffer, and Hackett have to certify the records to be accurate to submit to state, so yes Ms. Moon, the accounting firm MUST know Ohio law and statutes. I remain befuddled; if Mr. Kidd is correct as I read it, there is money flowing out of a ledger that is not comport to a city or perhaps a state ordinance and statute. Vet---CS& H IS the independent auditor, so the question would logically go to them. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 5:57am
|
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/AuditSearch/results.aspx -
Here is the link to the Auditor State of Ohio concerning Middletown
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/AuditSearch/results.aspx |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 6:34am
|
My question to those that are running for City Council: |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 6:39am
| accuro- Clark, Shaeffer and Hackett is the "independent auditor" used by the city every year to check the city's books and to report to the state that everythings fine with the city's finances. However, with all of the information given in the above posts on the subject of city finances, with comments pertaining to movement of money from fund to fund, city finance people not recalling when or where money from fund to fund went and the city "borrowing" from the General Fund to "re-stock" other accounts, how is Clark, Shaeffer and Hackett able to tract the money flow to be accurate with their reports to the state? Seems to be some "creative finances" going on here as we discuss this. How about the issues that Mr. Kidd brings up in his post about the Gas Tax money not being properly used? How about the street repair money "borrowed" by the city for an emergency (after voter approval) in the 80's and never returned to the street repair funds? How does C,S&H get around that? You could call CS&H an independent auditor, but you could also have suspicions that they may have something going with the city as to "manipulation of the data" also to conform to audit procedures. How about an independent auditor, other than CS &H every year, to get an "out of town" assessment of the city's finances? CS & H may be too "cozy" with the city's money manipulations. JMO |
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 8:46am
| VV- I am not disputing the seriousness of what appears to be allegations which may be inferred as ignoring the city ordinances or the state statutes. The point was the city wouldn't give answers (if I understood the jist correctly), and if that is so, a logical step would be to call CS, & H and ask how they would be assured there was no moving from funds that were dedicated (or could they?). If they then state, its an unknown, that the city could move funds from one fund into another, that becomes another issue. Then, from that position, how would the citizens know whether accuracy and transparancy is assured by the city? These are not only serious allegations, but the impact upon the property owner should not be ignored: if indeed $ Mm in funds dedicated for roads has been diverted, that impacts the quality of the road system, and property values, because the roads are a basic maintenance expectation. I'm looking for a solution, not a blame. If these paths are folowed, with no answers, then how to get answers? Think about this VV: CS& H would have to lnow what % of taxes were provided back to the city from the state- they would have to know the state law associated with the funds. They would have a responsibility to account for those funds- cash in goes where? |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 8:59am
|
Vet states: "How about the street repair money "borrowed" by the city for an emergency (after voter approval) in the 80's and never returned to the street repair funds?"
Vet if the voters voted to approve the placing of Infrastructure funds into the General fund I see little that the citizens can do about the past. Was the ordinance or charter provision for this repealed and no longer on the books or was it modified to allow this? I haven't seen the provision. I believe the only re-course the citizens have is to petition to have the Infrastructure Fund law placed back on the ballot for a vote to re-institute it and for the City to start funding it again. Am I correct in this thinking?
|
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 9:35am
|
Pacman, I believe you are absolutely correct. The voters passed this as a short-term situation which did not expire automatically after 3-5 years, and council never changed it, and the voters sat idly and said, so what? So, we now have roads a mess, the city spending previously dedicated monies or giving it to Perry Thatcher and the Atrium instead of having your street and my street repaired. Disgusting right? To Mr. Kidd's point: I believe the analysis becomes twofold. Firstly, how all encompassing was the ordinance change, ie- did it include gas, and taxes in the whole ball of wax (like you, I haven't taken the time to pull the ordinance but it should be easy to find electronically as the online ordinance is gotten through the city link), or did it pertain just to funds dedicated for sewer. On first blsh, I will assume it was "all encompassing." So---nuts and bolts, nuts and bolts, the citizens got screwed! And by themselves for stupidity, Forest Gump lives here. To your point: it would make sense topetition to have this put back on the ballot to be voted upon by November. THIS IS A CONSTRUCTIVE EFFORT THAT WILL BEGIN THE PROCESS OF RECLAIMING YOUR CITY AND TURING THE DIAL NORTH TO YOUR PROPRTY VALUES (or simpply continue to play the role of Forest Gump, now into its 22nd year). |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 9:51am
| Accuro can you direct me to the Ordinance that pertains to the Infrastructure Fund of Old and its current wording? I doubt a ballot initiative and the required signatures could be gathered by the deadline for the November Ballott, but I think it can be done for the Ballot in May 2010. |
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 11:18am
|
Pacman- here's the link, its easy to search for the ordinance once you review the numeric sequence which should describe the section, and then pull up the specific ordinance by inserting the number. With AJ Smith's location, we should see if he supports getting this reversed, lets hope he sees how irresponsible it has been, and have petitions ready to be signed for thouse who come into his office. http://www.cityofmiddletown.org/council/ordinances.html |
Posted By: accuro
Date Posted: Jul 16 2009 at 11:33am
| Pac- to load the link, clear out the http and copy this link above in, and you'll see the ordinances at the bottom you can launch. |