Most of this debt (about $35 Million) was for the 1998 School Building Program. The rest was for the Courthouse Addition and other small projects.
You can link to the entire Audit and scroll down to Page 131 to get a much better view of this page and the debt information.
The State of Tennessee is moaning about an impending "revenue shortfall." With the government, it's never "overspending." It's always a "revenue shortfall."
Morristown and Hamblen County? Same story. "Revenue shortfalls." We can manage to pay for new cars, SUV's, fancy trucks, computers, free (taxpayer-provided) lunches, and other perks for elected and appointed officials. But what does the lowly taxpayer get? Property tax increases, wheel taxes, new fees, increased fees, new permits, more costly permits.
And now just a few months after city officials zapped city taxpayers with a 40-cent property tax increase and county officials zapped county taxpayers with a 10-cent property tax increase, they are encouraging taxpayers to vote for a .25% sales tax increase to go with the 9.5% sales tax rate we already pay.
Is anyone minding the store at the city or the county?
The City of Morristown doesn't have a clue about its revenues, but the City has a really nifty $100 million dollar "wish list" according to a December Tribune headline and article.
Hamblen County muddles along adding more spending for SUV's and other vehicles, $600/mo car allowances, salary increases close to 10% for a few select employees, and on and on.
The School Board is asking for $57 Million or more for another school building program when we haven't even paid a dime on the old $35 Million building program. See the Audit above.
Who devised this brilliant "interest only" plan? The old 1998 county commission.
It's sort of a fiscal Ponzi scheme--nobody is quite sure who will get left holding the bag, but the idea is to pay interest only, postpone paying the debt itself, and hope someone else is left holding the bag.
While the School Board is talking about $57 Million or more for renovations to East and West High, County Commission Chair Stancil Ford apparently thinks the total may be $70-$100M. Nobody is quite sure what the plan really is or what the cost will be. A new East High? A new East High and renovations to West High? Renovations to East and West?
And, of course, nobody has asked why the School Board--just four years ago--built a new library that just sticks out like a sore thumb at East High for about $1.3 million and now that same Board is contemplating building a totally new East High somewhere else. Who is doing the planning at the Board offices?
[NOTE to anonymous commenters-to-be. Yes, I discovered and know a lot about the 1998 school building program. I was a teacher, pushing for school improvements in 1997, and then I saw it become a money grab, a bidding set-up, and a give-away of taxpayer dollars. When two entities---and it doesn't matter who they are---get 35 of 36 contracts where they "bid" for the work, something's going on and that something is not competitive bidding.
Besides, if the Board was so sure that it was all legal, why in the world wouldn't they let anyone see the 1999 letter that their lawyer Scott Reams wrote to them about letting the construction managers bid and get paid two, three, or even six ways on a school job? Surely that letter just explained how very legal it all was. Or did it?
The whole thing was a bidding set-up that circumvented the requirements of competitive bidding, so I met with the State Comptroller in August 2001 to explain face-to-face what was going on. The construction managers were set up with a huge bidding advantage by the Board--the construction management fee and reimbursables. Because the Board didn't provide this money/bidding cushion to other bidders, no other bidder wasted his time trying to bid against the (favored) construction manager. The managers knew they had an advantage. That's why they bid for lots of work but never tried to bid against each other. Result: The "managers" got paid to do the work under one or several contracts and got paid handsomely to manage themselves under another contract.
Stancil Ford was at the August 2001 meeting as our State Representative and Commissioner Larry Baker was there, too. The Comptroller prepared the new legislation, and the General Assembly UNANIMOUSLY passed the new law at its next session, making it clear to even the Hamblen County School Board that you don't let the fox guard the henhouse--and you sure don't pay the fox to guard the henhouse!]
Well, what are county commissioners saying now about taxes? Nothing. The only official who has mentioned the "T" word (taxes) is the county trustee who has said that it will take a 45-cent tax increase just to make INTEREST payments on a new $100 million dollar school building program. Yes, the trustee is talking about making INTEREST ONLY PAYMENTS AGAIN. Is that a great plan, or what? Is anyone ever going to pay the debt off?
The county goes 8+ years making "interest only" payments on a $35 Million dollar school building program, and now there is talk about borrowing $100 Million with "interest only" payments again. Who thinks up this stuff?
Spend, Spend, Spend! Tax, Tax, Tax!
Voters may have a short memory, but it really hasn't been that long since the infamous 2002 "pick your poison" wheel tax referendum. County officials tricked voters into voting "YES" in the wheel tax referendum by telling them via a Tribune article that it was either the wheel tax or a property tax increase. Then, just three months after the voters made their "choice" and voted for the wheel tax, the county enacted a 15-cent property tax anyway.
Today, there's a sales tax referendum on the ballot. And officials, just as they did in 2002, are telling taxpayers to vote YES in the sales tax referendum. If you vote YES, you will have the privilege of paying another 1/4 cent sales tax on top of the 9-1/2 cents in sales tax that you already pay for every $1 purchase. I think I'll vote NO.
Of course, some people will listen and respond to the city's version of "pick your poison." The city is telling its taxpayers that if the sales tax increase passes, then the City will take away 15-cents of last year's 40-cent increase. Really? For how long?
The county commission isn't offering to take away any of last year's 10-cent property tax hike. Commissioners are encouraging county taxpayers to vote YES to more sales tax (1) so the county can help boost city revenues and give city taxpayers tax relief and, of course, (2) to help the School Board get more money to shift all around "for the children."
You really can't make this stuff up!
No comments:
Post a Comment