I had a very nice surprise conference call with Hamblen County Commission Chair Stancil Ford and County Mayor David Purkey early this morning.
Stancil initiated the call, but Mayor Purkey was on the line as well.
Stancil said that the two of them had been studying commission operations and the way appointments are made to boards and commissions and they have decided to adopt some suggestions that I have made over the years in order to be more open and citizen-friendly. I listened.
Two of the changes that Stancil and David are proposing are:
1) Stancil said that Committee meetings will begin at 5:00 PM--just like commission meetings--instead of the current 11:30 AM. Stancil said that he had finally realized that having committee meetings at 11:30 AM shuts out the citizens of Hamblen County who want to hear the discussions and have input but have to work for a living. I thanked him.
2) David then said that he was going to propose time or term-limits for people who serve on boards and commissions in Hamblen County.
David said that Stancil and he had finally realized that the same people do not need to be appointed over and over to the same board and do not need to serve on 3-4 boards at the same time. They thought the Commission would go along with their idea. I thanked them.
It was a good conversation and I think they had some other ideas to share with me, but I didn't have time to listen.
In my best Stancil imitation, I banged the phone/gavel down and growled/shouted "Your three minutes are up!"
UPDATE: To all who e-mailed or called to tell me how pleased you are about this change of heart/policy by Stancil and David. Sorry, there hasn't been even the slightest change of heart by either one. It's April 1st and you just got pranked!
Showing posts with label Hamblen County Planning Commission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hamblen County Planning Commission. Show all posts
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
December 31, 2008 County Issues a "Cease and Desist" Order
The County Commission met with the County Planning Commission on Monday, December 29. The hot item, as it has been for several months, was outdoor shooting ranges and establishing regulations to limit where in the county they can be located.
The Planning Commission has received many complaints about noise and about individuals and groups shooting various size guns close to a nearby east-end subdivision.
According to a source, it is my understanding that the Planning Commission had the county attorney prepare a "cease and desist" order that has been served on the individuals who own the property where the shooting is taking place.
Even though the meeting was on Monday morning, there was nothing in the Tribune on Tuesday. My guess is that this will be reported in the newspaper on Wednesday (today) or at least on Thursday.
[NOTE: I just received a comment from "Happy" on this post. Happy, I will be glad to post your comment if I can verify your name. I have a policy of not posting anonymous comments due to profane and crude comments that have made at various times by "anonymous" individuals who don't have the courage or the facts to stand behind what they say. While your post does not fit in this category, the policy applies to all remarks--whether they contain praise, criticism, or just general commentary. If you will call me at 586-9246 or send another comment giving your name and phone #, I will verify the information and then publish your comment. Thanks for reading!]
The Planning Commission has received many complaints about noise and about individuals and groups shooting various size guns close to a nearby east-end subdivision.
According to a source, it is my understanding that the Planning Commission had the county attorney prepare a "cease and desist" order that has been served on the individuals who own the property where the shooting is taking place.
Even though the meeting was on Monday morning, there was nothing in the Tribune on Tuesday. My guess is that this will be reported in the newspaper on Wednesday (today) or at least on Thursday.
[NOTE: I just received a comment from "Happy" on this post. Happy, I will be glad to post your comment if I can verify your name. I have a policy of not posting anonymous comments due to profane and crude comments that have made at various times by "anonymous" individuals who don't have the courage or the facts to stand behind what they say. While your post does not fit in this category, the policy applies to all remarks--whether they contain praise, criticism, or just general commentary. If you will call me at 586-9246 or send another comment giving your name and phone #, I will verify the information and then publish your comment. Thanks for reading!]
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
September 13, 2005 More Spending
Check my September 2 post: "Waiting for the other (budget) shoe to drop"
PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission is going to ask for a 14% budget increase.
The County Commission approved the Planning Commission budget on August 4--in the exact amount that the Planning Commission itself requested.
Yesterday, however, the other budget shoe began to drop as the Planning Commission passed a budget amendment to increase their budget by $32,000. It appears that this request for increased spending may come to the full Commission on September 22 or more likely October 20.
Unless something really unusual happens, the amendment will pass. Two of the members of the Planning Commission are county commissioners (Joe Spoone and Herbert Harville) and voted for the original Planning Commission budget and have already voted for the budget increase as members of the Planning Commission.
The Hamblen County Commission passed a deficit county budget on August 4--meaning we expect to spend $460,000 more than we expect to take in during fiscal year 2005-2006. See my post of August 5. This Planning Commission amendment increases spending by $32,000 but may be accompanied by a prediction of increased revenues due to higher charges that have been implemented for fees and permits.
COUNTY INVENTORY
I just received a copy of the county inventory as of June 30, 2005. I don't want to comment too much on it at this time--except I will tell you that there are huge differences in the inventory reported 6/30/05 and the inventory reported on 6/30/04. Some of the differences are expected and are the result of reporting new equipment, vehicles, and items that were purchased in the 2005 fiscal year. But a large part of the difference can be traced to inaccurate reporting on the 2004 inventory--lots and lots of county equipment that should have been on the 2004 inventory was somehow "left off" and is just now showing up on the 2005 inventory.
When I asked whether there would be any report on mileage and hourly meter readings for vehicles and equipment as requested by the full commission almost two years ago, the Finance Director stated that GASB (that's "governmental accounting standards board") doesn't include mileage and condition in inventory reports. Of course, GASB wasn't even part of the discussion. I simply wanted to know if the Finance Director would send out an e-mail or request to department heads to include the mileage and condition information with the inventory. She did that last year for every department except the Sheriff. The County Mayor, who was sitting in a chair on a back row, answered and said if mileage information was desired, I would have to ask each department for it. Again, "don't ask and I won't tell/ Do ask, and I still won't tell."
I remember, when commission was discussing buying new patrol vehicles a few years ago, Commissioner Joe Spoone said he'd like to know about the mileage on the old vehicles that we were replacing. There is obviously a difference in, say, a 1999 vehicle that has 50,000 miles and the same vehicle with 125,000 miles. You might consider trading in the high mileage vehicle but not the low mileage one regardless of the model year.
That's why finding out and keeping up with how many miles are being put on county vehicles is important.
I'll keep you posted on the response as I ask for the vehicle and equipment information today and tomorrow.
.
Thus far, I have found that most department heads and other elected officials are quite co-operative when a commissioner or citizen asks a question.
There are only a very few who get upset when questions are asked and who resort to personal attacks on those who ask questions about public money and public property.
Most officials know that citizens pay the bills, and citizens have a right to know how their money is being spent.
PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission is going to ask for a 14% budget increase.
The County Commission approved the Planning Commission budget on August 4--in the exact amount that the Planning Commission itself requested.
Yesterday, however, the other budget shoe began to drop as the Planning Commission passed a budget amendment to increase their budget by $32,000. It appears that this request for increased spending may come to the full Commission on September 22 or more likely October 20.
Unless something really unusual happens, the amendment will pass. Two of the members of the Planning Commission are county commissioners (Joe Spoone and Herbert Harville) and voted for the original Planning Commission budget and have already voted for the budget increase as members of the Planning Commission.
The Hamblen County Commission passed a deficit county budget on August 4--meaning we expect to spend $460,000 more than we expect to take in during fiscal year 2005-2006. See my post of August 5. This Planning Commission amendment increases spending by $32,000 but may be accompanied by a prediction of increased revenues due to higher charges that have been implemented for fees and permits.
COUNTY INVENTORY
I just received a copy of the county inventory as of June 30, 2005. I don't want to comment too much on it at this time--except I will tell you that there are huge differences in the inventory reported 6/30/05 and the inventory reported on 6/30/04. Some of the differences are expected and are the result of reporting new equipment, vehicles, and items that were purchased in the 2005 fiscal year. But a large part of the difference can be traced to inaccurate reporting on the 2004 inventory--lots and lots of county equipment that should have been on the 2004 inventory was somehow "left off" and is just now showing up on the 2005 inventory.
When I asked whether there would be any report on mileage and hourly meter readings for vehicles and equipment as requested by the full commission almost two years ago, the Finance Director stated that GASB (that's "governmental accounting standards board") doesn't include mileage and condition in inventory reports. Of course, GASB wasn't even part of the discussion. I simply wanted to know if the Finance Director would send out an e-mail or request to department heads to include the mileage and condition information with the inventory. She did that last year for every department except the Sheriff. The County Mayor, who was sitting in a chair on a back row, answered and said if mileage information was desired, I would have to ask each department for it. Again, "don't ask and I won't tell/ Do ask, and I still won't tell."
I remember, when commission was discussing buying new patrol vehicles a few years ago, Commissioner Joe Spoone said he'd like to know about the mileage on the old vehicles that we were replacing. There is obviously a difference in, say, a 1999 vehicle that has 50,000 miles and the same vehicle with 125,000 miles. You might consider trading in the high mileage vehicle but not the low mileage one regardless of the model year.
That's why finding out and keeping up with how many miles are being put on county vehicles is important.
I'll keep you posted on the response as I ask for the vehicle and equipment information today and tomorrow.
.
Thus far, I have found that most department heads and other elected officials are quite co-operative when a commissioner or citizen asks a question.
There are only a very few who get upset when questions are asked and who resort to personal attacks on those who ask questions about public money and public property.
Most officials know that citizens pay the bills, and citizens have a right to know how their money is being spent.
Saturday, September 03, 2005
September 2, 2005 Waiting for the other shoe to drop
What's ahead on the accountability front?
Hamblen County's deficit budget that I spoke out against and voted against on August 4 is going to come back to haunt us sooner than we think.
The Planning Commission will probably come back at some point and ask for more money. (Commissioners Herbert Harville and Joe Spoone serve on the Planning Commission)
Gas prices: It may be time to look at the county's vehicle use policy and possibly eliminate take-home privileges for some vehicles. Departments hopefully are already eliminating anything other than absolutely necessary travel. Families are certainly being forced to cut back and eliminate unnecessary travel and trips. Let's make sure the government does the same.
County Inventory: The county's fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. The Finance Director indicated that she would have the county inventory ready by September 1. This is a multi-page document that lists each department and then the county vehicles, tractors, computers, desks, chairs, and other county-owned equipment assigned to that department.
I asked some questions after reviewing the 2004 vehicle inventory. In 2004, the inventory did not show a vehicle assigned to the Juvenile Court Department even though the county budget in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 had appropriated money to the Juvenile Court for the lease-purchase of a vehicle. (The car purchase had been placed in the line-item for "office equipment" but that is another audit story for another day.) I checked with Juvenile Court and they do have a Ford Taurus for transport. Maybe the Juvenile vehicle is listed in another department's inventory like the County Mayor's car is or maybe it was left off the county's inventory entirely.
In another strange twist, the car that County Mayor David Purkey drives is apparently listed in Sheriff Otto Purkey's inventory. Since there is nothing in Mayor Purkey's budget for gas, insurance, and maintenance of a vehicle, I guess the gas, insurance, and maintenance for the Mayor's vehicle also comes out of Sheriff Purkey's budget.
There may even be a car or cars (that are not undercover vehicles) that are not listed in any department's inventory.
The state auditors require that the county maintain an inventory as part of the audit process, but the state auditors don't go through our inventory and check that every vehicle, desk, and computer is listed. The accuracy of the list itself is the county's responsibility. This is another example where local officials have to be paying attention and asking questions in order to provide the accountability that the citizens deserve and that the officials, in our system of checks and balances, are elected to provide.
The inventory problem ties in with other recent questions about the 2004 audit. In the 2004 audit, the state auditors reported that the County Mayor switched money (over $360,000) from fund to fund without coming to county commission for approval and without even informing commission of his action. The explanation that County Mayor David Purkey provided to the auditors was that after consulting with Trustee Bill Brittain and Finance Director Nicole Epps, he (Mayor Purkey) ordered the shifting of money (over $360,000) to correct errors in past years and to "restore" those funds to their proper amounts.
The obvious questions that local officials should ask are exactly what errors happened in the past? Was revenue put in the wrong funds or were expenditures paid out of the wrong funds or both? Were these truly mistakes? If so, how did these errors happen-- by Mayor Purkey's own admission -- for years without detection? Were these employee errors or a problem with our accounting system or both? What has been done to make sure that this isn't still happening and that it won't happen again in the future?
Aren't those the questions that you would ask if it were $360,000 of your own money? What happened? How did it happen? If it happened for "years," exactly what has been done to keep this from happening again? It reminds one of the famous Watergate question posed by Sen. Howard Baker: "What did you know and when did you know it?"
Hamblen County's deficit budget that I spoke out against and voted against on August 4 is going to come back to haunt us sooner than we think.
The Planning Commission will probably come back at some point and ask for more money. (Commissioners Herbert Harville and Joe Spoone serve on the Planning Commission)
Gas prices: It may be time to look at the county's vehicle use policy and possibly eliminate take-home privileges for some vehicles. Departments hopefully are already eliminating anything other than absolutely necessary travel. Families are certainly being forced to cut back and eliminate unnecessary travel and trips. Let's make sure the government does the same.
County Inventory: The county's fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. The Finance Director indicated that she would have the county inventory ready by September 1. This is a multi-page document that lists each department and then the county vehicles, tractors, computers, desks, chairs, and other county-owned equipment assigned to that department.
I asked some questions after reviewing the 2004 vehicle inventory. In 2004, the inventory did not show a vehicle assigned to the Juvenile Court Department even though the county budget in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 had appropriated money to the Juvenile Court for the lease-purchase of a vehicle. (The car purchase had been placed in the line-item for "office equipment" but that is another audit story for another day.) I checked with Juvenile Court and they do have a Ford Taurus for transport. Maybe the Juvenile vehicle is listed in another department's inventory like the County Mayor's car is or maybe it was left off the county's inventory entirely.
In another strange twist, the car that County Mayor David Purkey drives is apparently listed in Sheriff Otto Purkey's inventory. Since there is nothing in Mayor Purkey's budget for gas, insurance, and maintenance of a vehicle, I guess the gas, insurance, and maintenance for the Mayor's vehicle also comes out of Sheriff Purkey's budget.
There may even be a car or cars (that are not undercover vehicles) that are not listed in any department's inventory.
The state auditors require that the county maintain an inventory as part of the audit process, but the state auditors don't go through our inventory and check that every vehicle, desk, and computer is listed. The accuracy of the list itself is the county's responsibility. This is another example where local officials have to be paying attention and asking questions in order to provide the accountability that the citizens deserve and that the officials, in our system of checks and balances, are elected to provide.
The inventory problem ties in with other recent questions about the 2004 audit. In the 2004 audit, the state auditors reported that the County Mayor switched money (over $360,000) from fund to fund without coming to county commission for approval and without even informing commission of his action. The explanation that County Mayor David Purkey provided to the auditors was that after consulting with Trustee Bill Brittain and Finance Director Nicole Epps, he (Mayor Purkey) ordered the shifting of money (over $360,000) to correct errors in past years and to "restore" those funds to their proper amounts.
The obvious questions that local officials should ask are exactly what errors happened in the past? Was revenue put in the wrong funds or were expenditures paid out of the wrong funds or both? Were these truly mistakes? If so, how did these errors happen-- by Mayor Purkey's own admission -- for years without detection? Were these employee errors or a problem with our accounting system or both? What has been done to make sure that this isn't still happening and that it won't happen again in the future?
Aren't those the questions that you would ask if it were $360,000 of your own money? What happened? How did it happen? If it happened for "years," exactly what has been done to keep this from happening again? It reminds one of the famous Watergate question posed by Sen. Howard Baker: "What did you know and when did you know it?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
