Search Results: Water Rates

It has often amazed me that Munson, most of the city council and the Argus Leader have always been gigantic fans of borrowing money for WANTS;

The central question about whether the city should proceed with issuing $20 million in bonds is whether there’s ability to repay the money.

 

Officials in Mayor Dave Munson’s administration say that answer is “yes.”

It has been proven time and time again you can’t take what Dave says with a grain of salt. Besides,  does he really care? He’s gone in the spring of 2010, he won’t have to worry about how the next council and mayor have to pay back debt. If you ask me, it’s a little irresponsible of him to leave that kind of debt over our heads.

 

Although some council members are nervous about borrowing more money right now, it actually makes sense to move forward with this round of bonding since most of projects on the list are construction projects.

With a sluggish economy, construction companies are looking for work, and the city is likely to land favorable bids.

I’m all for creating jobs, but let’s create sustainable jobs for once in Sioux Falls. The construction companies go through this dance every spring and fall, they hire when they have work, and layoff when they do not, it has little to do with a recession. I think the developers and contractors should be out looking for private sector work and leave the city alone for once. I already think they have their heads so far up the mayor’s ass that it borders on criminal conflict of interest.

Over Her Dead Body film

However, Finance Director Eugene Rowenhorst points out that much of the city’s current authorized debt, which exceeds $320 million, is being repaid with user fees from water rates and other utilities. That leaves more ability to use tax revenue to pay off this new round of bonds.

We SHOULDN’T BE PAYING BONDS OFF WITH USER FEES! User fees are for upgrading infrastructure, like water and sewer, not for building monkey crappers and lining the pockets of bond investors.

City officials are taking other prudent steps to control costs, but it’s actually unreasonable to expect time simply to stop because of an uncertain economy.

And because these are uncertain times, it’s especially important to avoid operating out of uncontrolled fear.

Well the rest of us have cut back (that’s pretty fricking obvious when you look at the tax receipt growth), we expect the same out of our government.

Now’s the time for the administration to show strong leadership, and proceeding with a smart, well-timed round of bonding projects that moves the city forward is an example of doing just that.

And, ironically you point out the exact reason why these bonds are bad idea. There has never been anyone SMART or STRONG at city hall over the past 7 years, just people interested in racking up massive debt ($230 million and counting, just under Munson). Once againg, the editorial board couldn’t be more wrong. No surprise.

As I mentioned on April 3, the Quality of Life bonds are coming down the pipe, sooner then I thought. As I mention in the post, Staggers asked Eugene, while he was doing his constingency plan presentation a few months back, if they were going to hold off on these bonds until the economy got better, At the time Eugene said they would, not so fast;

“It was in the plan for 2009,” Finance Director Eugene Rowenhorst said. “We’re just executing the plan.”

I guess Eugene needs to get himself a tape recorder so he remembers what he says.

Mayor Dave Munson’s administration is moving forward with a plan to borrow $20 million for a new round of quality-of-life projects.

The Sioux Falls City Council learned Monday that the administration will ask for approval of a new bond issue next month. If approved, the bonds could be issued by June.

For argument’s sake let’s pretend these projects are worthwhile and all of the citizens support them. So even if that is the case why would we be borrowing more money during a recession? And why would we be borrowing money for monkey crappers? If these projects are worthwhile, why not just budget for them in 2010 instead of borrowing?

Councilor Pat Costello noted Monday that because of slower growth in sales tax revenues, the city is preparing to postpone several projects totaling $5.3 million. Most are road projects.

“My thoughts are, we’re getting confused on our priorities,” he said.

No shit Sherlock? I have known the council’s priorities have been screwy for a very long time. We are $80 million behind on road maintenance in the city yet we continue to borrow money for monkey crappers and raise taxes to build new roads that are practically bordering Tea, SD.

And while the city’s total authorized debt now exceeds $320 million, a significant amount of that debt is being repaid with user fees from water rates and other utilities, Rowenhorst said, meaning there’s plenty of extra tax revenue in the administration’s view to pay off more bonds.

What a poor use of user fees! We should be charged fairly for the water we use, not overcharged so we can pay back bonds. The city should be balancing the budget every year and we should pay our debt down as quickly as possible. It pisses me off that I have to pay an extra 20-40% in water fees so I can line the pockets of bond investors  that don’t even live in Sioux Falls.

But putting off needed infrastruture upgrades isn’t the only concern about these loans;

But the decision also comes at a time when officials have been nervous about sales tax receipts. In the first three months of this year, revenues are up 1.3 percent over the same period last year. Officials had planned on 6.5 percent growth.

Mark Weber, a local economist who studies state economic data, warned the council Monday that job losses in the Sioux Falls area were mounting. By his count, using state data, the area has lost 5,600 jobs, and virtually every sector is down.

As I said early on, the city’s ‘constingency plan’ was just smoke and mirrors. They have had no intention of following it, which is pretty obvious after this bond proposal was presented. Eugene even tried to downplay the bonds by acting like he forgot to mention them, then pulls them out in the middle of his budget address and tries to move along to other things. Nice try Eugene. Kermit caught it and asked why none of this went through fiscal committee. Of course, the sheep they are, our council defended the proposal, saying they will have time to debate the bonds at the first reading. I have no doubt they will pass. If there is any NO votes they will only come from Costello and Staggers for sure and maybe Beninga.

On a side note, as you read, Mark Weber did his presentation to the council yesterday, he isn’t the world’s best speaker, but his presentation was very poignant, especially the graphs. The late 2008 and 2009 graphs had huge peaks and valleys when it came to job growth, etc. Amazingly, or maybe not, after the presentation, not one single councilor, besides Staggers, had a question, in fact they all just looked as white as ghosts (with rose colored glasses on).

Our city leaders(?) have been living in a freaking dream world, and they need to come out of their deep sleep.