Showing posts with label Two-Thirds Bonds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Two-Thirds Bonds. Show all posts

8/24/09

Who could gain from Greensboro City Council’s proposed “Two Thirds Bond,” and how much have whose political campaigns received from whom?

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul


can always depend on the support of Paul.


 


George Bernard Shaw

How much will taxes have to rise for Greensboro’s citizens to fund a $11,360,000 “Two Thirds Bond” on top of a $21,000,000 revenue bond?

Government spending is the ultimate tax on the economy.


 


Milton Friedman


Economic Nobel Laureate

Is there a publicly released record of a $11,360,000 “Two Thirds Bond” proposed by Greensboro’s City Council?

The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure


when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.


 


Patrick Henry

Why wasn’t the “Two Thirds Bond” proposal recorded in the Minutes of the City Council meeting or briefing on July 28, 2009?

…the City Council did not make a final decision


 on items to be funded from the City’s FY 09-10 two-thirds bond capacity


at its July 28th briefing.


 


 Of the approx. $11,360,000 capacity,


 we have recommended using $7,420,000 for Landfill closure costs.


 


The council will decide


whether to use the remaining balance of $3,940,000


and on what projects at a future date.


 


They are considering a variety of items


 


Rick Lusk


Finance Director


City of Greensboro




 


DRAFT


MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL


OF THE


CITY OF GREENSBORO, N.C.


http://greensboro.granicus.com/DocumentViewer.php?file=greensboro_85fc53a137e43d56f571360de0331c53.pdf


 


SPECIAL MEETING:                                         28 JULY 2009


 


Pursuant to the e-mailing of required public notices, the posting of notices on the City Council Chamber doors and the entrance to the Executive Offices, and the posting of notices on the City’s web page and Channel 13 television, the City Council of the City of Greensboro met in a Special meeting at 12:30 p.m. on the above date in the Council Chambers of the Melvin Municipal Office Building with the following members present: Mayor Yvonne J. Johnson, presiding; Councilmembers T. Dianne Bellamy-Small, Sandra Anderson Groat, Zachery Matheny, Robert V. Perkins, and Mary C. Rakestraw. Absent: Councilmembers Michael L. Barber, Trudy Wade and Goldie F. Wells. Also present were Robert Morgan, Interim City Manager; Terry Wood, City Attorney; and Elizabeth H. Richardson, City Clerk.


 


……….


 


Taking the prerogative of the Chair, Mayor Johnson stated the purpose of the meeting was to go into closed session to have discussions with the consultant for the City Manager position but that before doing so stated several of the candidates had requested that their names not be published and requested Council vote whether to keep this process confidential or not. Councilmember Bellamy-Small made a motion that we keep this process confidential throughout the entire process. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Rakestraw; the motion was adopted on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Bellamy-Small, Groat, Johnson, Matheny, Perkins and Rakestraw. Noes: one.


 


……….


 


Councilmember Perkins made a motion to adjourn to executive session to consider the qualifications, competence, character, fitness, conditions of employment of prospective City Manager applicants pursuant to NCGS Section 143-318.11(a)(1),(3) and (6) and NCGS Section 160A-168 and return to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded Councilmember Rakestraw; the motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote of Council.


 


……….


 


Mayor Johnson asked Councilmember Matheny to lead the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag prior to leaving the Chamber.


 


……….


 


City Council adjourned to closed session at 12:40 p.m.


……….


City Council reconvened at 1:50 p.m. with all members in attendance except Councilmembers Barber, Bellamy-Small, Rakestraw and Wells. Councilmember Perkins moved that City Council adjourn. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Rakestraw and adopted unanimously by voice vote of Council.


……….


THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED AT 1:52 P.M.


 


YVONNE J. JOHNSON                                   ELIZABETH H. RICHARDSON


MAYOR                                                                       CITY CLERK


 


**********


 


If Greensboro borrows $7,420,000, plus interest, for White Street Landfill closure costs, and gasoline prices double as tax revenues fall, could City Council inadvertently sacrifice hundreds of municipal jobs by voting for what could be a politically unethical “Two Thirds Bond”?


Editorial: It’s a dirty job, but …


 


…the council chose to avoid the most obvious…the costs and implications of reopening the White Street Landfill.


 


The landfill opened in 1940.


 


Further, some of the houses nearest the landfill weren’t built until 1990.


 


…the question of where garbage goes and for how much is important


and will affect the lifestyles and pocketbooks here for decades to come…


 


…cost is particularly pertinent given the ongoing economic downturn and tightening city budgets.


 


…Between July 1, 2008, and May 31 of this year, the city spent $7.67 million using the transfer station…


 


 In terms of pure dollars and cents, maintaining and expanding the White Street facility  remains the least costly option.


 


The council knew this all along.


 


A 2001 consultant’s report projected the White Street option as costing between $3.60 and $4.30 per household, versus $9.40 to $13.30 for “out-of-county disposal,” and $26 to $31 for burning and recycling,


 


…which option serves the greater good?


 


Further, there is ample room to expand in that area, mostly on land where development is sparse.


 


Expansion would buy time for even longer-term regional and technological solutions.


 


Put all of the facts on the table and revisit all of the options.


 


Ask everything that needs asking while there is time, especially the hardest questions.


 


Greensboro News and Record Editorial Board


June 28, 2009


8/22/09

Should Greensboro’s City Council borrow with “Two-Thirds Bonds” without voter approval?

Two-thirds bonds make comeback in Greensboro


 


What exactly are two-thirds bonds?


 


…as a portion of bond debt is paid off, state law enables local governments to issue bonds for up to two-thirds of the amount of the principle retired.


 


In other words, if Greensboro pays off $21 million in bond debt one year, council can issue $14 million in bonds the following year…


 


In the mid-1990s, several new council members…argued that voters should have a say in all bonds, and that doing otherwise was tantamount to undermining the will of the people.


 


Justin Catanoso


The Business Journal of the Greater Triad Area