Speak Out Loud NA

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Re-Print of "Freedom of Speech" blog Posting

Monday, February 27, 2006
THE 2004 AUDIT IS COMPLETE!
We understand a meeting was held in the Mayor's office on February 14, 2006, with no information made public!

We have had knowledge of this information concerning the 2004 Audit but have been sitting on it since 2/21/06, waiting for this information to be made public. If memory serves, the Mayor was asked, by a council member, at the last council meeting (2/16/06) if he had heard about the 2004 audit and he responded that he had not. Doesn't it seem rather strange that the field reps from the State Board of Accounts were right here in the city without his knowledge?

Well, citizens of New Albany this is how the procedure should be done.

1. The exit conference takes place before the audit is completed. That exit conference takes place in the city of the audit with the Mayor, Controller, and Council President. At this time the Official concurs with the Auditor's findings.

2. The audit is then submitted to the State Board of Accounts, (meaning handed over to the State Board of Accounts by the staff who did the audit of the city for the State Board of Accounts to review and agree).

3. After the State Board of Accounts in Indianapolis reviews and agrees with the findings it is then filed. At this time the audit should be made available to the public.

To the shock of the participants of Freedom of Speech we contacted the Mayor's office not once, not twice, but three times during the week of 2/21/06 and asked if there was any word about the 2004 Audit. We were told each time that there was no word. How can ordinary citizens have this information and the Mayor's office not?

We also contacted various members of the City Council during this time, even as late as today, asking the same question. None of the council members questioned had any knowledge of the audit either.

We, the participants of Freedom of Speech, feel the members of the City Council should have this information as a matter of course. Again, we must ask what does the Mayor have to hide? Why doesn't he communicate and update members of the council of the steps being taken for the audit. Doesn't the Council have the right to know about the audit? It is our opinion that this shows a total lack of professionalism.

In the next several days, Freedom of Speech should have a copy of the 2004 Audit. At this time it will be made public for all of the citizens of New Albany to review.

We, the citizens, do not see competence in the Mayor's administration. He continues to dismiss his critics as misguided and/or pessimistic. Contrary to his remarks, we number more than six of seven citizens.

We the public and citizens of New Albany no longer have confidence in his decisions and feel that he should resign.




posted by One voice at 5:51:00 PM

72 Comments:

  • Well, y'all just wait til you see what that there audit says. Nervous Nellies, are we? That is good! We certainly SHOULD BE!

    Let the numbers out, EastEnder...don't worry. Good job Freedom of Speech. We thank you! Salute!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:27 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • good job...,

    What you will post IF FOS is wrong?
    Will you run away like FOS did when I challenged him, her, them about the county elections not directly affecting NA citizens?

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 2:44 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Great job Freedom of Speech. Glad some one will stand up for the citizens.

    I personally enjoy the many articles on FOS. I personally sent them an email thanking them. Maybe you should to.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:11 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • So scientific your stupid claim that you number 6 of 7 citizens, who did your poll Laura and her crack team of pollsters LOL LOL

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:26 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Freedom Of Speech Blog
    Stand up for what you believe in. You'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

    Thanks

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:35 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Dear IAMHOOSIER: There really isn't an answer to the first question you ask "what will I do if the FOS post is wrong". I know personally it is not wrong. I, personally, have been waiting for these numbers with baited breath, only because IT IS "my" monies.

    I know you and a lot of others have a problem with FOS and "Eric", etc. But, it is "their" blog; no one is forcing us to read it; "they" have every right to set up their blog anyway they want to. It could probably be frustrating you can't get an e-mail back from them. Maybe some of us can't either, ever thought about that one? Doesn't mean we think those figures are going to be "hogwash".

    Taxpayer Advocates on this Blog have anxiously been waiting on the numbers; we also know the law and how the exit interviews go down. Tell you what, we (taxpayer advocates) are going to post a telephone number of a gentleman that works for you on the State Level. We just love his name -- it's Charlie Pride. He has several degrees behind that name, and if I remember correctly an expert on utility audits. This information being provided to ONE & ALL will help verify and lay to rest any suspicions about what is getting ready to be laid out there (FOS) & here (SPEAKOUTLOUDNA).

    Mr. Pride's telephone number is:
    317-232-2521.
    Local Representative from the State for Audits -- Scott Shireman. Telephone number 941-6970. Excellent public servants to one and all.

    Hope that helps out, but that's how I FEEL.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:58 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Yep, its pretty obvious they want all of us in the dark now. Somebody has some 'splaining to do, and it ain't us. Show us the MONEY.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:08 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Here's 1 of those anonymous quotes in History some like to ignore, but it's apt for the ground clutter on this blog:

    A person can fail many times, but one won't be a failure until one begins to blame someone else.

    Another one by Oscar Wilde "Always forgive your enemies. NOTHING ANNOYS THEM SO MUCH."

    Have a good day NA, while we get at the $$$$$$$.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:13 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Do any of you have the 2004 County Audit? FOS exposed an employee stealing. Guess that was a lie to uh? FOS gave copies of the report and exit conferences to each of the City Council Members. Mayor Garner got caught in another lie. So who is calling who what on this blog? None of you seem to get it. Or should we say you refuse to admit your wrong not SOLNA & Freedom Of Speech. Our Mayor Garner is done in this town. I called the Mayors office for information on the exit conference and he was out. But his secretary did confirm it is being typed up for processing. State Board Accounts is over 92 county's. I will put my money on Freedom Of Speech. Not you Iamhoosier
    Next.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:39 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • I am sorry that I did not make myself clear. It is not the numbers. Whenever it is back it will have numbers and I am interested too.

    My point was about the audit being back and the city lying about it.

    Do you really know what my problem with Erik is? I don't know how many times I have to say this.

    Says Erik is a college professor of Political Science in an attempt to legitimize their postings. It is so obvious there is not a professor behind that site that NO ONE has even attempted a defense. If he, she, they lie on the front page does it not cause you to question everything else? Can't their postings stand on their own?

    My problem is NOT with no comments, no response to email, and hidden identity because you are correct. They can set up their site anyway they want. If that includes lies on the front page and in profiles then I question their honesty period. Or doesn't honesty count anymore?

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 4:56 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Anon 4:39,
    Just exactly what I am supposed to admit that I am wrong about? Unlike some, I freely admit that I can be and am wrong frequently. What this time?

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 5:03 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • No, it is not reasonable to assume any information on FOS is false just because the administrator uses a pseudonym.
    I don't care if that person wants to call themself - Jiminey Cricket - who it is, doesn't have a damn thing to do with, what the information is.
    Why do you want to know so bad? Want to go set them straight?
    Want to harass?
    Want to put them on "candid camera"? Want to humiliate them?
    You're grasping at straws and I smell the distinct odor of panic in the air.
    I don't think you're gonna get a positive spin on this one.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 5:30 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • EE,
    Do you really want to go through this again?

    Show me where I said that about using a pseudonym? Come on!! We have been down this path before and you ended up deleting a WHOLE POSTING just to get rid of the evidence that you were wrong and you FLAT know it.

    I don't care who Erik is. I just said that above. It is also obvious that you know Erik is not a political science professor because every time I bring it up you go back on your high horse about screen names and I agree 100% with you about that. Talk about ground clutter!!!

    How can I make it any more clear?
    Anonymous is ok with me. Screen names are ok with me. Lying is not ok with me. Why is lying ok with you?

    That odor of panic you're smelling is not coming from me.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 5:55 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • AMEN..
    Maybe some of you need to re-think who your sources are? Maybe your sources are wrong? Do you know what happens when you just assume? Could it be you boys have been mislead? Why do you think FOS has to answer your emails or anyones emails? Sounds like you also have a problem with Anonymous postings as well. Facts are facts no matter how you try to spin it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:58 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Anon 5:58,
    Please see above about anon. Jeeze.

    I will admit to assuming here, am I included in the "boys" and if so why would you assume that?

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 6:04 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • What's the matter? Didn't you all call the numbers you were given? No. Then....

    That would be their problem EastEnder, not yours nor FOS.

    Prove to US THAT FOS gave copies of anything to the council members. Another blatant smear. Ain't 1 Councilmember I've talked to seen either/or. We're tired of your accusations. Take 'em back where you ALL bash EVERYONE here ALL the time. You do know where that is, don't ya?

    Our thoughts on the way the spin keeps spinning, makes my head spin. The numbers are being released, whether you like it or not. Finally. Thank you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:49 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Well, I can see that no one can stay on topic, like so many say they want to do, or answer my questions or show me where I have supposedly said any of the things that I am accused of.

    Thanks for your time. Good night.

    Iamhoosier

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 7:08 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Iamhoosier can you prove who is lying? Can you prove one posting is not correct on FOS? You base your opinion and comments on what have yu been told.As they say put up or shut up! Anonymous is your problem? Could there be several involved at Freedom Of Speech? So because some one told you something does that mean it is wrong or right?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:24 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Yeah, we sure see u can't stay on topic about the numbers or the sewers. Yeah, we sure are noticing all of the distractions and fingerpointing in order to circumvent or spin your story. Yeah, we see

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:38 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • Still just amazes me...
    Can we even agree on what the topic is we are all accusing each other of not sticking to?
    This posting is about the 2004 Audit bein back and Mayor Garner being party to an "exit" interview, and yet denied at Council that he had any new information about the Audit coming in or when it would be here.
    We just need to ignore, ignore, the ones who try to distract with "personal attacks" and
    we know the RIGHT people are getting a good look at this information, and the timeline is being recorded.
    We think the regular members of this blog would benefit greatly from a "collective" brainstorming event to gather proactive option ideas and plans.
    Everyone who's interested must contact me personally, by e-mail, and you will be sent more information.
    This event will be based upon applications for registration, and will be by invitation only.
    This is due to space limitations.
    Future gatherings will accomodate larger volums of people.
    However, this time we ask that you please apply.
    To those who want to talk about something different, things more personal, we ask again, please take it somewhere else.
    We really do have work to do.
    We appreciate your consideration.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 11:10 PM, March 01, 2006  

  • We enjoy Freedom of Speech.
    Excellent blog

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:32 AM, March 02, 2006  

  • Good morning,

    Anon 9:24, What part of "Anonymous is ok with me" don't you understand? Other than FOS claiming to be a college professor of political science, where have I accused FOS of lying? Yes, I suggested that what is posted on FOS should be questioned due to the obvious lie about the professorship. It is the same thing you are asking me to do with my so called "boys"(never got an answer to that either). I follow no one.

    Anon 9:38, Where have I questioned the numbers?

    Some of you folks sure have a short memory. Not too long ago I even gave credit to "Erik" for a good job with some tax terminology. Just a couple days ago I even posted my opinion that NA is sometimes blunt to a fault. Where is the balance among some of you?

    EE, finally, can you at least do the right thing and admit that I do not have a problem with anonymous posting or at least show some proof that I have written that? Or is your proof as elusive as the other "proofs" that you always claim to have such as Rumpke? Can you do the right thing? Reasonable minds would like to know.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 8:36 AM, March 02, 2006  

  • Any new news about that Audit?

    Rumblings abounding on the street about the findings of those Veteran tombstones.

    Rumblings abounding on the street about that "Ceasaers" sign on Rinky-Dinks. That is funny.

    Hopefully, the Council will be receiving their Budget approved by the State if they have finally waded through the Audit and figured out what has to be cut.

    Anxiously awaiting those results.
    Proof will be in the pudding. Take care NA.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:49 AM, March 02, 2006  

  • IAMHOOSIER: What do you want? A pat on the back, geez!

    signed, Reasonable Mind

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:17 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • No thanks, but some honesty and little reading comprehension would be nice. Thanks again for asking.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 2:13 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • IAMHOOSIER

    If some one spent $100,000.00. Will you worry about the money spent or the person that spent it?
    My point!

    Great blog FOS

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:47 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • I am having a VERY busy day today, but let me take a qwick moment to say...
    YES, iamhoosier has agreed that anonymity is and should be acceptable.
    However, this person, "iamhoosier" draws a distinction between the withholding of a name, and the use of a false name.
    One is OK, the other is not.

    The way I understand it, is that the use of a false name is OK, but the use of a false identity is not.
    iamhoosier will have to explain from there.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:13 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • It would be a little difficult for me to be against a "false" name since I use a screen name.

    It is the false OCCUPATION!!!!!!!

    I am sorry this is so hard to understand.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 3:29 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • We are "hearing" from a Council member that New Albany has been DENIED all Sewer Credits until the three unfinished projects are done and all SSO's have been demonstrated to be gone for AT LEAST 1 YEAR (and that demonstration period doesn't start until the WORK IS DONE).

    Boom. There's the EPA ruling. We will be trying to get a copy to post on here. Thanks.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:11 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • Wonder how the meeting with Fifer and Georgetown went over OUR MONIES, today? HMMMMMM

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:08 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • Having spoken with a SewerBoard member, I stated our feelings to him. Until they figure out and pay back the EDIT monies they owe to fix the inner-City; and until they get the monies from Georgetown to help in the Robert E Lift "project"; only then, and only maybe then, will ratepayers believe they MUST pay for this fiasco. The Plant is beautiful. You can't get the sewage to it.

    As the City is trying to get out of fixing our "Sewers" once again, I would suggest you immediately get on the horn to your Senator (State and National), your Congressional Rep (State and National), and the Govenor of Indiana. The funds the City borowed were from the "SRF" money. Those are Our taxpayers dollars we paid to the state we used on top of the rate increase we got hit with. Where does the madness stop and reality and logic set it?

    Our proposition to the City:

    The "Y" can sit by itself for a couple of years. Rescind Scribner and use the EDIT monies immediately for what YOU HAVE TO DO TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE, which is fix the inner-City sewers. 2 years is all taxpayers are asking.

    Tell ya the truth, as a person involved politically throughout the scope of things, if you do not attempt to retrieve these monies and get the Georgetown monies we are owed, you can not, CAN NOT, expect the ratepayers to pay for your MISTAKES.

    And, that is just how we feel about it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:15 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • EastEnder -- We really do need to post or link to these higher elected officials, ya know? Maybe we can link to the Senator's Web in Indy; the Rep's Web in Indy; Bay's web in DC; and Lugar's web in DC. Just a thought. It'd be a lot easier on some folks.

    Thanks, EastEnder :)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:19 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • You people have lost your minds, if you are so concerned about sewers why not take look and see if the mansion row homes on east main are on sewers, smile youuns on candid camera you all

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:37 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • I will be putting up that information ASAP.
    I have had a very busy day with lots of appointments, and I still have one more to go. So, it will be this evening.
    iamhoosier -
    that was me trying to explain earlier, so be mad at me if I got it wrong...again.
    When I said you were against false "identities", that was my way of trying to say that taking on false personalities, like professions, is what you are not OK with. But using false names (ie; screen names) is OK and anonymity is OK with you too.
    Isn't that right?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:39 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • The East End of Mansion Row was found not have sewers around 9 to 11 years ago. It was very comforting to know how much we were contributing to the pollution of our own enivironment.

    Maybe that is when the old saying "clean up your own backyard first"...came to mind. I was feeling sorry for the lack of infrastructure in third world countries, and then find, too, I am not better off than they were -- except they didn't pay a bill on these properties for over 30 YEARS.

    Better check the sewer board minutes around 1999 or 2000. Tribune would have them also, on michfiche. Think the title on the paper was "Raising a Stink On Main". Rest assured, and please, clean up your OWN BACK YARD. Thank you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:17 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • Teeny Timmy hard at work to disperse his dispicable comments towards Main St. Think he's got a thing for us? Guess he can't shake a couple of the women folk off he met down here. Poor Timmy. You really need to get a life.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:19 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • To 7:15 post "all you can of to say":

    You are correct, the Main Street problem did come up, I believe in late '98 or early '99. However, that was not the first time it was brought to the sewer board's attention. Check the minutes in the mid to late '80's when a resident of Main Street brought this to the attention of the Real administration and nothing was done then. If my memory serves me right, Mrs. Overton was a voting member of the board at that time.

    I'm not sure if the England Administration hooked up all the homes on Main Street, but I do know they hooked up some of them. I remember the work being done. Were there some that did not get connected?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:48 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • U CHECK THE MINUTES. MANSION ROW WAS ENTIRED CONNECTED. Now, let's move on down to the E 3rd, south side of 3rd, 2nd...etc.

    Nice try, though..

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:04 PM, March 02, 2006  

  • I wonder what Council Members think when they read "Freedom of Speech? When A blog has information the Council is not even aware of?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:51 AM, March 03, 2006  

  • Anon 5:39,

    Example,
    Someone named "Joe"(real or screen name) lists their occupation as engineer on their blog. Joe posts articles on building things as an EXPERT. You begin to realize that Joe SOMETIMES multiplies when he should be dividing or adds 2 + 2 and comes up with 5. Joe is not an engineer. Joe begins to explain how the Greenway needs to be built. I think that I am going to question what he posts. He still may be correct at times but I will not accept as readily the "facts" he presents as I would a real engineer. Substitute doctor, teacher, lawyer, etc as you will.

    I think what "Joe" is doing is wrong and dishonest. All Joe needs to do is not advertise himself as something he is not.

    Maybe we agree.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 8:54 AM, March 03, 2006  

  • I still enjoy reading FOS, I don't care if they call themselves college professors or whatever.

    Keep up the good work, FOS and don't worry about the critics, they just have to have something to try to make you look bad since you always seem to "scoop" everybody else.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:27 AM, March 03, 2006  

  • Thanks for that Shirley! Can you (oh sure you can) believe they are going to try and lay this at the NAPP's feet (do-gooders)? Does that make the Sewer Board "bad-doers" or "non-doers"?

    We spoke with a Council member and asked they return all of the EDIT monies back to the sewer's inner-city maintenance fund from 1997 and 2002. We asked they rescind Scribner for two (2) years until we can get our house in order. Just had that conversation this morning, matter of fact.

    It's going to take a lot of doing to show these EDIT monies HAVE TO BE REPAID and they are not available for Scribner for a couple of years. The NAPP took this issue before the Sewer Board LAST YEAR, the Mayor admitted we were correct, yet when asked how the City was going to repay these monies that are attached through bonds and the Consent Decree, he shrugged.

    It is our opinion that until they exhaust all avenues of revenue owed to the sewers, owed from Georgetown for fixing the Robert E. Lee, etc., don't come looking at the ratepayers. The Robert E. Lift was to be fixed in 1997 -- why are they holding us responsible? We testified on the Federal level, the State level and the City level THIS PLAN WOULD NOT WORK. What amount of time did they give ratepayers to speak at the public hearing on this "PLAN", was it 3 or 5 minutes to speak about $37 million dollars of work? Gimme a break. PLEASE.

    We were told ALL DEVELOPMENT HAS NOW STOPPED IN NA UNTIL 2008 and blah, blah, blah...

    So, does that help, Shirley? Thanks for asking. Our feathers are ruffled this morning, too much work and blood and sweat and tears and ruined shoes and meetings. We know someone has to do it, because someone else isn't.

    One Member of the New Albany Potty Polices' opinion. Thanks for the space EastEnder.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:11 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Ceece,

    You will have to examine relationships between developers and past and current elected officials in order to get your question answered. You may be hard pressed. Sewer Board meeting is Tuesday at 3:30. We urge all of public to turn out that possibly can. Bad time of day, but hey, we don't make the laws. Thanks for asking. It's a very telling and interesting question!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:19 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • look fellow bloggers,this Mayor has always been a crucible of conflict.

    Keep punch holes in the money trail.....FOS

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:21 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Iamhoosier what have you done for NA?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:32 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Anon 3:32,

    Nothing.

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 3:51 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Dear Iamhoosier

    Excuse me kettle? I have Pot on line 2 for you. *!#@

    Go Erik and FOS

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:35 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • At least I am honest about it and I did answer the question. Look above and see how many of my questions were answered. Especially about does honesty count? The closest answer was along the lines of "I don't care".
    Sure doesn't makes me feel good about the future of NA if there are as many of you as you say.

    I have been attacking Erik for lying about being a political science professor for a few weeks now. You know, the funniest thing happened or rather did not happen. Not ONE PERSON asked me how I knew Erik was lying about being a professor. Not one. Not EE, not $$$$$, not CT. Why? Because you already know that he is not a College Professor of Political Science. Case closed. I know, you don't care. Honesty is not that important.

    By the way, I have been called much worse than "kettle". Glad to see that you finally mastered that 2 line phone. Maybe you could be Professor Erik's secretary.

    Thanks for your time and everyone have a wonderful weekend.

    Iamhoosier

    By Blogger Iamhoosier, at 6:27 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • If the citizens on this blog listed their occupation, we would assume it would help in your identification of individuals.

    Leave $$$$$$ out of it, cos $$$$$$$ has enough troubles trying to keep their facts straight, going to meetings, and working with our finances. Therefore, we do not have the luxury of trying to figure out who "eric" is and why "eric" was created and "where" eric is employed. It has nothing to do with honesty, but that could very well be your take. It isn't ours. Thanks.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:39 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • 6:27 Prove it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:09 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • So purposely misleading the public has nothing to do with honesty?

    By Blogger Jeff Gillenwater, at 9:12 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • this bud's for you iamhoosier...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:12 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • bluegill nah..I bet Your talk'n about one term jimmy! he's the only one that l-i-e-s...next in line is r-o-g-e-r..Then we have r-a-n-d-y the wanna beeeeeee....Then we have timmy the stalker-raid skitter man...then we got jeffersonville blue gill who runs in bad circles...boy da ya gotta lotta to learn....

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:20 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • iamhoosier

    when did you become an expert on erik? admit it you boys are up against a real man who ignores s***bags like you and your warped progressive wieners...
    What's the name of your blog? "I hate men named Erik" You need serious therphy.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:32 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger The New Albanian, at 10:14 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • 10:14PM

    Nobody asked you...Capt. Obvious strikes again

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:59 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • 10:14

    What happen you coward. We read your post. And you deleted it. I guess you crawled back under your rock.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:01 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Nah, I made a spelling mistake.

    But eternally glad that you're reading.

    (Chuckle)

    By Blogger The New Albanian, at 11:16 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • Hey, I just caught that.

    Anonymous calling ME a coward.

    (chuckle again)

    That's funny. Can I quote you?

    By Blogger The New Albanian, at 11:28 PM, March 03, 2006  

  • How about that...sewer credits! For New Albany! After all that hullabaloo. Perhaps people's EPA contacts aren't as good as they thought.

    Crow? Anyone? No? Hmmm.

    Just my opinion.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:00 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • Well, too bad the City's apparently not going to be able to accept those sewer credits.
    The deal hinges on an agreement that all work that is mandated to be done, the screen bar AND the Robt. E. Lee(REL), will be done by September.
    The talks with Georgetown haven't exactly gone well with getting that $2 million payment to help fix the REL project.
    Without that money, to quote a councilman in the know "...we're screwed". Therefore, no promises can be made that this work will be completed by September.
    Guess they will have to figure a way to get the magic disappearing money back into the sewer works to get things going.
    That will require bringing back the EDIT funds that were pledged for the Scribner Swimming Complex.
    That money had already been pledged to sewer repairs and bond payments.
    Something about you can't spend the same money twice.
    Anyway, guess we'll see, huh?
    Some of us already see.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 12:36 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • Scribner Place only accounts for a small portion of EDIT funds and SOLNA advocated using EDIT funds for sanitation.

    How is it that SOLNA believes we have plenty of EDIT funds for sewers and sanitation but not for sewers and Scribner Place? You can't have it both ways.

    By Blogger Jeff Gillenwater, at 12:47 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • I never said the EDIT dollars from the Scribner Project would be enough, but we will need all of that, and more, like Georgetowns $2 million, and whatever else it takes to fix what they say needs fixed.
    The EDIT money from Scribner is an issue because those are EDIT dollars that were already pledged for sewer repairs and bond payments.
    We have copies of the appropriations made by council, and minutes of meetings that show this is the case.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 1:06 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • Then why advocate using EDIT for sanitation?

    By Blogger Jeff Gillenwater, at 1:09 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • First of all, I think the sanitation issue is over. Pretty much a done deal, except for informing the public of the company's partners.
    Even though it's a mute point, the EDIT money required to save sanitation from being privatized would have only been for one year of support while the department made the proposed changes they made which would have made the department solvent in 2 years.
    That's all we asked for sanitation. Give the proposed plan a 2 year opportunity to get itself running in the black, and turning a profit for the city, before they tossed the whole thing.
    Obviously, a 2 year reprive to give them a chance was too much to ask. The decision was made.
    Still, 1, maybe 2 years of some support from EDIT would have turned it around.
    For Scribner, we're talking $400K for 17 years. That's a lot of money for something we don't NEED and can't afford, with money that was already pledged to other projects. Namely, sewers.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 1:49 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • The point is, if the EDIT money is already pledged to the sewers, how could you have used it for sanitation? That would've been the same "spending the money twice" situation that you're claiming is happening with Scribner Place. The only way to avoid that conflict is to say that there's EDIT money available over and above what has been pledged to sewers that can be used for other projects. If that's the case, Scribner Place is no more in conflict (or even related to) the sewers than sanitation would have been.

    BTW, the amount pledged to Scribner Place is $270K a year, is it not? It was reduced after the county agreed to make up the difference.

    By Blogger Jeff Gillenwater, at 2:01 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Jeff Gillenwater, at 2:02 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • So how many sewer credits will we recieve?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:08 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • Actually, according to an official report for EDIT fund dispersements and balances, I have the following information:
    They have officially accounted for the $270K annually for sewer works bonds, it reflects $400K annually for Scribner Place, and $462,700 annually for 1997 A Bonds, as well as $1,132,700 annually for Estimated funds needed for debt service and Scribner Place.
    With EDIT reciepts estimated at $1,394,439 for 2005 & 2006, less these estimated disbursements, there should actually be $261,739 remaining in EDIT funds.
    However, I would suggest you find out for sure if those estimated revenues remaining are actually there?
    BTW, some numbers have been forcasted to change 2007 thru 2009.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 6:23 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • anonymous 3:08,
    Answer: None until both the Bar Screen and the Robert E. Lee project are completed.

    That is, unless they will PROMISE the EPA (one more time) that these projects will both be completed by September.

    Without Georgetown's money, and the EDIT money, as well as reeling in the TIF areas, which take money out of the General Fund, such promises would be impossible to make.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:28 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • I should note that the document referring to EDIT reciepts and disbursements has left out the $270K annual EDIT funds that were appropriated by Council in 2002 for inner-city sewer line repairs.

    By Blogger East Ender, at 6:45 PM, March 04, 2006  

  • Atty. Gibson saidmonth's ago they did not have to pay the $270,000.00 back! Then what???

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:20 PM, March 04, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

r

<< Home