DECISION, DECISIONS......
WARNING - WARNING - WARNING!!!
There are several important and costly issues that are currently under consideration by the City Council. We here at SOLNA feel that these issues warrant careful consideration and close scrutiny in terms of what events have predicated these issues, how the City of New Albany has been led to this dangerous precipice, and why the decisions being made regarding these issues will be so fundamentally vital to the community's future welfare.
First, let us simply list what we believe are the issues most pertinent to our inquiries and concerns:
1. City Financials
a) 2004 Audit Investigation as recommended by the State
b) Sewage/Sanitation/Drainage/Slush Fund deciphering
c) Budgetary Savings Opportunities
2. Sewer Rate Increases
a) EPA Agreement
b) Sewer Credits & Allotments
c) Necessary Projects & Repairs
d) Financial Statements
3. Stormwater Management
a) Rule 13 Mandate Requirements/Options
b) Funding/User Fee Assessment
c) Board/Staff Composition
d) Proposed Projects
4. Scribner Place Development
a) EDIT Funds
b) Referendum
c) Property Tax Encumberment
d) Alternative Community Needs
This is, unfortunately, only a short list of concerns facing the Citizens of New Albany, but these are the things we believe require our immediate attention and discussion.
Of course, we welcome your input on these matters, or any other that you may feel warrants expediated consideration, as we delve further into the details of these issues.
Our goal is to dissiminate as much information to as many of the public as we can. Especially since the NAFC School Board made its disappointing decision concerning airing Council tapes on WNAS, New Albany's original public access channel that was graciously put into the hands of the School Corportion in the first place.
Read about the Tribune's take on this decision Here.
posted by East Ender at
4:35 AM
20 Comments:
You would think after Gov.Ernie Fletcher being indicted it would be easy for an indictment against Mayor James Garner after everything he has pulled!
Could New Albany be so lucky?
By
Anonymous, at 6:35 AM, May 14, 2006
Of course we didn't get a Tribune today, but we are sure hearing about the headlines. The one day this person really needed the info, daggone it.
People, they were to have that $5 million bond payment put back; it was to start accumulating when the papers were signed with the state and it is in the bond documents floated then. The question would be is what did you do what the monies?
We also hope they realize they can not talk about our MONIES behind closed doors; we do not believe there CAN LEGALLY BE AN EXECUTIVE session held. We were told personally by the CJ it will be legally challenged. We are thankful they are doing the challenging, but it probably wouldn't hurt citizens to call their Public Access Counselor and make some noise, too.
They can not justify this rate hike. They do not have the financials to support a rate hike. Ought to be an interesting meeting.
We are compiling the information out of the March's monthly sewer report to inform the public about the 23 sewer system overflows occurring between 1 - 2" of rain. How many inches did the EPA require of us?
You will be surprised how much "guesstimated sewage" ran all over New Albany on March 11-12th. Don't get us wrong; they have excuses for it allllll. Most of it they attribute to the grit bar screen being clogged; not sure how that makes the Country Club's 3 SSO's play in, but, maybe someone else can tell us.
Stay tuned NA. Happy Mother's Day to All!
By
Anonymous, at 1:36 PM, May 14, 2006
Amen anonymous...they all need to go to jail.
Happy mother's day
By
Anonymous, at 2:51 PM, May 14, 2006
I haven't seen any comments on the increase in the interim fee for stormwater drainage by the Sewer Board from $2.00/mo. to $3.17/mo.
I thought any and all increases had to be approved by the City Council? What this administration will do for money!!!!! They follow no rules and feel they are above the law.
By
Anonymous, at 4:15 PM, May 14, 2006
The Stormwater fees are definitely on our list of pressing, urgent issues. The residential "interim" fee was supposed to be set at $2 for 12 months, and businesses and industrial "interim" fees would be higher and last for a lesser amount of time.
Our sources tell us that businesses have not been billed at all for the Stormwater "user fee" that SOME residential rate payers have been paying since Feburary.
We'll put up a link to those Council minutes.
Meanwhile, today's paper holds the other issue of plans to request a Sewer rate increase.
We knew it was coming.
They should know what's coming too.
By
East Ender, at 7:18 PM, May 14, 2006
It's time for all the citizens of New Albany to make a stand. We have had enough!
By
Anonymous, at 9:07 PM, May 14, 2006
James needs more money for his re-election for 2007. Sad but true!
By
Anonymous, at 9:50 PM, May 14, 2006
Referencing the Preliminary Engineering Report, prepared by Clark Dietz, Inc., for our sewer plan, we refer to page 3-1 and what was predicted. Now, explain to us how this City possible did a value engineering study and this did not appear in the plan and is now biting us in the ***.
Chapter 3- Future Situation (Pg. 3-1, dated June 2001, Revised February 2002):
And we quote: "Growth rates in the suburban area of Floyd County, such as Georgetown, have been much higher than in the City of New Albany. A more aggressive growth rate (3.5 percent annual growth) was assumed for Georgetown. The Year 2000 census places Georgetown's population at 2, 227. Therefore, in 20 years, its population would be 4,431, an increase of approximately 2,200."
Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
According to "Figure 6 - Selected Plan - Clark Dietz Preliminary Engineering Report, Revised February 2002, the installation of the new mini basin 8, 9, & 10 gravity relief sewer with an installation of 4,470 feet of 33-inch sewer main should have stopped all of the overflows occuring on Cherry Valley and in Anderson Park.
The monthly report for the sewers for March, 2006 is out. This is where we showed "some" of the manholes and "thangs" going around town with our new plant not working.
Now, don't forget our plant should be handling an estimated 66.0 million gallons per day (MGD).
We hd an "guesstimated" (we say that because the City states that in same documentation) the amount of raw sewage that ran onto New Albany, affecting all its' citizens, was guesstimated at 73,860 MGD for March 11-12. A lot is blamed on the bar screen; which they knew about 2 years ago (EMC, Fifer, IDEM). One they blamed on the bowling bowl, out by Preswick Square. We can't figure out why the 3 sso's are on the Country Club still. The manhole is still overflowing out by Meiers, even though they put a new collar on it.
The bond money was to come from TIF monies, EDIT monies, and the raises the taxpayers took. The monies cannot be accounted for and the State has asked this Council to investigate their monies because there is a sign there may be more significant problems.
They should not be allowed to have this meeting behind closed doors. They are not allowed to discuss OUR MONIES behind closed doors.
Let me show you a bill here from our local Accounting firm, and then maybe you can explain to us what the Controller's office is working on since Board of Works lost sanitation:
Seeing we thought it was against the law to outsource your financials, we are truly fascinated by WHAT IS GOING ON DOWNTOWN????
The bill is from Melhiser Endres Tucker, CPA's, P.C.
It is directed to the Wastewater Utility - City of New Albany
For Professional Services Rendered as Follows:
WASTEWATER UTILITY - CITY OF NEW ALBANY
Billing services through January 11, 2006.
Progression of Accounting Records from January-November 2005.
Posting receipts and disbursements.
Reconciliation of Cash Balance.
Other Schedules for meeting.
Income Statements and Cash Flow Statements for the Sewer and Sanitation Department (WHAT SANITATION DEPARTMENT?)
Attended Meeting.
Officer 6.7hrsx$155.00 $1,038.50
Staff Acct 22.1hrsx$65.00 $1,436.50
CURRENT CHARGES $2,475.00
The Date due is 2/22/06. Remember how the Mayor said the financials were being delayed because of Melhiser Endres Tucker and the "tax season"? Hmmmmmmmm.
More to come, New Albany (unfortuantely). Stay tuned.
By
Anonymous, at 11:32 PM, May 14, 2006
Is it true what the Mayor wants to use
the bulk of the Stormwater fee money that was put on us at $ 2.00 and now
they have raised it to $ 3.15 for?
It is being said that the MAyor wants to use most of this Stormwater we pay
for him to set up his own collection department for Sewer Bills and take that billing away from Indiana Water
Company that now does the billing.
If they run the billing like they are running his other departments,
what a mess that billing system will be.
How many more messes can New Albany stand?
By
Anonymous, at 11:42 PM, May 14, 2006
Anonymous 11:42------------------
Are you kidding? I thought that the
purpose of the stormwater fee we now pay is for engineering and pipes and
ditches to prevent the stormwater
from flooding our streets and yards.
Can they legally use our stormwater
fee that we now pay for other projects like billing ????
By
Anonymous, at 11:47 PM, May 14, 2006
OK, so let's see if I understand this correctly...
In other words, the original plan was to prepare the system to handle sewage from Georgetown and other fringe areas because that's where the highest growth areas were occurring, thus the greatest opportunity to bring on more rate payers.
They used this info to justify expanding the holding capacity at the plant rather than repairing the inner-city lines that are causing all the overflows, and preventing the raw sewage from reaching the $44 million expansion.
(we have pictures of manholes that have actually been cemented shut)
Therefore, due to expansion rather than repairs, in 2 days during the month of March alone, the citizens of New Albany were exposed to almost 75,000 gallons of raw sewage either running in the streets or seeping into our groundwater.
A serious health risk.
Furthermore, the money that was supposed to be put aside for the bond payments, a combination of the 49% rate increase, TIF dollars and EDIT funds (according to the contractural agreement) has been spent on other things (we don't know what) so now they want another rate increase.
They had to drop the Georgetown folks in order to free up sewer line loads, thus credits, or Garner would have to admit he had sacraficed any new development for the City. (we have more info on the sewer credits issue to post a little later)
Now, they are expecting New Albany rate-payers to make up the lost revenues from Georgetown rate-payers, as well as foot the bill for the 2 major repairs that they have known about for years:
The malfunctioning grit screen and the Robert E. Lee Lift Station.
The new agreement with the EPA calls for $500K every year be spent in repairing the faulty inner-city lines.
The old agreement called for $270K per year, and that wasn't done, nor was the money put aside to cover the repairs or to make the bond payments.
WHERE'S THE MONEY??????????
Finally, they CANNOT hold a private meeting to discuss the City's financials.
The meeting that has been called for Tuesday will be an illegal meeting if they indeed hold it.
We will put up a link on how to reach the Public Access Counselor and register your protest.
Finally, why are we paying our Controller and also paying an outside accounting firm to work the numbers?
An investigation into this whole matter, as advised by the State, is warranted and necessary.
(and they want to build swimming pools???????)
GEEEEEEEEZZZ!!!!!!!!
By
East Ender, at 12:42 AM, May 15, 2006
To read the minutes of the Council meetings that pertained to the Stormwater Management fees and the load of CRAP we were told about how and why the fee was needed, click HERE
Then click on Common Council Agenda and Minutes and go to the minutes of October 2005, both meetings, as well as a Special meeting held early in November.
Of Course, the minutes are somewhat lacking in details of the debate, and actually being able to watch the Council sessions would be extremely helpful to hear everything that was said, but alas...Council sessions have been deemed 'uneducational' and too politically biased.(???????)
We would like to give a shout out to Mr. Tucker, Editor of the Tribune, for sharing in our disappointment with the NAFC School Board's decision that Council Meetings won't be aired.
Their decision only adds to the huge divide that separates the people and the current City administration.
By
East Ender, at 3:05 AM, May 15, 2006
This information pertains to our "Flood Control Board".
2006 New Albany Flood Control District -- Board of Commissioners
Position Name Annual $
President Tony Toran $ 1,600.00
VP Tom Cannon $ 1,600.00
Member Shane Gibson$ 1,600.00
" Chas Hunter $ 1,600.00
" Fire Chief R. Toran $ 1,600.00
" Steve LaDuke$ 1,600.00
Ex Sec. Sally Mastrolia$10,000.00
Supervisor Ron Grangler $32,639.87
Employee Name Hr. Rate per Contract
Charles Baird $ 13.62
Gary Sams $ 13.62
Clinton Sorrels $ 13.62
Charles Weigleb $ 13.62
(Retiring 02/06)
Flood Control Meetings are the second Tuesday of every month, at 9:00 AM in the 3rd Floor Assembly Room of the City County Building.
Wonder what they are ALL working on?
FYI.
By
Anonymous, at 12:27 PM, May 15, 2006
2006 SALARY REVIEW OF CITY EMPLOYEES PAID FROM MORE THAN ONE (1) PUBLIC FUND:
MAYOR'S BUDGET:
Mayor James Garner
Mayor's Budget: $ 56,700
Pres. Sewer Board $ 7,500
Total $ 64,200
Plus Take Home Car
Plus Cell Phone
SECRETARY OF MAYOR:
Sally Mastoria
City Budget $ 28,784
Flood Control $ 10,000
TOTAL $ 38,784
(Do Not Know If This Position Has A Cell Phone)
BOARD OF WORKS BUDGET
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
Tony Toran $ 40,905
Flood Control $ 1,600
TOTAL $ 42,505
Plus Take Home Car
Plus Cell Phone
CITY ATTORNEY BUDGET
Shane Gibson
Attorney Budget $ 27,986
Planning Commission $ 13,165
Flood Control $ 1,600
TOTAL $ 42,751
(Do Not Know If This Position Has A City Cell Phone) (Do Know This Attorney, We Thought, Worked Full-Time for Nick Stein's Law Office.) Our mistake.
CITY CLERK
Marcey Wisman
Clerk Budget $ 29,096
Sewer Board $ 6,268
TOTAL $ 35,364
JOHN ROSENBARGER
Redevelopment $ 5,200
Planning Commission $ 57,535
TOTAL $ 62,735
FYI New Albany
By
Anonymous, at 1:41 PM, May 15, 2006
The following is Mayor James Garner testimony at a Public Hearing on the Sewer Bonds when our new "Plan" was selected: The testimony being referenced to is in the Preliminary Engineering Report by Clark-Dietz, revized 2002.
And we quote:
Mr. James Garner: James Garner, 1506 Sunset Drive, City Council, New Albany, City at Large.
"I just want to clarify something. We have had a separate system in this city since the 1900s. It may have been only clarified in the last administration, but you can go back to at least 1920 when Dr. Severnhaus said that we had two separate systems. So, it just wasn't the last administration who had this problem.
I'm going to reiterate real quick what Mr. Coffey said. As a member of city council we have not been given enough information in the last year and a half on our sewer problems and what it's going to cost and I believe we're headed in the wrong direction. The information provided by Clark Dietz is not much more than we got from Bob Hawkins and Presnell.
If you look through the report from Bob Hawkins and Anson Keller, it's pretty similar information. I don't know if every member of the sewer board got this report when it was put out the first quarter of last year. I know at least one member got his last month. And that's a sad state of affairs when a report was sent to each sewer board member and they didn't get it.
I think we need to go to a split system. Bob Hawkins and Anson Keller estimated about 15 million dollars, about 4 million dollars a year over three years, plus an extra possible year so we wouldn't have to borrow 36 million dollars at one time. We can't afford 36 million. The city residents can't afford a 36 million dollar project.
And I know the previous administration was spending $50,000 a month on a high paid attorney from Washington. And I figure if we did that again, even though I don't agree with it, that attorney could fight for us for about 15 years at the additional cost it would cost to build the system that's being recommended.
So, you know, 15 million dollars, we might as well fight this EPA, the IDEM for 15 years. I'm sure within the 15 years we would probably get something done where we could probably have a split system, because a lot of people in the country are going to be going to that. Not everybody can afford 36 million dollars, not every city, and we sure can't.
And the last thing I've got to say is some of the costs on these estimates have been included in TIF bonds that have been sold and one that we've talked about selling. There 1.2 million dollars that less than six weeks ago I was told the Prosser lift station did not need any work at this point. And I agree for infrastructure in a new industrial park area, because I was emphatically told that this would not come up again and I would not have to increase rates for the sewer system for 1.2 million dollars.
I can tell you I'm not going to vote for it at 36 million dollars if we'ere including 1.2 million dollars again which we have already approved for sewer repairs from that TIF district. We also have TIF money, the bonds we're going to sell on Charlestown Road, which are included in some of these project costs, and I think we're just heading in the wrong direction. Thank you." End of testimony. Interesting, huh?
WHICH PART OF THE SPEECH WHERE CITY RESIDENTS JUST CAN'T AFFORD IT DID YOU FORGET, MAYOR? Inquiring minds wanna know -- real quick.
By
Anonymous, at 2:02 PM, May 15, 2006
Question ???????
Does Plan Commissioner Director, John Rosenbarger, get a fee from the
developers that he stands up at council meetings and promotes projects for ???????
Is that legal ???????
By
Anonymous, at 2:06 PM, May 15, 2006
You would be having to ask John that question, and not sure what your chances may be in getting an answer in that department, if ya know what I mean. Let's face it. Good luck to getting any of our questions answered. We're still trying though, don't give up on some of the taxpayer advocates. We are simply hopping right now, finding the bond documents; minutes; any financials we can piece together over the years; etc.
Good question, though.
By
Anonymous, at 2:40 PM, May 15, 2006
Where have you folks been? This information has been put out on Freedom Of Speech for the last several weeks!
By
Anonymous, at 7:24 PM, May 15, 2006
This document can be found inside the Preliminary Engineering Report, prepared by Clark Dietz, Revised 2002.
This may help explain why negotiations and lawyers are suing the City of New Albany over just what their agreement is/was/are, etc.
This letter came from the Town of Georgetown and is dated July 27, 2001, addressed to the New Albany Sewer Board, Referencing the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER), Written Comments in Repsonse to Public Hearing - July 17, 2001
"Dear Board Members:
In response to your Preliminary Engineering Report (hereinafter "PER") and information presented at your SRF required Public Hearing on July 17, 2001, the Town Council of the Town of Georgetown offers the following quetions, comments and responses:
1. The fact that the Town is one of the largest users of the New Albany treatment facilities raises the Town's concern that no one from either the City or any of its consultants has contacted Town Representatives regarding the scope of the project or the Town's financial involvement.
2. The PER, as presented, does not differentiate facilities improvements that are required for or impacted by the Town of Georgetown. For example, it is our understanding that the flow from Geogetown does not make its way to the treatment plant through areas of the City's sanitatry sewer system subject to excessive infiltration/inflow. Accordingly, we should only be responsible for our share of costs pertaining to plant improvements and specifically not any plant expansion.
3. The Town is concerned that the City held a Public Hearing without providing sufficient facts and information regarding the impact of the various alternatives on existing rates and charges. Without this information the Town cannot have full comment on the PER, as the best engineering option is only a consequence to Georgetown to the extent it affects the Town's rate.
In conclusion, the Town of Georgetown is greatly concerned with the conclusions of the City's June, 2001 PER, its incompleteness and the financial impact on the Town's rate payers. Thus, at this time the Town has no choice but to object to the City's findings and conclusions.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to contact the Town of Georgetown.
Sincerely,
TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE TOWN OF GEORGETOWN, Patti Denison, Vice-President
cc: Commonwealth Engineers, Inc.
James E. "Jef" Fifer, Town Attorney
------
Then, we reached an agreement, then we reached another agreement, and now there is just a $800,000.00 payment with us looking at the loss of their customers.
THIS FIASCO IS NOT THE RATEPAYERS OF NEW ALBANY'S PROBLEMO. It is the City's, the Sewer Board's and the Engineers. We surely hope they still are holding the surety bonds.
We had our faith the meeting they scheduled for Tuesday night was illegal. The City CANNOT discuss our MONIES BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, no ifs ands or buts -- except possible litigation or personnel issues (could be a couple more -- but definitely NOT OUR MONIES).
Hoorah to Freedom of the Press!
Hoorah to Indiana Sunshine Laws and the Public Access Counselor!
Boo to Garner's secret meetings.
By
Anonymous, at 8:21 PM, May 15, 2006
P.S. Sorry, earlier I meant boo to Garner's secret government.
Thanks.
By
Anonymous, at 1:32 AM, May 16, 2006
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
r << Home