Monday, August 10, 2009

It's Official


...I'm skipping tonight's work session for a special birthday dinner with the fam.

Anybody want to moonlight on Conserve & Protect as a guest blogger? Sherri maybe?

5 comments:

  1. Wow it was boring last night. It was mostly a review of stuff that, if you had been to the other budget meetings, you'd heard before. I left when they were about halfway through the handout because it was obvious that the meeting was going to run well past 11 and I need my sleep. The only time anything was said that perked my ears up was when Keffler hinted about a new TIF based project. There was mention on the Executive Session Agenda of negotiations for a commercial development in the U.S. 75 and Floyd area, and if those two things are related I'm all kinds of curious.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Sherri! We make a good team. You show up for the first 3 boring hours and I make it for the last two. :)

    I'll post later today (during nap time) because there were a few noteworthy moments.

    ReplyDelete
  3. About the only thing that got my attn last night, for the short time I was there, was when a lady, I think her name was Amanda Tackett, was fairly confrontational with Bill about his daughter using his city car, and because his daughter was using his city issued car, he got another car out of the car pool for himself. If I heard correctly, the city is also paying car insurance on his city issued car so the rest of Bill's family an be covered while driving the city car as well (a bit foggy on that).I need to record these things so I can be sure my old brain remember the correct version of what really happens, and not just David's version. So where are those cameras and recording?

    At first sight the city issued does raise eyebrows. I think Bill said something to the effect of the city council approve these kinds of actions years and years ago, so it isn't something that he is "getting away with", rather it is just how the city does business.

    My own thoughts would be to not have car allowances and just let the city reimburse for employees using their own personal car. It does seem an excess expense. But that is just me.

    Chris got up with some great comments about the budget too. Go get 'em Chris!

    David

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm of two minds on the car thing. Way back when, my Dad was CEO of a medium sized company. As part of his compensation, he got a company car. The justification was that he would need it to drive visiting customers around in, but really it was a perk and he negotiated it as part of his compensation package.

    The way insurance companies work these days, everyone in a household has to be insured to drive a car, or they have to be specificly excluded (which means if they do have to drive it in an emergency, and there's an accident and someone is hurt or there's property damage, the insurance company doesn't pay). Some lease companies don't allow exclusions.

    Sometimes when we needed the larger vehicle, Mom or I would drive the company car and Dad would drive our car. So I can understand Keffler doing that. However, when we were driving the company car and one of our cars wasn't available, Dad NEVER had the company provide another car at the companies expense.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Look, the residents of Richardson never intended to provide cars to the Keffler 7. If I have to hear one more time about his large family, 5 kids, I'm gonna puke. It's called a condom. Embrace it, but don't make me pay for it. Okey dokey?

    I also loved the heartwarming discussion of sacrifice from the head of the Keffler 7. Everyone at COR is "sacrificing." Okay, I'll bite...

    Was Keffler's $200K advance a sacrifice? For residents, yes. For the Keffler 7? Not so much. Still can't find the Keffler 7's advance on any version of the budget. Must've gone through a sweep account via a non-profit.

    ReplyDelete