Sunday, April 18, 2010

Tweeting last night's 'Just Say 'No' To The Bond' meeting...

Two words: Geep Funderbunk (@ Richardson Civic Center) http://4sq.com/cMK88P

@ The bond meeting. And somebody just farted in here. Loud. #sirthatwasnotyourchair

Good site to know: texasbondreviewboard.com

Richardson is $358 million in debt.

State average for city debt is $4k per person. Richardson is at 11k+ per citizen.

Bill Keffler (Richardson City Manager) makes more than Rick Perry and Nancy Pelosi.

Who's here? Cheryl "Miller Time" Miller, Jim Shepherd, Andrew, David, Bache-Wiig, Nathan, Cheri, McCalpin, Jim and all the other regulars.

The Fred Hill talk begins...

75% of the budget goes to 'Personal Services' rather than 'Personnel'....yes, she did suggest what those might be. #callgirls

A self-proclaimed "filthy, stinking capitalist" is up next....

Ha! Jason Moore just called Mac, 'Mac Daddy!'

Why do men named Richard still go by 'Dick?' Don't the know by now.....

Someone just called the Eisemann Center 'Chuck's Place!' #love

"why do we have cities owning golf courses?" #golfcoursereform

Turns out Mac's gonna die soon....and we as a community MUST buy him a waterpark.

This is what happens when @Jennyd86 abandons her post. (as the keeper of the name tags)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All in all I thought this was a very informative meeting, and it did not strike me at a 'Down with the Bond!' rally. Good, logical reasons were laid out for why you should vote this bond down, but ultimately, my mind was not changed. I will still be voting in favor of Prop.3 and against all of the others.

7 comments:

  1. I am glad to see you took notes and made tweets about it. It was a very pleasant crowd and well mannered. It did provide, in my opinion, some very good basic information on how to assess the bond package and how to make an informed decision. I am glad you were there to listen and report. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maybe I need some more info on the Station 4 move and rebuild with the training facility as a necessary project at this time. Most often there are good reasons to update fire stations and it sometimes lowers our insurance premiums marginally. But I just have a difficult time approving this with all of the sweeping of funds that defies the charter, inflated costs and selling the bonds now for projects that may not begin for years down the road. They have not even completed the 2006 bond projects and those remaining are a couple of years out. It just makes no sense with the current high debt loads and rocky economy.

    I made a public information request for supporting documents on the entire bond package as well as any emails or correspondence. Received nothing on the latter.

    Mostly I received interoffice/accounting dept printouts stating a cost number for various projects with an added contingency amount of 30% and then an additional 5% on top of that for "Capital Improvement Costs" also known as payroll.

    One piece of documentation was a RFD Strategic Facilities Plan by BRW 03/13/09. This report showed the "notable deficiencies" of the FD #4 as being: 1) Building settling in kitchen area (Loved the stainless steel commercial stove in the place) 2) Wall tile and flooring damage in the restrooms 3) Facility not ADA compliant to current standards (as the other older facilities) 4) Living arrangements and bathrooms are co-ed as are in the other facilities. The report shows a current construction cost with a 30% contingency. Also noted is escalation of construction costs over the last five years is 5-7%. There are other factors the report notably has excluded and may possibly be deemed in the contingency, but the report focused on the structure alone. The training facility has all the increased design costs, contingency fee and 5% staff fee, but the interesting part to this one is a deferral amount from the 2006 bond of $695,000 for fire station number 3. Wait a minute are they mixing projects and voter approvals just like they have tried to do on the remaining 1997 bond? I hope not. But the time frame to completion per the report is 2016.

    The sidewalk repairs full cost with markups seems to be approx $65.25 a linear foot. So an average front to a residential lot of 70 ft, the cost with markups per home is $4565. That seems high to me. Maybe it is all the markups.
    The alley work documentation consists of a spreadsheet with a cost per ft of $82 (Chippewa)to $130(Chapparral). Is the difference sewer line repair and any utility coordination? There is no backup to know.

    Library RFID upgrade is a Multi Bin System from TechLogic at a cost of $450k. But the reported amount of 724,500 is almost double the cost with markups and the lovely 5% capital improvement cost (sweeping, sweeping, sweeping).
    The Height Rec Center, pool and gymnastics is reported as $16,245,000, yet the documents given to me show Option A costs as $17,394,382 as being all new construction. Option B is $15,467,878 with new construction and the gymnastics given to RISD. In light of the latest decision to decline the gymnastics to Highland Terrace area, one would assume the disparity is the reconcilable. But, the cost for new construction on the rec center and pool (Option E) is $13,673,586. What else is missing? The 5% Capital Improvement Costs aka payroll (Option B + 5%).
    No other documentation provided for the other numbers so I will assume they are made up numbers also with a made up contingency.

    Oh and 5% for payroll for the staff time to think up and make up the numbers. Refresh my memory but isn't all the staff payroll numbers in the budget, you know that 75% personal costs? I have asked before and there is no adjustments for partial payroll numbers to be allocated to capital projects. It works in reverse. The monies are swept to the General Fund never to be seen again.

    Has anyone ever heard of job costing???

    Cheri Duncan-Hubert

    ReplyDelete
  3. Destiny, honey, you are just as humorous as always. I missed being able to access your blog, but now I am back. Sorry I missed seeing you on Saturday night, although I did see "Mac Daddy". Can someone please define "personal services"? Is that the kind of activity that I hear is advertised in the back of the Dallas Observer?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Who is Geep and why is his name next to your heart?

    ReplyDelete
  5. As much as I want to play fair, I have to point out that a vast majority of facts and figures from the anti-bond camp are either vastly distorted or flat out lies.

    Example right here in your post, which I can prove in about 30 seconds using the math that my 2nd grader does for her homework:

    "Richardson is $358 million in debt... State average for city debt is $4k per person. Richardson is at 11k+ per citizen."

    Okay genius, so how is a city that is $358 million in debt with a population of 100,000 at 11k per person??? You take 358,000,000 (the debt level you cite) and divide that by 100,000 (the population) and you come out with... DING DING DING ... $3580, which is LESS than the state average.

    If the key players in your campaign cannot get their simple math straight then maybe you should leave figuring out this complicated bond stuff to the big boys and girls.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Greg, you left out all the unfunded liabilities. Even by GASB/FASB standards they are a debt. Maybe reading the CAFR and an accounting class would benefit you.

    Cheri Duncan-Hubert

    ReplyDelete
  7. Do you really have the mind of mush you appear to have? You cannot actually be as dim-witted as you appear, surely not. If I were you, the first thing I would do in the morning, would be to run like crazy to the admin office and demand a refund for the faulty education UTD is providing you with. Gather facts before inserting your foot in your mouth. And I really hope you are not typical of the average UTD student.

    You, very obviously, were not at the meeting. Otherwise you would know “the key players” were talking about total debt on Richardson taxpayers. I can tell that you know very little about what you are talking about (you probably don't even know what the cafr is), and you appear to be a border-line idiot (if Destiny will allow me to say that). You are doing nothing more on these blogs than playing the Pete-Repeat game. You are doing nothing more that “parroting” garbage in, garbage out. Dave has posted this information before. See the following link on his site.

    http://graphics.dc-tm.com/TBRBCORDebt08-31-09.doc

    Let your little mind of mush, mash about the facts on that document. The document is sourced if you want to check the figures for yourself (if you have that ability).

    W/O Bond
    City/County Population Debt
    DCAD-Richardson ~77,200 $495,468,850
    CCAD-Richardson ~22,500 $428,911,417

    Use your second grade math, you will find that average per capita debt on Richardson residents is a staggering $9,271.62, which is considerably more than your figure of $3580.

    With Bond & Interest-Richardson
    Population Debt Debt per capita
    99,700 $1,056,380,267 $10,595.59

    OK, we "key player" were wrong. We were $404.41 off. Now use your second grade math and tell me by what percentage we were wrong. If you came up with us being wrong by 3.68%, you used your second grade math correctly. You should feel proud of that!

    So rather than you saying DING DING DING, should you not be saying, about yourself, DING-A-LING DING-A-LING DING-A-LING?

    Do yourself a favor and check the facts before you start parroting crap you have absolutely no knowledge about.

    Now, then, are you suitably, properly and fully embarrassed (now that you have made a complete ass of yourself)?

    ReplyDelete