IS THIS REALLY THE BEST SOLUTION FOR FERNDALE'S PROBLEMS IN 2009?
The Ferndale city council led by Mayor Jensen plans to borrow $8 million without voter approval . The Council under the leadership of the Mayor recently passed a very complicated building switch/remodel authorization which would build a large new police station and a much bigger library.
This is the largest non-voter approved project since the sewage treatment plant - we are still paying for an over-sized facility. The tab for the new police station/library plan is $8 million and it will be paid for, in part, by a new tax on the two refuse companies headquatered in Ferndale.
As the Mayor has said in his 2009 State of the City Address, page 2 "the best green-built building is the one you do not have to build" - why does that not apply here? The Mayor goes on to assert on page 6, in referring to a future Ferndale Swimming Pool:
"As with the library project, a feasibility study will show us the path to follow in constructing a swimming facility:
Who will use it?
How much are taxpayers willing to spend?
How large should it be?
What will the costs be for ongoing maintenance?
How much will it cost to staff?
How much revenue will it produce?
Will we have to ask voters to form a recreation district for ongoing maintenance and operation?"
These are very good questions for any expenditure - were they asked in the proposed $8 million police/library swap?
In the Mayors own words "It would be a great project, but one that needs careful study and real costs that will be manageable for our citizen taxpayers to take on." Should this apply to any city project including the police and library swap?
In these economic times every penny counts -especially when it is ours.
Please attend the PUBLIC MEETING SEPTEMBER 14 - 6:30pm Central Elementary School Gymnasium.
Attend the City Council Meeting Tuesday September 8 - 6:00PM.
To improve the community of Ferndale by providing transparency and accountability of government
Nice job. Thank you for your work. Very lucid, clear, makes a point.
ReplyDeleteMost of us know what you mean when you write that the 7 questions the Mayor poses to Swimming pool advocates should apply to the council majority's project as well. The opposition is likely to insult everyone's intelligence by using the fact that a couple of the 'questions' would not apply to both a community pool and a police station. What you wrote is a point well taken, and it would be intellectually dishonest to dismiss it for the reasons I noted above. But alas, we'll see.
Keep up the good work. I support any civil approach to positive change. Glenn
Let's call this project what it really is: welfare for paramilitary organizations. Over the past 40 years, the police and the military have been quite successful in whipping up the fear level. It used to be the "dirty hippies" who had come to seduce your daughters with the pernicious weed marijuana. Now the cops want us to believe there are masses of terrorist Arabs massing on the border and a meth head behind every bush. Only our "brave boys in blue" can keep us safe! What racist nonsense!
ReplyDeleteIf you look south a couple of states you can see that California is in deep financial distress. One of the contributing factors is the large number of people in prison under the "three strikes" law. This law makes no discrimination between violent and non-violent felonies and does not allow judgest to temper their sentencing. This law was lobbied for quite intensively by the Corrections Officer Unions, simply because it gives corrections officers job security. So now you have a lot of prisons in California, a lot of prisoners, a lot of corrections officers with more job security than anybody else has, and a state that is going bankrupt. In a nutshell, this is the kind of thing that could happen to Ferndale. In the drive to give police officers more job security under the guise of providing safety from nefarious terrorists, the City of Ferndale could be bankrupt within 5 years. Walter
Walter has it about right. We've known for a while now, over 2000 years in fact, that democratic societies, if properly manipulated, will degenerate into fear and paranoia, and a strongman will emerge. Plato theorized such a thing before the Christian era.
ReplyDeleteWe need brave men, dedicated to their duty, to deal with bad guys and gals, we have them, and they do a fine job in dangerous situations. But the frequency with which situations in need of police intervention will not be reduced by expanding the ability of the police to respond to such situations. Unlawful behavior, at least the kind that threatens others, is most often a by-product of a more profound problem.
To dedicate the resources to Law Enforcement that the Council majority proposes, is to encourage the sick to spend every dollar on symptom relievers, rather than a doctor who might diagnose, and then treat the cause of the malady.
If one separates consensual, or what Peter McWilliams called "victimless crimes," from the equation, very little is left for Law Enforcement to deal with in Ferndale. Driving 35 in a 25, and domestic violence calls becomes the purpose for existence.
Walter is correct about the California model. I was at a meeting where the former head of Cal. prisons spoke. He made clear that anything resembling 'rehabilitation' was dead. "Three strikes," and mandatory sentencing for drug possession filled the prisons to overcapacity. Over the next five or so years, nearly a million people, incarcerated for non-violent crimes, will be released after at least several years in prison. The number will increase over the following 10 years, when over 4 million people will be released, accounting for those who will be locked up in the next 2 years.
It is insanity, and contrary to what seems to work in all of the rest of the civilized world.
More and better Law Enforcement? Show me the threat, and then, show me the money. Glenn
Glen and Walter:
ReplyDeleteYou are bringing very interesting points so far missing from our library/police station latest saga consideration.
It is a question of desire level of service our community would expect from law enforcement departments now and in the near future.
I don't think greater Ferndale community had any practical chance to participate in establishing desire levels of service or have any say.
I noted that over last 20 years when police station situation was discussed by our city leaders conversation almost always hovered around facility itself as a priority and not around community policing strategy.
I just returned from "eye opener" City Council meeting where Calvin Jordan Associates, Inc.–the architect for library/ police station swap had his well done,honest and informative presentation.
We will try to post extended report from tonight's council meeting including video recording of parts related to our subject.
For now I just want to briefly report that according to Mr. Jordan's design our new police station will be located in expanded existing library building (almost doubling existing square footage) and design to house 50 police officers.
For comparison now Ferndale is served by 19 police officers.
50 officers would be 25 years predicted level of policing service Ferndale will need according to our police chef.
Stay tuned
Art
I almost forgot;
ReplyDeleteWe will try to post scan of architectural drawings for proposed Law Enforcement Compound and brief cost estimate summary provided tonight by Mr. Jordan.
As per presented estimate Project Total adds to $ 5,204,412 (just existing library building renovation and addition parts).
It is also worth to note that new location for Ferndale Library hasn't been discussed at all, cost estimate were not presented and none of our council members ask about were "bump out" Ferndale Library will be located in this proposal.
Art
That can't be right...do I understand you to say $5 mil just for the library building expansion?---And there is a notion that with the less than $3 mil dollars left from the "Councilmatic" bond, we are to build a new library? I must have missed something, because it doesn't make sense.
ReplyDeleteJust because we happen to own some dirt does not mean we are obligated to build on it.
I will forever be accused of oversimplifying the issue, but I cannot escape the idea that we seem to be attempting to build a police station that will serve in 20-25 yrs.---Again, it seems to me that whether or not planning for 20 yrs. out is a good idea, is really not the point. The point is, we cannot afford to put so many financial 'eggs' in one or two large baskets, and expect to address any other needs properly. Forget visions, dreams, wants, and wishes---back here on Earth, is such a proposal as impelled by the Council majority, really practical in light of present circumstances?
Glenn
Glenn
Per the graphics posted elsewhere on the site, here is the shortfall for each department.
ReplyDeleteSales Tax Revenue $(222,192.00)
Permits/Fee Revenue $(280,217.00)
Traffic Mitigation Fees $(167,126.00)
Real Estate Excise Tax Revenue $(108,207.00)
Solid Waste Tax $( 21,848.00)
TOTAL $(799,590.00)
Note that the City of Ferndale is ALREADY nearly $800,000 below budget through August! And the Mayor and the Council want to add another $600,000 per year? This is insane and asinine.
After decades observing municipal and State budget processes, I still marvel at the ability of government to 'compartmentalize' financial issues/outlay. By some or another convoluted mechanism, we will be 'taught' by the Council majority that there is no connection between current revenue shortfalls, and future financed projects. It will be a bit like explaining that I may prudently go ahead and take out a loan for a large purchase, even as my ability to pay for the basics diminishes.---There I go oversimplifying again.
ReplyDeleteI am anxious to observe how we are to be persuaded that budget shortfalls and future debt burden are unrelated. I'm not optimistic that we will be convinced, alas I expect to hear and read government-speak,i.e., "No New Taxes"--(except for the Waste companies, who say simply that they will pass the tax along to us), which I have learned during decades of involvement, is usually no more than sophistry.
So go ahead, whomever you may be, 'splain to Lucy how diminished revenues and borrowing millions are not related. Perhaps I just don't understand, it's been known to happen.
Glenn
Hello Everybody we just made the blog user friendly so post to your hearts' content.
ReplyDeleteIn May 2008, Vallejo, California filed for bankruptcy because their budget shortfall for the fiscal year was $9 million for a city of 120,000 residents. This case is still in court, but last week the bankruptcy judge threw out the last union contract after most of the other unions, such as the police, had already settled. [In municipal bankruptcies all contracts with labor unions become subject to renegotiation, but the unions can challenge this.]
ReplyDeleteIf we extrapolate the budget shortfall of Vallejo ($9 million for 120,000 residents) onto a town the size of Ferndale (11,000 residents), guess what the requisite shortfall is to put the City in fear of bankruptcy? $825,000. So, with the Ferndale budget shortfall of $799,590 through August, we would reach $825,000 in shortfall by September 8th. Since this is now September 10th, we are already in the same financial position that prompted Vallejo to file for bankruptcy in May 2008.
Perhaps Ferndale is already in deep doo-doo because of mismanagement over the last few years. Perhaps the City should already be looking at bankruptcy options.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Vallejo analogy is interesting, and ominous. Do the specifics bare out the comparison? Were there factors that lead to collapse other than overcommitment? If the two, meaning Ferndale and Vallejo, can be fairly compared, it would be a powerful model, not to mention teaching tool. I'd like to know more...Glenn
ReplyDelete"Los Angeles
ReplyDeleteVallejo, a city on San Pablo Bay just north of San Francisco, has reduced its police force from 155 to 115, closed three fire stations, and halted capital projects that include road and sidewalk maintenance"
By Daniel B. Wood | Staff writer/ July 23, 2009 edition "The Christian Science Monitor"
If we extend the Vallejo analogy a little further, we can see how many police officers were too many and therefore contributed to Vallejo's bankruptcy. (Remember the public safety officers' salaries were part of the problem.) Let x stand for the number of police offices in Ferndale that could contribute to bankruptcy for the population. The ratios are:
ReplyDelete120,000 residents:155 police officers for Vallejo
11,000 residents:x police officers for Ferndale
The equation can be stated as:
x/11,000 = 115/120,000 OR x = 11,000*115/120,000
Solving for x yields the result x = 10.54 ~ 11
Therefore, IF the same financial situation exists in Ferndale as in Vallejo pre-bankruptcy, 11 police officer positions can contribute to a financial crisis in a city the size of Ferndale. As far as I know, we now have 19 police officer positions in Ferndale. My conclusion is that the excess number of police officers is ALREADY contributing to the financial troubles of the City of Ferndale.
Last night was the community meeting at Central Elementary. It was well-attended and the City Administrator and Mayor put on quite a show. Of course the deck was stacked in favor of the $8 million project, with a show-and-tell from the library, several police officers extolling the virtues of the police department (why this was necessary was beyond me), two Whatcom County Foundation fundraisers promising more money, and the presence of 4 uniformed police officers for crowd control. However, the content of the presentations was noticeably weak.
ReplyDeleteFor example, Greg Young, the City Administrator, mentioned the two revenue streams to be used for this project. These are the Real Estate Excise Tax Revenue and the Solid Waste Tax. Per the City's own budget numbers (posted elsewhere on this site), these two items total $838,376 in actual revenue through August, but budgeted items (i.e. the money needed) total $968,431. This means a budget shortfall of $(130,055). Even though there is already a shortfall for current budget items that will continue to grow through the rest of the year and beyond, Mr. Young stated that the new project will be funded by these two revenue streams. I find this puzzling, as I don't see how these two revenue streams can fund a project that adds $600,000 in debt service for 20 years, when there is already a shortfall. City Administrator Young also stated that no services will be cut out of already existing obligations AND backed up Mayor Jensen's assertion that property taxes will not go up to pay for this new project.
I am mystified. I don't see how these two revenue streams, which are already in shortfall, can possibly rise to the exalted heights needed. I suspect the project requires a large dose of magical realism. Perhaps this is all just a dream.
Speaking of dreams, many of the people who spoke last night mentioned that they have dreams for Ferndale and we should all follow our dreams. I don't really know if these are leftovers from the Joseph Campbell, follow-your-bliss days or just gullible small-town folks who don't read newspapers or investigate the issues. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking. At any rate, I have had my chance at the podium and I learned something 40 years ago that is still true today. You cannot make positive change without a great number of people involved. If people in Ferndale really want fiscal conservatism in their City Council, the Mayor's office, and in the Planning Department, they are going to have to get off their butts and throw the rascals out of office.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFind my response to the town hall meeting at the URL below:
ReplyDeletehttp://redpathwalker.blogspot.com/2009/09/our-city.html