Police and Fire Associations Finally Consider Compromise

It was good to see police and fire willing to consider compromise in the makeup of the pension board, as indicated in today's "Springfield News-Leader" article:

"The police and fire associations initially objected to the reduction in employee representation on the board but struck a tentative compromise during meetings with city leaders with the inclusion of the non-voting alternates."

Something that bothered me during the Police and Fire Pension Task Force's discussions was the unwillingness of the police and fire associations to even consider any compromise or concession to their pension plan's benefits.

I think everyone was well aware that the City and its residents should honor promises made in the past regarding benefits but, that wouldn't have stopped the associations from voluntarily offering compromise for the good of the City. The only thing they offered was the threat of a lawsuit every time the subject of change to benefits was even broached, and to be clear, that was their right.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Joint Pension Task Force/City Council Meeting Wednesday Night

As noted on the City Calendar below, the Police and Fire Citizen's Task Force is meeting tonight at the Busch Building in the 4th floor conference room.

Not listed on the calendar, but just announced, is a joint meeting of the Task Force and the City Council. The meeting is set for Wednesday night at 6 p.m. (August 5). The joint meeting will take place in City Council Chambers in the Historic City Hall.

According to the news release:

"The Task Force will use Wednesday's meeting as an opportunity to go into detail about its findings and draft recommendations regarding the pension fund shortfall. This meeting is open and citizens are invited to attend, but it will not be a public hearing."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pension Task Force Town Hall Thursday Night, July 30

You can watch the first Police-Fire Pension Task Force Town Hall meeting or, look through the Task Force Presentation from Tuesday's Town Hall Meeting ahead of time to get ideas about questions or comments you might like to ask or make.

Following is the City's News Release providing information about the last of two Town Hall meetings:

July 28, 2009

News Release

For Immediate Release

The second of two Town Hall meetings to take public input for the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizens' Task Force begins at 6:30 p.m., Thursday, July 30, at the Springfield Art Museum auditorium, 1111 E. Brookside Drive.

The Town Hall meeting will begin with an opening presentation by Task Force Chairman Jerry Fenstermaker, who will review the group's progress to date. The Task Force will then take public comment and questions with priority given to
citizens who did not speak at the first meeting last week.

The public input is intended to help the Task Force in developing its final recommendations, which the group expects to forward to the City Council in August.

Thursday's meeting will air on CityView, the City's government access channel, at 9 p.m., Monday, Aug. 3; and 8 p.m., Tuesday, Aug. 4. It is expected to be posted on the City's Web site by the end of the day Friday, July 31, at: CityView .

Summaries of the Task Force's Committee of the Whole meetings are available at: CityConnect. The documents and presentations from the meetings are posted at: Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizens' Task Force.

Citizens who are unable to attend either of the meetings can send questions
or comments via e-mail to: city@springfieldmo.gov .

The 16-member Task Force will hold a regular meeting at 6 p.m., Wednesday, July 29, at the 4th floor conference room in the Busch Municipal Building.

For more information, contact: Louise Whall, Director of Public Information, (417) 864-1009.

Note: I did provide simple hot links to the news release in place of Web page addresses.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is Springfield's Police-Fire Pension Plan Doomed?

Or: Take that Smoking Gun Away from that Straw Man!

The first paragraph of Sunday's Springfield News-Leader article, "Observer scours pension's past for cause of shortfall" began not as a paragraph but, as a single question:

"When it comes to the city's police-fire pension woes, how much more does the past have to offer?"

That's an interesting question, isn't it? Should past mistakes weigh into any discussion of the police and fire pension task force as they are seeking a solution to the underfunded police and fire pension plan?

In "Life of Reason," Vol. 1, "Reason in Common Sense," philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist George Santayana wrote, "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

The quote brought forth many variants, according to "Wikiquote," among them: "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it;" "Those who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat their mistakes;" "Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it," and; "Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them."

Today's philosophers, Mayor Jim O'Neal, who has sloughed off such questions as a seeking merely to asign blame, and Pension Task Force Chairman Jerry Fenstermaker, along with many of the Task Force members, who say discerning past mistakes which contributed to the pension plan's current massive shortfall will not change or affect the recommendations handed down to the Council and, perhaps, journalist Amos Bridges, who has to ponder and ask readers to ponder how much that dusty old history has to offer, seem to disagree with Santayana.

"...that's of no benefit to the community or the task force right now," said Jerry Fenstermaker, the group's chairman. "We need to put together a plan of action ... If you go and do all this backtracking, you're not going to get to any different recommendations." - Springfield News-Leader, "Observer scours pension's past for cause of shortfall," page 1.

Present City Manager Greg Burris, while noting, "We've tried to be very accommodating and very transparent," about past history related to the pension plan, in the News-Leader article added, "If other people want to delve further, we can keep trying to go farther in layers." That's one of the reasons for the citizens task force, he said.

Certain members of the task force have, in the past, suggested that looking into the causes of the pension plan's shortfall is not a part of their charge. Again, in the News-Leader article in Sunday's paper, reporter Amos Bridges noted, "city officials and most members of the task force say that work has been done and that dwelling on the past further is a distraction."

The first charge listed on the formal "Task Force Charge" pertained to determining the scope of the problem, and later states:

"Please be aware that a significant commitment of time and effort will be required of all task force members in order to fully research the problem, analyze various options, and select one or more recommended solutions to address the problem. I encourage the Task Force to set an aggressive meeting schedule in order to permit a thorough analysis and the development of recommendations by the report due date noted above."

But, even though citizens might have expected the task force to fully research the problem and provide a thorough analysis, it appears there is an attempt being made to reduce the concerns of the citizens of Springfield who seek answers to the causes of the pension plan's shortfall to an ill thought out and immature search for a single cause (smoking gun) with the motive of finding a single boogey man to blame (hang). I believe that is a straw man argument formed to distract the public from finding the answers they deserve.

Repeatedly, in the Sunday News-Leader article it was implied that certain concerned citizens expected to find a single "smoking gun," or person responsible for the shortfall.

These are quotes and paraphrased quotes by the reporter for the News-Leader from Sunday's article:

1. "To try to pin it (the pension shortfall) down to which piece of legislation or which city official signed off on it...." - Pension Task Force Chair Jerry Fenstermaker

2. "...there is no elevator speech for how this happened -- it doesn't boil down to any one single action." - City Manager Greg Burris

3. "There's no "smoking gun," he (City Manager Greg Burris) said, and it's likely those looking for one will continue to be disappointed." - attributed to City Manager Greg Burris by News-Leader reporter Amos Bridges

4. "O'Neal said he thinks part of the motivation for the continued questions boils down to a desire to know "who are we going to hang?"" -attributed to Mayor Jim O'Neal by News-Leader reporter Amos Bridges

5. "Going forward there have been numerous mistakes made, but there's not one thing you can hang your hat on." -Mayor Jim O'Neal

6. "... If there was a smoking gun, I didn't see it." -Mayor Pro Tem Dan Chiles

7. "...right now there is no single smoking gun, unless you want to point to the election of 1958 ..." -Mayor Jim O'Neal

I do not believe anyone is looking for a single cause of the pension's current shortfall, especially not those who have spent a great deal of time and energy in examining and researching the issue.

Who does believe there is a single cause of the shortfall, a single culprit to "hang," or a single "smoking gun?" If certain entities can characterize those seeking answers in such a light, they can make involved and time-contributing citizens seem ridiculous, marginalize them, discredit them and in the process make citizens who seek answers to legitimate questions fearful of asking those questions.

In fact, Alternate Pension Task Force Member Fred Ellison's actual statements, from that same article, never imply he believes there is a single "smoking gun" cause of the pension shortfall.

"Having studied the pension plan for more than a year, he (Ellison) recently has focused on increases to the pension multiplier granted in the 1990s as a primary source of the current shortfall." -attributed to Ellison by Amos Bridges News-Leader article page 1

"He (Ellison) thinks increasing the pension multiplier -- the number multiplied by years of service and final salary to determine a retiree's monthly pension -- from 2 percent to 2.5 percent between 1991 and 1993 could account for much of the shortfall." -attributed to Ellison by Amos Bridges, News-Leader article page 2

Every citizen of Springfield who has even the smallest interest in the pension issue must resoundingly cast aside the implied strawman argument that intelligent people, who would like to understand the historical actions which caused our police and fire pension fund to become so dismally underfunded, are simply a lynch mob looking for someone to hang or a single "smoking gun" cause of the short fall.

Are such implications being made to try to shift the focus away from a complete understanding of the pension issue, including an understanding of the mistakes that were made, because our City officials, City Council, Pension Board and Police and Fire Pension Task Force find it uncomfortable to hold accountable their own predecessors?

I'm tempted to agree that Mayor O'Neal, Pension Task Force Chairman Fenstermaker and the Task Force might have a point that understanding how the pension got into the troubled state it is in today will not, necessarily, change the ultimate recommendations made by the task force but, how can we know all the contributing problems will be addressed by the recommended solution if we do not know what all of the contributing problems were?

The larger issue is the public's right to know and understand how it happened. In fact, as reported in the News-Leader article in Sunday's paper, the Mayor agreed such questions are legitimate, even as he mischaracterized the motives of those who are asking them.

"Mayor Jim O'Neal, who with Councilman Dan Chiles helped organize Ellison's meeting with city staff, said he understands the desire to find a clear reason for the current predicament.

"I think it's a legitimate question," O'Neal said. "It was attempted to be answered during the campaign but evidently not to the satisfaction of all voters.""

Some educated people believe that knowing the answers, all the complicated answers, to how the police and fire pension plan became so underfunded, and having those involved in overseeing the pension plan's management during the decline of the pension plan's funded ratio, recognize, admit errors, and take responsibility for them, would go a long way toward healing the wounds inflicted on the citizen taxpayers of Springfield so that they might be better prepared to accept and support whatever recommended and approved solution the task force recommends and the City Council approves.

And, just an aside, when are City officials and newspaper reporters going to stop playing silly games, mischaracterizing the thoughts, motives and concerns of the citizens of this city in a, seeming, effort to downplay, marginalize, and diminish taxpayer's concerns?

If, as O'Neal stated in Sunday's newspaper article, these are legitimate questions, then they are legitimate questions, period. Since I have yet to hear any citizen who has spent serious time examining the issue make any statement to suggest they expect to find a single cause or a single individual to blame for the pension's underfunding, I do not believe they exist so, why is it being suggested in what is, supposedly, a straight news report, mind you, they do exist? Who are they? Bring them, quote them.

Anyone who has spent any time at all looking at this complicated issue understands there have been many contributing causes to the pension plan's reduction in funded ratio.

Statements such as those found in the News-Leader's Sunday article were unnecessary, and served no purpose, unless it was an underlying desire to characterize those seeking answers to serious questions as some sort of fire and brimstone lynch mob looking for someone to tar, feather, and run out of town on a rail.

Hogwash! There is a very small handfull of people in this City who have taken the time to study, research and try to understand all the contributing factors that caused the pension to be in the state it is in today. It isn't necessary to tar and feather any one, and especially not those who are seeking answers to these complicated but, legitimate questions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

July 27, Springfield City Council Meeting Agenda Online; Limited Opinion on Pension Task Force

Read the upcoming Council Meeting Agenda here.

I've had so much on my mind, I haven't known where to start. I feel pulled in several directions at the moment....

I attended the first Pension Task Force Town Hall meeting on Tuesday night. The main thing I'd say, is that I wasn't all that impressed with their presentation.

It appears the task force has come to a lot of conclusions but, what is not clear is how they came to those conclusions. While I understand how complicated the pension issue is, I thought the public would be receiving a more exhaustive report than what was received on Tuesday evening.

I'm not sure the public will be satisfied with recommendations unless there is a much better understanding about what the task force went through in order to rule out a number of alternatives, and arrive at those recommendations.

For anyone who is interested in my opinion, that's really about all I have to say about it for now. I'm sure everyone who reads this blog has been keeping up on the issue themselves or has read Amos Bridges accounts of the meetings in the News-Leader.

I'll be back soon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

City Council Meetings Still begin at 6 p.m. for the Time Being; City-Owned Property Sales: No "Windfall" for the Pension Fund

Nor will incremental sales tax revenues represent "a windfall" in the short term; it's all in the measurin' stick used

I was looking over this article in the "Springfield News-Leader" Sunday morning, and thought I would share a little fact picked up at a recent City Council luncheon.

Contained in the article is information pertaining to the sale of surplus City owned property, a small portion of which, said Deputy City Manager Evelyn Honea, would actually be eligible to benefit the police and fire pension fund because, revenue gained from such sales rarely may apply to the general fund. Any contribution on the part of the City to the pension fund has general revenue as its source.

But, back to my first point, which isn't an earth shaking revelation but, certainly worth noting.

The article reminded readers, who might want to be present for the discussion pertaining to the 900 City owned properties, that:

"The meeting starts at 6 p.m. but public hearings begin an hour later."

In an earlier, June 23, City news-release, plans to hold the Monday night meetings, beginning at 6 p.m. rather than the usual 7 p.m. start time, were announced. Mayor Jim O'Neal said the Council would try the new time for two months, and later decide if they wanted to continue the meetings with the start time of 6 p.m. or return to a 7 p.m. time schedule.

After the first meeting's trial of the 6 p.m. start time, however, there was a general consensus of the City Council to NOT continue that trial 6 p.m. start time after the trial period had run its course.

Bottom line: Those wanting to attend City Council meetings on Monday evenings should expect them to continue to start at 6 p.m., for the time being, until it is announced otherwise, however, if the Council does not change its mind between now and the end of the two month trial period, we can expect the Council will return to the historic 7 p.m. meeting start time.

Pension Fund "Windfalls" Elusive

A secondary, and perhaps more earth shaking subject, is the subject of the surplus properties which could be sold to the benefit of the general fund, and, in turn, be eligible for placement into the police and fire pension fund.

Honea has stated all along that of the, now known, 900 City owned properties, few of them will be eligible for use to benefit the pension plan if sold but, still unknown is the actual number of city owned properties which could be sold to benefit that plan.

Unclear is the percentage rate of the 900 properties, and the total amount of acres to which Honea refers. Often, City Managers and City Council members kick around figures they have been conditioned to think are miniscule amounts, and perhaps they are small amounts if taken case by case but, as a whole?

When Ms. Honea tells a newspaper reporter such property sales are, "...certainly not going to be a windfall for the pension fund," I'm inclined to want more facts before I am ready to agree. Honea's definition of a "windfall" and Joe and Josephine Public's definitions of a "windfall" might be two different things. I suspect it's easy to lose site of that when one is used to adjusting a City government budget representing millions of dollars in taxpayer funds.

At the June 29 Council meeting, Council approved the ongoing acceptance of donations to the pension fund from "Blue Noodle LLC" with the passage of Council Bill 2009-149:

"Representatives of the Blue Noodle LLC have expressed a desire to make periodic donations to the City of Springfield Police Officers and Fire Fighters Retirement System."

Most of the citizens of this City would see these periodic donations as a step in the right direction, although it might be said they represent no windfall for the pension fund.

The Pension Task Force will likely recommend some sort of sales tax to the Council for their consideration, maybe even more than one sales tax option. None of those sales taxes will represent a "windfall" for the pension fund, depending upon how they are characterized. As a monthly sales tax contribution they will seem like miniscule amounts, no doubt, but, as a plan over the course of 5 or 10 years, the sales tax revenue has a chance of making a real difference in the funded ratio of the pension fund.

As an aside, when my husband and I, ocassionally, get upside down at the bank, it isn't usually caused by us making a huge lump sum payment on a bill or for a purchase. It's the little things that nickle and dime us to death. Little things add up in reducing a bank account, little things can add up in increasing the amount of a pension fund too.

Besides all that, a "windfall" is a matter of personal perspective, in my opinion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Police & Fire Pension Task Force to Hold Two Town Hall Meetings

The City of Springfield just issued a news release about two upcoming Town Hall meetings hosted by the Police and Fire Pension Task Force. I would have just posted a link but, the news release is not yet available at their Web site:

July 10, 2009

News Release

For Immediate Release

The public is invited to attend two town hall meetings hosted by the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizens' Task Force on Tuesday, July 21, and Thursday, July 30, 2009. The Task Force is seeking citizen input on a list of possible recommendations before it begins drafting a final report in August.


The July 21 meeting will be held from 6:30-8:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers at Historic City Hall, 830 Boonville Ave. This meeting will be televised live on CityView on Mediacom channel 23, digital channel 80. The July 30 meeting will be held from 6:30-8:30 p.m. in the auditorium at the Springfield Art Museum, 1111 Brookside Drive. The airtimes for this meeting will be announced. Video from both meetings also will be posted on the City Web site.

The City Council formed the Pension Fund Task Force to conduct an in-depth study of possible methods to fund the more than $200 million shortfall in the Police-Fire Pension Fund. The group consists of 15 voting members and a non-voting chairperson, Mr. Jerry Fenstermaker. It began meeting in late April. As part of its work, the task force formed three subcommittees to study issues from three perspectives. The subcommittees examined possible recommendations
on what would be in the best interest of the Pension Fund and its beneficiaries, the taxpayers, and the City itself.

Fenstermaker and the chairs of the three subcommittees will discuss all of the possible recommendations the task force is considering thus far and how they arrived at these conclusions, then lead discussion about the recommendations. Other members of the task force also will be present at the town hall meetings.

Citizens can learn more about the Task Force's work and the Pension Fund by visiting the Pension Fund page on the City's Web site....

Here's the link to the Pension Task Force's Web site, Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizens' Task Force

Alternate to the Pension Task Force Proposes Police and Firefighter Retention Idea

Fred Ellison carbon copied me on an email he sent to the Mayor and City Council today. Ellison is an alternate member of the Police and Fire Pension Task Force. In the email, he presented a very intriguing idea for retaining police and firefighters who have reached retirement eligibility.

Following is Ellison's email:

Mayor and Council Members:

It has come to my attention that Police and Fire employees who exceed the period of employment for the maximum years of service are still required to contribute to the Pension Plan. This is a direct disincentive to any potential decision to continue their employment.

If the employee contribution for these retirement eligible employees was discontinued, this would be equivalent to an 11.35% raise and could provide the incentive for these very valuable employees to continue working for a few more years. This could be particularly helpful during the current personnel shortages in these two vital service departments.

I believe that this change is also a matter of fundamental fairness from the standpoint that when they stop receiving any additional benefits, they should no longer be required to make contributions.

Fred B. Ellison

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Recommended Reading 15: Reducing Police-Fire Pension Benefits Off the Table?

Pension reduction not among ideas News-Leader.com Springfield News-Leader

An excerpt:

"During recent small- group discussions, members of at least two of the three task force subcommittees have said the attempt (to reduce benefits) could be more trouble than it's worth...."

While the New-Leader article reports several members noted, "Nothing's yet set in stone," and further relayed one of the task force members as stating if members of the public request further study during town hall meetings the task force can take another look at the issue, and could "stop in our tracks and backtrack," for the moment, they don't appear to even be considering recommending any reductions in pension benefits for consideration by the City Council.

A fresh look at their "charge" might be a good idea. One of the bullet points in the Police-Fire Pension Task Force's Charge is that they are to:

"Provide written recommendations to the Mayor and City Manager, ranking the one or more recommended options that should be considered, recognizing that City Council must ultimately approve any proposal. In addition to ranking the Task Force's recommendations, the report should indicate the advantages and disadvantages of each option considered from the perspective of the citizen, the City as employer, the employee, and the pension system."

Maybe it is just me but, I think the task force should include reduction of benefits in their final recommendations, what benefits the task force might recommend be reduced, and fully document the pros and cons of such a move. In fact, I think they owe it to our elected City leaders to leave that option on the table as City Council looks toward solving the pension problem by providing the means for a healthy plan for our police and firefighters for the future.

The final decision is something to be considered and determined by the City Council, not the Police-Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Attorney for Springfield Police Officers and Firefighters: Attempting to Influence Public Opinion?

In a move which might be perceived as an effort to influence public opinion regarding pension funding recommendations, even before the pension task force has begun deliberations as a Committee of the Whole, the police and fire associations' retained attorney addressed the public through a column to the local daily paper. In the column, the attorney issued a warning to the public.

The Springfield Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizens Task Force is scheduled to begin making team presentations during a Committee of the Whole meeting Wednesday evening. Those team presentations will begin the task force's discussions, intended to narrow the options they might include as part of their eventual recommendations for addressing the underfunded police and fire pension fund.

Mayor Jim O'Neal has asked the task force to present more than one recommendation to be considered as a potential solution for the ailing pension plan.

Attorney Dan Tobben's letter, published as a "Voice of the Day" column in the "Springfield News-Leader" on Tuesday, warned:

"The task force or the council may ask you, the voters, to do a "hatchet job" on your police officers and firefighters and the benefits they have earned through "a vote of the people." This may itself be illegal and definitely will be challenged in court. ..."

Mr. Tobben is the head of litigation for the law firm Danna McKitrick, P.C.

On May 6, Tobben spoke to the pension task force (click the link <<< to watch). At that meeting, Tobben suggested, as a part of a worst case scenario, should the City not honor past promises made to employees of the police and fire departments, liquidation of the City's assets could occur, even including the sale of Springfield's Historic City Hall.

The entire meeting was a bit over 2 hours. You can move the video forward to watch Tobben or, watch the other presentations leading up to his remarks and the question and answer period that followed.

Source of link to task force video: Springfield Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force Web site

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Police-Fire Pension Citizens Task Force Agenda for Wednesday, June 17

The meeting will be held in the Busch building's 4th Floor Conference Room at 6 p.m. Wednesday night.

The tentative agenda includes: 1) Approve minutes from June 10 meeting; 2) Task Force Sub-Committees discussion; 3) Committee of the Whole - Start Team Presentations and; 4) Any and all matters that come before the Committee.

When the Task Force Sub-Committees hold discussions, they split up. Team One, led by Harmison, will move to the 5th Floor Conference Room; Team Two, led by Horton, will move to the 3rd Floor Conference Room and; Team Three, led by Wagoner, will move to the 2 West Conference Room.

Reminder from the City:

"In accordance with ADA guidelines, if you need special accommodations when attending any City meeting, please notify the City Clerk's Office at 864 -1443 at least 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting."

Source: Director of Public Information Louise Whall

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SOS Spokesman Mark Wright's Email, Declining Invitation to Speak to the Springfield Police Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force

Tom Martz's summary presentation

The other day, I had a short-but-sweet discussion with Darin Chappell in the comment section of another entry. In that entry, Chappell had already explained his personal reasons for declining to present the Save Our Springfield (SOS) pension plan proposal to the Police and Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force, after City Manager Greg Burris extended an invitation for them to do so.

When Chappell noted an email, written by Mark Wright to the City Manager's office, declining the invitation on behalf of the SOS spokesmen, I thought the public would be interested in reading that email so, I requested a copy of it.

Chappell had noted, "The very nice email response that Mark Wright sent back to Mr. Burris was much more than a simple declination, by the way. It says quite a bit about the City in general, and Mr. Burris in particular, that he seems to be characterizing our decision as he is."

Technically, I can't agree that Burris characterized SOS by not elaborating upon the reason behind the group's decision not to present their plan to the task force. It really isn't Burris' job to explain the reasons behind the actions of SOS, but, that said, I suspect Burris knew the negative nuance of, repeatedly, noting he had invited SOS to speak to the task force but they'd declined, while failing to share the reason for that declination.

Eventually, Mark Wright forwarded the email response to me.

I was surprised to find out, according to Mark Wright, no member of the press or media ever contacted him to find out why SOS decided against speaking to the task force, but, rather than holding Burris accountable for the negative nuance present, due to no reason for SOS' decision ever being published, I prefer to remedy the problem by publishing the reason here, and doing what I can do, in my small corner of the world, to make those reasons available to the public.

I do wonder if media representatives felt the public would not be interested in why the SOS group, after much public fanfare about their plan, chose not to present it to the task force. I don't even know if Burris, in an earlier interview with the News-Leader, might have elaborated on the subject. It is possible he did but the News-Leader failed to include that portion of his interview in their article. Who knows? But, according to Wright, "After Mr. Burris’ letter to the editor, when he mentioned we declined the invitation to speak to the task force, I expected some inquiries and never received any. You are the first. "

Tom Martz, who had signed on to endorse the SOS plan during his campaign for the City Council General Seat A, did make a presentation regarding the SOS plan to the Pension task force. In an email from Martz, he gave a summary of his remarks to the task force, which were delivered on Thursday, May 21.

"In this presentation I gave a complete review of the S.O.S. plan and expanded upon that by pointing out many of the pitfalls of the pension plan and the 1 percent tax, which the city tried to pass in February," Martz wrote. "With the opportunity given to me by the S.O.S group, in allowing me to present the pension solvency plan, along with the City Manager and the Pension Citizen Task Force, I believe they were given an opportunity to see that tax increases should not always be the first and final solution to government problems."

Anyway, it's kind of old news now but, I think the public might still be interested in that email so, following is the body of the April 30, email, SOS spokesman Mark Wright sent to the City Manager's office after Burris relayed an invitation for them to address the task force. I have omitted the email addresses and date and time stamps:

Darren and I are grateful for the invitation by Mr. Burris, however we have concluded that SOS cannot add anything of substance to our solvency solution for the Fire-Police Pension Fund. SOS respects the valuable time of task force members and has no desire to impede their important work by rehashing our well publicized plan.

Our goal was to bring forward a temporary alternative proposal that would be tax-rate neutral, which would allow city leaders time to come up with a permanent solution to the solvency issue. We are humbled by the fact that our proposal led to the creation of the task force and equally humbled that our proposal is under consideration. If the SOS solvency plan is chosen or a superior plan is adopted by the task force, we will be satisfied.

We sincerely wish city leaders and task force members the best of success as they seek out a solution to a challenging problem facing our city. SOS is confident that when the citizens of Springfield unite behind one common effort we can conquer any obstacle.

May God bless,

Mark Wright
Darin Chappell

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Councilman Doug Burlison Offers Pension Task Force Proposal for Consideration

Breaking...

Councilman Doug Burlison shared a proposal with Mayor Jim O'Neal, his peers on the City Council and the City Manager's office this evening via email. He also cc'd a myself and another local blogger, along with other media and news outlets in Springfield.

Following is his proposal:

Four months have nearly passed since we, as a community, went to the polls to decide whether or not to approve a 1-cent sales tax to fix or Police and Fire pension fund. By a slim majority, the vote was against this proposal at that time. Disregarding the one-time funds that have been contributed, instead of just over $13 million being injected into the fund by a new tax, we've let the liability get almost $4.5 million deeper in debt without it. It is undeniable that this is the position that we, as a city, find ourselves in right now. We have created a Task Force to dive into this issue, to evaluate different approaches, and to make a final recommendation for City Council to act upon.

As the citizen who called for an audit of this city, and now as a member of it's governing council, I have gone through a cycle of skepticism, investigation, and evaluation of my own. I am very appreciative of having a resource like this Task Force available to take an in-depth, independent look at the various proposals offered, and in light of that, I would offer up another proposal to introduce to the table. I would ask the Task Force to analyze the impact of a new, one-time (5 year) 3/4-cent sales tax, plus one-half of the next potential renewal of the 1/4-cent Capital Improvements Projects tax to supplement the pension fund. Perhaps this, coupled with other factors that the Task Force will recommend, could get us to the once-and-for-all remedy the situation requires.

Beyond just crunching the numbers, I am also aware of the political considerations to keep in mind:

*This community has a very low appetite/capacity for new taxes.

*Job # 1 for any level of government around here is public safety, with citical public infrastructure coming in at a close second.

*We want to solve this pension problem, not just put a band-aid on it so our kids will have to take care of what we couldn't.

*We have to be competitive with other cities if we want to maximize our police/fire training dollars, and to increase the retention of qualified personnel.

I personally feel like the ladies and gentlemen of our public safety departments have their finger on the pulse of what it takes to actively compete with other municipalities for (and to keep) good quality police and fire officers. To affect a workable solution to this problem will require their input. To place their negotiated benefits under the microscope may stop a couple of minor fiscal leaks, of which the pension board has already made recommendations to repair, but it won't make a dent in the big picture. The overall problem, however, will take great fiscal effort, and perhaps the swallowing of some political pride to handle effectively. Simply satisfying the state statute is nowhere near a long-term fix, and the problem with not handling this completely now, will absolutely result in the price tag getting much higher. If we continue to not adequately address this problem, lawyers and judges are going to force a solution on us, and that price tag will be astronomical.

It is with these thoughts in mind that I respectfully request the Police and Fire Pension Task Force to consider this proposal.

Thank you for your consideration,
--Doug Burlison

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Allow Newspaper to Do its Job, Mr. City Manager

In a rather scathing "Voice of the Day" letter in the "Springfield News-Leader" on Sunday, City Manager Greg Burris asked the Queen City's daily paper of note to "Allow task force to do its job." The task force the headline was referring to was the Police and Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force.

My suggestion to Mr. Burris would be, let the newspaper do its job, and consider giving your own Public Information Office some instruction on how to better perform their jobs.

Burris' letter followed, almost a month to the day, what I, personally, would call a tantrum, thrown by past Mayor Pro Tem Gary Deaver, in which he stated he was planning to wait until after he left his Council post to come back to a City Council meeting and "...discuss some of the coverage that I've felt that we've received on issues...in the past," in News-Leader editorials.

The News-Leader's quick response to Deaver's charges of inaccuracy on the part of past editorials, which were most recently, at the time, pertaining to a trash hauler agreement between the city and its two largest trash companies, was answered swiftly in a March 25, News-Leader "Our Voice" column:

"Oddly, he [Deaver] had never asked us to clarify anything in numerous news stories and editorials, and he didn't ask to write anything to offer another opinion himself. He also never sought a correction on the issue...."

Sunday's letter from Burris carried on this, apparent, traditional view on the part of the city, it's officials and certain Council members, by further displaying "the City's" disdain for communicating with the public through, what should be, or, at least, could be, the most valuable medium available to them, the daily paper. Burris wrote:

"After I was asked to put together a citizen task force to study the police/fire pension issue, our city staff made a conscious decision to step back and let the task force do its work rather than engaging in the News-Leader's various pronouncements about the pension plan.

"I remain hesitant about responding, mainly because I don't want my response to infer that I'm giving the material credibility. But Sunday's self-aggrandizing editorial warrants comment for the sake of the task force and our public-safety employees."

I would say to Mr. Burris, much more credibility is given to editorial comments in a newspaper when they are not rebutted, if wrong, than when they are rebutted.

The public wants the facts. The public wants the truth and, I have found, is quite ready to accept it when it is shared. Don't blame the newspaper for the City Management and the City Council's unwillingness to engage in discussion and to correct mistakes, when made. You, and the City, have no one to blame but yourselves for not being forthcoming when erroneous information is shared. Take responsibility for that fact.

When the public hears nothing from you, your employees or elected superiors, after faulty information is shared, they have no recourse but to believe that the information must have been correct.

But, all that said, I wonder, why is the City Manager of the City of Springfield writing letters to the News-Leader? Why aren't errors or misrepresentations (if they exist) being dealt with by the Public Information Office when they occur? Why are such errors, presumably, based on Mr. Deaver's comments, allowed to continue to build suspicion in the minds of the public with no rebuttal or correction on the part of the City?

Springfield's City Manager should let the daily newspaper of note in Springfield do its job and should be asking his own Public Information Office to do their jobs, they are under the manager's authority, the writers of News-Leader are not. Perhaps, instead of expecting writers of the newspaper to cease sharing information with the public about the pension issue, the City Manager should be addressing the City's Public Information Office about dealing with these issues as they arise? Is this a task beneath them?

What is the purpose of the meetings of the Police & Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force being open to the public? Why do they have their own City of Springfield provided Web page, with links to documents of the task force available for download to the public? Because, as the City's elected, appointed, and hired servants have inferred, they want the public to be informed or, because it's the law and since they have no choice anyway they might as well put a good spin on it? I ask these questions because the public keeps hearing lip service from "the City" about how citizen input is desired, about how the city desires this process, and that process, to be open and transparent but, sorry, actions speak much louder than words.

Blaming the newspaper, because they have done their job in reporting about city issues, including the police and fire pension issue, for police and firefighters retiring at the first available opportunity? Really? If confusion about the issue is to blame, it would behoove the City Manager's office and City Council to clear up the confusion. If, as Burris wrote, the News-Leader's editorials are culpable for, "scaring firefighters and police officers into retiring as soon as they hit eligibility," one would think the City Manager would wish to make addressing errors within those editorials a top priority.

I'm one person. I don't have a staffed Public Information Office behind me but, when I see a mistake in the News-Leader, somehow, free of charge, and all alone, with no support, I manage to report it at this Web log. It's amazing to me that the City, with all its staff, can't manage to do what I, often, do for nothing, all alone, here at this blog.

Take responsibility for those under your charge, Mr. Burris.

The News-Leader is not under your charge, but, would benefit from the attention of your staff when they need to make corrections. If there is not enough money in the general fund to properly address important issues of the City, hmmm, how did we get there? Oh, I know, it's the News-Leader's fault. Maybe, had they not reported on the State audit of the City, that pension sales tax might have passed in February, then the City could have afforded to address public relations through its Public Information Office.

Funny, everything bad that happens is, often, someone else's fault these days.

Allow the media in this city to do its job, which, whether you like it or not, happens to be reporting on your actions, the actions of those under you and the actions of those who are your elected superiors.

If the City's message is not accurately being portrayed or the City is having trouble retaining personnel, perhaps the City needs to look within.

In the end, I think everyone is just trying to do their jobs.

It continues to trouble me that the City appears to prefer taking an adversarial attitude toward the print press in this city, rather than working with them, to make sure factual information is shared and properly understood.

Oh, one more issue. Burris mentioned, again:

"We invited the Save Our Springfield group the News-Leader champions to present its plan, which includes a "bias" toward a tax trade-off. (They declined the offer)."

JackeHammer sent out an email inquiry to one of the spokesmen of the SOS group the City Manager claims the News-Leader "champions," inquiring about why the group declined to make a presentation to the Pension Task Force. Darin Chappell responded to that inquiry on Friday or Saturday:

"I cannot speak for everyone, but I decided not make a presentation on my own account for two reasons:

First, the SOS plan was never designed to be a permanent solution to the problem. It was only supposed to offer a temporary band aid to allow the City time to do what they are now doing. So, going before the task force to tell them what they really cannot use for the final solution seems a bit pointless.

Second, I do not think that it would serve SOS for me to be the one to make the presentation, even if it needed to be made, given the recent events between the City and myself.

So, for both of those reasons, I told Mark Wright that I would not be presenting anything.

In the final analysis, I believe we accomplished all we set out to do in that we got the people thinking about other options besides tax increases...got the City to establish the task force...got the Mayor to sign on to much of our platform (including reopening the police and fire academies), and most importantly, let the City know that we're watching."

A later email inquiry posted to Mr. Wright has not been answered.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'Sobering' Pension Discussions Deserve a Second Look for Clarification

If you, like me, were intrigued by a few short lines within Wes Johnson's article in today's "Springfield News-Leader": "'Sobering' pension fund issues discussed," then, you, like me, want to know more about Mehlville, Missouri's Firefighter pension fund.

Johnson wrote:

"Task force chairman Jerry Fenstermaker asked Zwiener to explain how one community, the town of Melville, solved its firefighter pension fund shortfall.

Zwiener said the fire district's trustees looked at their funding shortfall and decided to simply stop paying future benefits.

"They switched to a defined contribution plan," similar to a 401(k) , and that switch was upheld in court, Zwiener said."

Well, with a little assistance from a reader of "JackeHammer," what I found out is that "Melville" is Mehlville and it is in Missouri. I read a few articles about the Mehlville suit and decision, and I sent off some questions to actuary Michael Zwiener, thinking there was more to the story than what I, and others, read in the News-Leader this morning.

"The pension fund is sponsored by the Mehlville, Missouri Fire Protection District. What that fund did was cease the future accrual of benefits," Zwiener wrote in an email response. "The benefits of retirees were not affected. The benefits of active members earned to date were not affected. What ceased was the accrual of additional benefits after the change date, which I believe was March 2006 (guessing). In lieu of post 2006 pension accruals, the District installed a defined contribution plan."

Zwiener said Aaron Hilmer was the key player in the changes to Mehlville's pension plan. Hilmer was elected to the Mehlville Fire District Board in 2005, along with Bonnie Stegman, to whom Hilmer gives partial credit for the changes.

In a "Budget & Tax News" article, published by the Heartland Institute in November, 2007, Hilmer wrote about the case.

"The August 27 ruling by St. Louis County Circuit Court Judge Thea A. Sherry struck down a lawsuit by the local firefighters union challenging the MFPD's decision to terminate its defined benefit plan and put every employee, current and future, in a defined contribution plan," Hilmer wrote.

He also stated the ruling set an important precedent, " for government bodies that hope to reduce pension costs and give employees more control over and flexibility in their retirement programs."

Hilmer wrote, after he and Stegman, of the Mehlville Fire District Board were elected, they began to work toward reforming the pension and disability plan.

"We hired a disability insurance provider to take over the disability portion, and after two years of union-filed lawsuits against that move, the change became final earlier this year when the Missouri Supreme Court declined to hear the case."

An email query to Assistant Fire Chief David Hall has not yet been answered. I will update should Hall respond to my request for a comment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

May the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force Web site be with you

The City has provided a Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force Web site where documents can be downloaded and you can keep your finger on the pulse of the force.

I'll also place a link for it in the side bar.

Now, May "the Force" Be With You.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Timeline of the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force Selection

Via emails, and even a couple of phone calls, it has come to my attention there was some confusion regarding the process of selection of the 6 final members of the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force (or 7, including the Chair and Vice Chair selections).

I tried to clarify that process to the best of my ability in this previous entry but, I still received another phone call Friday evening from a citizen who had a lot of questions. He felt it might be helpful to have the Second-Round Applications list posted and still, further clarification.

I went directly to a newly elected member of the City Council to fill in some of the blanks on the process, and to assist in clarifying the issue, which appeared to revolve around whether all of the applicants were included in the process of selection undertaken by our newly elected and ongoing members of the City Council.

Councilman Nick Ibarra thought the confusion might be due to multiple lists, the original, plus the list of new applicants generated by the reopening of the application process for a brief window of time, immediately after the election of the new Council.

"The confusion, I believe, may be that there were two lists distributed. The lists were separated with one list being the original group of applicants, and the other being the new group. But all applicants, both old and new, were given to Council to be considered," Ibarra wrote in an email.

Based on information received in City news releases, from CityConnect entries, my own past reporting and information provided by Mr. Ibarra, this would be the timeline of the process:

Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen Task Force Selection Timeline

> February 26, 2009, applicants were solicited for the purpose of forming the Task force, with a deadline of 5 p.m. March 9. (City news release, "Police Fire Task Force and Voter Survey")

> March 10, the City's Web log, CityConnect, posted an entry stating the first application period was closed, along with a memo sent from City Manager Greg Burris to the City Council with recommendations for the selection process. (CityConnect: "Burris Memo - Task Force Recommendations")

> March 24, CityConnect issued another entry specifying the City Council, prior to the election of April 7, would choose part of the task force but, reserve some selections for the Council which would be voted in on April 7. (CityConnect: "Council To Begin Task Force Selection Process")

> March 31, at a City Council luncheon, City Manager Greg Burris made his recommendations to the (previous) City Council regarding applicants. Also included was a draft "charge" of the task force. Council could either approve Burris' recommendations or chose their own from the list of applicants for the task force. The City Manager requested they turn in their selections by 5 p.m. April 3. (CityConnect: "Burris Recommends Task Force Members")

> April 7, eleven applicants were approved to sit on the task force. (JackeHammer: "Police-Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force Approved at City Council Luncheon") Two of the members were later disqualified, due to conflicts of interest, leaving 9 approved members. Those disqualified were Carol Mihalevich and Matt Morrow.

> April 9, the new City Council was sworn in. (City news release: "City Council Swearing-in Ceremony")

> April 10, the pension task force application process was reopened with a deadline for applications of 5 p.m. on April 16, 2009.

An April 20 deadline was set for the incoming and ongoing City Council members to turn in 6 more recommended members each for the police fire task force, so that the results could be tallied in preparation for discussion and selection of 6 more members at the following day's City Council luncheon, April 21.

The City news release, again, dated April 10, stated, "Mayor-elect Jim O’Neal said the new Council will be asked to select six individuals from the new applications, the remaining applicants in the original group of 54, and others who have been recommended by Councilmembers. Individuals who have already submitted applications do not need to re-apply if they still wish to be considered for service on the Task Force." (City news release: "Pension Task Force Applications Re-opened" (JackeHammer: "Pension Task Force Application Process Briefly Re-Opened")

> April 13, a CityConnect entry reminded citizens they had another opportunity to apply to be a member of the task force. (CityConnect, "Pension Task Force Still Taking Applications")

Author's note: For further insight, I asked Councilman Ibarra what he could tell me about the process between the reopening of the application process on April 10, and the April 21 meeting, in which the Council approved 6 new members to the force:

"The deadline for the second application process was the 16th of April at 5:00 p.m. The following day (April 17) the applications, both old and new, were delivered to me with my regular information drop off from the clerk’s office." Ibarra replied on April 27 (emphasis mine). "Additionally, Mr. Burris had attached a note requesting that Council have their choice of six candidates turned in for a tally by the following Monday at 5:00 p.m. (April 20) to ensure that the list of successful applicants could be discussed at the Tuesday luncheon."

> On April 21, our current City Council members selected 6 more applicants to sit on the task force. The following "Second-Round Applications" list was distributed to the City Council members, (asterisks marking details added by author for clarification):

Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force

Second-Round Applications*
4/21/2009 (Numbers in parenthesis represent the number of votes the applicant received from the currently sitting City Council. If no number appears, the applicant was a new applicant who had applied between April 10 and April 16 but, who received no votes from the current City Council.)

Charles Wayne Bair
Nathan Baker
Lorenzo Baldwin (3)**
Thomas Billings (1)
Burl Brown (1)
Becki Carr
Gordon Elliot (4)**
Fred Ellison (2)
Jerald Fensterbaker (2)
Ed Griesbaum (1)
Louis Griesmer (1)
Donald Gutierrez (1)
Doug Harpool (1)
Jack Hembree (2)
Carl Herd (3)**
Bob Horton (5)**
Nancy Howard (1)
Denny Hyde (5)**
Chris Jackson
Joy Jones
Glen Larson
Michael Lumby
William Mabary
Joe Passanise (1)
Brian Perdue
Mike Ramon (2)
John Reed (1)
Steven Reed
Micah Scott (1)
Mark D. Steele
Andy Stewart
Larry Stock (1)
Bradley Stokes (2)
Brad Sturges
Steven Thomas
David Trippe (5)**
Katherine Trombetta (1)
Derek White (1)
Daniel Williams

*My understanding is, this list represents all of the new applicants who applied after the new City Council reopened the application process, whether the applicants received any votes or not. Applicants from the previously known list of applicants were included on the "Second-Round Applicants" list only if they received a vote from the current City Council, which would have been turned in by the City Council by 5 p.m. on April 20, in preparation for the luncheon on the 21st.

**Mr. Burris recommended the 6 names which received 3 to 5 votes from the current City Council, be approved and added to the existing 9 task force members to make a force of 15. Councilman Doug Burlison made a motion Burris' recommendation be accepted and those 6 recommended applicants were approved unanimously by a voice vote of the City Council. (JackeHammer: "Police and Firefighter Pension Task Force Selection Complete")

> On April 22, Mayor Jim O'Neal announced and introduced the Chair and Vice Chair of the police fire pension task force as Jerry Fenstermaker and Jerry Harmison. Fenstermaker will be a non-voting member, according to the City's news release.

The official charge for the task force was posted at CityConnect and a video of the news conference, held by Mayor O'Neal, was aired by the City's TV23, it can also be viewed online by selecting it from the "Special Programming" category link. (City news release: "Police-Fire Task Force Chair, Vice-Chair Named") (CityConnect: "Pension Fund Citizens Task Force Now Set") (JackeHammer: "Updates: Special Council Meeting to be Re-Scheduled; Chair and Vice Chair Appointed to the Pension Task Force")

> April 24, the City announced the first meeting of the task force would take place from 6 to 8 p.m. on April 27. The meeting is open to the public and will be held in the 4th floor conference room at the Busch Municipal Building and will also be accessible for viewing online at TV23's Web site.

Following is the tentative agenda for the first Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force:

TENTATIVE AGENDA

1. Individual introductions
2. Assign members to three teams
3. Deliverables / Assignments
4. Task force communications
5. Next steps

(City news release: "Pension Task Force First Meeting Date")

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Updates: Special Council Meeting to be Re-Scheduled; Chair and Vice Chair Appointed to the Pension Task Force

Mayor Jim O'Neal suggested a special meeting be called to fill Council's vacant Zone 3 seat at the last City Council luncheon. Originally, he called for the meeting to be held on Tuesday, April 28.

The meeting is being rescheduled, the new date has not yet been released but, it will not take place Tuesday, the 28th, due to conflicts in Council scheduling.

Also, last Tuesday, with Council approval of 6 new appointees, the Police and Firefighter Pension Task Force selection was complete, except for the Mayor's naming of a Chair and Vice Chair.

Yesterday, at a specially called news conference, Mayor O'Neal appointed Jerry Fenstermaker as the Chair, and Jerry Harmison as the Vice Chair of the task force. With the addition of Fenstermaker, the task force numbers 16 members however, Fenstermaker is not a voting member.

The City has provided links to the full task force and its formal charge.

Those interested may view the news conference at TV23, by selecting it under the "special programming" link.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mayor O'Neal to Introduce Chair and Vice Chair of Pension Task Force

Mayor Jim O'Neal plans to announce and introduce the Chair and Vice Chair of the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force at 2:30 this afternoon, Wednesday, April 22.

He will also discuss how the Task Force will proceed.

City Manager Greg Burris presented the City Council with his draft, recommended charge for the Police/Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force on March 31.

To access all the entries made concerning the police/fire pension to date at the City's Web log, City Connect, click this link.

Past entries on the topic, made here, can be located by using the search bar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Police and Firefighter Pension Task Force Selection Complete

Mayor O'Neal to appoint Chair and Vice Chair by Noon Wednesday

*Slightly edited for clarification*

From a list of 39 second round applicants for the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force, the Council unanimously approved names which were recommended by City Manager Greg Burris on Tuesday, to fill the remaining 6 spots on the force.

The "Second-Round Applications" list included all of the new applicants who had applied after the newly elected City Council, along with remaining members, decided to reopen the process. Also included, according to City Manager Greg Burris, were about three or four from the previous list of applicants who had received 3 to 5 votes from the new City Council.

"If you look at the totals, it works out pretty cleanly because there are 6 individuals who received either 3, 4 or 5 votes," Burris said.

Burris recommended those 6 who had received between 3 to 5 votes, "be added to the 9 individuals who were previously selected to create the task force of 15."

After a motion was made by Councilman Doug Burlison to accept Burris' recommendation, the Council unanimously approved the applicants by voice vote.

The new task force members are: Lorenzo Baldwin, Gordon Elliot, Carl Herd, Bob Horton, Danny Hyde and David Trippe

The nine who had been previously selected were: Mary Beth Daniels, Jerry Harmison, Kenneth Homan, James Jeffries, Robert L. Jones, Peggy Kubicek, Charles Munsey, Craig Wagoner and Lloyd Young.

Mayor Jim O'Neal anticipates appointing the Chair and Vice Chair by noon tomorrow, after confirmation is made that the selected applicants will accept the positions.

"Let's make sure everybody accepts the position, nobody's got cold feet, then, once they have all definitely accepted, I will appoint the Chair and Vice Chair tomorrow," O'Neal said.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~