SOS Spokesman Darin Chappell Bristles at Mayoral Candidate's Charge

Through various media and news sources Jim O'Neal, a candidate for Springfield Mayor (and Darin Chappell indicates other candidates, as well), have been leaving the public with the impression they have a "right" to vote for or against the continuance of the 1/4-cent capital improvement sales tax at some point before the tax is scheduled to sunset.

SOS (Save Our Springfield Citizen Coalition) spokesman Darin Chappell disagrees with that characterization, and I tend to agree wholeheartedly with his views on the matter. I heard him define the issue on the Vincent David Jericho Program (link at right under "Newstalk") on Tuesday, and he explained it very well. I am not directly quoting Mr. Chappell but, basically, what he said on Tuesday was that the voters voted on the issue in total when they voted for the tax the last time it was placed on the ballot. What they approved then was that the tax would continue (it had been approved before with a sunset) and would sunset on a date certain. It is entirely up to the City Council to decide whether they will approve the CIP sales tax to be placed on the ballot again at some future date but, let there be no mistake, the voters approved the CIP sales tax WITH a sunset date certain the last time it was approved.

Earlier today, Darin Chappell posted a blog entry at his own blog dealing with the issue, I am taking the liberty of sharing his entry in its entirety here:

"There has been a recent trend among some candidates running for the open positions on the City Council of Springfield, MO as well as for the mayor’s office of the same, which has aggravated me to no end. It is the thought that the Save OUR Springfield citizens’ coalition is trying to take away the “right” of the people to vote on the retention of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) ¼ cent sales tax currently on the City books.

Firstly, I bristle at the very thought that I would ever be in favor of excluding the voice of the people in the processes of governmental action. The concept of Popular Sovereignty (the power to rule being found in the People being governed) is one that is paramount in my political ideology; it is an integral part of my philosophy, and I find it offensive that anyone would suggest otherwise for mere political expediency.

Secondly, it simply is not true…

The SOS plan merely asks the Council Members to be LEADERS! This is not a problem (the police and firefighter pension plan being woefully under funded) that has crept up on us unawares; we have known about this for years, and the Council has done next to nothing about it. We citizens and tax payers who came together under the banner of SOS did so precisely so there would be some kind of discourse undertaken by the City, the police and firefighter unions, and the people of this great city of Springfield. Within that effort, we, respecting the fact that the voters of Springfield had already rejected the tired, old, ready-made answer of the City to raise taxes, determined that we would offer a tax-rate-neutral option by allowing a currently utilized tax to sunset and be replaced by the newly established tax that would be dedicated to fulfilling the responsibilities held by the City in relation to the pension fund.

This is not offered up as an attempt to ignore the will of the people, but rather an expression of it! If a candidate, as some have, signs on to this doctrine we espoused, and that candidate wins the seat for which he is running, then, by extension, the people have spoken that they want the CIP tax to sunset and the City to reinstitute that tax revenue as that which is specifically dedicated to the pension plan.

Those candidates who have been part of the problem in the past (and those signing on to that tried and tired paradigm) are grasping at straws, when they state that we do not want to have the voice of the people heard…we ARE the people! If the City had been doing its job in this matter, our group (truly an ad hoc committee, if ever there was one) would never have needed to be established. We are now told that we need to wait for the findings of the Citizen Task Force that the City is now putting together. Fine…but where was this task force two or three years ago? Would it even have been in the workings today, if it had not been for the pressures exerted upon the City by the SOS group?

People should vote on Tuesday, allowing their voices to be heard as to which pattern of governance they individually desire for the City of Springfield. But please, do not allow the hollow claims of those seeking to silence the voice of the only group to offer an actual solution to the problem thus far. We, the citizens and taxpayers of SOS, want nothing but the voice of the people to be heard on this, or any other issue. Let them hear you on Tuesday!"

--------

For future reference, you will find Mr. Chappell's blog has been added to my blog links.

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

Saving Our Springfield (SOS) Citizen Coalition Spokesman Chappell: "We need time to make a good choice."

SOS spokesman Darin Chappell penned a letter to the Springfield News-Leader which was published as a "Voice of the Day" column in yesterday's paper, "...there have been a few questions and critiques raised that deserve to be answered directly. As one of the spokesmen for the coalition, I would like to do so here," Chappell wrote.

One of the issues Chappell addressed was the true intent of the plan. He noted he felt it was unfair to discount or dismiss the plan based on the fact that it will not bring the plan to a 90 or 100 percent funding ratio for more than twenty years. To be honest, I'm not sure that the 1/4-cent sales tax the group has proposed would provide the momentum, on its own, to ever create enough funding that it would reach the 90 to 100 percent funding level needed in order for the pension system to become self-sufficient but, I don't think that was SOS' intent.

Chappell spelled it out more eloquently, and concisely, in his letter to the public than I could summarize:

"We need not fund the pension at 100 percent (or even 90 percent ), unless the city anticipates a mass retirement of the officers and firefighters in the immediate future. What we do need immediately is to fund the pension at the state-mandated level of 60 percent, thereby giving our City Council the opportunity (and the responsibility) to take further steps to make the fund permanently solvent. We need time to make a good choice, not just the easiest one."

The best I can tell, this alternative solution will simply shore up the plan, protecting our City from action on the part of the State. You see, the State has the ability, if the pension plan is funded below 60 percent, and if the City does not make a full actuarial recommended contribution once in every five years, to seize 25 percent of the City's sales tax revenue (which the State handles) and contribute it to the pension plan on behalf of the City.

SOS' plan, I think, is intended to keep the pension plan funded above the 60 percent level to ensure the State can't take action against the City while other options are considered in a more deliberate way.

Deliberate, good. Rash, bad.

I have no inside knowledge about SOS' alternative plan. Oh, I was aware discussions were being held. Heck, Jericho said as much on his show. I wasn't privy to any of those discussions so, I'm learning about SOS' alternative plan along with everyone else.

I like the idea of slowing things down and taking a more deliberate approach, and besides we don't know what is going to happen tomorrow, let alone between now and April 7, or now and at any point in the future of our City.

Today, the City of Springfield released news that there has been another telecommunications settlement, this time between the City and AT&T Mobility. The City will receive $10.22 million from the settlement.

Here are some details from that news release*:

"Under the settlement agreement approved in a closed City Council session on Tuesday, March 2, AT&T Mobility will pay the City of Springfield $10.22 million, which includes back taxes owed as well as taxes paid under protest that will be released. AT&T will voluntarily pay the gross receipts tax on wireless service going forward.

Mayor Tom Carlson said he will recommend to City Council that the $10.22 million settlement be applied to the Police/Fire Pension Fund. That amount would equal the amount the City underfunded the pension plan during four years from FY2004 to FY2007, plus interest."

So, there's another $10.22 million for the fund that, yesterday, we had no idea we'd have, and according to the release, "Litigation continues with AT&T (landline company that was formerly SBC) and Alltel." (I intend to look into the news release's claim that this takes care of the "interest," on what the City failed to contribute in the past.)

These settlements are good news for the pension fund.

I had some questions about information Mr. Chappell shared regarding the CIP in his letter published in the News-Leader. I have asked questions of the City regarding that particular aspect. I am told I should have answers within 24 - 48 hours of asking them. That's a rule of thumb, according to the Public Information Office's Director, for dealing with "citizen journalist's" requests for information because, citizen journalists are not generally on a "deadline." I wouldn't argue with that. I have no deadline here.

As a disclosure, I recently made the decision not to continue to contribute to the Community Free Press. Their publisher once told me, "I have no magic formula for how I pay people." That was the truth, folks. There was no consistency in how I was paid for my work, and no agreement was forthcoming in regards to my compensation so, with no pending agreement, I made a decision to look at, and for, other options.

Now I have to wait for information from the City, just as every other citizen who has a query has to wait. That simply means I won't be getting preferential treatment because I'm on a deadline. That's okay. I'm among good company. Besides, it usually took 24 - 48 hours to get answers to my more involved questions anyway so, I probably won't notice much of a change.

*For a list of City government news releases from the past 30 days, click on this link.

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