Collective Bargaining "Unit?"

Did a Local Springfield News Paper Article Display an Agenda?

In the Springfield News-Leader article today, "Teachers will vote on contract," first the article reports that Springfield's public school teachers will be voting to approve or reject a contract reached through collective bargaining. The contract will solidify terms and procedures related to wage and benefit increases along with other conditions of employment.

Historically, such an article would have identified the National Education Association (NEA) and the Springfield National Education Association (SNEA) as teachers' unions, but what I observed was that the term "union" was omitted throughout the entire article and not mentioned in any of the sidebar information shared at the News-Leader site. On some occasions in the article, whenever one might have expected to see the word "union," it was replaced by the word "unit" and although the article begins announcing the contract was reached through "collective" bargaining, later, when identified, the "unit" was referred to as simply the "bargaining unit," rather than the collective bargaining unit.

These observations give rise to some questions we should ponder:

Why do you suppose the writer of the article or the editing staff of the News-Leader chose not to identify the National Education Association or the Springfield National Education Association as the unions that they are?

Did the News-Leader writer or editorial staff want to obscure the fact that these are teachers' unions because of recent controversial national union news?

Would such a seemingly careful omission of the term "union" imply whoever is responsible would like to see this action on the part of the SNEA fly under the local radar rather than command any controversial reaction?

Ask yourself those questions, and after you ask them you can judge for yourself whether there is a potential media agenda involved.  I just wanted you to think about it beyond the surface.

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

Springfield City Council DOES Have Input on State and Federal Legislation

At least as long as they retain the service of state and federal lobbyist(s) and Council communicates with legislators

A lot of commentators at the News-Leader's Web site, including the editorial board of the News-Leader itself, are spending time today complaining about a discussion that took place at the City Council meeting on Monday.

The News-Leader editorial board complained that 40 minutes were spent on a topic of discussion that has little to do with Council responsibilities. Commentators chided Councilman Ibarra particularly, and the whole Council in general for wasting time. Most of the commentators are claiming the Council has no input on federal legislation.

This might be a good time to remind the public that the City Council has had paid lobbyists in the past, and may have paid lobbyists today who are tasked with lobbying state and federal governments. Every year the City Council updates and approves a list of your municipality's legislative priorities. The City Council has, and likely still is, using taxpayer funding to pay lobbyists to appeal to state and federal legislators regarding the interests of the City of Springfield, or at least its City officials.

It would be a fallacy to make the claim that our City Council doesn't have any input on state or federal legislation.

Apparently, the City's new legislative priority list for 2010 has not yet been added to the site map at the City's Web site. In 2009, the priority list was introduced, in part, with these words, "The following legislative priorities are established for the 2009 Session of the Missouri General Assembly: Environment and Quality of Life; Economic Development; Finance and Taxation; Municipal Administration and Intergovernmental Relations."

In 2009, I was present at the Finance and Administration Committee meeting when legislative priorities were first discussed. A reduction in the number of lobbyists Springfield retained, due to budget restraints, was also discussed and Springfield's City attorney Dan Wichmer, recommended Springfield not reduce them to zero. I can't remember for sure if Springfield retained one or two (and they called them both state and federal) lobbyists in 2009. I have inquired with the Springfield Public Information Office as to how many lobbyists the City of Springfield is retaining this year, if any. I will update this post when I receive the answer to that query.

In 2006 The Missouri Municipal League (MML) was listed as the client of 3 state lobbyists. In 2007, MML was listed as the client of 2 state lobbyists. The City of Springfield is a member of the Missouri Municipal League (see: National Institute on Money in State Politics). The MML is another way Missouri City Councils and/or City officials have sway over state legislators/legislation.

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

Springfield, We Have a Problem

Internal Auditor Position Should be Filled As Soon as Possible and Practical

If City Manager Greg Burris or City Clerk Brenda Cirtin announced today they would be retiring next week, how much time do you believe would pass before the City Council was discussing how they would go about filling the vacant positions?

Why does it seem the City Council's Internal Auditor position is and has been treated as though it is an unimportant, backburner issue? Because, I propose it has been.

I am fully aware that Ms. Lathrom's passing only occurred one week ago this evening, and I do not mean to sound callous but, I am aware that Ms. Lathrom had been on medical leave for many months prior to her passing, and the internal auditor position, although apparently not as *sexy* as the City Manager position, is an extremely important municipal government position.

I first started writing about the internal auditor position when I was still the City Council/City Government "beat writer" for the "Community Free Press." It's been obvious from the outset that the position simply is not valued in the same way the positions of City Manager and City Clerk are valued and yet, the internal auditor position is one of only three positions whose inhabitor answers directly to the City Council and who the City Council is tasked to hire and fire.

While today's Mayor and City Council look with ingenuity (sic) to a future appointment of a Citizens' Sales Tax Oversight Committee, I wonder when they will fill what I have advocated (in my own way) as a vitally important position within City government that has, in it's very short history, been consistently given only minimal thought and value. Such a position, if utilized properly would make a Citizens Sales Tax Oversight Committee a silly and unnecessary prospect.

Before Lathrom was hired, back in January, 2008, there didn't appear to be much consensus among City Council members as to the potential value of an internal auditor. Councilman Doug Burlison said, "This proposed position (internal auditor) is, in fact, the key to any reforms that City Council may enact in response to the audit." But, then Mayor Tom Carlson, in his State of the City Report, said about the position, "(State Auditors) talked about an internal auditor, and we're going to have one of those, and so, I hope everybody's happy, but it's not that big a deal." (Community Free Press Archive edition June 18, 2008, page 1 article, "City Manager vs. Internal Auditor")

Why is it important?

A March 4, "Springfield News-Leader" "Our Voice" editorial column pointed out the City will lose $63,000 in taxpayer money by holding the CIP tax renewal election in June rather than including it in a legally mandated, already existing, April election. The editorial also pointed out that by skipping over the mandated April, 2010 election and opting to put the measure on a June ballot, it will cost OTC an extra (estimated) $32,000 because they are on the ballot alone.

City leaders gave the "News-Leader" a few reasons for holding the election in June rather than April but, admitted they could have prepared for it and put it on the April ballot if they had chosen to do so. In other words, they could have saved the taxpayer and Ozarks Technical Community College about $95,000 in combined funds.

Apparently, Mayor O'Neal didn't know putting the CIP sales tax question on a June ballot was going to cost the City taxpayers $63,000 more than if they had scheduled it for the April ballot. That alone is, to borrow a phrase from KSGF's old radio talk show host Vincent David Jericho, asinine stupidy...how could the Mayor not know that!? Why wasn't he told!? Would an internal auditor have made a difference? I'd like to think so, IF that internal auditor was valued, with his or her services properly utilized.

I hate to keep repeating the same information but, people! In Section 2.15 of the City Charter it describes the "Investigator," or Council's internal auditor:

"The council may appoint an investigator who shall serve for such term as the council may prescribe. He shall be a certified public accountant or a person specially trained and experienced in governmental or business investigation or administration. His duty shall be to keep the council informed as to the work performed, methods, and financial affairs of the city. He shall not be responsible for the keeping of accounts. He shall make such investigations of the work of all departments of the city and such reports to the council as it shall require. He shall make such other investigations as the council may direct. He shall have access to all books and records of all departments of the city. If the council desires, he shall certify to the correctness of any or all financial reports before the same shall be regarded as official."

After April Lathrom was hired, she wrote her own Policies and Procedures. They were adopted by the City Council on November 10, 2008, (see Council Bill 2008-322/Special Ordinance number 25510) but, even as late as March of last year (2009), then Council candidate Nick Ibarra questioned the efficacy and transparency of the internal auditor's position, and also in March, 2009, Councilman Burlison said, "...we do not interact with April enough, however, that is an issue I'd rather attack with 4 or 5 fresh faces. I'm not suggesting that there is any kind of communication problem, I just feel like we are not doing enough of it. If I was April, I think I would want more contact with my bosses, as well."

Today, I heard from Chair of the Finance and Administration Committee Dan Chiles. The Finance and Administration Committee is the Council Committee that was tasked with oversight of the internal auditor. Chiles seems to still have a bit of appreciation for the position that no one, to date, other than the occupant of the position, has taken very seriously at all, that is if we judge by actions instead of words.

"We haven't talked about a replacement for April. There is a hiring freeze, but I will make the case to hire an internal auditor," Chiles wrote in an email response to my query. "We promised the voters we would create and fill that position, so that is what we should do."

I would suggest to the Springfield City Council that you consider the position not as merely something you promised the voters but, rather as an invaluable and essential asset that you cannot function well without. You wouldn't try to do your job without a City Manager. You wouldn't try to do your job without a City Clerk. Why do you undervalue the essential job of the internal auditor?

The internal auditor in Kansas City, Missouri is known as the "City Auditor." His name is Gary White and he has his own Web page.

"Our goal is to conduct audits that answer questions that matter to people outside of City Hall; that enable the city to reduce, avoid or recover costs; and to alert city officials to potential problems that could undermine the public’s trust in City government," the Web page boasts, among other things.

Just including and since November of 2009, KC's City Auditor has filed two audit reports and two survey memos on his Web site. The documents are available to the public and include: Resolution Tracking, This audit was conducted in order to determine whether city staff are implementing resolutions adopted by the City Council; E-Service Systems Security, This audit was conducted in order to determine the security of the City's e-service systems; Fiscal Year 2010 Second Quarter Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results, This memo reports the second quarter results of the Fiscal Year 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey and; Fiscal Year 2010 Third Quarter Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results, This memo reports the third quarter results of the Fiscal Year 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey.

The Springfield City Council, if it ever decides to take the "investigator" or internal auditor position seriously, will have an invaluable oversight tool for assessing the operations of Springfield City government but, on this account, I'm afraid their eyes will continue to be wide shut.

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

City Should Honor Original Council Pledges

Provide Additional Funding Contribution to the Pension Plan from a Different Source if Legal Opinion Demands it

The "Springfield News-Leader" reported January 27, City Manager Greg Burris is suggesting part of the A T & T telecom settlement money be used to pay a 2.77 percentage point difference to the Tier I police and fire pension plan to take responsibility for decreased employee contributions to the Tier I plan, a result of the plan being shut down to new hires in 2006.

According to the report, the pension board agreed to pay an "Additional Funding Contribution" to support a benefit "enhancement" in 2000. The enhancement allows Tier I police and firefighters to accrue maximum benefits at an accelerated rate, the report stated.

The issue might be considered to be raised fairly since, in 2000, the pension board would have no way of knowing Tier I would be closed in 2006, reducing the additional employee funding contribution to the plan.

I can understand, on one hand, why Burris would feel the City has some responsibility to contribute to the percentage point shortfall under the outlined circumstances but, by offering as one option, A T & T settlement funds as the means of covering the 2.77 percent, when the City Council has already pledged to put the entire settlement amount (and any other telecom settlement proceeds) into the pension plan anyway, could be considered to cut contributions by 2.77 percent, rather than take responsibility for them.

If the City wants to take responsibility for 2.77 percent on behalf of Tier 1-covered employees, then the difference should be paid through a funding source not already pledged to benefit the fund. Using funds already earmarked for the pension plan in the first place could be perceived as just a shell game, rather than a real contribution. One hand takes away, the other hand puts it back, and the 2.77 percent the employees would have contributed is lost in the shuffle, it would simply go away.

Of course, that's just my opinion, which is what the News-Leader reported about Burris' thoughts, that it's just his opinion the City should take responsibility for paying a portion of the additional funding contribution.

The paper reported Burris wants to wait and allow the Citizens' Sales Tax Oversight Committee to offer an opinion before the City Council makes a final decision about it.

The City began soliciting applicants for the Tax Oversight Committee on January 26, 2010. The deadline for turning in applications is 5 p.m., Feb. 9.

But, getting back to the original topic, in another way, it doesn't seem a fair question whether the City should be responsible for a portion of Tier I's "Additional Funding Contribution." While Tier I might not have known in 2000 that in 2006 Tier II would be created and Tier I would be closed, the time for this question would have been better suited to have been raised in 2006, or at least in 2009, when City Council stated at line 182 of resolution #9714 (passed on September 10, 2009 at a public meeting),

"If the tax passes ... The Additional Funding Contribution (AFC) portion of their (police and fire Tier I employees) contribution, as determined by the actuary's experience study, will continue in perpetuity; the additional contribution will sunset when the tax sunsets."

If the City chooses to label a portion of the A T & T settlement money as satisfying 2.77 percent of the additional funding contribution, it will take that much longer for the 3/4-cent pension sales tax to satisfy the pension shortfall and could potentially increase the number of requested extensions of that sales tax.

The News-Leader's Editorial Board also opined, in the January 27, "Our Voice" column, residents should be keeping an eye on the pension issue and that the News-Leader will try to seek answers as to why the City Manager would recommend the Council contribute millions more into the Tier 1 plan, money police and firefighters had already agreed to pay themselves.

One scenario (I'm just supposing) might be that Burris thinks there is a possiblity that if there is a legal challenge brought by the police and fire association/union attorney concerning this additional funding contribution, a judge might rule against the City, ruling the City should contribute the difference. In that case, Burris might want to play it safe and label part of the A T & T settlement money as payment of the 2.77 percent to protect himself and City staff from having to come up with an additional $5 + million in the future.

Certainly, the City manager could be considered crazy for recommending the Council pay a contribution police and fire employees have already agreed to pay but, is he? If he really thought the City could lose in a law suit against them, he might just be (in a self-serving way) "crazy like a fox" because, by recommending, as an option, mind you, part of the A T & T telecom settlement money be labeled as payment of the additional funding contribution, he and other City staff members wouldn't be scrambling to come up with the contribution through potential budget cuts later.

Think about it. The contribution(s), if payment is required from the City rather than Tier I employees, are going to come out of the tax payer's pocket regardless of when and how. Burris could be thinking, 'So, why not make it less painful for me and the City staff responsible for balancing a budget every year?' With a simple slight of hand it could appear $5 + million has been compensated in the fund. The reality is, if it is done using A T & T settlement funds, and the City manager gives up before there is even a legal challenge filed, it is crazy but, it would make his job easier. We need to know, for certain, the motivation for such a recommendation because, the difference is, by using that option, the responsibility is transferred from the collective shoulders of those police and fire employees who benefit from Tier I, and to the shoulders of the tax payer .

Regarding the potential legal question, in my opinion, since there was no objection to the additional funding contribution in 2006, when Tier II was created and Tier I was closed, then that ship should be considered as having sailed but, if there is still a question? There was even a very recent, second chance for police and fire Tier I beneficiaries to object to paying the additional funding contribution. The chance even occurred at a time the pension board, and many police and fire department employees, were fully focused on the pension plan and a highly touted sales tax remedy to its shortfall. You see, in 2009, when Tier I beneficiaries' responsibility to pay the additional funding contribution was reinforced by the passage of Council resolution #9714 in a very public meeting, Tier I employees, again, failed to object to taking responsibility for that contribution.

We really do have to wonder why Burris is offering an opinion that appears to concede this challenge before a challenge has even officially been filed (if it ever gets filed) a position the News-Leader reported was even in opposition to his own legal councel's opinion....

Experience might have been useful? (I'm just askin'...)

Where IS Vincent David Jericho when a girl needs him!? ;)

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

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.

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

Nuisance, Nuisance, Everywhere

"Though Police Chief Lynn Rowe said City Council had come up with the (nuisance) ordinance in order to deal with specific nuisance properties, Council was also reluctant to deprive people of their property without due process." - Community Free Press, DEC. 17, 2008 - JAN. 13, 2009 issue

In light of today's "Springfield News-Leader" article regarding City Attorney Dan Wichmer's letter and Reverend Rice's response concerning neighbors' allegations of misuse of the property at 806 N. Jefferson, or Veterans Coming Home, I felt the article I wrote for the "Community Free Press" regarding similar allegations might shed a bit of light on what the City is able to do or not do in the case of allegations of nuisance properties. Readers will find that CFP article below this entry. (And I have to wonder if neighbors of Veterans Coming Home are being made aware of how little the City can actually do to enforce the nuisance ordinance)

In the letter City Attorney Dan Wichmer wrote to Reverend Larry Rice, Wichmer referenced Springfield City Code sections 74-391 and 74-392. Wichmer noted, "Under these code sections, any property harboring a nuisance could be subject to closure for up to 1 year."

Wichmer then "strongly encourage(d)" Reverend Rice to stop activities not permitted and take action to eliminate activities which were a nuisance to businesses in the area. Wichmer wrote, "Failure to take corrective action will force the City to take action to abate the nuisance."

In the article attached readers will note, "According to City Attorney Dan Wichmer, as long as a landlord is working with the police department and there are no convictions, there is little the city can do under the ordinance."

The nuisance ordinance is very specific in describing the process by which the City of Springfield may close a property. One of the City's other options (under City Code) is to shut off utilities to that property for up to 1 year. The City really can't just go around closing properties based on neighbors' complaints, there is much more to it than that. For instance, before closing a property can even be considered notice has to be given and it must be given in very specific manner.

"JackeHammer" asked City Attorney Wichmer if there had been any notice of:

"...the illegal use, manufacture, keeping or selling of controlled substances" on the premises, and whether there have been any convictions related to "...the illegal use, manufacture, keeping or selling of controlled substances," (City code 74-391) where the initial arrest of a convict originated from the address 806 N. Jefferson Avenue, Springfield, Missouri


OR for:

"...the commission of crimes, ordinance violations, or acts done, permitted, allowed or continued to the damage or injury of any inhabitants of the city," and whether there have been any convictions related to "...the commission of crimes, ordinance violations, or acts done, permitted, allowed or continued to the damage or injury of any inhabitants of the city" involving an initial arrest of the convict from 806 N. Jefferson Avenue, Springfield, Missouri (City code 74-392)

BY: "The chief of police or his designee," (City code 74-391) OR "The chief of police or director of health or other head of a department charged with ordinance or code enforcement or their respective designees?" (City code 74-392)


"No." City Attorney Dan Wichmer wrote in an email response. "My letter merely referenced the fact that if we found and proved violations that originated from 806 N. Jefferson, we would treat (it) as any other nuisance property and use all tools available. We are not, to my knowledge, anywhere near sending any sort of nuisance notice."

Later in the day, when questioned about why he sent the letter at this time, Wichmer wrote, "In Feb of this year, BDS (Building Development Services) sent him a letter advising of purported improper uses. This letter was in addition to a letter from HHS (Health & Human Services) stating that their inspection to be sure that he was complying with his stated uses for the building per his application to acquire the building revealed that he was not in complete compliance with his stated uses."

City Clerk Brenda Cirtin wrote in an email to JackeHammer that Director of Building Development Services Nick Heatherly, indicated BDS has "posted" Veterans Coming Home for a code violation. She is awaiting his reply about when it was posted and the nature of the violation, "I asked him when and what the violation was, but haven’t heard back yet," she wrote.

Wichmer said the reason he sent the letter is because Rice's local representatives had stated Rice wanted to know if there were any issues, "When he opened the center, Rev. Rice, through his local reps, stated he wanted to be a good neighbor (especially in light of the incidents he had at the Free Store, his facility near Jeff City and the stabbing in St. Louis) so if we had issues, please let him know," Wichmer wrote.

According to Wichmer, the letter was sent out 2 weeks ago. Indeed, it is dated November 23, 2009. Wichmer indicated Ron Moore, New Life Evangelical Center's on site manager and Dan Boyle, Rice's attorney, were very cordial in their responses, with Boyle stating, "he would make sure there was follow up on their (Veterans Coming Home) end." Wichmer indicated that because he had received such a cordial response from them, he thought the issue was behind him and being handled.

"He (Boyle) told me in the future to just call him or NLEC’s business manager if we received further complaints. I thought that ended the matter. That is why I stated that Rice was merely grandstanding yesterday," Wichmer wrote.

At any rate, it all seems much ado about nothing for the moment (unless one considers how unhappy some City staff and some members of the City Council were at the time Rice was awarded the building...and unless one has a suspicious mind that the City is setting the stage for going after Rice on a trumped up code violation while it appears to ignore code violations of others it finds less unsavory....)

JackeHammer has placed a call to the Reverend Larry Rice for comment and is awaiting his response.

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

From the DEC. 17, 2008 - JAN. 13, 2009 issue of the "Community Free Press:"

"West Central WOES
Area developers’ cries for help reach a high level of frustration."

By Jackie Melton
CFP Contributor

At a recent meeting at the Busch Municipal Building,tempers and accusations sometimes flared over vandalism, theft, drug use, and whether the city’s nuisance ordinance can be used to remedy recurring problems in Springfield’s West Central neighborhood. One thing was made clear by the attending city officials: there are not going to be any quick fixes to neighborhood crime in West Central or any other neighborhood in Springfield.

Carol Nachbar, a real estate investor and redeveloper who owns property in the area was frustrated over what she perceived as non-enforcement of the city’s nuisance ordinance.

Though Police Chief Lynn Rowe said City Council had come up with the ordinance in order to deal with specific nuisance properties, Council was also reluctant to deprive people of their property without due process.


“We can’t take a whole complex with just one violating apartment unit,” Rowe said. “If they’re [owners/managers] dealing with the issue, then that precludes using the nuisance ordinance to take that property.”

Due process is what has Nachbar and other West Central investors and homeowners asking questions. Nachbar balked when told that, without convictions of crime, the nuisance ordinance could not be enforced.


“These people are out there causing all this havoc and this chaos,” Nachbar said. “The police put them in their cars and they handcuff them and then, 15 minutes later, they let them back out of the police car. That’s the problem, they are not arrested in the first place.”

The Windermere Apartments, 1055 W. Walnut St., is at the center of the debate among West Central residents and property owners. Nachbar claims problems originating at the property are interfering with her ability to lease a neighboring property she owns.

According to the city Web site, the business license for 1055 W.Walnut is issued to Shorty’s Holding, LLC. The address for the owner is also the same address issued to Cars 4 U, a car lot on Compton Street owned by Kendall Hancock. Hancock could not be reached for comment, but a woman at Cars 4 U, who identified herself as only Angela, said she was the manager of Shorty’s Holding, LLC.

“I’m the manager and we don’t have a comment,” she said.


According to City Attorney Dan Wichmer, as long as a landlord is working with the police department and there are no convictions, there is little the city can do under the ordinance.

“I can assure you that I take you seriously, but you sitting there, indicating that I’m not doing anything, isn’t going to make me a whole lot happier dealing with you,” Wichmer said to Nachbar at the meeting. “I’ve pulled your properties, you’ve had disturbances, and you’ve had complaints. Do I shut your properties down?”

Rowe explained his department is following procedure and doing what they can under the law.
“Sometimes there’s enough [evidence] to pursue it and if there is, they go to jail every time, even though it is a revolving door and they go right back out,” Rowe said.

Another local developer and investor, David Rhodes, said, in the past, when there was more police presence crime had disappeared.

“If this issue serves one purpose, I hope it is that it will get more police on the street,” Rhodes said.

Jack Pugh, Rhodes partner in “B’s” Renaissance Renovations, LLC, identified himself and Nachbar as two of the top investors in the West Central area. Pugh lives in a home on Walnut Street that he and his wife remodeled with the intention of retiring there. His wife has since moved out, and they have purchased a new retirement home in Greenfield.

“After the two attempted murders at the rental operations next door, and our neighbor who was stabbed and left to die on our front steps by two thugs who felt they had a right to own his bicycle, she just gave up,” Pugh said. “It was just too close. She didn’t work all her life to have to live in fear.”


Pugh talked about several contractors and residents who have been victims of theft. Later, as he steered his car down Pershing Street, where he has redeveloped and assisted others in redevelopment of several properties, he pointed to his “crown jewel.”

“A young family bought that a year ago and now they’re moving out. They’ve been broken into four times,” Pugh said. “They’ve just given up.”

Suggestions offered by city officials for dealing with the nuisance properties didn’t offer any overnight solutions. Beyond continuing to file police reports, working with their Police Area Representative officer, or taking the personal initiative to sue a nuisance property owner in civil court, one of the few other suggestions was that residents become more involved in their neighborhood associations. It was suggested they start a “Neighborhood Team”program.

“Neighborhood Teams can set priorities and then we all work together,” Rowe said.

Jack Pugh had little faith that forming a Neighborhood Team was the answer.

“It’s attacking the problem at the wrong end.” Pugh said. “If we had a Neighborhood Team in place reporting on the Windermere Apartments, would anything have been done differently at this point? Would it have helped to have had 120 calls this year instead of 100? The answer is no. It’s the policies that the Neighborhood Team has to work under that are the problem.”

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

What is a Public Nuisance?


“Any place that is used for the commission of crimes, ordinance violations,or acts done, permitted, allowed or continued to the damage or injury of any of the inhabitants of the city after notice is given and the place continues to be used for the commission of crimes, ordinance violations, or acts done, permitted, allowed or continued to the damage or injury of any inhabitants of the city is a public nuisance.”

Source: Section 74-392.A, General Ordinance Number 5465 (Springfield’s nuisance ordinance)

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

Recommended Reading 24: On Monsanto

Contracts show extent of Monsanto's control, Source: "Springfield News-Leader"

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

Associated Press should have Identified the Source of Information used to Insinuate Treasurer Clint Zweifel is Hypocritical or Broke State Law

State Treasurer Zweifel, a Democrat, also serves as the chair of Missouri's Housing Commission (MHC)

An "Associated Press" article in Saturday's "Springfield News-Leader," declares:

Treasurer accepts cash from developer
Zweifel backed new ethics rules requiring conflict disclosure

What the AP article tells you is that Zweifel supported state law mandating individual MHC members should disclose potential conflicts of interest, and then recuse themselves from the decision making which could be affected by such conflicts.

Then, as if disconnected from Zweifel's backing of the requirement that conflicts should be disclosed by members, the AP reported that Zwiefel accepted campaign contributions from people who had applied for tax credits which would be awarded by the commission on which he serves.

The kicker comes in the last paragraph of the article, when the AP states that Zweifel told "the newspaper" that lawmakers need to make a decision regarding whether elected officials, who under our current system depend on contributions to run their campaigns, should be prohibited from accepting campaign contributions if they serve on commissions awarding tax credits. Zweifel believes, according to the AP report, that policy should be consistent across the board for those who serve on commissions with a potential to judge who should receive tax credit awards.

What troubles me is that the report does not state how the AP or "newspaper" received the information and/or whether Zweifel was the one to disclose it. Also unnoted is whether Zweifel continued to be involved in any decision making regarding tax credits involving the named campaign contributors after the contributions were received. If Zweifel reported the conflict and recused himself from making a decision regarding the award of tax credits by the commission, he has followed the law he backed, which apparently, at this time, does not prohibit commissioners who deal in awarding tax credits from accepting campaign contributions from people who have applied to receive those tax credits.

The AP might have sensationalized it in their headline, in my view, casting aspersion on Zweifel rather than the system and process, or the lawmakers who define it. Zweifel is right in calling on lawmakers to make a decision about whether those who serve on tax credit awarding commissions should be allowed to accept campaign contributions. If they are not prohibited from doing so, which appears to be the case, then why did the AP set it up to insinuate Zweifel is doing some kind of shady, under the table sort of transaction with someone who might benefit from the current system? Where's the problem if Zweifel disclosed the conflict and recused himself from decision making?

On the other hand, if Zweifel did not disclose the conflict and did not recuse himself from decision making regarding the award of tax credits after he had received campaign contributions from applicants, it certainly would be a problem for Zweifel but, the AP simply doesn't give us enough information to support the insinuation they appear to be making.

Poor reporting all around, if you ask me. It raises far more questions than it answers.

Some people believe the issue of Missouri Housing Commission tax credits is even more complicated.

In an October 14 article, AP reporter David Lieb revealed two residents of St. Louis have filed suit, questioning the state constitutionality of the tax credits currently being awarded to private developers for large redevelopment projects. The suit also questions the constitutionality of recent expansions of topics under the law, reaching, the suit charges, past the original intent of such tax credit awards.

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

Approval of $50 Million Springfield Public School Initiative does not Guarantee Federal Stimulus Funds

Last night, I read with interest Brian Brown's article, "Pay longer, build now," regarding the $50 million bond initiative the Springfield Public School Board seeks the tax-payer to approve in the upcoming November election. The article can be found in the October 7, issue of the "Community Free Press (CFP)."

In the column, Brown wrote, "The $50 million bond issue will utilize $5 million to $7 million in federal stimulus money to fund a number of construction and air-conditioning projects in the district."

You see, what was unclear in Brown's article in CFP, was whether the federal stimulus money had been applied for and is guaranteed if the voters approve an extension of the previously, voter-approved tax levy.

Brown pointed out in the article that voter approval of the November bond initiative will extend the 2006 debt-service levy by four years, or until 2030. The debt-service levy, otherwise, is anticipated to be paid off in 2026.

Superintendent of Springfield R-12, Norm Ridder told Brown for the article in CFP, "The community has to pass the bond initiative for us to get the stimulus money." Ridder also indicated the board hadn't really planned to seek a bond initiative in 2009, "The board was not going to go for any kind of initiative this year, but then there was a stimulus package that came forward from the federal government."

Having just written an opinion piece at "JackeHammer," in response to Springfield School Board president Gerry Lee's recent "Voice of the Day" column in the "Springfield News-Leader," and having been the recipient of a response to that opinion piece, in the comment section of that entry, by Springfield Public Schools Community Relations Manager Teresa Bledsoe, I decided to call her with some questions.

I inquired as to whether the SPS Board, or its representative(s), had applied for federal stimulus money related to the bond initiative which will be on the ballot in November.

"We have to approve a bond issue before we can apply," Bledsoe said.

According to Bledsoe, there were $149 million in federal stimulus funds available in the Qualified School Construction Bond Program in 2009 and another $141 million will be available in 2010.

SPS does not qualify for application for those federal funds unless a bond initiative is passed within a certain time frame. Existing bond initiatives do not qualify Springfield to apply for the stimulus funds held in the Qualified School Construction Bond Program.

When asked if there was any guarantee that SPS would be awarded the $5 - $7 million Brown's article claims the bond issue will utilize, Bledsoe referred me to the confidence of the SPS Board's financial advisor George K. Baum.

"He feels fairly confident that we would receive at least $5 million," Bledsoe said.

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

Tit for Tat on School District Numbers

Opinion

Since I posted a link to Tom Gargus' "Voice of the Day" column, "Numbers don't back district's claims," as a recommended reading the day it came out in the "Springfield News-Leader," I feel I should also post President of the Springfield School Board Gerry Lee's response, "Numbers don't add up in criticism of district," of the same source. But, I have to tell you, since we all know numbers can be manipulated to make certain points, and since Tom Gargus spent over $100 in Sunshine Law requests and, more than likely, considerable time researching and analyzing the results of those requests, along with information available at the School District's Web site [according to the News-Leader], I think it might have been appropriate for Mr. Lee to explain why Gargus' numbers were wrong, instead of an equally appropriate exploration and interpretation.

Lee could have made his point in a more humble and respectful manner than he did, and Gargus, after spending considerable money and time in researching and analyzing the issue, was deserving of a more respectful attitude.

For instance, why would enrollment data present a more accurate picture than actual attendance data? Mr. Lee accuses Mr. Gargus of being deceitful for applying attendance data, but offers no explanation about why the use of attendance data offers an "inaccurate" and "deceitful picture," whereas Lee's choice of enrollment data would offer an accurate one.

I felt the president seemed to accuse, or imply that Mr. Gargus was intentionally providing misinformation, being purposely deceptive and simplistic.

I seem to remember, when the bond was passed for air-conditioning the schools, there was talk about all the schools being air-conditioned. My memory is certainly not perfect, but that is the way I remember it. I don't remember it as being a promise to air-condition a certain number of schools, rather I remember it as being a promise to air-condition all the schools. Now, if that isn't the case, I'll be happy to correct myself. I'm not posting such a comment as intentional misinformation, or a deception of the facts.

I'm not sure that Mr. Lee could have been more condescending and accusatory than he was in his rebuttal of Gargus' column. I can understand that Lee might have taken Gargus' accusations personally, however, they were not a personal attack on a person, they were, after monetary expense and sacrifice of time, an editorial commentary of Mr. Gargus' understanding of the issue. An issue, I might add, that involved considerable expenditure of tax-payer dollars.

I'm simply saying Mr. Lee's response could have been much more tactful and presented a better educational opportunity for all readers of the paper in the process, instead of seeming so adversarial and defensive.

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

More Garden News: Rutledge-Wilson Farm Park Leases Almost a Third of Available Garden Plots

According to an article in the Friday edition of the "Springfield News-Leader," the Springfield-Greene County Parks Department has leased 19 of the 60 garden plots it is making available to the public since kicking off the pilot program last month.

The 8 x 16 and 16 x 16 plots may be leased for $25 and $40 on an annual basis, respectively. Those signing up will have an option to renew their lease annually.

News-Leader reporter Wes Johnson laid out the particulars:

The Park Board provides soil, fencing, water access and a sign for each plot.

All food grown is the property of the plot's renter. Each participant is responsible for maintaining weed control, providing all seeds and other equipment required to grow a garden and removing debris at the end of the growing season.

"The goal of the new Urban Gardens program is to offer a space for people to grow fruits, vegetables or flowers, who otherwise don't immediately have the space available in their own backyard," said Parks Director Jodie Adams.

"They will also offer an opportunity for youth field trips to see and participate in a working garden, along with generally providing fellowship with others and recreational, exercise and therapeutic benefits to our community."

An urban garden program guide and application is available directly on the Park Board's Web site at www.parkboard.org.

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

Recommended Reading 22: Springfield Public Schools

Numbers don't back district's claims News-Leader.com Springfield News-Leader ~ by Tom Gargus

The "Springfield News-Leader" also provided the following editor's note:

"Editor's note: Tom Gargus says he spent $122 through the Sunshine Law obtaining district documents and used many others on the district Web site to draw his conclusions. We plan to allow the school district to respond to some of his contentions in a news story soon."

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

Repeat City Council Speakers not Going Away Anytime Soon

In fact, City Manager Greg Burris' recent remarks about regular speakers at City Council meetings, "probably just strengthens our cause," said Missouri Liberty Coalition member Carl Herd

I got wind that the Missouri Liberty Coalition (MoLiCo) would be meeting last Saturday, September 19, for a "planning meeting."

Considering I used to be the "Community Free Press" liaison with the local government watchdog group, and they haven't made it, as a group, into the news much lately, I thought it might be interesting to attend the meeting and see what they were talking about.

It has been nearly a half a year since three of the MoLiCo members ran for City Council seats. Nick Ibarra won his Zone 1 Council seat, the other two contenders, Tom Martz and Fred Ellison did not prevail against their opponents in the race.

Five members were in attendance at last Saturday's meeting, while a couple of other interested non-members contributed to the conversation.

The Missouri Liberty Coalition, as featured in the January 30, 2008 issue of "CFP," focuses on Springfield City government and City Council issues. For that reason, they regularly attend City Council meetings and address the City Council, often questioning actions the Council will take regarding legislation, for the most part, crafted in the City's legal department as a result of either an issue or interest of Springfield City staff or its City Council.

Listening in on their conversation, and even contributing my own thoughts at times (though I am not a member of the group) I learned they are content with maintaining a local city government focus, although, in the early days of their founding, they had considered scrutinizing the county and state governments as well.

Some members expressed concern about what, arguably, could be considered efforts by some people in the community, and even within the government, to minimize the opinions of the members of the group by seeming to suggest because they repeatedly address the Council, their voices are somehow less important than Springfield residents who do not regularly address the City Council.

"JackeHammer" would ask, who better to address the Council, who more credible, than a small group of interested and passionate Springfield residents, to raise questions about potential legislation facing our elected representatives, than a group who regularly and consistently reads and studies each City Council agenda and every item listed upon it?

In a recent interview in the "Springfield News-Leader," reporter Kary Booher asked Springfield City manager Greg Burris some pointed questions to commemorate his first year anniversary as Springfield's City manager. During the course of answering one of Booher's questions, Burris responded,

"When we go to a City Council meeting, there is a group that shows up -- it's a small group -- and speaks out critically against the city on anything. It doesn't matter what it is. But you don't see a civil discourse within the meeting. The meetings are civil, don't get me wrong. But you don't see other citizens getting engaged in the process. That's been a little disappointing. I'm hoping that changes over the next few years. Things have been so good for so long that I think many of us took it for granted that things would continue to go very well. But we're living in a different time right now. When the only people that bother to show up to City Council meetings and other meetings and speak out are the regulars -- and that's the only voice that the council gets to hear in a public setting -- that's a little disappointing."

There was little doubt in Carl Herd's mind that Burris was speaking of the members of the Missouri Liberty Coalition, who regularly attend Council meetings.

"I think that this just shows his inexperience as a City Manager in how he responded to Mr. Booher in his interview in the paper, and that when he looks back on it, he might have answered differently," Herd said. "But, as far as him trying to diminish the small group of people who attend City Council, and we pretty much know that that's the MoLiCo, for the most part, that probably just strengthens our cause."

MoLiCo member Tom Martz gave grace to Burris' right to have and share his opinions in the "News-Leader" but, wanted to be sure there was recognition that every member of the public has that same right to address their elected representatives. He felt that through Burris' comments he had learned more about Burris' thinking.

"Mr. Burris is entitled to his opinion, just like I am entitled to my opinion, and the individual membership of MoLiCo are entitled to their opinions as well, " Martz said. "To attend City Council meetings is my right as a citizen of Springfield, to question the actions of government is my duty as a citizen of Springfield, and we are a representative republic, therefore, my representation at City Council meetings, no matter how many I attend, should not be looked at as a means of disdain."

What are MoLiCo's plans for the future?

"We're still a very active group, maybe not huge in numbers but, a very passionate group that are still working on the real important issues, following City Council agendas, and responding to that, whether it be the pension shortfall or Springfield Mill and Lumber, or whatever issue comes up," Herd said.

Tom Martz, who due to his busy work schedule has not been able to attend City Council meetings as regularly as he has in the past, said when his seasonal work schedule begins to slow down he plans to start attending Council meetings more regularly again.

"Come about the middle of November, when my schedule slows down, then I will be back attending City Council meetings on a regular basis," Martz said. "I think it's irresponsible for people not to attend City Council meetings. Everything they do has an effect and an impact on what you do in your personal life."

One thing is certain, City manager Greg Burris will continue to have the ear and influence upon Springfield voters' elected representatives. He is a regular attendee of all meetings of the City Council, and it is his well paid job to continue to be a regular attendee. Burris' opinions will never be "diminished" because he repeatedly bends the ears of our elected representatives. Should your opinion be diminished because you regularly exercise your right to address your elected representative?

I'm just askin.'

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

News-Leader Responds with Follow Up to JackeHammer's Breaking Story

It was really nice of the "Springfield News-Leader's" Wes Johnson to follow up today on the story I broke at JackeHammer last Friday.

Wes expressed his appreciation for all the hard work and research I have been providing when I saw him at the last meeting of the Task Force.

"I've been enjoying your reporting on the Urban Garden Task Force. Thank you," Johnson said.

It was the first time the News-Leader was represented at a task force meeting since the group announced their first meeting in early August and the fourth time the group has met.

In the mean time, I had received, along with the Urban Garden Task Force, a response via email to my blog post of last Friday from assistant City attorney Nancy Yendez.

In that response," Yendez indicated she had not researched state statute pertaining to Missouri Court definitions of farms or farming in relation to the sale of vegetables from a residential zoned property.

"Whether someone is a farmer for the state statute if they are selling in front of their residential house where they grew the vegetables has not been researched by me yet and it is not a simple answer," Yendez wrote.

She had anticipated being at the next Urban Garden Task Force meeting but did not realize it would not be held until next Tuesday evening, on September 22, rather than on September 15.

"I now have a conflict with that time period, so I do not know if I will make the meeting. I have talked with [Senior Planner] Daniel Neal today about my research on zoning sales in residential, on streets, etc," Yendez wrote in a later email.

Yendez had previously addressed the task force concerning the bearing Missouri state statutes might have on potential city policy regulating "urban gardens" at the group's second meeting on August 18.

As usual, I will continue to update the blog when I feel I have enough new information to share that it is warranted. At the moment, I am awaiting information which I feel might be pertinent to a clear understanding of the Municipal Code section sited by Ms. Butler in Friday's blog entry and discussed in Mr. Johnson's article in the "Springfield News-Leader" today.

...and Wes, I've been enjoying reading your coverage of the Urban Garden Task Force. Thank you. - Jackie Melton

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

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.

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

Community Improvement District Debate Continues and: An Open Question to the Springfield News-Leader

Regarding Sunday's "Our Voice" column: "Lumber company should not be forced into CID Springfield News-Leader"

The inclusion of Janss Lumber into the Commercial Street CID was based on its inclusion in Commericial Street's tax increment financing (TIF) district wasn't it?

I'd be interested to know exactly how many "economic development" improvements Janns Lumber benefitted from, in the past, as a result of captured existing sales tax generated by Janss into the Commercial Street TIF district's coffers, News-Leader?

Did Janss benefit at all?

Such "tools in the tool box," as past Mayor Pro Tem Gary Deaver liked to characterize them, are, as you pointed out, supposed to benefit the participants by economic development. If Janss Lumber has been paying into C-Street TIF district coffers but has not benefitted from the tax captured from its business, it would seem a good argument for being excluded from the CID.

It seems like I read there were some small improvements made to Janss' parking situation, at some point, through the TIF. It would have been nice to have seen that information, if I am correct in my remembrance of its existance, included in Sunday's editorial column.

It might also serve as a warning to businesses who have allowed themselves to become involved in a TIF district, intended to capture existing sales taxes from their own businesses as a sort of tax incentive from the city. Since a TIF appears to be the precursor to a later request for a CID, perhaps the time to take real action against the CID is when a TIF district is first offered. They seem to go hand in hand, if my understanding is correct.

I think you can have a TIF district without becoming a CID. I'm not sure you can become a part of a CID without having first been a part of a TIF district?

In lieu of the News-Leader answering these questions, I guess I could buck up and do the research, myself. I just don't have their staff and am working on other projects at the moment. It takes three staff reporters covering the City government at the News-Leader for a reason, you know?

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

Local Writers Continue to Inform Public about Community Improvement Districts

Mark "Stormy" Davis weighed in on the Community Improvement District (CID) issue in the "Springfield News-Leader" on Friday. Davis is a member of the News-Leader's Editorial board.

What you may not know is Davis also writes a local blog, "The Storm Watch," and this is not the first time he's written about CIDs (see: "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly About CID's !").

If you are interested in learning more about CIDs, I posted links, specifically related to the Commercial Street CID, written by the News-Leader's Kary Booher back in June and for further background, Brian Brown, a staff writer for the "Community Free Press" wrote "C-Street May Seek Improvements Tax," for the November 19, 2008 issue of that paper. Brown's article also provided some basic and comprehensive facts about CIDs.

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

Nothing Much has Changed on the Urban Gardening Issue

The "Springfield News-Leader" finally caught up to "JackeHammer" and "busplunge" Web logs by reporting on the "urban gardens" issue in Monday's edition of their paper. Through interviews with City staff members, and more time having played out on the issue, Johnson was able to provide a few new tidbits of information that this blog and busplunge had not previously reported.

It is edifying to note that some Springfield residents are asking some of the same questions asked by this blogger and "the bus," back in mid May.

To read those previous reports:

JackeHammer: Bill Allows City to Propose Gardening Regulations in Residential Areas of Springfield

busplunge: About This Garden Thing....

JackeHammer: The Garden Plot Thickens...or not?

Certainly I will have more to say about it later but, rather than spouting off prematurely, I'll wait until we know more about it when, according to a past City news release,"A staff report describing the proposed amendment in detail (is) delivered to the Planning and Zoning Commission and made available to the public on Thursday, July 2, 2009."

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

The Springfield News-Leader Offers Interesting Articles about Community Improvement Districts

Kary Booher of the "Springfield News-Leader" has provided interesting and informative information regarding the use of Community Improvement Districts (CIDs) within the City of Springfield.

Today, Booher offers two new articles on the subject:

"Council believes it lacks power to turn down CIDs," and "CIDs trouble some Springfield merchants."

Past related articles, from the most current to the oldest, written by Booher (with one article having been written by Amos Bridges) on the subject are:

"Councilmen want tax rates posted"

"Janss Lumber hints it could reverse course"

"CID board applicants hold sway over future"

"Backlash to proposed Commercial Street CID begins"

"Businesses can seek exemptions"

"City greenlights CID"

"Tax proposal divides Commercial Street"

"Even supporters worry about effect of new tax"

"Opinions vary on Commercial Street CID"

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

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.

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