Editor:
From many of the comments that I heard at the Public Hearing on the proposed City budget at the May 14 meeting, it appears that many of our citizens use your paper as an information source and use it as a basis to form their opinions.
With that in mind I thought I would use it myself to expand on things I said at that meeting.
First, the newly proposed Internal Services plan has provided a lot of confusion to the mix. It has been called the reason for the proposed transfers and nothing could be further from the truth.
While it is nothing but an accounting vehicle, the council should scrap this idea and revert back to the old way of making transfers directly into the General Fund and go from there.
Second, the city manager and finance director have been called the new kids of the block and been looked at as the villains of this debate about the proposed transfers.
The city manager works directly for the council, who along with the finance director and all departments, put together a budget based on their needs and the stated goals of the City Council.
If there are villains in this issue, it is the City Council and if you like, you can list me as a co-conspirator.
Let’s look at their *crimes” of these people as they try to put forward a path that will let Sweet Home continue to grow.
Susan Coleman worked tirelessly along with the Forest Service to make the National Christmas Tree happen.
Dave Trask has spent many hours in meetings with the Parks Board and others to push for improvements in our parks and due to their efforts we now have new restrooms at Sankey Park, as well as new paving in the parking area.
James Goble has spent a lot of time in seeking to make improvements to the upper area of Sanky Park.
Diane Gerson has a big interest in economic development and has been instrumental in setting aside funds for work in that area.
Lisa Gourley, along with her husband Jim, has led the plan to handle the Hero Banners that recognize the military service of Sweet Home veterans.
Mayor Greg Mahler has logged a lot of hours in planning and work on the new City Hall, a project that was made possible by using money that was saved over the years and interfund borrowing to complete the project.
Cortney Nash is new to the council and is fast learning the many duties of this board.
These are just a few of the “crimes” of this group as they try to find a way forward for the betterment of Sweet Home.
Everyone seems to be in agreement that Sweet Home has an extremely low tax base and over the years the General Fund has used franchise fees and administrative cost transfers to fund their side of the budget.
It is not a new concept. Public Works for years has made this transfer from water and wastewater funds and their rates are set to reflect this transfer.
Although the last time it happened was in the late 1990s, transfers have been made from the police levy. And unless my memory is faulty (no guarantee on that), not too many years ago the General Fund transferred $200,000 to the police levy to help fund a shortage.
So what happens if we don’t make the transfers?
With this in mind, the Budget Committee asked for a spreadsheet that would show the result. We saw that the unappropriated money that pays the bills from July 1 until November, when taxes come in, would cover only three months.
We have a duty to see that four months is available and the auditors prefer six months of funding. Anything less than four months’ funding puts the city in a position to borrow money to pay the bills and that is absolutely unacceptable.
That means the council, or the full committee called back into session to make the necessary cuts to put us in balance.
My best guess is that the $125,000 budgeted for parks would be cut, as well as the extra $50,000 being added to the payment on the loan, making us on a 10-year payback plan with no money going into building reserve during that time.
If more cuts were needed, they would come from materials and services. To answer a question asked at the public hearing, I see no scenario for people to be cut during this proposed budget.
I can’t answer for future budgets. With the transfers, the police levy would have six months’ unappropriated funding and the library would have seven months.
About two months prior to the start of this year’s budget cycle, I told both the mayor and the city manager that this would be my last year.
It fulfills my commitment to the latest three-year appointment. At the time, I had no idea what would be proposed and my leaving has absolutely no connections to current issues.
I know and respect people on both sides of the debate and hold no animosity toward anyone for their views. At the same time, I make no apology for my position.
I know that over the years I have made my share of mistakes but my focus has always been on what was best for the city.
I have always supported the efforts of the Police Department and will continue to do so. Since I use the library a lot and know the ladies that work there I know their dedication cannot be questioned, they do a great job.
I am simply tired.
Tired of the open spots on the Budget Committee. I can’t remember the last time we had a full committee. Or maybe they take the appointment and just don’t show up.
Tired of the scramble for a quorum to hold meetings and yes, if I’m honest in the assessment, I am tired of the criticism from people who can’t or won’t take the time to become involved themselves.
There is a poem by John Donne called “No Man is an Island.” Its first line is ”no man is an island entire of itself.”
If I can paraphrase that, I would say “no department is a place unto itself, it is part of a city that together will flourish.“
Together we can make it happen, thanks for everything and good luck.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave Holley
Sweet Home