New Albany masterplan must be funded to work, officials say; Drainage plan calls for $22.4 million in projects, by Daniel Suddeath (Tribune)How did the expected CFA self-immolations proceed, anyway?
... But officials realize the city can’t afford to fund $22.4 million in projects within a few years, (Stantec project manager Steve) Hall continued.
Another gem, this one of the legal bagel/copperhead variety, comes packaged within Suddeath's account of the city council's shiny new 5-4 progressive majority, which held long enough to pass two 3rd readings at yesterday's special conclave. It seems that even though the council president and city clerk scrupulously obeyed the law as it governs placement of agenda items for such a gathering, it did not please the resident reptilian polymath:
New Albany council passes sewer loan; Full-time attorney, grant writer also OK’d by councilThat's a world classic quote, perhaps sufficiently profound to be printed on the front of the tickets required to visit the Open Air Museum.
“It is the law, yes. But to me, it’s not enough,” (Dan) Coffey said.
9 comments:
I think we should all be glad we've finally got a grant writer--the existing staff can only do so much, and we badly need someone who can look for funding opportunities for New Albany.
I couldn't agree with Ann more.
I don't think most people realize how much money we've left on the table over the years. How many $6.7 million grants did we pass up?
I am also pleased with the addition of council attorney/ combination grant writer.
I would agree with the objections that were raised by Mr. Gahan. The council and public were under the impressions that the special meeting was in regards to the bond issue only and not the attorney. I was surprised to see it on the agenda after the meeting had started.
There was no register for the public to sign to speak, which I have noticed is becoming a pattern at special meetings ever since Gonder became president.
Mr. Coffey's statement that Marcy was incompliance with the law but it is not enough, is an opinion I share. Just because Marcy posted the changes of agenda items on the third floor wall is not enough effort to inform citizens of those changes and she did so under the direction of John. The burden lies with John and not Marcy. Because the last council meeting adjourned with the impression that only the bond issue was to be addressed that should have been the case yesterday. I would have gladly made a public comment in favor of the hiring Matt if the chance was given.
It is this mentality of lack of transparency in my opinion that is the greatest problem in New Albany. I have been told more than once that decisions made meet the standard of the law but I question how ethical are those decisions.
Even though I support the hiring of Matt and I believe his commitment to the city will be invaluable the process of what happened yesterday puts a bad beginning to something that should not have been.
Should New Albany be a city the only meets the bare minimum standard of governance or should to strive to be a leader?
I know this may sound like wishful thinking but I can't help imagine a lake district downtown.
Jeff's canal proposal is very interesting could New Albany do the same or something similar with Falling Run Creek?
Re: stormwater masterplan. 600 pages and nothing about conservation? Nothing about the primary role 200 year old hardwoods play in our floodplain? Shocking people in 2010 think environmental damage already inflicted here doesn't impact massively on any stormwater plan. For 50+ years developers have chewed through every last green acre in this valley laying hundreds of miles of sewer and water lines to their benefit. As a result, we have an unsustainable sewage and storm water system. So is the plan to borrow millions and millions patching it after every breakdown? As the costs of treating waste and providing clean water increase, what is New Albany's plan? Just put more pipes in and run it into the river?
I enjoyed the article posted here on April 2 about Portland, Oregon's storm water plan. How about we just cut-and-paste Portland's plan?
So nobody reads the"Code of Ordinances" anymore. A special meeting procedure is spelled out plainly for anyone to read. This past City Council meeting was sad to watch as lack of reading skills and vodo ecomonics were on display.
Gina you are right the propose StormWater Master Plan does not addess conservation. Just to try and prevent flooding is the main focus. There is a meeting before the Plan Commission, im May, where you can urge pubicly urge the adoption and inclusion of conservation guidelines in the plan before the city council votes on the ordinance.
Maury
RE: $75 million sewer Debt.
April 27 (Bloomberg) “Municipal water bonds are a sought-after sector because a lot of investors see them as monopolies of the service they deliver.” “They’re able to raise rates and charge as they see fit and generally the bonds have good stable coverage in good economic times and bad.” said John Hallacy, a Bank of America Merrill Lynch municipal strategist in New York.
Post a Comment