Something that the City of Lake Worth NEVER talks about--pensions, part of the piece of the pie that takes 66% of our budget! What it does talk about, however, is spending $100 million of taxpayer money for roads and infrastructure. A month ago or so, Vice Mayor Maxwell was miffed that a figure of $100 million was on the lips of people because "we don't know how much it will be." Well, check with City Manager Bornstein--he does.
Everyone at city hall has a wish list especially the present commission. We are bringing in $5.7 million dollars in advalorem this year and they "expect to spend between $75 and $115 million over the next 6 years on various projects." Well, expecting the money and actually getting it is another story. The people would have to vote on a General Obligation Bond. Bornstein has said, "Creating positions, DIPPING INTO THE GENERAL FUND RESERVES, and proceeding with Infrastructure plans with limited funding, will require creative solutions and active policy discussions." The creative solution is YOU and there has been no policy discussion other than the city telling us of its plan to spend 6 figure multi-millions re-building our city and acquire tremendous debt doing it all on the backs of taxpayers.
We continue to spend money on city buildings and then turn them over to the CRA or some other non-profit. Our unfunded retirement liabilities are crazy and we have no way of paying them. The PBSO gave us a break this year but this has been a bad contract from day one. And don't even mention the firefighters and what the city contributes towards that retirement plan. Pension costs have increased for public safety by $500,000 for 2014 and we don't feel particularly safe.
The Florida legislature has battled the unions for years but it is still trying to do something about city and state pensions that are out of control. What is the city of Lake Worth doing? Instead of being fiscally conservative, or even talking about our biggest debt, the unions, they are looking to spend a small fortune of your money to rebuild a 100 year old city almost from scratch. The only asset that we have that even helps pay for anything (we take more from that than we get in advalorem) is our Utility and there are some who still want to sell that.
So, not only do we have one ticking time bomb, pensions, but if the City gets its way, there will be two ticking at the same time.
Click here for the PBPost article on government pensions.
TICK, TICK, TICK, TICK.
12 comments:
I haven't heard antyhignabout spending this amt of mon4ey until I read the article. They're serious? Christ, thank god I rent.
Where have you been? I have been writing about it for eons. :) Stop by more often.
Oh, thank you to that sick little guy who keeps coming over here with his personal attacks...no original thought...a total vacuum--Obtuse one. I hope you know that I know who you are. What about making a New Year's Resolution to expand your vocabulary. Forgot. That would take work.
At least we passed with a D. 2 others got F
Well using your "two ticking time bombs" theory, what should we do??? Ok. vote against any infrastructure improvements so we won't have to pay for the sad conditions of our roads and water pipes. Then watch as they crumble further and cause property values to surpass Belle Glade. Don't see many sky scrapers out there either and they wish someone wanted to build something, ANYTHING out there.
Or we can start by implementing a strategy. Hey, that's an idea. A strategy to help rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. But wait... everyone will start crying and wailing about how much it will cost. Well if it had been addressed by previous commissions or city managers, the cost would have been less and would have already started appreciating property which in turn brings in advelorem taxes to help pay off the improvements.
Or we can keep this spiral going just like it is. Oh ya... we still have the ticking and with no way to pay for it.
If the choices were easy, they would have already been made. Guess what.... It ain't easy.
That's for all of you officials to come up with a plan that will be acceptable to the people who will be picking up the tab. If you think they will vote in $100 mil, go for it. I say, go for something lower scale in the $$$ department.
You're right. It is not easy especially in a down economy. Good luck. Let's hope the market doesn't crash for then you will be in bigger do do than you are right now.
So as I recall, when they went out for the over the top, if the sky was the limit and we could do everything we needed to do... what would be the cost. Then throw in a wish list or two. Add the two together and vowalla! $100 million, more or less.
So what is the dollar figure that you'd come up with that YOU would vote for?
$50 million? $20 Million? How about $5 million?
What would you prioritize? How much would it be reduced if they took all building out of it and kept all the street/sidewalk and below?
Those wishing to keep Lake Worth poor will campaign HARD against anything that will increase the cost of living here by any amount. And you will be blasting the commission for their attempts at righting this ship.
You are constantly complaining about the lack of information from this administration. Your hero/heroine Stanton used to give you plenty. Way too much and it got her/him in trouble. Remember the projections of the beach revenue. Worst case, best case and reality what to expect? Was that with or without the lighting, infrastructure improvements and Greater Bay pay off?
People who understand CAP rates said they were way to low, people who understand finance said that Greater Bay would crumble under their own inability to get financing and they would have had to go away without a penny, but thanks to Lawsuit Larry and friends, hoping to "save" Lake Worth, we ended paying for it.... big time. Yes he was a flimflam artist. No... we should not have rolled the dice and go to trial when we know we would have lost... and even bigger time.
The point is they stuck to their guns just as the current commission is sticking to theirs. To give you a rash of information that you could post here and tear apart causing much consternation instead of letting it come out with projections, however flawed, is just plain politics.
So how much would you vote for Lynn? $20 million?
I went ahead and posted your comment although it is full of mis-speaks. I don't feel like re-hashing the GB thing again. Haven't we done that enough? You have your opinion and others have theirs although I really wish you would study what exactly went on then as GB could have stalled forever on the 19 acres at our beach. Just because Moira said they 'would go away' doesn't make it so. That was an opinion.
The roads have to be done, no doubt about that. I would like to see some plans and some choices...something that people would accept and not be a burden on the wealthy property owners or those with property that has some value that will pay for it all. That's about it...something that makes sense for our poor city and the economic depression that this city has never come out of. I have said before, block by block, worst first, with those properties on that block being assessed for the improvements is a possibility. This would have to be thought out fully as it might not make any sense.
If you are comparing a past commission to this one who wants to obligate property owners to $100 million, I would say that sticking to your guns on this is no comparison at all. I don't really see politics in this. What I see are 4 people wanting to turn this city around quickly, believing that new roads will do it and infrastructure will attract developers. I honestly believe that we need to do the first things first in order to do that--eradicate the slum, blight and crime.
But we do need road repairs and done correctly.
Thank you for that vacillation (lol) I had to read it several times and am still bouncing.
You do admit we need road repair and thankfully you want them done correctly. I think that means you want the infrastructure beneath them done as well.
Assessing the property owners adjacent to the improvements, especially in the alphabet streets where there is little taxable value I think would be burdensome.
The roads in front of most commercial and waterfront homes are in decent shape, basically because they were more outspoken and they do shoulder most of the tax burden already. So where the State or County wasn't involved, the low income properties helped to pay for THOSE improvements. Why shouldn't the whole of the city pay for the improvements that would help the whole of the city?
I do not think you can separate the slum, blight and crime effect from the terrible and crumbling condition of our streets and sidewalks. It's a great tribute to the neighborhoods that are keeping their values up in spite of the decay in front of their homes.
It is obvious you don't want to attract developers, or at least those who would propose projects that could lift our city to its potential, but fixing the roads helps those of us who are not developers too.
So we have four people who want to turn this city around and one who wants to keep things as they are. I have to wonder why you chose that as your argument.
After all, what should be the responsibilities of a city government be? Institute policies that prevent gentrification? To make sure we remain poor?
That's the ultra-lefty bunch you seem to be enamored with. Thank God there is only one of that crew left.
Fact remains that as other progressive communities plow under their slums and build nicer dwellings for their residents, the slum dwellers have to scatter. And where better for them to scurry to? You got it! Lake Worth... why? Because we want to stay "quaint" and "quirky". (and poor) No "national chains" make sure Publix's architect knows where the tomatoes were picked and by who and God forbid using the evil plastic bag. Make sure any building of any size can only look like a big box. That'll sure entice good development.
Yes we need roads and sidewalks fixed and yes we need to pay for them. We all need to pay for them.
$100 million? Ya, I question that amount too. But it doesn't get cheaper as time goes on. The cheap fix was what was done 10 years ago and meant to extend the life of the roads 5 to 7 years. Most of the roads that are now the worst are the same ones "micro-surfaced" because it was the cheap way to go. Sometimes cheap is expensive.
Boy, you really have a bug if you're still bouncing. LOL yourself.
After all, what should be the responsibilities of a city government be? Institute policies that prevent gentrification? To make sure we remain poor? That's the ultra-lefty bunch you seem to be enamored with. Thank God there is only one of that crew left.
To defend Christopher McVoy, he may be a "leftie" as you put it but then most of the people in our city are Democrats, would you not agree to that? He has voted with this commission 99.9% of the time so your put-down of him is baseless.
I agree with you that sometimes "cheap" is expensive. Good observation. Doing things right the first time is the best and in the long-term, the affordable way to do it. We have been patching our roads forever.
To inquire about corporate responsibility is not something to mock. It was far cheaper than giving a multi-billion private corporation $500,000 of our TIFF money.
Quaint and small town feel in the downtown has worked for 100 years. I still say, the people won the vote IN SPITE OF YOU. That vote should be honored. attracting developers is a good thing--just have them stay within the ordinances and the LDR's while doing it and keep the taxpayer subsidies to them OFF the table. We are not wealthy.
How about starting by doing the road repairs properly, i.e. overfilling the holes so that when settling occurs a new puddle does not develop after the next rain and form a new pothole. This requires attention and proper policy from the top but there seems to be lack of oversight from those in charge.
We are staggering under the tax burden already.
Our water pipes are like any old city. Other cities fix them on an as needed basis. This is far from ideal but the pipes rarely burst now.
This Commission would do well to deal with present reality rather than waste their time and the public's attention on pipe dreams such as a $100 million GOB.
Why don't we tear down these atrocities so that development can come into our city? Good idea. East of Federal has always been kept up. More expensive properties. The city, overall, has neglected those west of Dixie and has allowed illegals to move in along with the gang-bangers and other low people. Those property owners have had to endure the worst of conditions with a city still ignoring them.
Post a Comment