This was another 2 hour meeting and I actually got there a couple minutes early!
First item on the agenda was a Proclamation for American Red Cross. Mayor Thornton presented a Plaque to the local Red Cross Volunteers for their tireless efforts of helping families in need. The Mayor declared the month of March, American Red Cross Month.
Another item of interest was new playground equipment for two of our city parks. Rucker Village and Chief Reed Park will be getting new playground equipment at a cost of $19,000. This cost would also include a swing for Garrard Park which is handicap accessible .
It was noted there wasn’t enough money in the budget to also have a handicap swing included with the equipment being installed at RuckerVillage and Chief Reed Park.
Mayor Thornton asked "how much extra was needed to include a handicap swing?" It was stated each of the 2 swings would cost an extra $ 500.00 each. The lady who was presenting the information to city officials stated that Mayor Thornton last year donated his personal money for a handicap swing at Claysville Park.
Mayor Thornton then stated, "he would donate his personal money for 1 swing this year also."
Commissioner Fryman then stated "the other swing money could be donated by the 4 city commissioners."
I want to thank Mayor Thornton and the Commissioners for donating this money for our kids. THANKS!
Another item was to advertise a bid package for the Cable TV Franchise in Paris. It was noted it’s been 10 years since it was last bid. It was stated there are several areas within the city limits that still have no cable service. This time it will be part of the bid package to extend coverage into these areas. It was noted they also wanted a local access channel so schools and civic organization could have access to broadcast events if they wanted. This local channel could even be used to show commissioner meetings. I am sure for that!!
Next time I will continue with more on this meeting.
Until next time,
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Bourbon County Regional Jail Ordinance
I decided to attend the Bourbon County Fiscal Court meeting this past Thursday night 2/11/2010. They were going to have a Second Reading of the Regional Jail Ordinance. The Regional Jail concept has Bourbon County entering into an agreement with neighboring Nicholas County. There was a lot of interest and the court room was full.
I wanted to hear both sides on this issue because I pay taxes in Bourbon County too. The jail and it’s problems seems to make the news more often than not. Several people signed the public comment sheet to speak including myself.
One of the biggest concern to Bourbon County tax payers should be that Nicholas County will have two voting members on a regional board that will hire an administer to run the jail instead of the elected jailer.
To me this is a problem because the jail will still be funded 100% by Bourbon County Tax Dollars yet Nicholas County has a vote on how Bourbon County taxes are spent?? I have a huge problem with that. If Nicholas County is going to have a say, bring some Nicholas County tax dollars to the bargaining table.
Another problem with this idea is that no one really knows the cost on this, they only think it will be better. To me the Bourbon Fiscal court members should have asked for an independent study and get the facts on regional versus local county jails.
When questioned at this meeting fiscal court members agreed they needed more information but went ahead and voted 6-2 in favor of the regional jail. Magistrates Overly, Hay, Foley, Dawson, Offutt, and Smoot voted in favor of the ordinance. Magistrate McCarty and Judge Foley voted no.
I will say that Judge Foley ask all the magistrates before they voted, did they want to postpone the vote until they could provide the public with more information. They declined, went ahead and voted . After the vote Judge Foley said they would be working up an agreement with Nicholas County within the next 30 to 60 days. Judge Foley indicated the agreement would be shared with the public. He also said the regional jail would start at the beginning of 2011.
I was told that now it takes about $ 1,000,000.00 of our tax dollars a year to run the jail. The worst part of all this is, both sides agree running a jail whether it is local or regional loses tax payer dollars. Tax payers of Paris/Bourbon County our Fiscal Court Magistrates owe it to all of us to provide information showing were our tax dollars are going. Again, I urge more of you to speak up, the era of fiscal responsibility is here.
Until next time,
I wanted to hear both sides on this issue because I pay taxes in Bourbon County too. The jail and it’s problems seems to make the news more often than not. Several people signed the public comment sheet to speak including myself.
One of the biggest concern to Bourbon County tax payers should be that Nicholas County will have two voting members on a regional board that will hire an administer to run the jail instead of the elected jailer.
To me this is a problem because the jail will still be funded 100% by Bourbon County Tax Dollars yet Nicholas County has a vote on how Bourbon County taxes are spent?? I have a huge problem with that. If Nicholas County is going to have a say, bring some Nicholas County tax dollars to the bargaining table.
Another problem with this idea is that no one really knows the cost on this, they only think it will be better. To me the Bourbon Fiscal court members should have asked for an independent study and get the facts on regional versus local county jails.
When questioned at this meeting fiscal court members agreed they needed more information but went ahead and voted 6-2 in favor of the regional jail. Magistrates Overly, Hay, Foley, Dawson, Offutt, and Smoot voted in favor of the ordinance. Magistrate McCarty and Judge Foley voted no.
I will say that Judge Foley ask all the magistrates before they voted, did they want to postpone the vote until they could provide the public with more information. They declined, went ahead and voted . After the vote Judge Foley said they would be working up an agreement with Nicholas County within the next 30 to 60 days. Judge Foley indicated the agreement would be shared with the public. He also said the regional jail would start at the beginning of 2011.
I was told that now it takes about $ 1,000,000.00 of our tax dollars a year to run the jail. The worst part of all this is, both sides agree running a jail whether it is local or regional loses tax payer dollars. Tax payers of Paris/Bourbon County our Fiscal Court Magistrates owe it to all of us to provide information showing were our tax dollars are going. Again, I urge more of you to speak up, the era of fiscal responsibility is here.
Until next time,
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
02/09/2010 Commissioners Meeting
Again I was about ten minutes late for this 9 a.m. meeting. It seems no matter what I do this morning meeting instead of evening doesn't work for me. When I arrived there were two gentlemen talking to city officials. As I listened I realized they were talking about the City of Paris Financial Statements fiscal year 2009 which started 7/1/2008 ended 6/30/2009. This time frame was only a partial 1st year in office for our present city officials.
The following is a brief summary of the auditors- Ray, Foley, Hensley & Company.PLLC.
The auditor started out with their Findings Related To Financial Statements conditions. They discussed three items of concern to them.
Item 1. Auditors stated Condition was- . Bank reconciliations are not being performed timely or reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Internal controls should be in place that provide reasonable assurance that bank reconciliations are prepared in a timely manner and reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Auditors stated Cause was- There are no policies and procedures to require timely preparation and review of bank reconciliations.
Auditors stated Effect was- Errors and irregularities may not be identified on a timely basis.
Auditors recommendation was- Bank reconciliations should be prepared monthly and reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Item 2 Auditors stated Condition was- The City lacks experience in applying generally accepted accounting principles to transactions recorded throughout the year and aid in selecting appropriate financial statement disclosures.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Appropriate experience should be sought to more effectively apply generally accepted accounting principles to transactions recorded throughout the year and aid in selecting appropriate financial statement disclosures.
Auditors stated Cause was- The City’s growth necessitates additional expertise in this area.
Auditors stated Effect was- This results in a number of year end adjustments to bring records in-line with generally accepted accounting principles. Also additional assistance is required to produce the statements.
Auditors stated Recommendation was- We recommend management consider the feasibility of the addition of a financial officer with the required background or retain additional consultants to aid the city with the necessary help.
The City of Paris stated Response to item 1. & item 2. was- The City is currently considering reallocating and / or adding resources to more effectively monitor and oversee the financial reporting process. This should also serve to strengthen year end closing procedures.
Sounds like to me, there might be a job opening with the city if you have a financial background.
Item 3 Findings and questioned Costs for Federal Awards-Assistance to Firefighters Grant.
Auditors stated Condition was- The city did not file required reports timely for the Assitance to Firefighters Grant.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Internal controls should be put in place to assure timely filing of required reports.
Auditors stated Cause was- No procedures were in place to monitor compliance with reporting requirements.
Auditors stated Effect was- Grantor may delay further funding or request reimbursement.
Auditors stated Recommendation was- We recommend management design control policies and procedures which aid monitoring all aspects of grants with emphasis on compliance and reporting requirements.
The City of Paris stated Response to this was- The city was in a period of transition. During the transition, reporting requirements were not met due to employee turnover. At present, responsibility for monitoring grants has been consolidated under the assistant city manager. Ongoing assessment is being conducted by the office of the City Manager.
The auditors noted to the city officials they should have been called earlier so they could be presenting the audit to them much sooner. The auditor stated “ We should have presented this in Oct-Nov time frame instead of February.” He noted more than half of fiscal year 2010 is already over and that doesn’t give the city enough time.
Commissioner Galbraith agreed they needed a financial system in place to remedy the present problems. He also said, “that it was city officials responsibility to not have repeat offenses year after year, because that meant we aren’t doing our job.”
I want to again thank the mayor. He had an extra copy of the City of Paris Financial Statements audit. He got up and came to where I was setting and gave the copy to me so I could follow along as the auditors explained the financial statements.
Over all the auditors stated that the turn around from fiscal year 2008 was very good. He felt this group of city officials did a good job of fiscal responsibility.
Mayor Thornton asked the auditors could they give city officials an idea how they measured up to other cities that they audited. The mayor asked are we average, below average, or above average?
The auditor replied he would give them a grade point B just a little above the middle of the pack.
I was pleased to hear what the auditors said, it makes me think they must be doing some things right. Now lets hope the present fiscal year of 2010 which ends June 30th will show an even better job of fiscal responsibility by our city officials.
Until next time,
The following is a brief summary of the auditors- Ray, Foley, Hensley & Company.PLLC.
The auditor started out with their Findings Related To Financial Statements conditions. They discussed three items of concern to them.
Item 1. Auditors stated Condition was- . Bank reconciliations are not being performed timely or reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Internal controls should be in place that provide reasonable assurance that bank reconciliations are prepared in a timely manner and reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Auditors stated Cause was- There are no policies and procedures to require timely preparation and review of bank reconciliations.
Auditors stated Effect was- Errors and irregularities may not be identified on a timely basis.
Auditors recommendation was- Bank reconciliations should be prepared monthly and reviewed by the appropriate level of management.
Item 2 Auditors stated Condition was- The City lacks experience in applying generally accepted accounting principles to transactions recorded throughout the year and aid in selecting appropriate financial statement disclosures.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Appropriate experience should be sought to more effectively apply generally accepted accounting principles to transactions recorded throughout the year and aid in selecting appropriate financial statement disclosures.
Auditors stated Cause was- The City’s growth necessitates additional expertise in this area.
Auditors stated Effect was- This results in a number of year end adjustments to bring records in-line with generally accepted accounting principles. Also additional assistance is required to produce the statements.
Auditors stated Recommendation was- We recommend management consider the feasibility of the addition of a financial officer with the required background or retain additional consultants to aid the city with the necessary help.
The City of Paris stated Response to item 1. & item 2. was- The City is currently considering reallocating and / or adding resources to more effectively monitor and oversee the financial reporting process. This should also serve to strengthen year end closing procedures.
Sounds like to me, there might be a job opening with the city if you have a financial background.
Item 3 Findings and questioned Costs for Federal Awards-Assistance to Firefighters Grant.
Auditors stated Condition was- The city did not file required reports timely for the Assitance to Firefighters Grant.
Auditors stated Criteria was- Internal controls should be put in place to assure timely filing of required reports.
Auditors stated Cause was- No procedures were in place to monitor compliance with reporting requirements.
Auditors stated Effect was- Grantor may delay further funding or request reimbursement.
Auditors stated Recommendation was- We recommend management design control policies and procedures which aid monitoring all aspects of grants with emphasis on compliance and reporting requirements.
The City of Paris stated Response to this was- The city was in a period of transition. During the transition, reporting requirements were not met due to employee turnover. At present, responsibility for monitoring grants has been consolidated under the assistant city manager. Ongoing assessment is being conducted by the office of the City Manager.
The auditors noted to the city officials they should have been called earlier so they could be presenting the audit to them much sooner. The auditor stated “ We should have presented this in Oct-Nov time frame instead of February.” He noted more than half of fiscal year 2010 is already over and that doesn’t give the city enough time.
Commissioner Galbraith agreed they needed a financial system in place to remedy the present problems. He also said, “that it was city officials responsibility to not have repeat offenses year after year, because that meant we aren’t doing our job.”
I want to again thank the mayor. He had an extra copy of the City of Paris Financial Statements audit. He got up and came to where I was setting and gave the copy to me so I could follow along as the auditors explained the financial statements.
Over all the auditors stated that the turn around from fiscal year 2008 was very good. He felt this group of city officials did a good job of fiscal responsibility.
Mayor Thornton asked the auditors could they give city officials an idea how they measured up to other cities that they audited. The mayor asked are we average, below average, or above average?
The auditor replied he would give them a grade point B just a little above the middle of the pack.
I was pleased to hear what the auditors said, it makes me think they must be doing some things right. Now lets hope the present fiscal year of 2010 which ends June 30th will show an even better job of fiscal responsibility by our city officials.
Until next time,
Thursday, February 4, 2010
02/03/2010 Special Meeting
Special Meeting of City Officials
This was an early 8 a.m. meeting. It really played havoc on my normal morning routine to get to this meeting. I especially wanted to hear the discussion on the weed/grass ordinance proposal.
Here were the 3 items on the agenda, Little League Baseball Program Bids, Take Home Fleet Policy, and weed/grass ordinance.
The Little League Baseball program had 2 bids for the council to consider. Commissioner Brooks excused himself from voting because one of the bids was from a family member of his. It was stated that the bids were very close and after a short discussion the contract was awarded to Mr. Rodney Roe. The Mayor, Commissioner Fryman, and Horn voted yes. Commissioner Galbraith voted no.
Another item was the Police cruiser, Take Home Fleet Policy. This policy describes the do’s and don’ts to the police officers of Paris. Each officer will have to sign the policy in order to participate. At first there was slight confusion among the council about the contents of the policy.
They then decided because Chief Sutton had just been hired to go ahead with what was presented so all voted yes for the new policy. It was stated, come budget time this issue would be re-opened again.
The next item drug-out for over an hour discussing the high weed/grass ordinance. After sitting and listening to there discussions it became very apparent to me they hadn’t read the present ordinance. The questions they were asking each other about adding in the ordinance were already in the old ordinance. Here are some examples of things they wanted to add in the ordinance, send a letter to property owner, post a notice on the property, put the property owners name in the paper, etc.
They knew ahead of time this was going to be discussed in this special meeting, why didn’t each one of them take the time to know what was in the old ordinance before coming to a meeting to make changes in it??
One good thing they decided to add was a specific height because the old ordinance just said a reasonable height and that leaves it to an individual discretion.
I will say that the mayor was very vocal about saying, “ the city was very slow about responding to issues and this needed addressed as an internal issue.”
I also thank the mayor for allowing me to speak when I held my hand up. He allowed me to enter my thoughts about the city just enforcing the ordinance instead of letting it drag on the whole mowing season.
Until next time,
This was an early 8 a.m. meeting. It really played havoc on my normal morning routine to get to this meeting. I especially wanted to hear the discussion on the weed/grass ordinance proposal.
Here were the 3 items on the agenda, Little League Baseball Program Bids, Take Home Fleet Policy, and weed/grass ordinance.
The Little League Baseball program had 2 bids for the council to consider. Commissioner Brooks excused himself from voting because one of the bids was from a family member of his. It was stated that the bids were very close and after a short discussion the contract was awarded to Mr. Rodney Roe. The Mayor, Commissioner Fryman, and Horn voted yes. Commissioner Galbraith voted no.
Another item was the Police cruiser, Take Home Fleet Policy. This policy describes the do’s and don’ts to the police officers of Paris. Each officer will have to sign the policy in order to participate. At first there was slight confusion among the council about the contents of the policy.
They then decided because Chief Sutton had just been hired to go ahead with what was presented so all voted yes for the new policy. It was stated, come budget time this issue would be re-opened again.
The next item drug-out for over an hour discussing the high weed/grass ordinance. After sitting and listening to there discussions it became very apparent to me they hadn’t read the present ordinance. The questions they were asking each other about adding in the ordinance were already in the old ordinance. Here are some examples of things they wanted to add in the ordinance, send a letter to property owner, post a notice on the property, put the property owners name in the paper, etc.
They knew ahead of time this was going to be discussed in this special meeting, why didn’t each one of them take the time to know what was in the old ordinance before coming to a meeting to make changes in it??
One good thing they decided to add was a specific height because the old ordinance just said a reasonable height and that leaves it to an individual discretion.
I will say that the mayor was very vocal about saying, “ the city was very slow about responding to issues and this needed addressed as an internal issue.”
I also thank the mayor for allowing me to speak when I held my hand up. He allowed me to enter my thoughts about the city just enforcing the ordinance instead of letting it drag on the whole mowing season.
Until next time,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
