Supervisor Candland is proposing a resolution to begin a much more extensive process to our “discretionary” spending problem in PWC. To read the full resolution, click here.
Discretionary money only scratches the surface to a much broader endemic problem in Prince William County– Who, what, when , where receives tax payer funding that is not a direct government entity. I am a strong proponent of private/public partnerships. However, in PWC, there is no real process for which non profit receives tax payer funds. Our “process”, or lack thereof, has been at the sole behest of the individual Supervisor. The only pseudo check and balance is a perfunctory Board approval that we all know is simply a rubber stamp.
Ending discretionary funding will not solve this problem. We give away 12 million dollars in each annual budget to our “community partners”. I would like to know, how are these partners selected? While some may seem obvious, many others may not be. What is the process that defines the success of such groups? How do other counties partner with non-profits?
What citizens like myself are wondering is, where is the transparency for funding these groups? This is not a left or right issue, this is not a republican or democrat issue, this is an issue of fairness and open government.
Prince William County can no longer operate like a “good ole boy” network. It is time to govern like we are a modern exurb of our nations capitol! My hope is that the Board of Supervisors will take Peter Candland’s resolution and not just approve it, but build upon it and really start addressing how we do allocate our government funds in PWC.
This resolution is not about ending private public partnerships, it is about improving our process so that there is a fair playing field, one that is transparent to citizens and non profits alike.
The discretionary funds are quite literally only the tip of the iceberg, that tiny visual portion of a much greater problem. It is and always has been a Gordian Knot of conflicts between several members of the BOCS and select well-connected local interests. Everything revolves around the interest of several developers (we know who they are) and several law firms (again, no need to name names). This knot extends to those discretionary fund donations as well as some budget line items, ie: contributions to the Hylton Center, War Museum, Boys and Girls Club, etc. ad nauseum. If you scan the members of the boards of the various groups who receive the most egregious funding you will find the same cast of BOCS members and well connected locals (names are pointless, we know them all).
Its a convoluted mass of interelated quid pro quos that involve land use decisons, charitable donations, campaign contributions, board appointments, etc. largely orchestrated by Caddigan, Jenkins, Nohe and Covington, a situation Corey allows as it conveniently affords him a manner to fill his campaign coffers. I will give Corey (and Stirrup) this much, apart from the “Rule of Law” mailing which may or may not qualify as this type of abuse, those two and to a large degree Mike May, haven’t engaged in the type of narcissistic behavior best exemplified by the Queen of Dumfries and Supervisor Jenkins.
A glimpse of just a couple of campaign contributions from last year will give you a real sense of what is going on, take note of the similarities, everything is interelated:
Jenkins
$2,000 Allan D Cors
$1,500 Conrad C Hylton $500 Firefighters – Prince William
Nohe
$1,000 Firefighters – Prince William
$500 Allan D Cors
$500 Conrad C Hylton
Caddigan
$500 Allan D Cors
$500 Firefighters – Local 2598
Principi
$1,000 Allan D Cors
$500 Firefighters – Prince William
The Sheriff is most correct in one thing, none of this could be accomplished without the aid of the County Exec[CUTIVES PAST AND PRESENT.] [Ed. Note: comment redacted because of blog policy regarding non-elected officials.]
Reminder to all,
When you demean and insult people personally, it diminishes the validity of your points. Please be specific regarding policy decisions without attacking people personall,especially if they are county or city employees.
The “use it or lose it” component of budgeted items often produces undesirable results, especially in government spending.
Over the years I have seen money wasted because time ran out, Hopefully money will be allowed to roll over with a specific target that is an approved expenditure.
Otherwise, perhaps this resolution is long overdue and we will be able to soon say “The Resolution” to mean a different way of doing county monetary business.
What Elena said: Totally agree. These are discussions we need to be having. They aren’t always pleasant. Please be mindful of our guidelines, found on the Guidelines tab up top.
https://www.moonhowlings.net/index.php/guidelines/
Tom Jackman has a detailed article in this evening’s Washington Post on the Prince William County Office Funds that many people call discretionary funds.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-state-of-nova/post/prince-william-discretionary-funds-up-for-vote-tuesday-as-heat-is-turned-up-high/2012/06/04/gJQAFqX9DV_blog.html
First off, several blogs were listed as keeping the pressure on the supervisors. We were not listed and I am glad to be left off of that list. Things are not always as they appear and we feel this is the time to listen and learn rather than attack. We are not comfortable accusing others of impropriety.
That does not mean we don’t think there is plenty of room for questions. Absolutely. If Pete Candland can suggest a better mousetrap, then I would like to hear all about it. It sounds like he has some good plans and is handling the discretionary funds professionally, without accussatory, pointing fingers. He has identified a problem and proposed a solution. He has not gotten hysterical, wallowed in righteous indignation, or tried to incite others to riot. He has offered a resolution [thus known as THE Resolution] to solve the problem.
I plan on sitting back and watching his lead.
I encourage all citizens to read the WaPo article and to take note of the money involved.
“Ending discretionary funding will not solve this problem. We give away 12 million dollars in each annual budget to our “community partners”. I would like to know, how are these partners selected? While some may seem obvious, many others may not be. What is the process that defines the success of such groups? How do other counties partner with non-profits?
What citizens like myself are wondering is, where is the transparency for funding these groups? This is not a left or right issue, this is not a republican or democrat issue, this is an issue of fairness and open government.”
Elena, regarding the Community Partners, there is a process to that each Fiscal Year and being the Board President of one of those Partners, quite familiar with the procedure. There is a formal written application each year. Beginning in FY2012, that application also required the organization being able to meet one of the County Strategic Plan areas, and also goals within those areas. The County calls a meeting, normally in January, where the groups come together and the Finance Office reviews the procedures and the application.
Each group also is identified under a specific County Agency/Entity for the most part, especially within the Human Services. If you look at the County Budget Book for the section on Community Partners, you will see the respective affiliations.
PWC Finance, upon receipt of the application, gets with the County Agency/Entity to review the application. Funding is then determined and either can be the whole requested amount, or in most cases, is reduced. Key within the Human Service Agencies is how many PWC residents are being served, and at what cost. The nonprofit also must submit its latest Form 990 IRS Return and latest Audit. Then it all gets compiled and presented to the BOCS.
Now, through the year, each quarter the nonprofit has to submit a progress report on how it is meeting the goals, and then receives it quarterly amount till the whole PWC budgeted amount is payed out. Naturally, at the end of the Fiscal Year, the nonprofit must submit a final report. Then the process starts all over again.
The City of Manassas also has an application which, like the County, is sent out every year as part of the budget process. For Budget Year 2013, the City tried something different…instead of having each group come and present to the full City Council, the Council created a committee comprised of two City Councilmen and I think it was 4 City Residents (two for human services, two for the Arts-type organizations). A recommendation was made from this group to the Council, and then it was voted on in a worksession.
Over in Manassas Park, because of their budget woes of the last several years, they have continued the practice of no funding to Community Partners.
All of this in the budget process is on paper, and if you ask, both the County and the City will produce the documents, and do not even have to invoke the VA FOIA to do it. Overall, a very clean process. I also have to have the County credit in FY2012 of doing that Baseline Review of contributions through the budget process to the Partners, and publishing the document on the website.
Oh, other Counties: forgot to add that. I know down in Fauquier County (since my nonprofit provides services there) each year there is the application and also the meeting with their finance. You are required in Fauquier to tie it into the Comprehensive Plan mainly within Community Developement. That also is available online to see the amounts and what County Agencies/Entitities the nonprofits are teamed with.
Across NoVA, I know the other four jurisdictions are all application process too. So totally different than the way the discretionary funds are handled. Of course, as I have said more than once, when it came to the discretionary funds and the nonprofits, it always seemed to be only specific ones recurring all the time. There are just about 50 nonprofits in PWC who could be considered, and do apply during budget time, but do not seem to make “the cut” for individual BOCS donation.
And lastly, about “scratching the surface”: What about when the BOCS approve as part of the five year budget plan to provide funding to a nonprofit so that it may leverage private donations? There are two such receiving $1million over the five years – the ARC for its new building, and the War Time Museum. I personally hold government money should not be given to a nonprofit to leverage private donations.
Now, this is not the same as the funding of the Volunteer Fire Companies I mentioned in another post….they are part of the budget process to include approval of the PWC Government backing loans for purchase of equipment and apparatus. That is all part of COunty FRS stuff. What I wrote above about tax dollars to leverage private donations is another matter people should ponder on.
I am not sure that war museum should be getting anything from the county. I don’t see that as the same as ARC. ARC serves citizens in the community. Not sure how many or if there is a better way to accomplish this.
@Moon-howler
“First off, several blogs were listed as keeping the pressure on the supervisors. We were not listed and I am glad to be left off of that list. Things are not always as they appear and we feel this is the time to listen and learn rather than attack. We are not comfortable accusing others of impropriety.
The fact that you are unwilling to take a stand on this issue says a great deal. The Sheriff of Nottingham has provided irrefutable evidence of what has been going on and yet you and Elena continue to demure. What has to happen to convince you that our elected officials are picking our pockets for their own glorification? Do you think it is right for Caddigan or Jenkins or Principi to spend tax payer dollars to have their names and the names of family members engraved on such things as theater seats, memorial bricks and plaques.?
Why are you so unwilling to put these “gifts” under the microscope of public scrutiny and the budget process? I simply do not understand.
When I take a stand, I like to make sure I am dealing with facts. Right now, I see investigation and exploration. Much of this has been provided by the hard work and diligence of the Sheriff. H/t.
There are some folks who are going to lob grenades just because that’s what they do. I don’t really like poking around in the bushes with some who are salivating to get something on someone, while the entire time cross pollinating…buzzing here and buzzing there, sucking up to this one and sucking up to that one.
I believe my reputation is based on having clean hands. I choose my alliances carefully. If that means being seen as “not taking a stand” then so be it. Most people who know me know that about me. I am in no hurry.
Most importantly, rather than a public hanging where the commoners throw tomatoes and rotten fruit at those they feel fall short of the mark, I prefer supporting those who have solutions to potential problems. Wisdom sometimes involves not following the crowd.
Meanwhile, I will continue to question the huge expenditures that deal with Rainbow and the war museum. Those large expenditures are potential problems and most people can wrap their heads around outlandish big items. If we can clean up the big messes, the little messes are less likely to happen.
Actually, the fact that you are willing to publically attack me says a great deal–none of it very pretty.
Surely my response does not surprise?
The BOCS meeting begins at 2 pm today. Citizens time appears to be about half an hour into the meeting. The discussion of the Candland Resolution is towards the end of the afternoon session.
Select current agenda
http://www.pwcgov.org/government/bocs/Pages/BOCS-Landing-Page.aspx
The irony here, is that they can spend the money on their office budget, spend it all, and there would be no peep. Why does it cost so much for them to run an office, and should that budget be cut?
Each gets just under $400k a year to run things, I think. is “site based management” the best way?
The Sheriff of Notthingham continues to supply fresh information. Where has he been all these years.
http://sheriffofnottinghampwc.blogspot.com
Don’t we pay county attorneys? Why doesn’t the county attorney advise the supervisors about matters that maybe aren’t illegal but that look bad? Isn’t that what our mothers used to tell us was “propriety?”
I don’t want to stone anyone, I just want a working form of government that is fair to everyone. Hopefully the work of the Sheriff sends a wake up call that business as usual just isn’t going to happen here in Prince Billy Bob.
Maybe we should all thank Wally Covington for hitting us over the head with a baseball bat when he initiated the give-away of $100k to his wife’s favorite non-profit organization. We all sat up and took notice. If a big ticket item stinks, then you can be sure there is lots of rot below the surface. Good for Pete Candland for stepping up to the plate, even if it is a swing and a miss this go round. He is looking for solutions to what are obviously problems.
George,
Rainbow Riding has stood as an example of the abuse of tax payer funding to small non profits for over a year now. We have discussed the problems, not just with discrectionary spending, but the budget as a whole, for some time. I don’t actually believe we haven’t taken a stand. However, if the entire process is broken, and the supervisors simply are “following” the current procedure, or lack there of, in my opinion, the best way to deal with the problem is attack the problem, not the individual supervisor.
Citizens want the process fixed and the best way to do that is to point out the holistic problem and demand that we, as tax payers, want a solution. Moonhowlings has done that, consistently, for quite some time. The historical record on this blog points that out, and it begins with our focus on Rainbow Riding of more than a year ago.
Thank you Ray! I guess when I look at community partners and see Rainbow Riding recieving over thirty grand annually, I wonder about the process.
MOM brings up a critical point. Who here remembers the Grizzlies? Wally was able to trade away public land to a private organization on the taxpayer dime. Avendale turned 25 homes into several hundred and who pays for the infrastructure to support that huge development? Yes, we, the tax payers do. People may not remember Braemar in Bristow, another huge developement of a few thousand homes. Sudley Park, aka Catharpin Park, was traded for development rights to build out Braemar. Want to know how that park is working out for citizens more than a decade later……it AINT. Which, of course, brings us full circle to Silver Lake. A park that sits there undone, and looking horrific. Somehow, within that development deal for TollBrothers, Rainbow Riding found a seat at the table as an integral player. How is that? How was 45 acres of public land turned into private land on the tax payer dime?
There is a system so broken in PWC that Pete Candland is only scratching the surface with this resolution.
Moon, the reason I have issues with the ARC and that $1million is this: at the sime time that large request was coming forward, Matthew’s Center (serving children with autism and their families) applied for a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) in the amount of $250,000 also for a new building. This Block Grant is Federal HUD funding, and is a way for Community Partners to compete through an application to the PWC Office of Housing & Community Development. Matthew’s Center, although having an excellent application, did not get funded.
CBDG is the proper way to compete for funding; albeit there is limited funding each year. ARC used instead the approach of directly to the Supervisors to use local tax dollars without competing for HUD funding.
Granted, ARC does a wonderful job of serving those with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities. So do two other organizations which use other grant processes to seek funding vs. going to the BOCS to seek direct funding….and note, I am not saying as part of the Annual Budget Process as that is a grant process. I am talking about standing before the dias and asking for it directly just like Rainbow and ARC have done.
I will defer to you, Ray. You are much more on top of this than I am. My only point is, ARC at least serves someone. The War Museum? Not so much.
I just want to know why the executive staff here is the same person who chairs the doling out of PWC money to various groups.
Does anyone else see that as conflict of interest or is it just me?
There is just something about that War Museum that just isn’t right.
I wish the Sheriff would start sniffing around that one.
“Most importantly, rather than a public hanging where the commoners throw tomatoes and rotten fruit at those they feel fall short of the mark,”
NOW THAT would make for fun “town hall meetings.” THIS we should bring back. We could charge admission for that. 🙂
Ok, back to the regularly scheduled post…..
From the Washington Post:
Let me be clear–I like Marty and this is a feel good story. However, I question if providing a home is the job of the citizens of Prince William County. Shouldn’t they have a say-so?
It seems to me that churches and other charities could provide the same services and those who wanted to could make the donations.
Where is Brother Marin? Isn’t this the type of thing he objects to? It is as though you are being forced to contribute to this charity or face jail time or loss of property if you don’t comply. I feel the same way about that damn war museum. Its 10 miles from the Marine Museum. Enough already. I shouldn’t be forced to support it.
Mom and Elena are absolutely correct. I applaud Pete’s initiative, but there is much more to be done. Giving away exclusive rights for public facilities in exchange for political support as was done in the cases of Avendale and Rainbow Riding; crony spending even in the normal budget process; and an arts grants process that is fatally flawed, lacks transparency and is susceptible to gaming by those who know the system are all parts of a much broader problem.
Moon, I’ll abide by your rules but will second Mom’s comments about corruption in senior County management, then and now, that aims to help supervisors skirt the rules rather than honor them.
Bully for Pete! His actios to eliminate the slush fund spending is a great first step in cleaning up our County government, but we still have a long way to go.
They are Elena’s rules also as she is co-owner of this blog.
You are aware that these people you are criticizing also work for the supervisors and must do as they are told to do? Feel free to discuss the problem professionally. Feel free to discuss policy or implementation of policy. It should be discussed. However, we will continue to guard people who are employees and in the position where they cannot fight back.
There is an old expression about ” you can’t fight City Hall.” I think that comes in to play here.
meanwhile, I drag my index and middle fingers from my eyes for about a foot and then point outwardly…..I am watching.
There are blogs where you can say anything about anyone you want…..regardless of how personal or disgusting. They know where they are…and they are proud of it.
I prefer the Andy Harrover model….
@Elena
But it is the supervisors as well as the county executive who are to blame. John Jenkins has served for 30 years and has done NOTHING to change the feudal system the county operates under. He like it that way and apparently so does Maureen Caddigan. If the error of their ways is not pointed out and they are not made to acknowledge their errors, how do we fix the mess? Collectively, supervisors have given away nearly a half-million of our tax dollars to satisfy their whims and to often memorialize their names in places. Despite their protests that they gain no political advantage through their “gifts”, that is just plain DUMB!.
Moon, I understand our position and largely do not disagree, however, in an organization as large as the Prince William County wherein the “decisions” are made by a handful what are in essence part-time employees, the real power lies with and the real decisions made by those behind the curtains. Specifically, those who control what supporting information is delivered to the BOCS members and equally importantly, how their instructions are carried out. What is readily apparent in PWC is that those who control the county employees behind the curtain are in truth the ones who control the agenda and by extension the county.
As to their not being able to fight back, I guess you’ve never run afoul of Craig or Melissa, defenseless they aint.
@Moon-howler
“Actually, the fact that you are willing to publically attack me says a great deal–none of it very pretty.”
I’m sorry you feel like you have been attacked. But let’s look at something–Yes, you and Elena did bring the egregious act of Wally Covington into the sunlight and he finally withdrew his proposal. But let me ask you this–did the BOCS do anything before or after that? No. The BOCS did nothing but approve his original resolutions to give $100,000 to Rainbow in what should be seen as a “You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” or “Wink, wink, nod, nod” approach to the whole thing. Why didn’t the BOCS disapproved the original resolution? Why? Because it is the way they do business. What has the BOCS done despite all the public uproar over “discretionary funds”? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING until Peter Candland came along–the very same Peter Candland who was treated badly by this blog. Now all of a sudden he is the Golden Boy. So where is the fairness? I’m not sure I know. The problem won’t be fixed until the root cause is exposed and dealt with and the root cause is the supervisors or at least some of them.
@Moon-howler
Yes, a feel good story and your right…it is not the responsibility of citizens to provide a home. The citizens pay for the Office of Housing & Community Development that seeks the Federal & State dollars which can be made available (within various program rules) to be used by citizens.
I asked about that Veteran if any of the Veterans Administration money for home modification was tapped – and it is not. For a permanent home, there are two different programs which could be used; one paying for adaptive items (ramps, grab bars, etc) and the other paying for major modificiations. Neither was tapped.
The effin’ nerve!!!
Things have moved along ….The Resolution discussion was moved head and Candland is reading his plan now.
I’m glad they’ve moved on. At least they heard our voices and changes have and are being made. Nice to see Mr. Dawson back to give ’em hell. He’s Mr. Crone’s Nokesvill replacement in my book. 🙂
@Ray Beverage
So you are saying that there were other resources available that no one looked into?
What is John Jenkins’ motion about? He is not making sense to me.
Although I admire getting rid of the fund, the Candland proposal that it just goes into the office and everything not spent has to be returned is almost worse. No government entity EVER gives back unspent funds because they spend them. So now instead of ACTS, school PTAs, the libraries or the Red Cross getting donations, the money will be used to buy TVs, new desks, copiers, etc. for the supervisors’ offices. Or they will hire extra people to use up the funds. Yuck, at least the other way the non profit groups would be getting the money.
If they cut out the discretionary funds, then they need to cut out the money completely. How could something that was supposed to right a wrong create a monster.
They are trying to eat Candland’s lunch. I am not sure what the amendments even mean.
Wally is making sense…let the county attorney look at all these amendments.
Jenkin’s motions are aimed at Candland’s office and to some of his minions. It’s simply a ham-handed attempt at tit for tat. Not surprising that everyone else is going along with Jenkins.
Where did overtime come from? Why is that even an issue?
This is retaliation against Peter for taking away their candy, just like earlier when Nohe pulled Catharpin Park in retaliation for Pete not supporting their budget. Unbelievable. PWC hits a new low.
I am now so confused I have no idea what is going on.
Usually when new ways of doing things happen……new replaces old. In this case, I saw the bull dozer, I just don’t know where the bodies are buried.
PWC did what it does best–it obfuscated something fairly simple into a plan no one will ever understand.
Ah life might not be good but at least it is consistent.
Anonymouse’s concerns have been my concerns all along. I think we just cut out a vital part of the community in exchange for someone buying up enough bic pens to last 20 years….except the ink dried up.
I don’t like where all this ended up and I feel like I just got run over by a steam roller. I expect Pete will feel that that for years.
@Mom
I expect you are very correct, MoM. However, we have to make our policies with more than one person in mind. The average county employee cannot fight back. We can’t have a policy that says no trashing county employees by name except for Craig and Melissa.
Feel free to debate policy and their actions…..Just no trashin’.
George said:
It sounded pretty personal to me and it didn’t sound like you approved of what I was doing. Did I misread your intent?
George said:
I beg your pardon. This blog meaning, Elena and me, did not treat Peter Candland “badly.” As I recall, it was YOU who discovered some rather unflattering remarks made about Elena on his official website. Before that discovery, Elena and I had decided that we were going to sit out the election and simply go vote as private citizens. But all that changed. Please note, we did not shoot the messenger.
Mr. Candland is certainly not the golden boy here. He is the Gainesville supervisor which makes him OUR supervisor. He proposed a resolution which appealed to many different people. We plan on listening and discussing his suggestions. If he plans something we don’t like, I suppose he knows he will be hearing about that also. What perhaps makes this a unique situation is that Mr. Candland IS our own supervisor.
What fairness are you talking about? There was an extremely contentious primary and an heated election. That’s politics. There have been personnel changes that hopefully have cleared up some of the previous angst.
It is time to bury the hatchet. Burying the hatchet doesn’t always mean in someone’s back, although the week I am having is certainly no proof of that. I have several folks’ personal weapons deeply embedded in my own back, thank you very much.
“I have several folks’ personal weapons deeply embedded in my own back”
I can sympathize.
I’ll pull yours out if you’ll pull mine out. Only thing is, if it is in MY back, I don’t return the weapons. I hear scotch is a good anticeptic.
Now I get the wounded warrior remark. I have about 5 gouging my rib cage and spine.
Chris, saddle up and ride the circuit. Come remove my hatchets and then go help MoM out.
Email from the Core-ster:
Dear Friend,
I wanted to be the first to let you know that today the Prince William County Board of Supervisors voted to eliminate discretionary funds from our budgets.
During my tenure as Chairman, I have always looked at ways to decrease the size of government and increase transparency. I am pleased that the Board was able to reach a consensus and agree that these funds were not in the best interest of the county or its taxpayers. It also should be noted that we have put into place tighter controls on how Board members staff their offices or enter into contracts with outside vendors for constituent outreach. These amendments were added to make sure the Board is beyond reproach.
While leading the Board, I have been proud of the financial management of this county. This is reflected in our three AAA bond ratings, a budget that has been reduced by $143 million, and tax bills that are 30% lower than the rest of the region.
Prince William County is a model of how conservative government should work.
It is also an example of the success a locality can have when they adhere to conservative principles. Prince William County is ranked #1 in job growth in Virginia and #3 in the country. The county also saw its median income jump by more than $3,000 making us the 9th wealthiest county in the nation.
It is not an accident or coincidence that we received these accolades; it is because of the fiscal discipline exhibited by not only this board but previous boards.
I look forward to continuing to serve as your Chairman of this dynamic and diverse county.
Correction from Corey’s Office
“I look forward to continuing to serve as your Chairman of this dynamic and diverse county (at least until something bigger and better comes around).”
Well if Core-ster(love it) was fond of this idea. Then why didn’t he introduce this resolution? I think we’ve seen this one played out before. Oddly, enough it was another ‘lil resolution itroduced by the Gainesville supervisor and Corey rode that one like the Big Kahuna on a wave. It looks like this will be no different. Is there anything that prohibits as Chairman from introducing resolutions such as the two aforementioned? Looking for the “wounded warrior” mom to answer this one. 👿
@Mom
Did you notice he used the wrong stationery?
@Chris
Oh Chris! You sure are connecting the dots and spotting a pattern. ho ho ho
He is already riding this one. Surfs up. He used his “Looey” stationery.
Looey gov that is.
I think I need a cartoon artist….I want a picture of the Core-ster, toes curled around that surf board, riding the big one all the way to Richmond. Surf’s up!!!
The big Kahuna is going to be making quite a splash.
wounded warrior???? Is Mom going to try to sneak in Reinbow Riders? MOM! No fair.
George,
I have been sounding the alarm regarding Supervisor abuse of tax payer dollars for quite some time, from Avendale and the Grizzlies being bought to Rainbow Riding recieving 45 acres of public land. I am more than aware of who is culpable 🙂
@Moon-howler
I would refer you back to your own blog about Candland– several of us, including me, you and Elena made comments that wre not exactly kind. How soon we forget.
@Elena
Yes Elena, you and Moon repeatedly sounded the alarm, but mt point is that despite all of that the BOCS did NOTHING to change itscwaynof doing business until Candland came along. And even his efforts fall short of the mark. While it is not clear, it looks like supervisors will still get at least $315,000 to run their offices and any left over money’s can still be used for certain projects. It does not appear that supervisors must submit a line item budget nd the live by it. I may very well be wrong and perhaps Ray Beverage can help out here. I know that some federal agencies carefully monitor fund expenditures on a quarterly basis and if sub-organizations are not spending funds as projected, the funds get recouped and reassigned–they don’t get used to buy TVs, new desks, copiers or a 20 year supply of Bic pens. But that means the fiscal folks must not be patronage employees. Having an Inspector General or someone similar who is independent of the BOCS and would keep track of the “comings and goings” of the departments, including the BOCS. Those items/undocumented rules regarding the expenditure of funds must be codified. To do less will simply invite a return to the “good old days.”. Storm und drang are one thing– finding the causes and culprits and doing something about the is another.
@Moon-howler
“It is time to bury the hatchet. Burying the hatchet doesn’t always mean in someone’s back, although the week I am having is certainly no proof of that. I have several folks’ personal weapons deeply embedded in my own back, thank you very much.”
I’m not sure martydom becomes you. (I could not help but rise to the bait.)
I am not interested in living in the past. Mr. Candland has made a personal effort to make amends and move forward. I am not one to carry a grudge, never have been, never will, not my personality. He is making a good faith effort to change a policy that has been in effect for decades and he has my support in this endeavor. Will this be a end all fix, no, but it is at least a beginning and citizens will need to remain vigilant in keeping this process moving forward.
Cheer Elena. totally agree.
Rising to the bait? George S. Harris, have you come to reclaim some of your weapons?