38 replies to this topic

[bhudson]

Link

A couple of 'funny' things in this article:

1. It is implied that the city will be realizing shrinking property tax revenues owing to declining property values. Which leaves me a little confused because my appraisal hasn't gone down, and I don't expect that it will. Has anyone's?

2. We have been hearing a lot of noise about how the Barnett boom is bolstering the local economy, allowing us to be shielded from the national economic trends. The writer implies "not so" in the first line, which I disagree with. I still think DFW is largely shielded from what is happening on the national level.

I tend to think the problem was that the city over-aggresively forecast future revenues. The problem is not that property values (appraisals) are declining, it is just that TAD won't be able to justify ratcheting them up as once anticipated in the coming years. Somebody was counting their chickens a little early.

**edit** Now that I reread the article, I realize that I misread part of it. Regarding tax revenues from property taxes, they are expected to grow more slowly, not shrink. So that turns my argument with point 1 into an agreement...

[360texas]

Agreed.... maybe the city folks should stay with Core city services, fire, police, streets, parks, and start cutting the extra nice to have stuff along with the staff that supports the extra stuff.

That tax that they put on our water bill to repair flood drainage areas. Wonder if there is a city page showing progress todate?

I also wonder how those companies who needed tax breaks in order to stay in / move into the area are turning out? I can name 3 or 4 companies promised tax breaks..... is that in effect lowering our cities future operating revenue too? Wonder where we can find out a meaningful progress report on the City Page.

Hmm have not seen our property tax appraised value yet. Guess I had better go visit the TAD website.

[ghughes]

"...start cutting the extra nice to have stuff along with the staff that supports the extra stuff."

What is that "extra nice to have" stuff? There are always proposals to cut waste, fraud and abuse, but I don't ever see any specific examples. So maybe someone can provide (with actual dollar amounts) some examples?

[mikelee]

Link

2. We have been hearing a lot of noise about how the Barnett boom is bolstering the local economy, allowing us to be shielded from the national economic trends. The writer implies "not so" in the first line, which I disagree with. I still think DFW is largely shielded from what is happening on the national level.

There was a section of the story that got left out for lack of space that deals with this issue. Ray Perryman, the economist who has done a lot of work on the Barnett Shale, did indeed predict at the council budget session that the gas boom would shield Fort Worth from some of the housing downturn. But the council members and the city financial folks pointed out that gas drilling doesn't automatically translate into property taxes, which are the mainstay of most city budgets.

Hope that helps. Watch the paper as we go through the summer, we'll be covering the budget quite a bit.

Mike Lee
Star-Telegram

[safly]

I'll pass. I think I'll just get my info from West and Clear.

[JKC]

I'll pass. I think I'll just get my info from West and Clear.

Whew, that is harsh!

[360texas]

With the downturn in the housing market - meaning that new and existing homes are going to sell for what the buyers are willing to pay... maybe the home prices will actually sell for less. TAD bases their property tax on "actually SOLD values" not the sellers asking price. Maybe the fair market value of our home will be appraised lower than last years TAD tax value. AND the total property tax will go DOWN for a change. Which translates into less property tax revenue for the city, county, schools, hospital, water etc.

Recent Feel Good "We are doing alright" its the rest of the country thats in a Re-pression comments by the Governor and other folks speak hollow wishes about our local economy. The Fort Worth Startlegram reports 1 week, look at the new companies coming to DFW. Next week they report about how this or that company is laying off thousands of employees. Anyone keeping a score card on the FWST statistic reporting accuracy?

[Sam Stone]

I think a lot of people are probably going to just hang on to their homes and stay put rather than sell for lower. If people and businesses are feeling pinched, there will probably be more appraisal appeals. This will of course push revenue down. Also, new economic news may have altered their sales tax forecast. But there might be something going on on the spending side. I have a feeling that inflation and gas prices are playing a role in the city's budget cuts.

[360texas]

Agree, I now do not drive out and about unless I have 3 or more tasks to complete. I should resolve to accumulate all driving tasks to 1 time each week.

I have recently switched to changing fuel consumption. from old Miles per Gallon to Cost per/ mile example $/mile

[ghughes]

I'll pass. I think I'll just get my info from West and Clear.

Whew, that is harsh!

The complete lack of critical writing from the S-T when it comes to City Hall, Barnett Shale, TRV, etc. has led me to not renew my subscription to the S-T after twenty years of having it on my door step every morning. Nothing against the writers themselves but the failure of the policy makers to cast a critical eye on anything of substance means the S-T is simply not delivering enough value to be worth my while. So, I'm with safly, except will consult more sources (as I'm sure he does as well).

[ghughes]

From April 7 S-T:
Ironhorse leaves city spinning its wheels
By Barry Shlachter, Jim Fuquay, Maria M. Perotin
Star-Telegram Staff Writers

Among the losers in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing by American IronHorse is its landlord, the Fort Worth Local Development Corp. The entity was established by the city, and City Council members just happen to be its sole board officers, but it is nonetheless considered autonomous.

The odds are not good that the LDC will receive much, if anything, from the custom motorcycle maker, which owes $377,157.57 in back rent and taxes as of Feb. 6. The corporation is an unsecured debtor.

The total includes six months' rent on the 224,800-square-foot facility, the former Fruehauf Trailer assembly building, that had been deferred in exchange for IronHorse's pledge to repave the sprawling parking lot at 4600 Blue Mound Road.

IronHorse never got around to it.

And, somehow, the up-market bikemaker slipped up when it came to paying property taxes -- to the tune of $97,488 in 2006, which includes some penalties, and $82,071 last year.

LDC made good on the overdue taxes to avoid paying even more penalties and interest if the whole mess fell into its lap, said Cynthia Garcia, an attorney who administers the development corporation.

Paying the rent, said Buck Hendrickson, who took over as IronHorse's chief executive in mid-2007, "wasn't a big issue. We certainly had a lot more pressing problems than that."

Besides, Hendrickson said, "the city wants to see us there because it wants us to have jobs there. And property taxes to me are not an issue -- we are in bankruptcy."

The LDC agrees.

"People are inquiring about the building, but we'd love for IronHorse to continue their operations and keep high-paying jobs here," Garcia said.

At IronHorse's peak employment of 250, the assembly jobs paid $25 to $35 an hour, Garcia said.

"It was something we were trying to keep, especially in north Fort Worth."

The LDC administrator stressed that no city programs were affected by the nonpayment because the funds hadn't been earmarked for any particular purpose.


>>> Make sure to read that last line about how "no city programs were affected..." -ghughes <<<

[Sam Stone]

I'll pass. I think I'll just get my info from West and Clear.

Whew, that is harsh!

The complete lack of critical writing from the S-T when it comes to City Hall, Barnett Shale, TRV, etc. has led me to not renew my subscription to the S-T after twenty years of having it on my door step every morning. Nothing against the writers themselves but the failure of the policy makers to cast a critical eye on anything of substance means the S-T is simply not delivering enough value to be worth my while. So, I'm with safly, except will consult more sources (as I'm sure he does as well).

Not to mention that it is online for free. No dirty newsprint, no piles of paper to recycle, and no ads if you have the right browser and blockers. Just a poorly designed website.

I can't think of the last time I read something in the S-T that I hadn't already been aware of. I've come to think of it not so much as news, but a confirmation of news.

[gdvanc]

I think the S-T has a lot of talent on their staff and I really enjoy some of the work, but I agree that there often seems to be an institutional reluctance to question the plans and actions of some of those in power. There can be a number of reasons for that - some more disturbing than others - but the end result is that regarding some issues we only get hymns from one hymn book sung by those drinking from the same pitcher of Kool-Aid.


Greg, the article you included leaves a lot of unanswered questions. In defense of Schlacter et. al., investigative reporting isn't what their column is all about. Still, couldn't someone dig into this?

>>> Make sure to read that last line about how "no city programs were affected..." -ghughes <<<

Yes, not sure if someone's guilty of bad economics or good spin. Do your property taxes go into the general fund? If so, I guess there's no harm in your not paying them.

Never mind that they do receive city services. And that there is the opportunity cost given that a financially sound tenant would be paying its property taxes. And a time-value-of-money cost in any delay in receiving the taxes and rent.

Rent? What property are we talking about? American Ironhorse seems to own the 4600 Blue Mound Rd property. Now there's one that enjoyed a nice drop in taxable value last year. What are they renting from FWLDC?

So peak employment at 250 with salaries in the $25 - $35 range. Never mind peak; that's useless. What has been the average head count? What is it now? What is the median and mean salary? Or save us the trouble and present the total local payroll. Oh, and we don't have a municipal income tax, so you would have to do more work to figure out the direct fiscal implications of that. How much do those employees pay in Fort Worth property and sales taxes? Does Fort Worth receive taxes from the company's sales? It has long been a pet peeve of mine when a news source (or government body) prints a handful of hard figures but doesn't include enough information for you to do anything useful with them. But look - there are numbers; it must all be true.


Here's a question: how is the Fort Worth Local Development Corp funded? Donations? Bake sales? Grants from the city? Where can a concerned citizen get more information on how it is set up, how it spends its money, what its objectives are and how it achieves them? Where can you learn about the projects they've worked and how successful those have been?

The entity was established by the city, and City Council members just happen to be its sole board officers, but it is nonetheless considered autonomous.

Why did the name "Enron" just pop in my head?

Not to mention that it is online for free. No dirty newsprint, no piles of paper to recycle, and no ads if you have the right browser and blockers. Just a poorly designed website.

I don't know of any local newspapers with well-designed web sites. Not sure how newspapers (that's already sounding archaic) will continue to generate revenues in the future. Definitely challenging times ahead.

Heartfelt condolences to those about to be laid off, by the way.

I've come to think of it not so much as news, but a confirmation of news.

And sometimes they're just the city's PR arm.

[safly]

^^^^

Or for certain District 9 candidates.

Newspapers WILL ONLY continue to make money if they can EFFECTIVELY advertise in new media fashion. MEDIA CONVERGENCE is crucial in this handheld world.

FWFORUM is a PRIME EXAMPLE of community lead/oriented NEW MEDIA. W&C and FortWorthology are young sprites too. Again, lead by COMMUNITY interests and principals involved. And if all three "happen" to eventually SELLOUT to THE MAN, then kuddos to them. It would only seem indicative as to how much more WE (the LOCAL consumer and audience) favor those particular media outlets and their journalistic style.

[Bradleto]

Greg,

I, too, plan to drop the Star-Telegram but missed my opportunity as my wife renewed just before I told her I had no interest reading "yesterday's news" any longer. I suppose I will keep the Sunday paper, but that is it. All the news is so dated and the local information that I'd pay to read, is so controlled or passed over.

I wonder why more wasn't made of the story a year or so ago when Mayor Moncrief and the city council voted to override the then city manager's proposed meager city-wide annual employee pay increase. If I recall correctly, Boswell recommended a number based on whatever metrics were at his disposal, and Moncrief and some others largely ignored it and promoted a larger percentage increase, larger than the city manager was asking for. Huh?

As things have subsequently worked out, a wage freeze was placed in effect, a hiring freeze, too, for the City. The wage freeze must have been absolute torture for Moncrief and others, so there was supposedly a plan afoot to issue a mid-year pay raise. This failed to gain a foothold when yet another bit of bad and unexpected financial news was uncovered. Oops!

I guess we will all pay dearly in the end as a manageable city the size of Fort Worth morphs into artery-clogged western version of Dallas where the only plan appears to be to get as large as possible at any cost.

Brad

[safly]

Talk about yesterday's news. How retro.

[mikelee]

Interesting discussion about the S-T, and I appreciate the heartfelt condolences, GDvanc.

If I could throw in my two cents: This discussion thread got started with a story in the dead-tree version of the Star-Telegram (or the admittedly clunky website).
Here are the next five five topics on the forum, and their sources:

-- DFW largest metro growth area (CNNMoney, we also ran a version in the S-T)
-- Background Check reveal problems in races (S-T, by yours truly)
-- Cracked Windows close parts of downtown (S-T)
-- Broadway Baptist (first post was from the church website, second post quoted the S-T)
-- FW 9th best place to live/launch (from a magazine, also covered in the S-T)

I'd say we're still alive and kicking. Safly is right, we're not the only game in town any more, and that's probably a good thing. But a lot of the comments about the S-T, and the old media in general, seem to pop up because we don't wear our opinions on our sleeves.
Where we do our best work is gathering raw information and getting it out there for folks to talk about. Look at GDvanc's post where he answers some of Ghughes' questions -- we had the answers in the story. So we must've been asking the questions. (Or we just got lucky)

-- Mike Lee

[safly]

I'll be the first to THANK YOU for your expedient reply.

Where we do our best work is gathering raw information and getting it out there for folks to talk about

Are we still a RAW INFORMATION society? It's like so punchcards to me, when we have evolved into these morphed Bluetooth eared 4 Gig Microdisc having ADDICTS! Prime example: Rather Gate. I think society (possibly due to the instantaneously effective multimedia machine) in a way has become a more GIVE ME GIVE ME GIVE ME more information NOW! And then I'll actualize, dissect and disperse it based on my perspective or needs. My prime news sources are CNN and NPR, then FWF. Why FWF? Because WTFNFWF! J/K, but it is all layed out (news and opinionated/sometimes factual responses) there for me and I get to pick and choose what I want to ENGAGE TALKS in and what I will simply pass up. Now I'M a part of my news, not "FORD IS THE BEST IN TEXAS!" or "DUHN DUHN DUHDUH DUH DUHDUH!" annoying Six Flags Guy.

[mikelee]

Fact is, bro, you're still reading my stuff, whether you get it through a blue tooth or in old-fashioned fish wrap. That's my story, waaay up at the top of this thread. And it ran in the paper/on the website a day before it got to the forum.


ML

[mikelee]

BTW, here's West and Clear's take on newspapers:

And speaking of “big crashes,” the Star-Telegram had to cut another 15 jobs, 8 from the newsroom. Ouch, all collegial jocularity aside, best of luck to those on the way out. And the rest of you…Go out a buy a paper, right now. I mean still read West And Clear, but a free (as in speech, not beer, bro), thriving press is as vital to American Democracy as voting and the slow death of newspapers isn’t a good direction for our society.

[Bernd]

Hey, how about a link?

[safly]

BTW, here's West and Clear's take on newspapers:

And speaking of “big crashes,” the Star-Telegram had to cut another 15 jobs, 8 from the newsroom. Ouch, all collegial jocularity aside, best of luck to those on the way out. And the rest of you…Go out a buy a paper, right now. I mean still read West And Clear, but a free (as in speech, not beer, bro), thriving press is as vital to American Democracy as voting and the slow death of newspapers isn’t a good direction for our society.

More like Pete's take on it. If newspapers go, it's only because there is a BETTER way to get NEWS! With more interaction, not pizzazz. In this city, you can expect the institutional news departments to lean up a bit every now and then.

That's great that it ran in both YOUR newspaper and YOUR website. But I prefer to read what is becoming more and more like OUR website(s) to gather information, not YOURS. Do you start to see a pattern developing here? No annoying popups or having to get a certain software to surpass them, and I still get to pick and choose from a VARIETY of opinions, topics and media originators. And when I have some problem with the topic or opinion or want to throw in my hat for the discussion, it gets met with some folks of similar needs and ideas, or who want to form their own opinions. And if a NYTimes blurb or Bloomberg financial ticker somehow RELATES to me or many on this FORUM, we still have a viable platform to discuss and INTERACT, free of charge.

The FWF, this here, is INTERACTIVE NEWS and is exactly the last mile that MOST huge news conglomerates wish they could achieve. And there are zilch ads for crying out loud. WC and FWology could easily hit up the wires on getting instant news for an instant crowd. My suggestion, incorporate those particular sites into your overall online webframe, not just mention them. If they so choose to accept that offer.

[Dcurtis]

Re: the star. A coworker, knowing I'm from FW, asked me one day if the Star was owned by an energy company. I said no and asked him why he asked. He said he reads several papers online a day and there's not one day the Star doesn't have a story about Barnett Shale, Cheseapeak, or XTO, many which are very repetitious and say absolutely nothing, but always positive. I don't read the Star often, but everytime I do, I've noticed he's right. The paper has turned into such a joke!

[safly]

It is suspect, no tellin what occurs behind those closed doors. They say if you see a product more than 27 times, you're gonna buy into it. In this case, get those leases. Think Social Marketing Product Placement. Like those kids on The Hill ALL talking on a Blackberry, coincidence? Will Smith only driving GM vehicles in his last sci-fi thriller movie, with the majority of parked vehicles throughout the city being GM models.

Perhaps that is the point, and I tend to side that the STAR treats most FW'ians like a bunch of bumble hick simpletons. I'll let them state their case on that if they so choose to engage.

[gdvanc]

This thread is now way off-topic (but engaging) and I should split it, but I'm at lunch and don't want to risk hosing it up.

I do have just enough time to offer some more off-topic thoughts, though. (Will comment on the city's budget cuts later. Not that anyone cares.)

Mike, I don't think anyone would suggest that the S-T doesn't produce anything. Clearly it does. However, many of us have developed the impression that the paper isn't as objectively critical on some issues as it could be. Trinity River Vision. Southwest Parkway. Urban drilling. Some of us view the S-T's reporting on these issues to be lop-sided in favor of the city's position. That's what we have been saying off-topically in this thread.

I assume any bias in the paper's articles is a reflection of the paper's (reporter's? editor's?) support for the program being covered. Of course, these are important issues about which the paper should have some opinion. It can be informative to read those opinions when they are clearly expressed in the editorial section. However, an insidious form of editorial sometimes exists elsewhere in the paper. What you include in an article and what you leave out of can be editorial - subtle and dangerous.

Now, you may (and probably will) argue that our perception is incorrect and that the paper has covered these fairly and has given both (or all) sides of these issues equal representation. Even if that is true, the existence of that perception has to concern a news organization because if that perception spreads it will certainly impact the organization's bottom line. MNI's bottom line is already ... weak, is it not? On the other hand, perhaps we are just a handful of cranks who only perceive bias where we disagree with the paper's position. Hard to tell.


Back to work for me. I do have more to say about the future of newspapers but it will wait. Oh, well.

:-Donnie

[mikelee]

I ought to be working too, but I can't help point out that there's a big ad up at the top of the fw architecture website.

Breathe deep . . . . let it go. . . .

[safly]

I know.
But I only read up on the FORUM.
No ads.

[Keller Pirate]

Mike, I'm glad you're here. I often read articles in the S-T and am left with questions. Today's paper carried the story about the Southwest tollway under your name. There was a box about the vote scheduled next week about road impact fees. I don't know if you had anything to do with that box, but it seemed confusing to me. I'll just quote the part I didn't understand.

Councilman Carter Burdette wasn't buying it.
"Do other cities in North Texas have road impact fees? Have they reached a tipping point?" he asked. "Why should we adopt something that is totally ineffective?"

He was joined by councilmen Jungus Jordan and Sal Espino, who also represent rapidly growing areas. Mayor Mike Moncrief said he supports the compromise that the developers proposed.

I'm guessing that Burdette and the other councilmen are supporting impact fees, but on first blush the way it is written it sounds like Burdette is saying they are totally ineffective. Who is at a tipping point? Ft Worth or some other city? What does being at a tipping point mean?

[ghughes]

I'm with you, Pirate, it didn't make sense. And I have even researched the topic back to the Tx Supreme Court decision that forced us to re-think impact fees. See http://www.fortworth...?showtopic=2510

So I have a pretty good grasp of what's being discussed and still couldn't get it. I suspect a scissor-happy editor tangled things up...

[mikelee]

Burdette was replying to a group of developers, realtors, engineers, etc., who were pushing for a lower fee.

The developers said if the fee was too high, it would "hit the tipping point" and begin driving away new construction, which they call "killing the goose that laid the golden egg." (Same bunch of guys who were quoted in the March 3 and March 11 stories on impact fees -- Ken Davis at Carter Burgess, reps from the Development Advisory Committee and someone from the realtors, the general contractors association.)

Burdette spoke for probably 5-10 minutes. He was saying the developers' proposal was totally ineffective, and implying that other cities have adopted tougher impact fees without reaching a tipping point.

Sorry if that wasn't clear enough -- not a lot of space in the paper. I'll follow up next week, though.

Glad to know someone's reading.

Mike Lee

[gdvanc]

The most recent CAFR on the city's Finance Department web page is the 2005. Is that still the most current? Wasn't there an issue with the city having trouble getting their annual reports out? Shouldn't there be an explanation on the finance web page?

Where's last year's proposed budget? The most recent on the Finance Department page is for FY2006-07. Was the publication of the budget a victim of the budget?


The following quotes are from the S-T article (linked in the first post of this thread) by Mike Lee and Anthony Spangler.

The math is simple: Revenue from taxes in Fort Worth is projected to increase by 3.5 percent to 5.3 percent annually over the next five years. Spending is projected to rise by 5.1 percent to 6 percent annually during the same time.

The implications of these figures may be simple, but it would be interesting to see the math - and assumptions - behind them.

What are the important drivers of - and constraints on - the growth in revenue and expenses? Not just "higher prices for fuel and labor costs will require us to spend more money next year", but "expenses are expected to increase by approximately $30,000,000 next year. Of that, $X is expected to be a result of increased fuel prices; $W can be attributed to increases in labor costs; ..." and so on. For which of these estimates is the confidence relatively high and which are much harder to predict? Over which of these cost drivers does the city have some decent level of short-term control? How much of the expected increase in sales tax is the result of higher prices of consumer goods and how much is just more people buying more stuff?

Also, how much of the growth in expenses is a result of higher costs of providing existing services? How much of the growth in spending is to cover new demands on city services made by new development? How much is to cover new services?

Property values are expected to grow by 4.5 percent in fiscal 2009, which starts in the fall, after exceeding 8 percent growth in the past two years, Grimm said. Through 2013, the projected increases are in the range of 4 percent. Revenue from sales taxes is expected to increase 3.2 percent each year through 2013, based on population growth.

I wonder how much of that 4.5% in property value growth is inside a TIF so that additional tax revenues from those properties is not available for general municipal expenses? Of the $25B or $30B (?) in property valuation, how much is in a TIF (or other) district and how much of the taxes collected in those districts are unavailable for the general fund? How much is expected to be collected for use in each TIF? Considering that development in a TIF (particularly of the theoretically disallowed greenfield variety) could result in additional municipal expenses for police, fire, code enforcement, etc., are any of the above-the-cap taxes collected in the district directed to help offset those higher costs? Or do properties outside the TIF bear that burden of that additional cost? The numbers might be insignificant, but it's worth examining.

If property value growth (and so property tax growth) is only about 4.5% and sales tax growth is only 3.2%, it isn't likely that tax revenues will hit the high end of the range (5.3%) given above. That doesn't change the point of the article, but makes me wonder that much more about the estimates and assumptions used in the city's (or consultant's) analysis. Assuming the projected growth rates are correct and given the current gap between revenues and expenses, how long before expenses exceed revenues?

The city has historically given 4.7 percent annual salary increases, and insurance premiums are expected to rise by about 15 percent.

4.7%? Every year? Wow. Is everyone else getting that? We're not seeing that at my company. Not in this century at least. There was this general softening of the economy six years or so ago that put some downward pressure on salary growth here. Reduced demand for labor results in a new, lower equilibrium price for labor - or something like that. Or maybe I'm the only one not getting more pay.

The council, which has to approve the budget, would have to cut $19 million to $24 million -- 3 percent to 4.5 percent of the budget annually -- to balance the budget and restore the reserve fund balance, Grimm said.

$19 million is 3% of $633,333,333; $24 million is 4.5% of $533,333,333. I'm going to guess the latter budget number is correct and that the "3%" should be "3.5%". $533 Mil would be closer to the budget figures given in the out-of-date documents on the city's web site. Again, it doesn't change the point of the article but this issue is all about numbers (numbers that impact us in a substantial way) so the numbers should be as solid as possible.

"If we don't change what we're doing, we're fixing to dig ourselves a deeper hole," Mayor Mike Moncrief said.

"Fixing to"? Ugh.



There are other cities facing budget difficulties. It could be informative to compare some of those cities with Fort Worth. The magnitude, the causes and contributing factors, the proposed solutions, the outlook, the side-effects: how are they similar and how are they quite different?

[360texas]

I do not know a thing about how the city goes about creating a budget but if it were me, I would decide if my expenses are more than my income I would reduce my expenses. Can't spend what you don't have.

FWST page 1B Municipal Spending Saturday 26 Apr 08 by Mike Lee
First part of the article says $24 M must be cut.

page 12B
Says "City department heads have been asked to draw up their bugets based on 70% of their exiting budgets." Article leads me to this they have not produced department budgets yet.

Causes of the crunch:

"Growth in property taxes is expected to be slow because of the down turn in the housing market".
Yes, this issue has been on the financial horizon for a couple of years. Watch to see if the VALUE of your property goes UP/ down this year. Remember the seesaw affect few years ago, tax rate goes down, value goes up. Value goes down rates go up. Whoes following that game again. Either way - the property owner gets ding in the pocket book. I think this rate/value pumping affect is real and the taxing authorities take advantage of it.

"City financial department discovered in February that the reserve fund contains less money than previously thought $26m instead of the $51m required by city policy." Geewiz guys, where did the other $25m go. Isn't that why we have budget managers to watch cash flow usages? And audits to find out who or what department is using the money? Certainly the missing $25 had to be authorized by someones signature.

Suggest, the city policy be changed to the current $26m. Preceived short fall now is a non issue. The reserve fund should be restated to be "city taxes collected but not yet allocated to any city expenditure" Also might mean they over collected and really should return it to the Fort Worth property owners in cash or a meaningful tax rate reduction. Slush funds like this one might being used for inaccuate budget estimating.

But what do I know... I just read the newspaper - sometimes....

[mikelee]

Whew, that's a lot of questions for a Saturday night.
GDvanc: The city's last CAFR was 2005. That's one of the reasons they're in such a bind with the reserve fund. They're still untangling the finances from 2006 and 2007, and as they go through that process, they've discovered that there's less in the reserve fund than they thought.

Let me throw out a suggestion: We've been covering the city's financial meltdown for more than two years. Rather than try to respond to the two previous posts, what if I provide a representative sample of the old stories somewhere, say on the S-T's politics blog?
I could also post the budget presentations, etc., that get handed out at these council meeting.
Sounds like there are a couple of folks out there who are interested enough to look at all that.

(You could also google some of the old stories about Fort Worth's annual audit. Check under my name, Dave Lieber, Amie Streater and Anna Tinsley.)


Mike Lee
Star-Telegram

[ghughes]

Mike:

Truly without the coverage over the past years we would have no insight at all, and I appreciate the fact it has been there. But your allusion to a financial meltdown is the insight one would gain from looking at all those stories and reaching a conclusion. And that's an example of what's missing from the S-T so far. Maybe it's due to a lack of expertise to really analyze the city's financial problems, but who is holding feet to the fire? Why was it never noted that the accounting failures occurred within the department that was run by the man who became city manager? Each piece of news was treated as a separate story yet you and others can recognize there is a bigger story to be told. Many newspapers would grab that in their teeth and give the city a good shaking.

Let's shoot for a Pulitzer here and bring the information from all those individual articles together to show the impact of financial mismanagement on the city and its citizens. Take it from the arcane world of public finance and turn it into understandable prose that will outrage the citizens. I realize it would require the paper to depart from the Amon Carter boosterism model, but without self-criticism Fort Worth cannot move forward.

Greg

[360texas]

Yes, go for it ! There should be a paper trail that when consolidated into one "larger picture" tell a meaninful story that will have large interest to the local public.

[safly]

MIKE!

You CAN DO EET!

[gdvanc]

Mike - fair enough. I still feel like the paper's coverage of some big projects is slanted toward the pro, but I can try to be open-minded-ish. I also think "Fort Worth" needs to be proudly displayed again. Can you look into that, too?

Safly - what did you drink for lunch yesterday?

[safly]

Ha ha ha high- quality hhhh H20.

[davis Quadrant]

Mike:

Truly without the coverage over the past years we would have no insight at all, and I appreciate the fact it has been there. But your allusion to a financial meltdown is the insight one would gain from looking at all those stories and reaching a conclusion. And that's an example of what's missing from the S-T so far. Maybe it's due to a lack of expertise to really analyze the city's financial problems, but who is holding feet to the fire? Why was it never noted that the accounting failures occurred within the department that was run by the man who became city manager? Each piece of news was treated as a separate story yet you and others can recognize there is a bigger story to be told. Many newspapers would grab that in their teeth and give the city a good shaking.

Let's shoot for a Pulitzer here and bring the information from all those individual articles together to show the impact of financial mismanagement on the city and its citizens. Take it from the arcane world of public finance and turn it into understandable prose that will outrage the citizens. I realize it would require the paper to depart from the Amon Carter boosterism model, but without self-criticism Fort Worth cannot move forward.

Greg

I agree

I think one way to begin to trim the fat and many problems is to eliminate the city manager form of government. I'm not sure how much money 5 assistant managers and one city manager consume including benefits and staff but it is probably over 1.5 million and maybe more. A strong mayor would save us money and provide more accountability. This would force elected officials to be accountable not non elected assistant city managers and a city manager.