EDITOR:
In follow up to my letter last week regarding the Parkville 2025 budget, I looked at the details to be presented at the Oct. 15 work session. The review confirmed my previous concerns and raised some new ones.
Fund 90, 9 Highway Downtown Fund, shows revenues of $3,200,000 from Bond Proceeds. The budget document notes “grant anticipation debt.”
Administrative expenses previously paid from General Fund revenues (property taxes and general sales taxes) are now captured in a newly created Fund 35, Internal Services Fund (ISF). These expenses are then allocated to some, but not all, funds.
ISF allocations are scattered within the accounts of certain departments: the ISF Payroll Fee is included in Personnel; the ISF Fleet fee is in Capital; and ISF Administration, Facility and Technology are in Professional Services. Why the different account buckets for what are overhead allocations?
On each of pages 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, the third column of numbers do not foot to the totals shown. What else in this 185-page document does not add up?
There are two revenue allocations from the General Fund to NID debt funds: $65,000 is transferred to the Brush Creek NID Fund, and $235,000 to the Brink Meyer Road NID Fund. Debt service payments are the only expenditures in these NID funds.
You may recall the previous mayor proclaiming that the city was “free and clear” of this NID debt. Unfortunately, that was a lie and the city knew it was. The city retains primary liability for NID debt until it is paid in full.
So… riddle me this, Batman:
·Can a budget that includes bond proceeds be approved if that debt has not been approved and issued?
·What is the real motive for applying ISF if the allocation is limited to only certain funds?
·If there are no ISF services identified to the sewer system, on what basis is the Sewer Fund being charged $180,000?
·If general expenses are to be paid by ballot specific sales tax funds, how does that line up with the ballot language and the city’s representations? E.g., “Revenues generated from Proposition P are dedicated funds that can only be used for public safety projects.”
·If general expenses are to be charged to funds whose revenues are ballot specific sales taxes, and those monies transferred to the General Fund are then transferred out to pay NID debt, isn’t the city then using commingled monies to pay NID debt?
There are expenses being moved around between funds that was not done in the past, and for those not inclined to look at this level of detail, it can be difficult to track the numbers. Perhaps that is intentional.
--Gordon Cook
Parkville
