Do we have a Money Tree?

The Mayor has another message on her website. This time she is thanking all of her supporters for their "overwhelming positive responses" to the new, likely libelous, section of her website where she presents edited audio clips and various misquotes of several Council Members as fact.

For the record, I want our council to vote on the removal of all links to the Mayor's personal website from our official city site. Those links suggest possible city support of her site which could create more expensive legal entanglements for our community should any one of the many people who have been potentially libeled by her there choose to sue. We do not need even more legal expenses due to our Mayor's poor choices and ethically questionable actions. Let's keep the city out of her legal rodeo as much as possible.

In the rest of that posting she states she wants to restore our tax dollars for:

"Free" Trash Service
a "Dog Catcher"
a Community Calendar
a Swimming Pool
and "other services"

She says that all of these services were lost due to other politicians "re-allocating" the tax dollars residents have already paid for these services.

Well, Mayor Purzner is correct, the dollars were "re-allocated" in a sense. However, I have yet to see anything to suggest that any of the city revenues were ever collected to specifically pay for any service, other then councilman Knode's claim (that he has yet to publically provide proof of) that the utility tax dollars were originally ear-marked for the Trash service. Outside of that it is certian that none of the tax dollars collected were specifically ear-marked for any of the above sevices.

The leaders that came before Mayor Purzner did "re-allocate" funds to pay for other city services like our Police force for example. They did so for the good of the community as a whole. The bottom line is that there is a finite amount of revenue available to the city (any city for that matter) and an infinite amount of things various interests within Overland (and elsewhere) want the city to fund. Decisions have to be made on which services are more important for the residents as a whole. That is what separates the Leaders from the Politicians. The Leaders are willing to make the hard decisions for the good of everyone in community while the politicians will promise anything and everything for the good of themselves and their political careers (while having no real plan to pay for any of them).

We have covered the so called "free" trash issue time and time again. As a resident, I cannot support the measure when we need to replace 4+ police officers (which this current budget does not authorize). I also cannot support a measure when there is not supporting documentation in regard to the cost of this service to the city or what services will be provided. At the August 14th meeting Mayor Purzner stated that the city had not discussed this issue with any trash companies or received any bids. So how can we have any idea what the actual cost of this service will be? How can the Mayor's proposed $600,000.00 or so for this service possibly be accurate when it cost the city far more than that before the service was discontinued? Prove the numbers to me Mayor Purzner and I might reconsider.

Few have a problem with hiring a new Animal Control Officer other than the fact that it might be just another patronage position. Lets get our former Animal Control Officer back (if possible) as he was top dog (pun intended). I don't know anyone who ever had anything by positive things to say about him, lets stick with success and see if we can get him back.

No mention of the unnecessary purchasing officer position Mayor Purzner? Is this a sign that even you now see that this position is a waste of scare resources? Could it be that you now realize that it is unlikely that this person would be able to save the city enough to even cover their salary (not to mention benefit costs, payroll taxes, etc)? Maybe you now see that this position is very dangerous as it sets up one person at a low pay scale to be the target of kick-back and bribery offers for all sides.

And you want the Community Calendar back now? Last I heard you wanted to bring back the community Newsletter. So, now it is the Calendar instead? Of is it in addition? Where is all this money supposed to come from? I do NOT want the city to dip into the revenue reserves to pay for a calendar. This is unnecessary. For access to a free calendar there is one on the city Web Site, if people want a paper version they can print it from the site themselves, or they could ask a friend or neighbor to do so (I would be happy to do that for my neighbors as I am sure others would be as well). Are we really willing to sacrifice our revenue reserves (that should be left there for emergencies) or even take a police officer off the street just to create a glossy calendar? And how accurate would that calendar be when we have a Mayor who is always adding, canceling, or rescheduling meetings?

However, if a glossy calendar is something we really feel is needed, why not consider the option taken by many communities, private funding? Allow advertising from local businesses. Have enough advertising at a high enough rate to pay for the production of the calendar and this would not be an issue at all. I doubt anyone on the council would oppose a calendar that does not cost the city any money.

As for the swimming pool, we have options here. For example, why consider paying someone $25000.00 to do a study when every pool contractor in the area would likely offer us free estimates / bids? Why consider spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on an outdoor pool that will only be used for only part of the year when the old YMCA building is available (and has been offered to the city before)? That is an indoor pool that can be used year round, not to mention that there is alot of other space in the building that the city could use for various departments and projects? Also, that pool is in far better shape then our former community pool.

Why even consider a pool at all when Woodson Terrace has allowed us to use theirs? They have a pool, we have a community center. Why not work together to share resources rather than reduce the number of police officers on the street protecting residents in exchange for a pool that the city's own study a few years ago showed was used by only 15 people a day on average?

The Leaders that came before Mayor Purzner and her Councilmen had the foresight and strength of character to make the hard choices for the good of the entire city. We DO NOT HAVE the funds to pay for all these services unless we reduce the police force, cut salaries, raise taxes and/or dip into the reserve accounts. This is irresponsible politics at it's worst.

Mayor Purzner, PLEASE reconsider putting the residents at risk by keeping the Police force of the city understaffed. We need the police more then your friends need patronage jobs and government handouts. I would rather know the police are keeping my child safe, then have a pool a few miles closer for her to swim in. And I am willing to bet if you bother to ask, most of the residents of Overland feel the same way.