I truly appreciate the thoughts expressed in Tina's posting. I believe that approval of the 1% Pension Sales Tax would be a huge mistake. As a matter of fact, Tom and I discussed yesterday that this would be a 38% increase in the city/county portion of the sales tax (2.625%) that we already pay. There are several specific reasons that I cannot support this proposal: 1) The proposed rate is too high for the economic situation that currently exists. To date we have a better economy than many other areas and will risk aggravating the downturn in our local economy. 2) If the sales tax is approved, all incentive for City government to improve efficiency, reduce wasteful spending, and get control of personnel and benefit costs will be eliminated. It will be back to 'business as usual'. Automatic wage and benefit increases will resume and the deferrred compensation of City management will be 'reviewed' (as approved in the Council Bill 2008-368, ( http://www.springfieldmo.gov/egov/agenda/2008-368.pdf ) see item #6 at line 128. (Is it any wonder that city staff supports the sales tax proposal? They are also being told that if it doesn't pass, they will risk termination.) 3) City management and the City Council are betting that the 1% Pension Sales Tax will get the funding level of the Police and Fire Retirement Plan (the legally correct name of the pension plan which was not used in the ballot language) back to reasonable levels before the settlement of the Telecommunications Sales Tax Lawsuit. If the settlement is received after the majority of the pension sales tax funding is received, the settlement funds will not go into the Retirement plan and thus can be spent on other 'priorities'. 4) The fundamental cause of the Retirement Plan under funding is that benefit increases granted in the late 1990's, as a result of poor personnel management (which continues today), has caused the liabilities of the Retirement Plan to spiral upward long before the investment losses that have occurred in the last six months. These benefit increases include: 1) The 100% return of employee contribution. 2) The inclusion of payments of accumulated leave, holiday, sick and vacation pay at the end of employment and overtime compensation in the calculation of pension benefits. The Police Officer and Firefighter Associations (Unions) need to accept their share of the responsibility for the unrealistic increases in these benefit costs. In 1996, the City's Annual Required Contribution was $2,578,429. In 2006, ten years later, the ARC was $9,834,917 an increase of almost 400%. Based on these facts and that the 1% Pension Sales Tax will not be a permanent solution to the problem until the basic causes have been addressed, I cannot support the proposal. Fred B. Ellison Council General B Candidate
--- On Sat, 1/31/09, Tom Martz <t.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: WOW !!! I don't think much can be said after that. Nice to hear from you Tina as the old saying goes if you can't handle the finances in your own home how can you possibly do it with other peoples money. Many on that council have been employ in government service or used taxpayer funds to build an empire of assets they forgot what it was like to struggle by while building a business without the help of government On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Tina Yearack <tmyear...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: Good morning! I have to jump in on this one..... Fortunately for the city (and unfortunately for its citizens), our city's leadership has the perogative/option to put this option before us when its poor, arrogant, and self-serving spending decisions have driven this city's financial position into the ground. I do understand that the market has had an impact on the pension fund's losses, but so has the complete and total lack of fiscal responsibility on this Council's part. When we as private citizens make poor, arrogant, and self-serving spending decisions that have the propensity to run our personal financial position into the ground, we do not have this option. We either have to just figure it out by living on LESS (which means giving up everything except the basic necessities), or declaring bankruptcy, and starting over. Either way is painful. Doug, I can tell you quite sincerely that I, as a private tax-paying citizen of Springfield, DO NOT TRUST that this Council has done its due diligence in trying to scrutinize the city budget for areas of over-spending. I know this for a fact, because I have friends who work for the city who are flabbergasted at the prices of some of the office equipment/furniture that has been purchased in the last year or so. No, I don't believe that, in a better situation, the City Council should have to micro-manage every city department. But, drastic situations call for drastic measures, and I do not believe that the Council has not pulled out all of the stops to avoid putting this sales tax proposal before its citizens. What this Council needs is a group of people who know what it means to first manage their own households in a fiscally responsible way. That means GETTING IT DONE IN YOUR OWN HOME FIRST. Doug, I'm sure you're a great guy, and you seem sincere. But your personal situation has greatly lessened any credibility that you could have when it comes to convincing me that this is what the city needs. And, that's all I'm going to say about that. I'm voting "no". I love our city police, and our firefighters. They deserve better from our city's leadership FIRST. And, I fully expect the Council to blame the taxpayers for any further losses where our police and firefighters are concerned. But, this isn't about finger-pointing. It's about the taxpayers being expected to once again compensate for the Council's poor decisions. ENOUGH!!! I'm no financial guru, but how much do you want to bet that a team of people who truly understand fiscal responsibility could take a peek and find plenty of money in the existing budget? Larry Melton, your WIFE is about the best I've seen when it comes to handling money. She just gets it. Doug, if you want to spend the city's money wisely, hire her, pay off their house, and let HER come in and show you how it's done. Trust me, you'd be paying her a LOT less that some of the other "consultants" that you've paid to come in, just to tell you that the city's broke! It's time to get real. Can't speak for the rest of the citizens of this great city, but I've had enough. We will pray for the existing and new leadership of this city, and we will bring ourselves in under the authority of the leadership of this city, but anytime we have the opportunity to be a part of making decisions that affect the city, we're going to vote in a fiscally responsible way. Blessings! "Cause I'm letting go of everything I am; and I'm holding on to everything You are..." from "All in (letting go)" by TobyMac Tina Yearack Staff Accountant Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor Stufflebam CPA Group 1650 S. Enterprise Springfield, MO 65804 (417) 882-2273 (office) (417) 882-0644 (fax) (417) 880-1501 (cell) ***********Stufflebam CPA Group, PC Confidentiality Footer ****** Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message, and notify us immediately. If you or your employer does not consent to Internet email messages of this kind, please advise us immediately. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorized representative independent of this message. Any tax advice contained in the body of this e-mail was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by the recipient for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions. -----Original Message----- From: missourilibertycoalition@googlegroups.com [mailto:missourilibertycoalit...@googlegroups.com]on Behalf Of Tom Martz Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 9:59 AM To: missourilibertycoalition@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: From the Horse's Mouth - Spfd Police/Fire Sales Tax The content of this letter is solely the responsibility of the writer, just as all post are. This is not a position of the group. On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Doug Burlison <dab1...@mchsi.com> wrote: As January comes to a close, we are at the doorstep of decision time. Many voices have expressed support or opposition to the proposed 1 cent sales tax to repair the Tier 1 Police and Fire pension fund. If the numerous statements indicate the level of legitimate concern for our community, then Springfield is, indeed, a fortunate city in that a lot of us do actually care what happens here. I've had the priviledge of serving this community on City Council for almost two years now. Prior to that, I was instrumental in having the State of Missouri audit our city. Early on in my term on the council, I resigned my position as the Chief Petitioner of the Springfield audit in order to reduce any conflict of interest, and to move into a place where I could help fix the problem, rather than just work to identify it. One of my first votes on the council was to oppose seeking authorization from Jeff City for this sales tax. My reasoning was that if we receive the go ahead for this proposal, then we would not explore any other options to fund the shortfall. In spite of my concerns, many options have been discussed over the last couple of years, especially during the 2009 budget deliberations. In a departure from the past, direct public participation was included the budget process, and a wide range of ideas was brought to the table for consideration. In light of all of this, I believe that it has become increasingly clear that there is only one mechanism that will be sufficient to take care of our shortfall in the time frame reqiured, and that is the 1 cent sales tax. I have great respect for those that oppose this measure, and to denigrate those views would be disrespectful. It is that voice of opposition, in fact, that we need to continually keep our feet to the fire as we move forward, regardless of the outcome of this election. Those that support this measure, however, are earnestly looking at the real mathematical challenges, not just the minimum contributions required by state law. In another first (at least in my recollection), commitments have been made by the current City Council, in writing, to insure that these funds are spent as the voters intend. The resolution that we recently passed has added other protections that secures the interests of the taxpayer, and the pension fund recipient. The current management, and a majority of the upcoming City Council will not have had a hand in getting us to this point, yet will need the tools to fix this problem. The question is, "Do we take care of this now?" I think at the rate of at least $39,000 per day of interest income lost, the answer is a resounding, "Yes!" I have no personal love of taxes, and have worked to avoid increasing them. Higher taxes are not good for any public economy, but then again, neither is banckruptcy. If we do pass this measure, we need to work to shorten it's duration as much as possible; but before anything else, we need to insure that the shortfall in the pension fund gets taken care of, completely. My main motivation behind my support of the 1 cent proposal is to avoid passing this problem on to others so they will have to take care of it in the future. Instead of handing down a list of bad choices to subsequent councils, and instead of sticking my head in the sand and letting my children's generation deal with this, I will take a stand that is politically unpopular with several in our community, and vote in support of the sales tax. The honest truth is that this proposal is the cheapest way to shore up this pension plan, and any delays will greatly increase the mountain of liability that we will have to overcome. At the risk of offending some, this additional sales tax is the most fiscally responsible thing to do out of the options we have available to us. I am asking you to join with me on February 3rd, and vote "yes" on the pension fund sales tax. -- http://votetom4council.webs.com/ www.moliberty.org http://417-political-pundit.blogspot.com The power to tax involves the power to destroy. ~Justice John Marshall~ Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you! -Pericles (430 B.C.) "no cause is lost if there is but one fool to fight for it" ~Will Turner~ ~Pirate's of the Caribbean @ World's End~ A legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law. ~Justice John Marshall~ http://www.radiofreeliberty.com -- http://votetom4council.webs.com/ www.moliberty.org http://417-political-pundit.blogspot.com The power to tax involves the power to destroy. ~Justice John Marshall~ Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you! -Pericles (430 B.C.) "no cause is lost if there is but one fool to fight for it" ~Will Turner~ ~Pirate's of the Caribbean @ World's End~ A legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law. ~Justice John Marshall~ http://www.radiofreeliberty.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave, learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
