Perhaps some light will be shed tomorrow night but I won't hold my breath. There's been enough publicity now to have a potentially nice turnout.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Tony Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > I still wonder why appropriate checks and balances, which should be > available in any computerized system the city might have been using, missed > the overpayment on an invoice for a year. And how the auditors missed it > entirely, since that's *why* you have auditors come in, to make sure > everything was done right. > > > > --On Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:42:33 PM -0400 David Hardy < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Well, then; that puts a different slant on the operation. Thanks, > Rubin. > > I just wonder how thoroughly the contractors get vetted for these gigs. > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Rubin Bennett <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > Not to jump to the defense, as mistakes were obviously made, but... > > > > > > The mistake was found, and the mayor and the city council, after > > > speaking to the contractor, were doing their best to get paid. The > > > contractor was already heavily leveraged and they didn't want to go > > > public for fear that he would just declare bankruptcy and nobody would > > > get anything. > > > > > > The contractor paid back ~100k of the debt before he finally was unable > > > to continue. The city council had, by then, put a lien on one of the > > > guys properties (the one that appeared to have the best likelihood of > > > some return should the lien have to be executed). > > > > > > As a listener to the Mark Johnson show on WDEV this am mentioned, the > > > real issue at hand here is how the *Contractor* "mistakenly" cashed a > > > check for $468k too much. I don't know about anyone else, but as a > > > business owner if someone overpays me, I would immediately notify them. > > > That money is now owed to me, and is therefore *not mine*. Hell, if I > > > find $20 on the sidewalk, or on the floor of Capitol Grounds, I try to > > > track down the owner. > > > > > > The real issue is that the contractor stole $468k from the City of > > > Montpelier. The city council appears to have tried to do what was in > > > the best interest of the city, which was to recover the money. > > > The only real issue I see so far is that the business owner stole > nearly > > > 1/2 million dollars and wasn't immediately sent to jail for it. Of > > > course the city council had to decide what was in the better interest > > > for the city - retribution or repayment of the debt. > > > > > > Rubin > > > > > > On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 13:01 -0400, Stanley Brinkerhoff wrote: > > > > All, > > > > > > > > I know this list has members in the Montpelier/surrounding areas. > > > > Incase you missed the articles -- apparently Montpelier overpayed a > > > > contractor in ~2005 to the tune of $400,000. It wasn't noticed until > > > > ~2006, and the city council, nor the mayor have been entirely > > > > forthright about its occurrence. They do cite that they their legal > > > > requirements by putting it in their counsel minutes (only available > on > > > > paper via request) and in the "annual report". They also note > > > > repayment was ongoing from the vendor who was over-payed, which made > > > > them feel as though the "issue was resolved". > > > > > > > > Appropriate links > > > > > > > > http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091010/NEWS/910109998/ > > > > http://www.montpelier-vt.org/story/241.html > > > > > > > > City Council meets this Wednesday to review the situation > "publically" > > > > http://www.montpelier-vt.org/community/313.html > > > > > > > > Stan > > > -- > > > Rubin Bennett > > > rbTechnologies, LLC > > > 80 Carleton Boulevard > > > East Montpelier, VT 05651 > > > > > > (802)223-4448 > > > http://thatitguy.com > > > > > > "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." > > > Voltaire, Essay on Tolerance > > > French author, humanist, rationalist, & satirist (1694 - 1778) > > > > > > > >
