In answer to the questions presented about Metro Council discord on furloughs reported here: Louisville News and Politics: METRO COUNCIL DISCORD?
23 members of the Council have agreed to the furlough that all Metro employees are being asked to take. Conspicuously NOT agreeing are Districts 1,3, and 5. Specifically Judith Green, Mary Woolridge, and Cheri Bryant Hamilton.
You can read the article from the C-J here: Most Metro Council members agree to furlough plan courier-journal The Courier-Journal
The quote of the day has to go to Judith Green quoted from the article:
"Green said in an interview that she wouldn’t rule out foregoing her own pay for three days, but she said she didn’t favor furloughing the legislative aides “because of some of the financial restraints they are under. I don’t want to get into any personal business, but right now things are hard for a lot of people.”
Anyone catch that?
Judith Green feels that times are hard for a lot of people but her people should be excluded from the same hardship everyone else in City Government is facing. Times are hard for people because of lack of oversight on a Mayor who spends recklessly with our tax money. A situation that is supposed to be overseen by Ms. Green and the rest of the Council.
Interesting.
With everyone hurting, whether a government employee or private sector, it seems she and her office would be willing to share the sacrifice wouldn't it?
Consider this. The Metro Council approves every budget and is supposed to be looking after ALL of our best interests. The fact that we are in this supposed "budget crisis" is a shared responsibility for the Metro Council who have let Abramson reign supreme in spending. This would of course include Ms. Green.
The message from Councilwoman Green perhaps should be amended to read: " While I understand I have not done my job in the best interest of the people by failing to hold Mayor Abramson accountable for spending, including the recent Center City project I was against but voted for anyway, including the lost jobs in our community leading to high numbers of unemployment for those who can least afford it, my office will not be involved in sharing the financial burdens each member of this City face due to my shortcomings. We are, in short, above you in this regard. So while you continue to sacrifice you will continue to pay us for our failures."
Councilwoman Green, Councilwoman Woolridge, and Councilwoman Bryant Hamilton should be ashamed of themselves for not standing with the rest of the Council in this regard.
Considering they make more than most workers they represent the message sent is a bad one.
Regardless of whether there is a budget crisis or not the appearance of indifference is one we should remember in the future.
Monday, December 8, 2008
4 comments:
Thank you for reading LNP. Open and honest discussions of local politics and relevant issues is important to voter understanding. Please listen to the "Ed Springston Show". We broadcast Monday through Thursday evenings at 7 PM on local media outlets. Please check for the links.
Yours truly,
Ed Springston
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
You read that right. Welcome to today's liberal utopia where anarchy reigns supreme. There has been an orchestrated, well funded, well o...
-
I was recently asked by some sportsmen why the Jim Strader Hunting and Fishing expo was not being held this year. Though I am an avid gun ri...
-
Rick Redding over at thevillevoice has been following the Southern Belles occassionally this season and posted his last (according to him) p...
The best comment that I heard from Ms. Green is that some of THEIR aides are heads of households - like that isn't the case in the rest of Metro Council.
ReplyDeleteAnd as another person pointed out to me, all their checks are signed by the Mayor.
Why do you insist on saying "supposed" budget crises. The state is over 400 million short, the school board is over 40 million short. The city is only 20 million short.
ReplyDeleteThey are all reading the same revenue income statistics to calculate their income. Why suggest it would be true for the city budgets when everyone is in the same boat.
I know, you suggest the using the rainy day funds of some 60 million. OK, that gets us to July 1st then the cuts have to start. School board said the same on the issue.
Other than the fact you don't like the Mayor, your stance here doesn't make sense.
For many of us it is a supposed crisis. This isn't a traumatic event it is one that has steadily been growing due to what many, including myself, consider to be poor oversight and leadership.
ReplyDeleteWas it prudent to force the Centre City project down the throats of all of us then announce a couple of days later we are in a budget crisis?
Was that responsible leadership?
Did he not know about the nayional budget problems or not capable of reviewing possibilities before now that could have prevented the shortfall?
It isn't a matter of whether I like the Mayor or not. It is a matter of taking responsibility for current events. The Mayor is the one who is charged with the oversight of this situation therefore is responsible.
Many things could have prevented what he claims is a crisis. Quarterly budget reviews and adjustments, a less bloated command staff, open and frank discussions, and so many other things.
Transparency would be the first step of all.
Considering he has been claiming shortages practically every budget since merger inception, with the facts from annual CAFR's signed off on by Jane Driskell and his personal outside accounting boys at Strathmoor disproving his claims, one would tend to believe his claims are suspect at best and therefore a supposed crisis.
This hasn't been a sudden economic downturn that created a traumatic event leading to a crisis. This has been a steadily developing problem that should have been dealt with at inception not at the last minute where once again he claims "there is no time."
Thanks for writing.
Egads ... Another Abramson apologist.
ReplyDeleteTO: Anonymous December 9, 2008 1:32 PM
The only PROOF that a budget "crisis" exists is because Abramson SAYS so.
WHY are you defending the status quo?
Metro Louisville's very own CAFRs* clearly SHOW in WRITING that in each of the last 4 fiscal years there has actually been budget surpluses that total over $198,000,000.
WHERE DID ALL of that REAL MONEY GO?
FY 2007 - $64,837,000+ SURPLUS (page 79) - Police $13,254,000+ surplus
FY 2006 - $44,412,000+ SURPLUS (page 75) - Police $13,598,000+ surplus
FY 2005 - $49,846,000+ SURPLUS (page 71) - Police $ 9,703,000+ surplus
FY 2004 - $39,564,000+ SURPLUS (page 71) - Police $ 5,732,000+ surplus
CAFR= Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
My God, man, get off your butt and check this stuff out yourself.
Don't take Abramson's word for anything.