This Has To Be A Joke…Right?
mike writes
I cannot believe my ears after hearing that the city is even considering moving forward with a multi-million dollar renovation of City Hall. WE JUST LAID OFF CITY EMPLOYEES?! Even if common sense fails to overcome such foolishness, doesn’t someone believe building a new building for less money makes more sense? Seriously, is the creature comforts of city hall so bad that we have to spend this amount of money?
continued in comments
Folks, there are people who are going without a place to sleep or something to eat in our city and our “appointed” leaders want to spend money in this way? GIVE ME A BREAK!!
Thank you to Greg Waddell and Joe Sweet for standing up and givng way to reason. No wonder our local economy is so bad; we aren’t trying to bring new economy to town, and we are hiring companies from out of town to perform work that like companies who pay taxes here could perform?
Comment by mike — October 7, 2009 @ 12:23 pmTalk about a dog without a leash…..
No to the majority of them it is business as usuall. I’m sure the foundations eroded, brick walls fell down and the other issues happened within the last 5 years. Our leadership would never purchase a POS knowing in advance the state of repairs needed. OOPS>>>>business as usual.
Comment by hac — October 7, 2009 @ 2:33 pmI do have a solution:
1. The three that support this have enough resources to fund this themselves. Let them invest their money, get paid the same rates as the lending institution. Put their money where their mouth is. What happens if the economy keeps going south? The funds they are expecting to spend won’t exist, then what? I forgot, business as usuall.
2. Let them approve the funding, I’ll personalty walk, drive and recruit any and all people, signatures or whatever is needed to have a special election or whatever is necessary to get them replaced. So it cost twenty thousand or more for a special election. After they whizz away 3 to 5 million the extra 20,000.00 is a bargain to have them removed.
There is no political correct way to put this:
Gentlemen,(Mark, Chris & Edward) your middle and upper middle class have now reached a breaking point with the stupidity and utter lack of common sense considering the state of the economy. You are rapidly becoming a liability to the citizens of this town.
You were elected by people like me and I will do everything possible to rectify that mistake.
I’ll second the thanks to Greg and Mr. Sweet
Hal
If the building is in that bad of shape, what about moving the folks out of it and into a safer building while everyone decides what to do and when to do it?
Mike, I completely agree, what is wrong with getting local folks to do the renovation!! I am sure they would not charge near that outrageous amount!!
It is sooooo easy to spend other peoples money!! Good grief!
Comment by curious — October 7, 2009 @ 4:21 pmjust look at the bang up job that was done on the renovations of the courthouse it is still leaking and needs a new roof nough said!!!!! these people wouldn’t know a good contractor if they came in gold lame’.
there is a building they use for the county just down the street let them share the offices since nothing is done to generate money in it till the economy gets better and some improvements can be done or build one at half the cost and save a heck of alot of money!!
Comment by infohungry — October 8, 2009 @ 12:31 pmIt is my understanding that the SPLOST funds allocated for the renovation project was actually voted on by the public back in 2005. I cannot say whether this is true or not, but a lot has changed since then! Unemployment wasn’t over 12% as well! Why can’t we simply go back and visit how these funds are spent and allow the public to voice their opinion on it? Elected leaders should not be allowed to make a decision on spending over a certain amount without it being put to a vote, in my very honest opinion!
Seriously, if we took 10% of the 3.5 million and put it toward economic development, just think of the possibilities it could lead to? Folks, we need the leaders in this community thinking this way! $350,000 would go a long way to lure big industry to town. Tax incentives, land development, etc. You have to spend money to make money!
I’m so tired of seeing money poured in to downtown projects that are more a tribute to a museum than economic development! Spend money wisely that will lead to economic growth, better education of the current and future workforce in our community. How many more ball parks, tennis courts, renovations of worn out buildings is going to take to realize this just isn’t making a big difference? People want good quality jobs so they can provide for their families to live in decent neighborhoods, get a quality education, know the law enforcement is funded in such a way to actually make a difference, not just put a band-aid on the problem.
This is not impossible! We simply need leadership who actually cares about all the people in this community, not just the select. We need leadership who are just as concerned about the needs of citizens behind Stone’s as they are about those who live in prominent neighborhoods. We need leadership who is willing to change the status quo! Our workforce has been “dumbed” down in this community for years by not allowing industry to come here and force the long standing local industry to raise the wages they pay. By doing this, we force those who want a better way of life to leave Bainbridge to go where the jobs are! Those that remain in our area to make up the workforce feel as though they have nothing to work for since they know they will never be payed fairly for the work they do! This can change! We need to educate the youth of this community, provide good jobs for them to stay here after they graduate, entice industry here by showing them we want them to be here, etc.
It all comes down to how bad we want to see it happen….but I bet City Hall gets renovated before anything close to this becomes a reality.
Comment by mike — October 8, 2009 @ 4:21 pmI agree with what everyone has said here, Especially this: “Seriously, if we took 10% of the 3.5 million and put it toward economic development, just think of the possibilities it could lead to? Folks, we need the leaders in this community thinking this way! $350,000 would go a long way to lure big industry to town. Tax incentives, land development, etc. You have to spend money to make money!”
I HOPE that the city officials are reading all of these comments Maybe we need to have a rally down on the square such as the one in DC last month, to protest the laxidazy attitude of our so-called leaders here.
They seem to have no clue what its like to be without a job and knowing you have a family to support and bills to pay. They cut back our services, lay off people, and spend foolishly. This is a good recipe for a revolt of the taxpayers. Hmmmmm
Thanks to Greg Waddell and Joe Sweet for taking the stand you have taken!
Comment by Corky — October 9, 2009 @ 10:43 am2009 Memory Refresher – Various published articles
JANUARY
The City is facing a general budget shortfall of about $343,000 and despite attempts to cut costs must continue to look for more ways to save money, according to the city manager.
MARCH
Although the financial crisis is still ongoing, the city will likely avoid a budget shortfall, according to city manager. After projecting a budget shortfall of more than $300,000 in January, he said current revenue estimates show the city could see a six-figure surplus in its general fund which pays for the day-to-day operation of city government.
To keep the city budget sustainable in the future it may have to look at reducing some of its staff through attrition instead of layoffs, according to city manager. Cutting city trash pickup from two days to one will also save some money, but adjusting future water and sewer rates to keep pace with inflation will need to be looked at.
JULY
The city announced it has terminated nine city employees as part of a reduction in force which was attributed to a decrease in city revenue. For the first time in memory the city will experience negative revenue growth this year. The current situation makes it critical for the city to maintain close scrutiny of its revenue stream and to adjust budget expenditures accordingly.
July 4th entertainment – we all know the story here; Roslyn voted against hiring big-name talent citing tough economic times.
AUGUST
The city cut out overtime pay altogether back in February by adopting an amendment to its employee personnel policy. I think the employees miss overtime pay but they understand the reality of the economic situation we’re experiencing, according to city manager.
Budget presentation: city manager reported to council they are projecting revenue to grow zero in the next year where it typically grows about 6%. He stated over the last 2 years the expected growth in revenue of $1.1 million was not there. This was the approximate amount used from City reserves which now stands at about $5.8 million, a little more than 6 months of operating reserves, with no reserves anticipated to be used this year.
Somewhere along the way employees insurance benefits increased dramatically - i.e. economy.
OCTOBER
Best illustration of how bad the local economy may have been during the last 12 months - almost $40 million didn’t pass through local cash registers last year, according to city manager.
Will it pass through the local economy during the next 12 months? Current Decatur county unemployment rate is 12.4%.
Comment by makeyourvoiceheard — October 10, 2009 @ 2:51 pmThanks to some honest city council members, thats the problem today with people that has no concern for honest hard working people with a family to raise. Yet you take money to upgrade a building when you could relocate. You take that to heart about upgrading, but the people lives you have just set back doesn’t mean anything to you. I think it need to be up to the citizens to decide.Instead of the unconcern members that don’t care. Bring some more jobs here then worry about that building later. Thanks again to Greg and Sweet for being realistic about it all. And some of the one’s making 60 to100 thousand dollars a year can pay for it or take a pay cut.
Comment by realtalk — October 10, 2009 @ 5:31 pmRE a comment I did not post,
which, in essence, blasted Mr Waddell and Mr Sweet for not knowing “how SPLOST is allocated and that the city can’t change what the public voted on”.
I thought it important to delve into a clearer explanation on the city SPLOST controversy.
What I understood Mr Waddell questioned was, is there was anything that could be reallocated to SPLOST from the budget.
Typically yes, is the short answer to this question.
I included in Hobby On City Hall Renovation the list of SPLOST V projects.
Typically there are items within the budget which may be reallocated to one of these capital projects.
I certainly am not familiar enough with the budget to give any examples but
Is there any budgeted equipment that may be included in “Public Safety Equipment and Building Improvements”
or
what about items that may be included in “Recreations Improvements”
In this city budget, there is probably very little that could be moved to a designated SPLOST project, but the question asked is a valid one.
The SPLOST ballot, by design, is not very definitive for the projects voters approve. That leaves officials some flexibility in the use of the funds within the project.
Comment by Larry — October 12, 2009 @ 6:13 amLet me reword my comments to a more positive flavor. We as a community tend to look at the political leaders and volunteers as if they are making uniformed decisions. The council was working of the premis that the public voted for roughly 1.8 million to be spent on city hall renovations. The money is allocated and we should move forward with the selected architectural firm that was chosen from a pool of 29 companies to see what it is going to cost to renovate. This will allow the council to use the money wisely. Two years ago we would have only had a quarter of the interest in this project. Now is the time to do this because people need work and the price will be considerably less. To move city hall and build new makes no long term sense. If we start to vacate downtown then we might as well roll up the door mats, because Bainbridge will dry up. No economic prospect wants to come to a town that has a bunch of closed down and dilapadated buildings.
Lets try to be positive and offer a vibrant downtown and a growing commercial area on Hwy 27. We have a lot to offer to a business prospect now. Plenty of labor, vacant buildings, and as much land and water as they could ever want. Why put a black eye on Bainbridge with run down buildings.
Lets be positive and make informed choices, show up to meetings and participate in the process. After reading the editorial in the paper, I wonder if some of the council have been informed. I’m just saying.
Comment by just saying — October 12, 2009 @ 6:44 pmYou talk about putting a black eye on Bainbridge, let me guess you still have your job. If you lost it because of budget cuts to fix a building not just that but keep from having to give the ones making 60to100 thousand a year a cut it would be looked at from others point of view.
Comment by realtalk — October 12, 2009 @ 10:43 pmwhy can’t they use the west bainbridge middle school that is sitting empty?
Comment by infohungry — October 14, 2009 @ 1:08 pmWell first of all, the school belongs to the county school board not the “City”. Second the school board has plans for that building, some time in the near future they are planning to consolidate alot of the little post,ie… Annex, Maintainence, Martin St. and place them there along with transportation.
Comment by aGAgal — October 15, 2009 @ 9:37 amWell it would seem comments on this site might actually make a difference!? Thank you to the City Manager and Council for making a wise decision during these tough economic times….
Comment by mike — October 21, 2009 @ 12:15 pmHey Mike, just tabled until they receive the answers they requested.
I believe the project will continue, maybe scaled back some.
I am hoping that some of the available SPLOST funds could be shifted into approved areas where many more of our citizens can benefit.
Comment by Larry — October 24, 2009 @ 12:12 amlooks like downtown could be renamed “moneypit” Why not take a 3.5 million project that will probably end up 8 million and go elsewhere and build a new building instead of throwing good money after bad?
Comment by climaxian — October 28, 2009 @ 12:06 pmThis is just like when the POWERS that be,decided to close “Bainbridge State Hospital” They said there was no MONEY to renovate the buildings,yet I guess money fell from the sky to build that DRUG REHAB PLACE.
Comment by Sweetjanice39897 — November 3, 2009 @ 11:25 am