City of Eureka sinks further down the SHN(t) hole

cesspool

No, this isn’t the swimming pool at the Towndowner

During last Tuesday’s meeting, the city council approved another $1.04 Million dollars to complete a portion of the Martin Slough Interceptor.  That is the over budget cost for Wahlund Construction to “maybe” put in the sewage line where Apex had gotten stuck.  So now, instead of a potential $11.9 Million dollar boondoggle, we’re looking at a potential $13.03 Million dollar travesty.  The money to fund this project is coming from Eureka Waste Water bonds.  The sad part is that those bonds were supposed to fund other projects and maintenance relevant to Eureka Citizens, not their developer buddies/campaign contributors or the comatose Forster-Gill project.  The developer friendly Eureka City Council just continues to use your money as “Infrastructure Welfare” for the local land speculators.

For more background, refer to our previous post’s or this Thadeus Greenson/Times-Standard article from September 12, 2010

Wastewater waste? Eureka officials deny wrongdoing after questions arise over reserve fund

The city of Eureka is in the process of reconciling funds with the Humboldt Community Services District, but officials deny that the city has done anything inappropriate with a joint wastewater reserve account both agencies have been paying into for almost two decades.

Issues surrounding the joint reserve fund have been bubbling up for almost a year now, but were thrust into the spotlight last week when Humboldt County Supervisor Bonnie Neely addressed the Eureka City Council and questioned whether the city had illegally depleted $6 million or $7 million in reserve funds by spending them on other city services or redevelopment projects.

With the city having raised wastewater rates by more than 60 percent over the next five years, Neely questioned whether the increases would be used to backfill the depleted reserve and asked the city to perform a complete forensic audit of the account.

The questions raised in this article right before the 2010 election were never adequately answered just a lot of posturing from city officials. Neely was on to something but lost the election so it was dropped

Full story here:

http://www.times-standard.com/ci_16056139

most recent examiner post here:

https://tuluwatexaminer.wordpress.com/2014/05/15/apex-city-of-eureka-deserves-a-healthy-and-transparent-city-government/

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “City of Eureka sinks further down the SHN(t) hole

  1. Gosh this sounds familiar… the City of Eureka spending funds for which those funds were not allocated?

    Where have we heard that since then… Oh YES! Six open police officer positions in a crime ridden city with nearly a million dollars of Measure “O” funding sitting in the General Fund waiting for something new and shiny to catch the current City Council’s fancy.

    Vote No on the extension of “O”. Make the City of Eureka promise to be responsible for a change.

    Like

  2. How sad. Of course, they will say “This money isn’t from the general fund. So who cares?” Well, the bonds are being paid off from taxpayer money, with interest! If the project costs $13 million now, then you can bet that there’s several more millons added to that in interest.

    Where’s Fred on this? He probably knows the true cost of these wastewater bonds.

    Liked by 1 person

    • He probably knows the true cost of these wastewater bonds. “

      No, I don’t, but bonds often end up costing twice as much as the bond value due to the interest paid. Depending on the time it takes to pay them off, of course.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks Fred. I am terrible with numbers, but it doesn’t surprise me that it might be double.

      Liked by 1 person

    • ” …but it doesn’t surprise me that it might be double.

      I’m not sure about shorter periods, but the 20 and 30 year bonds often go that high because of interest. As bad as it sounds, we all do the same thing when we take out long term loans- to buy a house, for instance. The interest really ads up.

      Nothing wrong with issuing long term bonds for long term infrastructure projects that will last the life of the bond payoff or longer.

      Sometimes, though, bond money is used for very short lived benefits. I was surprised, as was a colleague of mine, to find a local school bond we were looking at was being used among other things to by things like computers. Yet it was a 20 or 30 year bond.

      You’d likely still be paying for those computers decades after they’d been discarded. My colleague questioned those expenses at a Taxpayer’s League meeting with the Superintendent of Schools, or whoever it was. His response was that, “That’s just the way it’s done”.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. And who did they run for supervisor instead of Bonnie Neely? The mayor of Eureka!

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Pingback: Tuluwat Examiner | More taxpayer dollars to be flushed down the SHN(t) hole

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s