Several months ago, Livingston County Democrats learned that Oakland County was filing a lawsuit against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to collect back taxes from the two mortgage giants. The privately owned but federally backed mortgage lenders had not been paying transfer taxes on real estate, claiming they were exempt as part of the federal government.
We thought this could provide some needed revenue for our county. Jordan Genso, then party chair, went to the Livingston County Commissioners and urged them to look into joining the lawsuit. The all-Republican county commission didn't take that step, but a federal judge later created a class-action lawsuit.
That lawsuit has resulted in a ruling that the two lenders do owe the transfer taxes. Livingston County Register of Deeds Sally Reynolds says the ruling could mean $217,000 for the county. It's disappointing that Reynolds sounded negative about the extra revenue for the county, complaining that it was an "ongoing nightmare."
A good use of that money would be to start a foreclosure prevention program in Livingston County, as local Democrats said at the time.
The local media didn't mention that it was Livingston County Democrats who first brought the issue up here, but it was.
The public has the idea that it's only Republicans in Livingston County that have good ideas. Here's one case where it was Democrats who were on the ball.
Showing posts with label Livingston County Commission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Livingston County Commission. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Monday, March 5, 2012
Cleaning Up the Mess Denby and Rogers Left Behind
Like the pooper-scooper behind the elephants in the circus parade, the Livingston County Commission is going to try to clean up the mess that Reps. Cindy Denby and Bill Rogers left behind when they were local officials.
The two Republican officials were once Handy Township supervisor and Livingston County Commission chair, respectively. And in those capacities, the two "fiscally conservative" Republicans spearheaded an arrangement by which Handy Township borrowed millions of dollars for water and sewar improvements on behalf of private developers of new subdivisions. The county agreed to back the bonds with its full faith and credit, putting the county taxpayers on the hook if Handy Township failed to collect enough money to pay for the bonds.
The subdivisions never filled up with homes and the money that was supposed to be collected from homeowners never came in to pay off the bonds. Several other townships did the same thing, creating special assessment districts to pay back the bonds for these improvements without waiting to see if the lots in already improved subdivisions sold.
The mad rush for development outpaced demand and the lots never sold, making Livingston County, "ground zero" in the problem of Toxic Special Assessment Districts, according to Bloomberg News.
On Monday, (March 5, 2012), the county commission will try to clean up the mess by approving the issuance of up to $8.5 million in new bonds, replacing the previous bonds, with a longer repayment period in order to stretch out the payments to a level Handy Township can afford. The item and backup materials are item number 2012-03-080 at the bottom of page 2 of the agenda posted on the Livingston County website.
This fiasco has been a major headache for the county commission over the last two years or more. How can two people who created such a mess claim to have any credibility as fiscal conservatives?
The two Republican officials were once Handy Township supervisor and Livingston County Commission chair, respectively. And in those capacities, the two "fiscally conservative" Republicans spearheaded an arrangement by which Handy Township borrowed millions of dollars for water and sewar improvements on behalf of private developers of new subdivisions. The county agreed to back the bonds with its full faith and credit, putting the county taxpayers on the hook if Handy Township failed to collect enough money to pay for the bonds.
The subdivisions never filled up with homes and the money that was supposed to be collected from homeowners never came in to pay off the bonds. Several other townships did the same thing, creating special assessment districts to pay back the bonds for these improvements without waiting to see if the lots in already improved subdivisions sold.
The mad rush for development outpaced demand and the lots never sold, making Livingston County, "ground zero" in the problem of Toxic Special Assessment Districts, according to Bloomberg News.
On Monday, (March 5, 2012), the county commission will try to clean up the mess by approving the issuance of up to $8.5 million in new bonds, replacing the previous bonds, with a longer repayment period in order to stretch out the payments to a level Handy Township can afford. The item and backup materials are item number 2012-03-080 at the bottom of page 2 of the agenda posted on the Livingston County website.
This fiasco has been a major headache for the county commission over the last two years or more. How can two people who created such a mess claim to have any credibility as fiscal conservatives?
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Voters Deserve a Choice -- It's Time to Think About Running for Office
Livingston County residents who are interested in running for office on the Democratic ticket are invited to attend the party’s 2012 Candidate Recruitment Night on Thursday, March 1.
The event will feature two guest speakers – Rep. Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing, and Derek Dobies, a former Livingston County resident recently elected to the Jackson City Council.
The event will be at 7 p.m. at party headquarters, 10321 Grand River Road, Suite 600, in Brighton.
"We are delighted to have with us two speakers who can share their expertise about the political landscape in Michigan and some of the ins and outs of campaigning," said Judy Daubenmier, chair of the Livingston County Democrats.
Meadows leads the House Democratic Caucus’ candidate recruitment effort. He will speak about the importance of electing enough Democrats in November to retake control of the Michigan House and how Livingston County fits into that picture. Dobies will share some of his experiences in putting together his winning campaign in 2011 and how that can be translated to other local races.
The November 2012 ballot will feature contests for Michigan House seats in District 42 and District 47; all nine seats on the Livingston County Commission; countywide offices of prosecuting attorney, sheriff, county clerk, county treasurer, register of deeds, and drain commissioner, and positions in Livingston County’s 16 townships, including supervisors, clerks, treasurers, and trustees.
Candidates must file by 4 p.m. May 15 in order to have their name appear on the Aug. 7 primary ballot.
"Sometimes people think politics is not important, but politics affects every aspect of our lives – the quality of our schools, the quality of our environment, the roads we drive on, our families’ health, the services available in our local communities, and the taxes that we pay. We live in a democracy and voters always deserve a choice at the ballot box. As Democrats, we are looking forward to providing voters with that choice," Daubenmier said.
"The 2012 election promises to be a great year to be running as a Democrat with President Obama and Senator Debbie Stabenow at the top of our ticket. Democrats will be energized about the need to re-elect both of them after seeing how Republicans in Washington have wanted to slash Medicare and attacked women’s access to birth control, and refused to recognize the growing inequality of wealth in this country. At the state level, people are turning away from Republican rule after the GOP has slashed school spending, taxed senior citizens’ pensions, and cut help to our most vulnerable citizens. This energy will translate into more support for Democrats farther down the ballot."
Besides the two speakers, the meeting also will feature information about how the local party assists candidates and other resources that are available for training and fund-raising. Previous candidates also will be on hand to talk about their experiences.
People wishing more information may call (810) 229-4212 or email livcodems@gmail.com.
The event will feature two guest speakers – Rep. Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing, and Derek Dobies, a former Livingston County resident recently elected to the Jackson City Council.
The event will be at 7 p.m. at party headquarters, 10321 Grand River Road, Suite 600, in Brighton.
"We are delighted to have with us two speakers who can share their expertise about the political landscape in Michigan and some of the ins and outs of campaigning," said Judy Daubenmier, chair of the Livingston County Democrats.
Meadows leads the House Democratic Caucus’ candidate recruitment effort. He will speak about the importance of electing enough Democrats in November to retake control of the Michigan House and how Livingston County fits into that picture. Dobies will share some of his experiences in putting together his winning campaign in 2011 and how that can be translated to other local races.
The November 2012 ballot will feature contests for Michigan House seats in District 42 and District 47; all nine seats on the Livingston County Commission; countywide offices of prosecuting attorney, sheriff, county clerk, county treasurer, register of deeds, and drain commissioner, and positions in Livingston County’s 16 townships, including supervisors, clerks, treasurers, and trustees.
Candidates must file by 4 p.m. May 15 in order to have their name appear on the Aug. 7 primary ballot.
"Sometimes people think politics is not important, but politics affects every aspect of our lives – the quality of our schools, the quality of our environment, the roads we drive on, our families’ health, the services available in our local communities, and the taxes that we pay. We live in a democracy and voters always deserve a choice at the ballot box. As Democrats, we are looking forward to providing voters with that choice," Daubenmier said.
"The 2012 election promises to be a great year to be running as a Democrat with President Obama and Senator Debbie Stabenow at the top of our ticket. Democrats will be energized about the need to re-elect both of them after seeing how Republicans in Washington have wanted to slash Medicare and attacked women’s access to birth control, and refused to recognize the growing inequality of wealth in this country. At the state level, people are turning away from Republican rule after the GOP has slashed school spending, taxed senior citizens’ pensions, and cut help to our most vulnerable citizens. This energy will translate into more support for Democrats farther down the ballot."
Besides the two speakers, the meeting also will feature information about how the local party assists candidates and other resources that are available for training and fund-raising. Previous candidates also will be on hand to talk about their experiences.
People wishing more information may call (810) 229-4212 or email livcodems@gmail.com.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Are Livingston Republicans Signing on to 'Picking Winners and Losers'?
I wonder if the Tea Party Republicans know what their elected officials in Livingston County are up to regarding the Ann Arbor SPARK contract.
Livingston County officials seemed to be trying to sneak the $1 million, three-year deal in the backdoor when nobody was looking by holding closed door meetings to have it explained to them. After that was exposed, the deal has been slowed down enough so that people can at least ask a few questions. Not that the answers from the economic development corporation with strong ties to Republican Rick Snyder have been very illuminating.
But the power point presentation made to Livingston County government officials suggests that grants and loans to private businesses are part of the deal. When Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm did it with the film industry, Republicans attacked it as "picking winners and losers."
But it looks like that is some of what Ann Arbor SPARK does. The power point presentation, no longer available on the Livingston Press and Argus website, says that its services for start-up businesses include "microloans" and "pre-seed investments."
In 2010, Ann Arbor SPARK says it awarded "12 pre-seed investments and 30 microloans" to start-ups. Between 2006 and 2010, Ann Arbor Spark reported it made 54 pre-seed investments in 52 companies, at an average of $225,000 per company, and it made 48 microloans to 46 companies, averaging $39,000 per company.
Ann Arbor SPARK's power point presentation didn't explain where that money came from, but since private business is only kicking in $60,000 of the $335,880 a year that Ann Arbor SPARK wants from Livingston County, the question should be asked whether taxpayer funds will be going to private companies or whether there is another source of funds for these "pre-seed investments" and "microloans."
In other words, will Livingston County be picking winners and losers with our tax dollars? Given that Republicans hated that idea so much when Granholm did it, it's pretty remarkable that no Republicans are putting up a fuss over that possibility.
Livingston County officials seemed to be trying to sneak the $1 million, three-year deal in the backdoor when nobody was looking by holding closed door meetings to have it explained to them. After that was exposed, the deal has been slowed down enough so that people can at least ask a few questions. Not that the answers from the economic development corporation with strong ties to Republican Rick Snyder have been very illuminating.
But the power point presentation made to Livingston County government officials suggests that grants and loans to private businesses are part of the deal. When Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm did it with the film industry, Republicans attacked it as "picking winners and losers."
But it looks like that is some of what Ann Arbor SPARK does. The power point presentation, no longer available on the Livingston Press and Argus website, says that its services for start-up businesses include "microloans" and "pre-seed investments."
In 2010, Ann Arbor SPARK says it awarded "12 pre-seed investments and 30 microloans" to start-ups. Between 2006 and 2010, Ann Arbor Spark reported it made 54 pre-seed investments in 52 companies, at an average of $225,000 per company, and it made 48 microloans to 46 companies, averaging $39,000 per company.
Ann Arbor SPARK's power point presentation didn't explain where that money came from, but since private business is only kicking in $60,000 of the $335,880 a year that Ann Arbor SPARK wants from Livingston County, the question should be asked whether taxpayer funds will be going to private companies or whether there is another source of funds for these "pre-seed investments" and "microloans."
In other words, will Livingston County be picking winners and losers with our tax dollars? Given that Republicans hated that idea so much when Granholm did it, it's pretty remarkable that no Republicans are putting up a fuss over that possibility.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Former GOP Chair's Comments Shows Need for Obama's Jobs Bill
Sometimes your political opponents make your case for you. That's certainly true of former Livingston County Republican Party chairman Mike Murphy's comments about the state of public safety.
In an article in the Livingston Press and Argus on Tuesday (Nov. 1, 2011), Murphy complained that the county does not have enough deputies on the road to answer many emergencies. It won't get better "until people decide they want to pay to have more deputies out there."
And as his boss, fellow Republican and county Sheriff Bob Bezotte said about the lack of officers and its impact on public safety, "It's important to me, but it doesn't seem to be important to the bean counters up town because they've cut us so much."
The "bean counters" would be the all-Republican Livingston County Commissioners, whose budgets have resulted in the loss of 18 officers from the sheriff's department in recent years. And who, with Murphy's help, have bragged about having the lowest property tax rate in the state.
But Murphy doesn't seem too happy with the services that his very own "lowest property tax rate" politics produce. Perhaps if his leadership, and that of the county commission, had been different, the county might not be facing a situation in which suspected drunk drivers are not pursued because no deputies are available. Voters don't just "decide they want to pay more" taxes. Sometimes leaders need to explain to them why it is necessary, but local Republicans will never do that.
Nevertheless, Murphy's comments are useful because they help make the case for President Obama's American Jobs Act. The measure, which Republicans reject, would provide $5 billion nationally so that financially-strapped communities could keep firefighters and police on the job.
If local Republicans can't come up with the money to keep us safe, maybe they could ask Rep. Mike Rogers to vote for the American Jobs Act so that drunk drivers don't roam free any longer in Livingston County. Mike Murphy probably would like to have some of that money to hire more deputies.
In an article in the Livingston Press and Argus on Tuesday (Nov. 1, 2011), Murphy complained that the county does not have enough deputies on the road to answer many emergencies. It won't get better "until people decide they want to pay to have more deputies out there."
And as his boss, fellow Republican and county Sheriff Bob Bezotte said about the lack of officers and its impact on public safety, "It's important to me, but it doesn't seem to be important to the bean counters up town because they've cut us so much."
The "bean counters" would be the all-Republican Livingston County Commissioners, whose budgets have resulted in the loss of 18 officers from the sheriff's department in recent years. And who, with Murphy's help, have bragged about having the lowest property tax rate in the state.
But Murphy doesn't seem too happy with the services that his very own "lowest property tax rate" politics produce. Perhaps if his leadership, and that of the county commission, had been different, the county might not be facing a situation in which suspected drunk drivers are not pursued because no deputies are available. Voters don't just "decide they want to pay more" taxes. Sometimes leaders need to explain to them why it is necessary, but local Republicans will never do that.
Nevertheless, Murphy's comments are useful because they help make the case for President Obama's American Jobs Act. The measure, which Republicans reject, would provide $5 billion nationally so that financially-strapped communities could keep firefighters and police on the job.
If local Republicans can't come up with the money to keep us safe, maybe they could ask Rep. Mike Rogers to vote for the American Jobs Act so that drunk drivers don't roam free any longer in Livingston County. Mike Murphy probably would like to have some of that money to hire more deputies.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Is County's Economic Development Director Getting the Heave-Ho?
You know something is wrong when people start talking about your replacement even though you don't have any plans to leave.
That's what is happening with Fred Dillingham, executive director of the Economic Development Council. Dillingham has held that post since 1997 and has no plans to retire. But all of a sudden, the Livingston County Commission is talking about who will replace him when he retires.
The all-Republican county commission already has its eyes on having an Ann Arbor group, Ann Arbor SPARK, take over the job of marketing Livingston County. Now, why would Livingston County want a group from another, more urban county to take over economic development for us? Did I mention that the group is tied in with Republican Rick Snyder?
And did I mention that Dillingham was less than enthusiastic earlier this year when Snyder ditched all of the state's economic development incentives in favor of cutting taxes for businesses by $1.7 billion?
Here's what Dillingham said last spring:
"Dillingham said the county's manufacturing base could face a 'double whammy' with Snyder's corporate income tax and the governor's call to end all business-tax incentives. Dillingham previously said tax incentives are responsible for several manufacturing companies setting up shop in the county."
Could that be the reason Dillingham will be feeling some of Rick Snyder's shared sacrifice and Livingston County will have its economic development efforts farmed out to another county?
That's what is happening with Fred Dillingham, executive director of the Economic Development Council. Dillingham has held that post since 1997 and has no plans to retire. But all of a sudden, the Livingston County Commission is talking about who will replace him when he retires.
The all-Republican county commission already has its eyes on having an Ann Arbor group, Ann Arbor SPARK, take over the job of marketing Livingston County. Now, why would Livingston County want a group from another, more urban county to take over economic development for us? Did I mention that the group is tied in with Republican Rick Snyder?
And did I mention that Dillingham was less than enthusiastic earlier this year when Snyder ditched all of the state's economic development incentives in favor of cutting taxes for businesses by $1.7 billion?
Here's what Dillingham said last spring:
"Dillingham said the county's manufacturing base could face a 'double whammy' with Snyder's corporate income tax and the governor's call to end all business-tax incentives. Dillingham previously said tax incentives are responsible for several manufacturing companies setting up shop in the county."
Could that be the reason Dillingham will be feeling some of Rick Snyder's shared sacrifice and Livingston County will have its economic development efforts farmed out to another county?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Livingston Dems: County Should Look Into Foreclosure Lawsuits
A pair of Livingston County's neighbors are suing two mortgage giants for not paying millions of dollars in taxes for homes they foreclosed on. Shouldn't Livingston County join in?
Livingston County Democrats think so and on Wednesday, county chair Jordan Genso urged the county commission to look into joining the lawsuits brought by Oakland County and Ingham County against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
With money tight, governments ought to be looking at any potential source of revenue. And that's what officials in Ingham and Oakland have done.
In June Oakland County Treasurer Andy Meisner sued mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in federal court, alleging that the lenders failed to pay real estate transfer taxes to the county when they recorded documents with the county Register of Deeds.
The county portion of property transfer taxes is $1.10 per $1,000 of a property’s value. The state portion of the transfer tax is $7.50 per $1,000. Oakland County officials have estimated the two lenders owe the state and county $12 million for unpaid transfer taxes.
Ingham County Register of Deeds Curtis Hertel Jr. filed a similar lawsuit naming not only Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but also Bank of America, BAC Home Loans Servicing, Wells Fargo Bank, Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, and two Michigan law firms, Trott & Trott and Orlans Associates.
That suit, filed in Ingham County Circuit Court, names the entities besides Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because Hertel believes that the companies might have assigned mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac right before a foreclosure in order to avoid paying the transfer taxes.
Hertel also said millions of dollars could be owed to the county and the state.
Genso asked the county commission to look into how much Livingston County might have lost in transfer taxes unpaid by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and report that figure to the public, along with its decision on whether or not to join the lawsuits, by August 31.
Money recovered from the lawsuit could be used to start foreclosure prevention and assistance programs in Livingston County, Genso said.
Livingston County Democrats think so and on Wednesday, county chair Jordan Genso urged the county commission to look into joining the lawsuits brought by Oakland County and Ingham County against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
With money tight, governments ought to be looking at any potential source of revenue. And that's what officials in Ingham and Oakland have done.
In June Oakland County Treasurer Andy Meisner sued mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in federal court, alleging that the lenders failed to pay real estate transfer taxes to the county when they recorded documents with the county Register of Deeds.
The county portion of property transfer taxes is $1.10 per $1,000 of a property’s value. The state portion of the transfer tax is $7.50 per $1,000. Oakland County officials have estimated the two lenders owe the state and county $12 million for unpaid transfer taxes.
Ingham County Register of Deeds Curtis Hertel Jr. filed a similar lawsuit naming not only Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but also Bank of America, BAC Home Loans Servicing, Wells Fargo Bank, Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, and two Michigan law firms, Trott & Trott and Orlans Associates.
That suit, filed in Ingham County Circuit Court, names the entities besides Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because Hertel believes that the companies might have assigned mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac right before a foreclosure in order to avoid paying the transfer taxes.
Hertel also said millions of dollars could be owed to the county and the state.
Genso asked the county commission to look into how much Livingston County might have lost in transfer taxes unpaid by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and report that figure to the public, along with its decision on whether or not to join the lawsuits, by August 31.
Money recovered from the lawsuit could be used to start foreclosure prevention and assistance programs in Livingston County, Genso said.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Presto! Township Debt Problem Disappears!
Livingston County must be home to some real magicians. They can make millions of dollars of debt just disappear.
Last month, the all-Republican Livingston County Commission set aside $2 million to create a fund to help townships pay off bonds for water and sewer systems in subdivisions that were never finished. The county backed the bonds for the townships, who paid for the projects for developers who walked away from the projects and left the townships holding the bag.
The county is left with egg on its face as it scrambles to figure out how to salvage its credit rating if townships stop making the payments. And it may face having to pay out $200,000 to $400,000 a year in payments for Handy Township because it can't make its bond payments starting as early as next year.
But just last week, the Livingston Press and Argus reported that everything is fine with the townships' special assessment debt. In some cases, township voters have approved millages to make up the shortfall. In other words, they raised taxes to cover up county and township officials' mistakes.
So what was the point of the $2 million loan fund? None of the township officials interviewed seems to have been asked if they will make use of the county's loan fund. Did the problem magically disappear in the month between when the loan fund was set up and the time the township officials were interviewed? Or does Handy Township at least expect to borrow money from the fund? What are the terms of the loan from the fund and can Handy Township meet them?
The article's emphasis was on whether or not the state would send in emergency managers to take over any townships, not the value of the county loan fund. And it turns out the state treasurer's office has met with local officials to discuss assessment debt. What happened in those discussions? Does the treasurer's office have a plan the people don't know about?
The two stories don't add up. The county commission sets up a loan fund for townships that have debt, and townships that have the debt don't even mention whether they will use it.
Last month, the all-Republican Livingston County Commission set aside $2 million to create a fund to help townships pay off bonds for water and sewer systems in subdivisions that were never finished. The county backed the bonds for the townships, who paid for the projects for developers who walked away from the projects and left the townships holding the bag.
The county is left with egg on its face as it scrambles to figure out how to salvage its credit rating if townships stop making the payments. And it may face having to pay out $200,000 to $400,000 a year in payments for Handy Township because it can't make its bond payments starting as early as next year.
But just last week, the Livingston Press and Argus reported that everything is fine with the townships' special assessment debt. In some cases, township voters have approved millages to make up the shortfall. In other words, they raised taxes to cover up county and township officials' mistakes.
So what was the point of the $2 million loan fund? None of the township officials interviewed seems to have been asked if they will make use of the county's loan fund. Did the problem magically disappear in the month between when the loan fund was set up and the time the township officials were interviewed? Or does Handy Township at least expect to borrow money from the fund? What are the terms of the loan from the fund and can Handy Township meet them?
The article's emphasis was on whether or not the state would send in emergency managers to take over any townships, not the value of the county loan fund. And it turns out the state treasurer's office has met with local officials to discuss assessment debt. What happened in those discussions? Does the treasurer's office have a plan the people don't know about?
The two stories don't add up. The county commission sets up a loan fund for townships that have debt, and townships that have the debt don't even mention whether they will use it.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Denby and Rogers Getting Their Own Taxpayer-Funded Bailout
Livingston County taxpayers are about to bail out Republican Reps. Cindy Denby and Bill Rogers for decisions they made while holding local elected positions. Our tax dollars are going to go to cover up the multi-million-dollar mistakes made by this pair of "fiscal conservatives."
The taxpayer bailout amounts to $2 million, in the form of a special fund being set up by the all-Republican Livingston County Commission to loan money to townships that can't make the payments on sewer and water projects paid for by bonds backed by the county.
Handy Township is one of the townships in the most dire straits. It approved multiple new subdivisions, financed by bond issues backed by the county, when Denby was township supervisor. Rogers was chair of the commission when it decided to back the bonds for more subdivisions even though the Michigan economy was struggling, auto makers were losing money and laying off workers. Developers never finished the projects and walked away, leaving the townships and county holding the bag.
According to the Livingston Press and Argus, the county commission will take $1.6 million from money set aside for a new jail and $354,000 from the county's general fund to set up a fund to loan money to townships to make their bond payments. The same general fund that has had to be cut and cut, meaning fewer services for county residents paying the same amount of tax dollars.
So now, county taxpayers in townships like Hamburg and Putnam, which didn't participate in the risky overbuilding, are going to have their tax dollars going to bail out other parts of the county and paper over Denby and Rogers' mistakes.
Democrats running for county commission raised the issue of these toxic Special Assessment Districts during the 2010 county commission races but board Chair Maggie Jones insisted there was no problem at all. Everything was under control. Not to worry.
It worked until after the election, but Denby and Rogers' chickens are coming home to roost and pick the pockets of Livingston County taxpayers.
The taxpayer bailout amounts to $2 million, in the form of a special fund being set up by the all-Republican Livingston County Commission to loan money to townships that can't make the payments on sewer and water projects paid for by bonds backed by the county.
Handy Township is one of the townships in the most dire straits. It approved multiple new subdivisions, financed by bond issues backed by the county, when Denby was township supervisor. Rogers was chair of the commission when it decided to back the bonds for more subdivisions even though the Michigan economy was struggling, auto makers were losing money and laying off workers. Developers never finished the projects and walked away, leaving the townships and county holding the bag.
According to the Livingston Press and Argus, the county commission will take $1.6 million from money set aside for a new jail and $354,000 from the county's general fund to set up a fund to loan money to townships to make their bond payments. The same general fund that has had to be cut and cut, meaning fewer services for county residents paying the same amount of tax dollars.
So now, county taxpayers in townships like Hamburg and Putnam, which didn't participate in the risky overbuilding, are going to have their tax dollars going to bail out other parts of the county and paper over Denby and Rogers' mistakes.
Democrats running for county commission raised the issue of these toxic Special Assessment Districts during the 2010 county commission races but board Chair Maggie Jones insisted there was no problem at all. Everything was under control. Not to worry.
It worked until after the election, but Denby and Rogers' chickens are coming home to roost and pick the pockets of Livingston County taxpayers.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Cleaning Up Cindy Denby's Mess
Livingston County taxpayers have just made a $100,000 installment on a multi-million-dollar problem.
Their elected representatives -- the all-Republican Livingston County Commission -- has decided to give $100,000 to Handy Township for legal fees over an uncompleted sewer line. The line was part of an expansion the township was constructing for a private developer. The bonds were backed by the county, which puts all county taxpayers on the hook for paying them off. The first construction company failed to complete the sewer line and walked away in 2008. The second one hired to finish the job also gave up on it and its owner says the county failed to inform it of numerous difficulties with the project when the company bid on it. Now the matter is in the courts, and Handy Township needed money for legal fees.
Whose idea was this mess anyway?
Why, none other than Livingston County's own Rep. Cindy Denby. The so-called conservative Republican lawmaker was township supervisor when the project was initiated. She was in charge when the township, with a population of roughly 7,000, decided it needed not one, not two, but three more subdivisions in the township, (on top of another one in the village of Fowlerville.) Combined, they would have added thousands more households to the 2,500 in the townships. Even as the auto industry shed thousands of jobs in Michigan that decade, Denby listened to the snake oil sales pitch private developers were giving and decided to build sewer lines for the developers' pipe dreams without getting any financial guarantees from them. Denby's "conservative" Republican buddies on the Livingston County Commission aided and abetted the plan, giving county backing to the bonds. Now the township can't make its payments to the county for the bonds because the projects failed.
Now that the chickens have come home to roost, Denby has moved on. Voters rewarded her by electing her state representative in 2008 and then re-elected her in 2010.
Because she is "conservative."
Their elected representatives -- the all-Republican Livingston County Commission -- has decided to give $100,000 to Handy Township for legal fees over an uncompleted sewer line. The line was part of an expansion the township was constructing for a private developer. The bonds were backed by the county, which puts all county taxpayers on the hook for paying them off. The first construction company failed to complete the sewer line and walked away in 2008. The second one hired to finish the job also gave up on it and its owner says the county failed to inform it of numerous difficulties with the project when the company bid on it. Now the matter is in the courts, and Handy Township needed money for legal fees.
Whose idea was this mess anyway?
Why, none other than Livingston County's own Rep. Cindy Denby. The so-called conservative Republican lawmaker was township supervisor when the project was initiated. She was in charge when the township, with a population of roughly 7,000, decided it needed not one, not two, but three more subdivisions in the township, (on top of another one in the village of Fowlerville.) Combined, they would have added thousands more households to the 2,500 in the townships. Even as the auto industry shed thousands of jobs in Michigan that decade, Denby listened to the snake oil sales pitch private developers were giving and decided to build sewer lines for the developers' pipe dreams without getting any financial guarantees from them. Denby's "conservative" Republican buddies on the Livingston County Commission aided and abetted the plan, giving county backing to the bonds. Now the township can't make its payments to the county for the bonds because the projects failed.
Now that the chickens have come home to roost, Denby has moved on. Voters rewarded her by electing her state representative in 2008 and then re-elected her in 2010.
Because she is "conservative."
Friday, January 14, 2011
So the County Commission DOES Have a Role in County Roads?
I'm confused, and readers of the Livingston Press and Argus must be, too.
When Democratic candidates for Livingston County Commission pointed out the poor condition of county roads and pledged to stop spending money on wasteful projects and fix the roads instead, the county commission insisted it had no role whatsoever in county road building. That was all up to the road commission and all the county commission did was appoint the commissioners and set their salaries and then totally ignore whatever they did. Even though the commission has an "infrastructure committee."
The Livingston Press and Argus backed them up on that during the campaign and again later, insisting in its year-end story wrapping up political highlights of the year that the county commission doesn't have anything to do with the roads.
So here we are on Friday (Jan. 14, 2010) and we read in the Livingston Press and Argus that the county commission plans to give $1.5 million to the Latson Road interchange project.
So the newspaper and the commissioners are admitting that the county commission DOES have a role in road construction in this county when it chooses to. And the conclusion is obvious that it has CHOSEN not to do a darn thing about the poor roads in the past.
The county commission didn't say where this $1.5 million for the Latson Road project is coming from and the reporter apparently didn't ask. My guess is it's coming from the deliquent tax revolving fund.
The article also is interesting because it draws a direct connection between county commission spending, or not spending, on roads and its foolish backing of sewer and water projects for private developers which have now gone belly-up and left the taxpayers holding the bag.
Commissioner Dave Domas didn't want to give the money to the road commission for the Latson Road interchange, only loan it to them. As the newspaper reported:
"Domas said the county must pay attention to several pressing financial issues, including accounting for township water and sewer special-assessment projects the county has backed with its credit rating. Several assessment projects have been built without expected development, which will leave the county responsible for paying them off if townships fail to."
In other words, Domas can see that county taxpayers are going to soon be getting a big bill for the county's borrowing to cover losses in these special assessment districts and he wants to have some money in reserve so that taxes don't have to be raised to pay off Wall Street.
Which is exactly what Democratic candidates were saying last fall.
When Democratic candidates for Livingston County Commission pointed out the poor condition of county roads and pledged to stop spending money on wasteful projects and fix the roads instead, the county commission insisted it had no role whatsoever in county road building. That was all up to the road commission and all the county commission did was appoint the commissioners and set their salaries and then totally ignore whatever they did. Even though the commission has an "infrastructure committee."
The Livingston Press and Argus backed them up on that during the campaign and again later, insisting in its year-end story wrapping up political highlights of the year that the county commission doesn't have anything to do with the roads.
So here we are on Friday (Jan. 14, 2010) and we read in the Livingston Press and Argus that the county commission plans to give $1.5 million to the Latson Road interchange project.
So the newspaper and the commissioners are admitting that the county commission DOES have a role in road construction in this county when it chooses to. And the conclusion is obvious that it has CHOSEN not to do a darn thing about the poor roads in the past.
The county commission didn't say where this $1.5 million for the Latson Road project is coming from and the reporter apparently didn't ask. My guess is it's coming from the deliquent tax revolving fund.
The article also is interesting because it draws a direct connection between county commission spending, or not spending, on roads and its foolish backing of sewer and water projects for private developers which have now gone belly-up and left the taxpayers holding the bag.
Commissioner Dave Domas didn't want to give the money to the road commission for the Latson Road interchange, only loan it to them. As the newspaper reported:
"Domas said the county must pay attention to several pressing financial issues, including accounting for township water and sewer special-assessment projects the county has backed with its credit rating. Several assessment projects have been built without expected development, which will leave the county responsible for paying them off if townships fail to."
In other words, Domas can see that county taxpayers are going to soon be getting a big bill for the county's borrowing to cover losses in these special assessment districts and he wants to have some money in reserve so that taxes don't have to be raised to pay off Wall Street.
Which is exactly what Democratic candidates were saying last fall.
Friday, January 7, 2011
How the 'Lowest Tax Rate in the State' Makes Us Less Safe
Livingston County's all-Republican County Commission continually brags that we have the lowest tax rate of any county in the state, but they never admit the shortcomings of that approach, one of which became brutally obvious recently.
The Livingston County Sheriff's Department didn't have enough deputies on hand to take defendants to court so the court system had to grind to a halt, according to a story in the Livingston Press and Argus on Friday (January 7, 2011). That's not a minor thing for the dozens of lawyers and clients waiting for their day in court. The newspaper implied it was a waste of time to have deputies "sitting in a courtroom," but the fact is that accused criminals can't just be left in courtrooms with no security. Courthouse violence against judges, witnesses, and lawyers is a reality in America.
The paper cast the security matter as a "feud" between a local judge and the sheriff, no doubt spin from some Republican in county government who wants to cover up the fact that the sheriff's office is down 18 deputies. Some townships pay for their own police protection to make up for the county's failure to provide adequate service because of the GOP's low tax line. That system makes the county's lowest tax rate brag a lie. The Republican county commissioners push the costs and responsibilities that they should be covering onto townships via a shell game that makes them look good and leaves us less safe.
But the bottom line is the county sheriff's office doesn't have enough deputies to do the job. And that's the county commission's fault.
The Livingston County Sheriff's Department didn't have enough deputies on hand to take defendants to court so the court system had to grind to a halt, according to a story in the Livingston Press and Argus on Friday (January 7, 2011). That's not a minor thing for the dozens of lawyers and clients waiting for their day in court. The newspaper implied it was a waste of time to have deputies "sitting in a courtroom," but the fact is that accused criminals can't just be left in courtrooms with no security. Courthouse violence against judges, witnesses, and lawyers is a reality in America.
The paper cast the security matter as a "feud" between a local judge and the sheriff, no doubt spin from some Republican in county government who wants to cover up the fact that the sheriff's office is down 18 deputies. Some townships pay for their own police protection to make up for the county's failure to provide adequate service because of the GOP's low tax line. That system makes the county's lowest tax rate brag a lie. The Republican county commissioners push the costs and responsibilities that they should be covering onto townships via a shell game that makes them look good and leaves us less safe.
But the bottom line is the county sheriff's office doesn't have enough deputies to do the job. And that's the county commission's fault.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Was the Michigan Economy Bad Early in Last Decade?
Democratic candidates for Livingston County Commission rightly made this county's $100 million debt for overbuilding subdivisions an issue in the last campaign. But defenders of the Republican regime insisted that the multiple special assessment districts that were approved by townships, and then backed by county taxpayers, were not foolish investments. Nobody could see economic problems coming in Michigan, taxpayers were told over and over, so it was perfectly logical to keep approving more and more subdivisions that remain unfilled.
But now, when it comes time to assess the performance of Gov. Jennifer Granholm, people have changed their tune. Turns out, the economy was lousy all through the last decade and Granholm should have recognized it.
According to a Livingston Press and Argus editorial on Sunday (Dec. 12, 2010):
"While Michigan's economy has long bounced up and down with the domestic auto industry, there was no reason to believe that was going to be the case with the slump that greeted Granholm. There was plenty of reason to think otherwise.
"Michigan, as Comerica Bank economist Dana Johnson said early in the decade, had the most to lose because it, by far, had the highest percentage of manufacturing jobs. The state was not enduring a cyclical fluctuation, but instead enduring a fundamental shift.
"Over the last decade, Michigan has been suffering greatly while the rest of the country was doing well or at least limping by. That all changed by the end of 2008, when the rest of the nation's fortunes crashed. But Michigan had been in those economic throes for up to eight years by then."
So, according to the editorial, Granholm should have recognized the state's fundamental economic problems earlier, but county leaders like Maggie Jones, Dave Domas, Carol Griffith, and Jack LaBelle, (and state Rep. Cindy Denby) could not be expected to have reached the same conclusions and stopped putting taxpayers on the hook for subdivisions that are near ghost towns.
Granholm should have seen it coming, but Republicans here in Livingston County shouldn't be held to the same standard.
That's a double standard if there ever was one.
But now, when it comes time to assess the performance of Gov. Jennifer Granholm, people have changed their tune. Turns out, the economy was lousy all through the last decade and Granholm should have recognized it.
According to a Livingston Press and Argus editorial on Sunday (Dec. 12, 2010):
"While Michigan's economy has long bounced up and down with the domestic auto industry, there was no reason to believe that was going to be the case with the slump that greeted Granholm. There was plenty of reason to think otherwise.
"Michigan, as Comerica Bank economist Dana Johnson said early in the decade, had the most to lose because it, by far, had the highest percentage of manufacturing jobs. The state was not enduring a cyclical fluctuation, but instead enduring a fundamental shift.
"Over the last decade, Michigan has been suffering greatly while the rest of the country was doing well or at least limping by. That all changed by the end of 2008, when the rest of the nation's fortunes crashed. But Michigan had been in those economic throes for up to eight years by then."
So, according to the editorial, Granholm should have recognized the state's fundamental economic problems earlier, but county leaders like Maggie Jones, Dave Domas, Carol Griffith, and Jack LaBelle, (and state Rep. Cindy Denby) could not be expected to have reached the same conclusions and stopped putting taxpayers on the hook for subdivisions that are near ghost towns.
Granholm should have seen it coming, but Republicans here in Livingston County shouldn't be held to the same standard.
That's a double standard if there ever was one.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
They Beg to Differ
Republicans can tell us that everything is perfect in Livingston County all they want. But anybody who drives a car knows that's not true. And people are starting to get the message that the Livingston County Commission has something to say about that.
Two letters to the editor this week from people pointing out that our roads are in poor condition and that the Livingston County Commission could do something about it and in fact is responsible for doing something about it.
Asks one letter writer, where is the accountability?
With the all-Republican county commission.
Two letters to the editor this week from people pointing out that our roads are in poor condition and that the Livingston County Commission could do something about it and in fact is responsible for doing something about it.
Asks one letter writer, where is the accountability?
With the all-Republican county commission.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Livingston Dems on the Radio!
Livingston County Dems are on the air!
The first ad in support of Democratic candidates for county commission focuses on the county's misplaced priorities -- millions for an airport nobody uses but nothing for the roads we all drive on.
Listen here.
The first ad in support of Democratic candidates for county commission focuses on the county's misplaced priorities -- millions for an airport nobody uses but nothing for the roads we all drive on.
Listen here.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
New Leaders in Action!
The Democratic candidates for Livingston County Commission presented their platform, "Smart Leadership, Smart Growth," an agenda for getting Livingston County moving again, at their news conference Monday (Aug. 16, 2010).
These are fresh faces, not tired old incumbents.
These are fresh faces, not tired old incumbents.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Watch Democratic Candidates for County Commission!
Livingston County Democrats' candidates for county commission laid out their agenda for "Smart Leadership, Smart Growth" on Monday (August 16, 2010) and now you can watch the news conference yourself!
Video will be coming soon!
Video will be coming soon!
Friday, August 6, 2010
Don't Shoot the Messenger
Today's Press & Argus has a front-page article on Livingston County's liability for township debt.
If you haven't seen it, here are a few key points:
- Eight LivCo townships are in danger of defaulting on over $100 million in assessment-backed bond debt.
- The county commission chose to guarantee the township bonds -- they weren't legally obligated to do so.
- Things are bad enough here in LivCo that a national news agency wrote about us; the MI House has put together a bipartisan package of bills to address the problem of township bond repayment.
- We need to have an open discussion about the extent of the problem and how we can fix it.
Thanks to the story's, ah, interesting slant, though, the average reader might come away with the impression that County Democratic Chair Judy Daubenmier is raising the issue for purely partisan reasons. ("Chairwoman upset over assessments backing by county" "Party chair slams county board).
Why blame Daubenmier for talking about an issue that affects ALL LivCo residents -- even the ones who don't live in a township that borrowed during the boom years? She's not the first to raise the subject, either: Bloomberg News and even the P&A have written about our toxic debt problem.
Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, it seems to me that everyone should be concerned about elected officials giving the OK to speculate with taxpayer money.
Shooting the messenger won't solve our problems.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Domas: Not Much to Do About the Economy
David Domas made one statement in a recent Livingston Press and Argus interview that shows he doesn't deserve re-election to the County Commission.
"While he see jobs as a big issue for the county, he said there's not a lot the county can do to get people working."
Domas advocates throwing up our hands and walking away from the problem, apparently. After 16 years on the board, he can't come up with a single idea to build the local economy.
How about a one-stop shop for new businesses? How about a strategy to promote local businesses? How about letting businesses know about programs that are available to help? Remember the $24 million in bonding available for local businesses that was made available under the federal recovery act that the commission didn't tell anybody about for weeks? And with Livingston County having the second highest foreclosure rate in southeast Michigan (behind only Wayne County), shouldn't the county have a program to help homeowners facing foreclosure? Did Domas participate in the New Economy Summit that the area Chambers of Commerce put together or did he decide that the situation is hopeless and stay home? How about improving our county website so it makes our county look like an attractive place to live and work, instead or presenting a website that looks like the inside of a phone book?
Dane Morris, the Democratic candidate who will face the winner of the GOP primary, has more ideas than either Domas or his primary opponent put together. When times are tough, voters look for alternatives and Dane is top-notch.
"While he see jobs as a big issue for the county, he said there's not a lot the county can do to get people working."
Domas advocates throwing up our hands and walking away from the problem, apparently. After 16 years on the board, he can't come up with a single idea to build the local economy.
How about a one-stop shop for new businesses? How about a strategy to promote local businesses? How about letting businesses know about programs that are available to help? Remember the $24 million in bonding available for local businesses that was made available under the federal recovery act that the commission didn't tell anybody about for weeks? And with Livingston County having the second highest foreclosure rate in southeast Michigan (behind only Wayne County), shouldn't the county have a program to help homeowners facing foreclosure? Did Domas participate in the New Economy Summit that the area Chambers of Commerce put together or did he decide that the situation is hopeless and stay home? How about improving our county website so it makes our county look like an attractive place to live and work, instead or presenting a website that looks like the inside of a phone book?
Dane Morris, the Democratic candidate who will face the winner of the GOP primary, has more ideas than either Domas or his primary opponent put together. When times are tough, voters look for alternatives and Dane is top-notch.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
County Passing the Buck on Lake Patrols
The Livingston County Commissioners brag a lot about having a low tax rate, but they don't tell you how they get that -- by passing the buck to the townships for services the county used to provide but doesn't any more.
Take lake patrols for example. The Livingston County sheriff's department used to patrol the county's many lakes, but this year it decided it couldn't do that anymore.
As WHMI reported recently (July 3, 2010), Hamburg Township has had to take over patrolling lakes because the Livingston County Sheriff's Department said it didn't have the money for it. Voters in the township approved a millage for expanded police protection awhile back, but now instead of expanding service, some of that money has to go to picking up the work that used to be done by the county.
Until the county commission passed the buck, so the Republican incumbents could brag about their low tax rate.
And it's not like lake patrols don't matter. People die on Michigan lakes every summer.
Take lake patrols for example. The Livingston County sheriff's department used to patrol the county's many lakes, but this year it decided it couldn't do that anymore.
As WHMI reported recently (July 3, 2010), Hamburg Township has had to take over patrolling lakes because the Livingston County Sheriff's Department said it didn't have the money for it. Voters in the township approved a millage for expanded police protection awhile back, but now instead of expanding service, some of that money has to go to picking up the work that used to be done by the county.
Until the county commission passed the buck, so the Republican incumbents could brag about their low tax rate.
And it's not like lake patrols don't matter. People die on Michigan lakes every summer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)