Powered By Blogger

Monday, July 26, 2010

INTENTIONAL MISINFORMATION

'DPS Mess' as reported by Katie Farrell Lovett on July 15, 2010. The Headline should have been "City messes up Low Street Legal Challenge".




It appears that the Newburyport City Council is unaware as to the legal process of paying enterprise bills and the City Auditor, Bill Squillace, failed to inform the Council fully of the due process of paying these bills. The person that the Mayor chose to temporarily replace Brendan O'Regan on the Sewer Department side of the DPS, Jamie Tuccolo spoke at the July 12, City Council meeting not knowing his presentation materials nor the reasons that the legal bills were invoiced and were not paid. Several misquotes in his presentation to the council and his follow up to the Sewer Commission on the 22nd of July are proof of the demise of the financial security of the Newburyport Sewer Department. This may be the intent of this Mayor by allowing untrained and uneducated personnel to manage these tri departments.After all, the Water and Sewer Departments (and Harbor) are the only solvent departments the city has. There are actually millions of dollars at stake here, if the Mayor can control the commissions and managers of these enterprise departments, she can balance her city budget on the backs of the ratepayers from two communities.



Acting Assistant Deputy Director, Mr. Tuccolo reported to the City Council that legal bills were "swept under the rug" and "were not presented to the Sewer Commission for payment". These are only two mis-statements and false statements made to the City Council on July 22nd 2010. He also stated to the sewer Commission that he 'does not remember saying that these bills were 'swept under the rug', accusing his previous boss and the sewer commissioners of negligence.



As a Collection System foreman, Mr. Tuccolo has no prior training in municipal finances, nor in personnel management. He has no degrees and was hired to a position that clearly stated the need for a minimal degree. He does have the ear of a first time Mayor and an otherwise unemployable acting deputy director, looking to secure a longer contract than all his previous employments combined. Both would not be in leadership positions if their education was a factor. And both would have much lesser incomes today.



The process of paying bills by enterprise departments has always been processed the following way;



All Department bills are presented to the Director (an exception with legal bills in that they are first sent to the Mayors office at City Hall, copied by the executive assistant to the Mayor and then forwarded to the department for payment) verified as a proper department expenditure and then placed upon a warrant before being presented to the Sewer Commission for signatures and returned to the Auditor for payment processing. No invoices are paid out of departmental funds without the proper signatures of the commission. Or at least under good accounting practices should not for legal reasons.



A little reminder of the city budgetary process. The Department heads create the needed budget and first submit their request to their commission. The Commission either adds or subtracts from this presentation and forwards the budget request to the Mayor. The Mayor makes recommendations to the presented budget and submits the budget to the City Council. The City Council affirms or adjusts the presented budget for the next fiscal year. So all expenditures are approved by a process ending with our elected council overseeing the budgets. And they discuss each expenditure line by line. Including the expected legal line items. Following so far? When unexpected bills or vouchers are presented, the account becomes expended. When this happens a request must be made by the commission to the Mayor and Auditor for them to file for a transfer of funds, either from another line item or from excess reserves to pay these over and above expenses. A strong explanation of the need is required and the presentation usually is sponsored by a councilor who has researched the issue and can stand and explain the request. This is the oversight and balance procedure.



Now, is it just me, or does one see several failures to this system? First off, the Mayor(s) had possession of the bills. Secondly, the Sewer Commission knew of the legal bills from the Low Street Sewer Challenge, because they needed to get permission from the Mayor to hire a second legal firm to decide the direction to take after the Judge awarded damages to the plaintiffs. To be paid from monies not expected when the FY10 City Budget was approved. Or, to be paid from the loan or betterment changed?



It is my opinion that 'somebody' is attempting to cover their tracks at the expense of others. I think the Daily News did not do their research well enough to tell the public how bad things are at the DPS since the recent changes were made in MAY, two full months before the fiscal year and money ran out of the sewer legal line item.



I would think that the ratepayers in both Newbury and Newburyport would like to know this information, after all the Sewer Commission represents all the ratepayers that use the sewer services. The safety of their utility services may be compromised should this process of hit and run management continues . My guess is that the Newburyport Daily News does not want to let their readers know that something is wrong in their reporting and presentation.









Dan Sweeney



13 Drew Street



Newburyport, MA 01950



978-462-1870



Tax and Ratepayer

No comments: