pool ponderings 4

Continuing in a legal vein, is there not something in the City charter about NOT allowing the subsidizing of private enterprises? Wonder what his legal opinion would be regarding the ridiculously low pool rental payments on the pool? If PENNIES on the dollar RENT isn’t a subsidy to a for-profit business, at the taxpayer’s expense, what is? When did the City Attorney know there were NO contracts and NO use agreements? Has he ever offered a legal opinion regarding the validity and enforceability of these handshake deals? If so, what WAS that legal opinion? On what legal basis was it formed? When did that happen? By doing nothing, or NOT suggesting any changes, the City Attorney seems to be in tacit legal approval of the handshake process already in place.

pool ponderings 3

How is it that the City Attorney can approve a handshake deal as a legally sound method of doing City business? How would the terms of that handshake be enforced? Who were the witnesses? What terms and agreements, and under what conditions, did they witness? Were the witnesses of legal age, of sound mind, and in possession of sound hearing? Were the witnesses able to comprehend what was transpiring? How does a handshake deal meet any of the requirements for a legally binding contract? Was the City Attorney present at any of these handshake agreements? If so, what did HE witness? Was he consulted before these agreements were made? If so, did he offer a legal opinion of the said agreements before they were consummated? If so, where ARE those legal opinions? Now that he KNOWS there ARE no contracts OR use agreements in place, only handshake agreements, what is his legal opinion of the status of these aforementioned handshake agreements? Is he going to recommend to the Mayor and Council that formal contracts be put into place, or is he comfortable legally that the handshakes are defensible and enforceable, if needed? Is he going to wait for the Mayor and the Council to ask him his legal opinion first? Why would he wait, now that he is aware of a potential problem? Isn’t a large part of his job to anticipate potential legal problems and proactively advise and warn the Council BEFORE something adverse happens? Why is he NOT doing that in this case?

pool ponderings

What has the City Attorney done regarding the legal status and proceedings in the taping incident? Where does that stand currently? What was his legal opinion of THAT situation and the basis behind that opinion? What steps need to be taken, or has he recommended be taken, to prevent any legal liabilities to the City in the future? Any? If he hasn’t made ANY changes or suggestions for the future, does that mean he feels that taping people’s conversations without their knowledge or approval is legally and ethically okay? Is it his legal opinion that taping city employees without their knowledge or approval is okay? What changes in city policies has he recommended to avoid having this situation arise again, if any? If none, why not? What has he done to resolve and remedy the current situation? What legal suggestions to the Mayor and Council has he made regarding this situation and others with the same potential legal liability? Any? Response? IF it is the City Attorney’s legal opinion that handshakes are a legally defensible and enforceable means of doing City business, what legal steps would he suggest to the Mayor and Council to enforce said handshake agreement with MDAC and any of the other schools into payments of pool rents that appear to be, from recent research, very possibly seriously in arrears? Again, a ledger sheet was provided that suggested that several payments had been made by various entities, but there no deposit slips or bank statements to confirm those claims. And there has been NO explanation regarding what accounts to which the possible deposits were deposited or why some were noted on the daily admission sheets at times, and were nowhere to be seen on most of those sheets.

pool audit needed

Fifth, the Rip Tides Water Polo club seems to be the only ones paying on a regular basis their $200 a month. Their checks are noted among the daily logs. 9 receipts were reviewed totaling $6672 were found, going back to 2005. Receipt was found for $800 for a meet on 5-6-06. Another Rip Tide receipt was found 6-6-06 for another polo meet for $800. Still another Rip Tide receipt was found for Rip Tide pool rental for $800, ck # 1178. 11-28-06 Rip Tide pool rental receipt found for $500 for pool rental. Oct 2005 pool rental receipt found for $200 from Rip Tides, along with 11-25-2005 dated receipt for $800 Rip Tides (Parent Booster Club). Jan 6, 2006 receipt from Rip Tides was for only $160 for some reason but was connected to a check for $2000 for the water polo camp 12-27 thru 12-30. Last check was for $600, written on 5-3-06 from Rip Tides.

pool inquiries continued

This is part of the 5-page report that was made to the Council in Open Forum, for those who missed it...Secondly, where are the cancelled checks and bank statements that reflect those revenues from MDAC, Columbus HS, Reagan HS, MS middle school, and Doral middle school for this and every year for the past three years? How is it that sometimes the MDAC pool rents are noted on the daily logs and other times not? A review of the daily logs by me for the past three years have only revealed a possible five months of payments from MDAC, so I would be interested in knowing where the rest might be from MDAC, and the others? There were no records of payments made by Columbus, or Reagan high schools, or the two middle schools for the three years period on the daily logs I reviewed. Doral middle says they pay $2 a day per swimmer. Where is THAT money reflected? I was told by the City Clerk there were no records of revenues received from Doral middle school - why not? Ledger statements of possible revenues received WAS provided, but no verification regarding deposit slips or bank statements showed up. How do we know those possible payments made it into the City coffers? Dr Mel P. Johnson

pool commentary

How did the City Manager decide that $200 a month is an appropriate rate to charge for the use of our pool for practices six days a week and three hours a day? Did he know the rates and guidelines recommended by the Council? If not, why not? What made him decide to ignore the guidelines of the Council and charge only $200 a month? He says it was to encourage Springs kids to join, but the only one who benefited was the owners of MDAC. How could putting $1100 a month in the owners pockets be an incentive for new Springs swimmers? Charging the owners $1100 a month less than what they were paying prior to coming here was NO benefit to any swimmers, only the owners. He is on record as saying he had NO IDEA what other pools charge for practices, so was this just an arbitrary figure he chose? Did he consult with ANYBODY before deciding this? Was the City attorney consulted regarding the legality of that handshake deal?
This is a repeat of the presentation that was made to the Council in Open Forum, for those who missed it.

pool commentary

The City Manager is on record as saying he has NO IDEA what other pools charge for practices, and apparently little idea what the standard rates for meets are. Perhaps he has FINALLY learned how LITTLE he has been charging for our pool usage NOW, 3 YEARS later. Perhaps. What would make ANYBODY believe that he would NOW start charging the standard going rate for our pool use? He has given it away for the past three years at a FRACTION of its true value. What would make the residents feel NOW that he is actually trying to look out for THEIR interests, instead of the that of private businesses? His horrible record speaks for itself! Just another case of abysmal management practices, to use the term loosely! It will be interesting to see how he justifies the amount charged, as he was given Hialeah's rate of $45 per swimmer per month, and the MDC rate of $1300 a month for 4 lanes and less swim time. Pool giveaways, Giglio hiring disaster, construction debacles, little and no controls in place and method of verifying admissions at the pool after 40+ years, oppressive, unresponsive, and secretive management style, little and no transparency and accountability - when will it end? April? When we say we want a contract, we mean we want a contract that is fair and equitable to the RESIDENTS, not a steeply-discounted giveaway to private businesses.