Royal Eccles 10/23/07 Email

From: "royal eccles"
To: [Addresses Redacted]
Subject: debate
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:01:00 -0600

Following are some statements by Susie VanHooser about Ogden's finance s
from the debate at Weber State on October 12.

Susie VanHooser’s Statements:

CITY DEBT
“The only thing growing faster in Ogden than its crime is its debt – and
we’re $93M in debt.” WSU Debate – Opening Statements
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bAsiEWb5L-c

Fact Check: According to FBI statistics, crime has gone down 23.3% since
Mayor Godfrey took office. According to the Ogden City Finance Department
the debt owed by the city is currently $31.4M while it was $38.6M in 1999.
Total city debt has decreased by $7.1M during the Godfrey Administration -
a 19% reduction.

Actual fact check: The FBI's figures (which don't include all types of crime) are: 5390 total crimes in Ogden in 1999, and 5444 in 2006. So the absolute number of crimes has increased by about 1%. Because Ogden's population has probably increased by more than 1% since 1999, the FBI figures indicate a drop in the crime rate--but not by 23%. If you use the population figures on the FBI's web site (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm), you get a 16% drop in the crime rate. However, the FBI population figure for 1999 is suspiciously low (almost 10,000 less than the 2000 census figure). An analysis of all the available data from the FBI and the Utah BCI shows that the total crime rate has been essentially flat since 1999. The uncertainties and inconsistencies in the data are larger than any apparent upward or downward trends.

The most recently released figures for Ogden's total debt are in the city's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2006. On page 50 the report states: "The accompanying financial statements include all activities of the City and Ogden Redevelopment Agency (RDA). The RDA was included because the separate governing bodies of both entities are comprised of the same individuals and the City is financially accountable for the RDA." On page 124 the "total primary government" debt is given as $93,029,566.

DRINKABLE WATER (?)
“I’m not a CEO and it doesn’t make sense to spend our resources wooing big
corporations when many of our community don’t have drinkable water in their
homes.” WSU Debate – Opening Statements
http://youtube.com/watch?v=b AsiEWb5L-c

Fact Check: The Ogden City Public Works Department confirmed that all
Ogden residents have potable water. Due to the draught, the taste of the
drinking water deteriorated for a few weeks when the water table dropped.
So is she asserting that if Ogden didn't recruit corporations the draught
would end?

Additional fact check: The Public Works Department doesn't actually test the water in every home. Nevertheless, Van Hooser's words were poorly chosen. Her greater point seems to be that the city's water facilities have a tremendous backlog of needed repairs that have been neglected during the Godfrey administration. Even the administration admitted this during the public meeting on the water study last month.

DEFICITS
“I may not have an MBA, but I can balance a checkbook and I know it’s not
sensible to be continually operating at a deficit.” WSU Debate –
Opening Statements http://youtube.com/watch?v=bAsiEWb5L-c

Fact Check: Ogden has never operated at a deficit – state law prohibits
it.

Response: The difference between debt and deficit is a technicality. The debt has increased.

RDAs
In response to a student question asking what Ms. VanHooser would have done
differently to bring vitality back to downtown:

“We’re still building a mall that you and I are paying tax dollars for that
we be tter hope succeeds because you own every piece of equipment. You own
every single thing in that mall. When you stand back and you look and you
think about what has happened downtown – it’s all been done with your
money. It’s your tax money. I don’t care if it is the revitalization of
the city building, you go to the Egyptian theater, you go to the Eccles
conference center, you go to the hotel –which was already RDA funds, now
you’re going to the mall. And we’ve all paid for that.”

“The taxes aren’t going to pay for this – you’re going to be paying for
it.” WSU Debate – Student Question #3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uiso3_6XEpg

“I can tell you that I a copy right down here and on page 50 – I can lay it
out and it says, by our accountant, that ultimately Ogden City is
responsible for RDA debt. It’s just that simple.” WSU Debate - Student
Question #4 http://youtube .com/watch?v=uiso3_6XEpg

“How many checkbooks do we need? The RDA has a lot of money to
spend. But where does it go and who does it go to? It certainly does impact
our taxes.” WSU Debate – Question #6 http://youtube.com/watch?v=uiso3_6XEpg

Student Question - "What is an RDA?"
“It is a taxing entity.” WSU Debate Question #6
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uiso3_6XEpg

Fact Check: According to Utah Code Section 17C-1-506 regarding “Community
Development and Renewal Agencies”:
(2) (a) “A bond issued by an agency is not a general obligation or
liability of the community, the state, or any of its political subdivisions
and does not constitute a charge against their general credit or taxing
powers.
(b) A bond issues by the agency is not payable out of any funds or
properties other than those of the agency.
(c) The community, the state, and its polit ical subdivisions may not be
liable on a bond issued by an agency.
(Emphasis added.)

In other words, buyers of debt issued by an RDA against the future
incremental taxes of a project (taxes based on increases in taxable value
that wouldn’t have happened without the project) have no recourse against
the City nor its citizens.

Conclusion: All of Ms. VanHooser’s statements noted above are legally and
factually false.

It’s just that simple.

Either Ms. VanHooser has no understanding of municipal finances (yet
chooses to discuss them anyway) or she chooses to misstate the facts.
Either option is a cause for concern.

The city's finances are indeed confusing, thanks to the intricate shell games that the Godfrey administration has played with our taxpayer dollars. The legal restrictions quoted above have loopholes. For example, the city's Justice Court building has been pledged as collateral on a loan for the Junction. Van Hooser also seems to be making the broader point that when a project is developed under an RDA, is pays less in taxes to the schools and other taxing entities than it normally would--and that the rest of us therefore have to pay more tax to these entities.

The fact is that neither Godfrey nor Van Hooser has done an adequate job of explaining all of these intricacies to the public--but for very different reasons. Godfrey has access to all the relevant facts and chooses to present only what he wants us to hear; Van Hooser does not have this level of access so she's relying on partial information and the common-sense notion that you can't get something for nothing.

Please forward this e-mail to as many people as you know
and encourage them to watch the debate for themselves on Channel 17 or on
youtube.com (keywords: Mayor, Ogden, Debate). It is imperative that
everyone gets the facts before they vote.