Bloomfield Township Citizens: Get Ready to Open Your Wallet
On March 25, 2019 Bloomfield Township Supervisor Leo Savoie sought a motion for a new special assessment proposal to tax all residences. The matter was tabled by dissenting Trustees requesting further discussion. It will be brought forward again, perhaps on April 8th. The proposed ballot request is positioned as a “public safety” assessment but it will not fund safety, rather, it is needed to cover a budget shortfall resulting from mismanagement.
Bloomfield Township has incurred a multimillion-dollar budget deficit in pension funding. With taxes at the highest levels allowed by state law, and the maximum amount of millages already levied, the administration must find a way to plug the hole. After years of ignoring the pension shortfall, our elected leaders are scrambling to solve the problem without addressing spending. Rather than simply trimming costs from a bloated budget, Savoie says the only option is to tax all property owners with a “Special Assessment District” or SAD.
How did we get to this point? Questionable business practices, mischarging fees, lack of competitive bidding, rich perks, over-spending and a “pay as you go” philosophy on retiree benefits that ignored the future caused the problem -- just to name a few things. More on the key issues below….
Why now? A new rule forces local government to report their full pension debt on their balance sheets (ours is about $164 million) and to fund a portion of the total each year. Many people (including Trustees Buckley and Walsh) requested that our elected officials both address the pension shortfall and control spending over the years, but they chose to kick the can down the road.
What is the size of the immediate issue? Starting this year, the Township has to fund between two and three million dollars annually for the shortfall in retiree benefits (also called Other Post Employee Benefits or OPEB.) On a total annual Township budget of approximately $50 million, the amount that must be funded this year is not huge and probably achievable by belt-tightening. However, there is a funding shortfall of a few million dollars already forecast in the normal budget for this year. Additionally, the Township may have to pay approximately $9 million for overcharging residents on Water and Sewer, according to an Oakland County Court judgment which is being finalized soon. Other lawsuits pending could add to the deficit. So, the fiscal blunders are adding up. (It is also important to note that the OPEB shortfall will be an annually-recurring problem until we catch up with the full underfunding.)
Isn’t this a more complicated situation? Like the Water and Sewer overcharging, this issue has been deliberately convoluted. If you wade through the details, it is not all that complex but it is far-reaching. To summarize: We are short on money because the Township was not managed prudently.
What is the proposed fix? Prepare yourself for the “Savoie Spin” in response to this deficit. The Supervisor asked the attorneys draft a ballot proposal for a “Special Assessment District” (SAD), a means of funding usually applied to pay for a new road or sewer for a specific group of properties. The proposal will levy a SAD on the entire Township, justifying it by saying that public safety employees comprise a significant portion of the budget so it’s okay to use a SAD for pension benefits. There is also talk of a possible “administrative” levy on all residents.
What’s a better approach? The Township should start implementing the cost cutting measures already outlined in a study that was delivered to them by a public accounting firm. Then, they should correct the unusual financial and business practices employed by the Township for years which citizens have often questioned. The Township must fix the fundamental flaws which led to our budget deficit BEFORE any assessment is considered. Immediate cost savings can contribute to fixing the OPEB shortfall and responsible management can eliminate ongoing problems.
Where should the changes in financial and business practices start? In the opinion of those who pay attention to Township management, below are the “seven deadly sins” in the Township and suggested solutions which should be pursued immediately.
1. Purchasing and contracting are undisciplined, and the Township has no policies for guidance. The Township does not triple bid most service contracts! This means that a huge portion of Township spending is awarded based on relationships and gut feel, rather than through a documented bid process. Proposal review is fragmented with limited oversight, with no progress reporting on spending, and no public accounting of money spent compared to the budgeted amount.
Solution: Immediately institute strict purchasing policies and rebid all service contracts (legal, engineering, etc.) with outside oversight on the process which will achieve immediate cost savings.
2. Conflicts of interest are common, also with no governing policies. Board members do not routinely declare conflicts and vote some on issues even when they have a conflict (e.g.: more than one Township official voted to award a contract to a campaign donor.) Some who serve on boards are also vendors. Three top Bloomfield Township executives are all actively engaged in outside businesses which is prohibited in many other organizations.
Solution: All conflicts must be declared and eliminated immediately according to a clear-cut policy, which will deliver future cost savings.
3. Spending management is lax and methods violate common-sense practices. Payments are approved each month at Trustee meetings without any discussion about them at all, much less how they line up to the budget, or how payments add up in total. There is rarely a public discussion of what is missing from the budget (e.g. retiree health care funding was brought up by citizens years ago but pushed aside by leadership). Many accounting entries are blurred by grouping them into a single line item so that only the person keeping track of balances knows the sources and uses of funds. All Trustees are not given full income statement and balance sheet views of all of the numbers.
Solutions: Revamp the entire financial oversight and reporting approach to provide complete visibility into spending vs. budget. Provide the information in writing well in advance of meetings to all (including the public) on a monthly basis. Drive basic professionalism in the management of our finances. Together, these actions should deliver considerable spending reductions.
4. Large categories of expenditure are not adequately controlled. There has been no reasonable basis for fees resulting in years of overcharging for Water and Sewer (An Oakland County judge ruled in favor of the citizens on the 2018 lawsuit, recommending that residents deal with our officials at in ballot box because financial practices were so bad.) Consulting studies are paid for with no results published. Equipment purchases are often hidden in the budget rather than being voted on by Trustees. Company cars are granted to many people without usage or cost transparency. Rather than outsourcing, Bloomfield is the only Township in Michigan with its own Road Department (millage is inadequate to cover services.) There is no financial statement that consolidates the Township operations and all departments (like Water and Sewer) so it is impossible to assess the totality of revenue and spending.
Solutions: Document the justification for fees. Outsource the Road Department and vehicle management. Eliminate the “company car” perk. Produce detailed, consolidated financial statements that include ALL departments. Require a written report be published for every “study” that is commissioned, with follow up on the results one year later. Immediate cost savings will result.
5. Sweetheart deals are common in the Township. The examples in this category are many so just a small sample will be mentioned here. Development approvals vary considerably by the party involved (e.g. A club was allowed to turn residential lots into parking in violation of Township ordinances with involvement of an elected official who is the past-president of the club.) Some developments are fast-tracked without public hearings and motions, and others wait months on nit-pick items. Yet others are approved which obviously provide benefit to a specific party (e.g. A Township official owned a land-locked property and through a huge re-zoning and development deal, was given the prime corner lot in exchange for his parcel.) There are several examples where sewers were not funded by special assessments on those that benefited, but rather were charged to all citizens through the overall fund. Two similar subdivisions were both repaved but there was a significant difference in the cost to the taxpayers with no explanation for the differential. The Township selectively put aside basic rules (such as curb cuts, adequate parking and special land use conditions) for some developments.
Solutions: Stop granting favors and go back to the “Wilma Cotton” approach in the Building Department -- make every development follow the rules. If exceptions to ordinances are absolutely justified and required, declare them publicly with full transparency. Keep a running list of who is being granted the exceptions and what the relationships of those beneficiaries are to Township officials. Provide complete and current information on costs for every project and how they are funded.
6. There are many issues employee and labor-related issues. The Township does not routinely publish job openings to ensure transparent and impartial hiring. Only the police department has an anti-nepotism policy. No financial justification is given for new positions (e.g. during a recent three-year period, the Township added over $ 1 M to payroll by adding 14 new employees.) Across-the-board 2% raises for all employees were granted every year from 2013 to 2020. The Township operates on a four-day work week which is customer-unfriendly, an unmatched job perk, and never delivered the promised energy savings.
Solutions: Return to a five-day work week, authorize an outside study on the organization (tasks, levels, and spans) and institute common HR policies around hiring and raises. All contracts expire in 2020 so contracts must be reviewed and negotiated now with commitment to deliver cost reductions.
7. The Township lacks basic transparency and documentation. Citizens are now prohibited from asking questions after each agenda item, and inquiries are often waved off without response (e.g.: when a citizen asked about duplicate payments in the same month to the same vendor for the same amount of over $100k each, she was ignored two months in a row.) Reports to Trustees by Township managers usually lack written documentation and verbal presentations are accepted as factual without supporting detail. Most public meetings (Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Wetlands and Special Study Sessions) are not video recorded or audio archived. Meeting minutes are short on details.
Solutions: Allow citizen questions on each Board item, video record and archive all meetings, require written reports, and respond in writing to every question on an online platform that is accessible to the public and allows public comment. Full transparency is essential to identify cost savings in this organization.
What can you do to help? Go to the next Trustee meeting and demand change. Use the three minutes you are granted to call for immediate cost cutting and implementation of the policy safeguards to restrict overspending going forward. Or, pick an issue noted above and highlight it as a priority. Demand budget reductions before any SAD is even discussed. Insist that an independent group of experienced citizens be empaneled to help drive and ensure that changes are made.
Also, continue to pay attention to what is happening. (Attend future meetings or at least watch Trustee meetings on cable.) Send emails, letters and phone calls to our Supervisor, Treasurer and Clerk. Our elected officials have landed us here because we did not call them to account for poor management practices. We must continue to watch and put pressure on them to act responsibly.
Please share this with your Bloomfield Township friends.
On March 25, 2019 Bloomfield Township Supervisor Leo Savoie sought a motion for a new special assessment proposal to tax all residences. The matter was tabled by dissenting Trustees requesting further discussion. It will be brought forward again, perhaps on April 8th. The proposed ballot request is positioned as a “public safety” assessment but it will not fund safety, rather, it is needed to cover a budget shortfall resulting from mismanagement.
Bloomfield Township has incurred a multimillion-dollar budget deficit in pension funding. With taxes at the highest levels allowed by state law, and the maximum amount of millages already levied, the administration must find a way to plug the hole. After years of ignoring the pension shortfall, our elected leaders are scrambling to solve the problem without addressing spending. Rather than simply trimming costs from a bloated budget, Savoie says the only option is to tax all property owners with a “Special Assessment District” or SAD.
How did we get to this point? Questionable business practices, mischarging fees, lack of competitive bidding, rich perks, over-spending and a “pay as you go” philosophy on retiree benefits that ignored the future caused the problem -- just to name a few things. More on the key issues below….
Why now? A new rule forces local government to report their full pension debt on their balance sheets (ours is about $164 million) and to fund a portion of the total each year. Many people (including Trustees Buckley and Walsh) requested that our elected officials both address the pension shortfall and control spending over the years, but they chose to kick the can down the road.
What is the size of the immediate issue? Starting this year, the Township has to fund between two and three million dollars annually for the shortfall in retiree benefits (also called Other Post Employee Benefits or OPEB.) On a total annual Township budget of approximately $50 million, the amount that must be funded this year is not huge and probably achievable by belt-tightening. However, there is a funding shortfall of a few million dollars already forecast in the normal budget for this year. Additionally, the Township may have to pay approximately $9 million for overcharging residents on Water and Sewer, according to an Oakland County Court judgment which is being finalized soon. Other lawsuits pending could add to the deficit. So, the fiscal blunders are adding up. (It is also important to note that the OPEB shortfall will be an annually-recurring problem until we catch up with the full underfunding.)
Isn’t this a more complicated situation? Like the Water and Sewer overcharging, this issue has been deliberately convoluted. If you wade through the details, it is not all that complex but it is far-reaching. To summarize: We are short on money because the Township was not managed prudently.
What is the proposed fix? Prepare yourself for the “Savoie Spin” in response to this deficit. The Supervisor asked the attorneys draft a ballot proposal for a “Special Assessment District” (SAD), a means of funding usually applied to pay for a new road or sewer for a specific group of properties. The proposal will levy a SAD on the entire Township, justifying it by saying that public safety employees comprise a significant portion of the budget so it’s okay to use a SAD for pension benefits. There is also talk of a possible “administrative” levy on all residents.
What’s a better approach? The Township should start implementing the cost cutting measures already outlined in a study that was delivered to them by a public accounting firm. Then, they should correct the unusual financial and business practices employed by the Township for years which citizens have often questioned. The Township must fix the fundamental flaws which led to our budget deficit BEFORE any assessment is considered. Immediate cost savings can contribute to fixing the OPEB shortfall and responsible management can eliminate ongoing problems.
Where should the changes in financial and business practices start? In the opinion of those who pay attention to Township management, below are the “seven deadly sins” in the Township and suggested solutions which should be pursued immediately.
1. Purchasing and contracting are undisciplined, and the Township has no policies for guidance. The Township does not triple bid most service contracts! This means that a huge portion of Township spending is awarded based on relationships and gut feel, rather than through a documented bid process. Proposal review is fragmented with limited oversight, with no progress reporting on spending, and no public accounting of money spent compared to the budgeted amount.
Solution: Immediately institute strict purchasing policies and rebid all service contracts (legal, engineering, etc.) with outside oversight on the process which will achieve immediate cost savings.
2. Conflicts of interest are common, also with no governing policies. Board members do not routinely declare conflicts and vote some on issues even when they have a conflict (e.g.: more than one Township official voted to award a contract to a campaign donor.) Some who serve on boards are also vendors. Three top Bloomfield Township executives are all actively engaged in outside businesses which is prohibited in many other organizations.
Solution: All conflicts must be declared and eliminated immediately according to a clear-cut policy, which will deliver future cost savings.
3. Spending management is lax and methods violate common-sense practices. Payments are approved each month at Trustee meetings without any discussion about them at all, much less how they line up to the budget, or how payments add up in total. There is rarely a public discussion of what is missing from the budget (e.g. retiree health care funding was brought up by citizens years ago but pushed aside by leadership). Many accounting entries are blurred by grouping them into a single line item so that only the person keeping track of balances knows the sources and uses of funds. All Trustees are not given full income statement and balance sheet views of all of the numbers.
Solutions: Revamp the entire financial oversight and reporting approach to provide complete visibility into spending vs. budget. Provide the information in writing well in advance of meetings to all (including the public) on a monthly basis. Drive basic professionalism in the management of our finances. Together, these actions should deliver considerable spending reductions.
4. Large categories of expenditure are not adequately controlled. There has been no reasonable basis for fees resulting in years of overcharging for Water and Sewer (An Oakland County judge ruled in favor of the citizens on the 2018 lawsuit, recommending that residents deal with our officials at in ballot box because financial practices were so bad.) Consulting studies are paid for with no results published. Equipment purchases are often hidden in the budget rather than being voted on by Trustees. Company cars are granted to many people without usage or cost transparency. Rather than outsourcing, Bloomfield is the only Township in Michigan with its own Road Department (millage is inadequate to cover services.) There is no financial statement that consolidates the Township operations and all departments (like Water and Sewer) so it is impossible to assess the totality of revenue and spending.
Solutions: Document the justification for fees. Outsource the Road Department and vehicle management. Eliminate the “company car” perk. Produce detailed, consolidated financial statements that include ALL departments. Require a written report be published for every “study” that is commissioned, with follow up on the results one year later. Immediate cost savings will result.
5. Sweetheart deals are common in the Township. The examples in this category are many so just a small sample will be mentioned here. Development approvals vary considerably by the party involved (e.g. A club was allowed to turn residential lots into parking in violation of Township ordinances with involvement of an elected official who is the past-president of the club.) Some developments are fast-tracked without public hearings and motions, and others wait months on nit-pick items. Yet others are approved which obviously provide benefit to a specific party (e.g. A Township official owned a land-locked property and through a huge re-zoning and development deal, was given the prime corner lot in exchange for his parcel.) There are several examples where sewers were not funded by special assessments on those that benefited, but rather were charged to all citizens through the overall fund. Two similar subdivisions were both repaved but there was a significant difference in the cost to the taxpayers with no explanation for the differential. The Township selectively put aside basic rules (such as curb cuts, adequate parking and special land use conditions) for some developments.
Solutions: Stop granting favors and go back to the “Wilma Cotton” approach in the Building Department -- make every development follow the rules. If exceptions to ordinances are absolutely justified and required, declare them publicly with full transparency. Keep a running list of who is being granted the exceptions and what the relationships of those beneficiaries are to Township officials. Provide complete and current information on costs for every project and how they are funded.
6. There are many issues employee and labor-related issues. The Township does not routinely publish job openings to ensure transparent and impartial hiring. Only the police department has an anti-nepotism policy. No financial justification is given for new positions (e.g. during a recent three-year period, the Township added over $ 1 M to payroll by adding 14 new employees.) Across-the-board 2% raises for all employees were granted every year from 2013 to 2020. The Township operates on a four-day work week which is customer-unfriendly, an unmatched job perk, and never delivered the promised energy savings.
Solutions: Return to a five-day work week, authorize an outside study on the organization (tasks, levels, and spans) and institute common HR policies around hiring and raises. All contracts expire in 2020 so contracts must be reviewed and negotiated now with commitment to deliver cost reductions.
7. The Township lacks basic transparency and documentation. Citizens are now prohibited from asking questions after each agenda item, and inquiries are often waved off without response (e.g.: when a citizen asked about duplicate payments in the same month to the same vendor for the same amount of over $100k each, she was ignored two months in a row.) Reports to Trustees by Township managers usually lack written documentation and verbal presentations are accepted as factual without supporting detail. Most public meetings (Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Wetlands and Special Study Sessions) are not video recorded or audio archived. Meeting minutes are short on details.
Solutions: Allow citizen questions on each Board item, video record and archive all meetings, require written reports, and respond in writing to every question on an online platform that is accessible to the public and allows public comment. Full transparency is essential to identify cost savings in this organization.
What can you do to help? Go to the next Trustee meeting and demand change. Use the three minutes you are granted to call for immediate cost cutting and implementation of the policy safeguards to restrict overspending going forward. Or, pick an issue noted above and highlight it as a priority. Demand budget reductions before any SAD is even discussed. Insist that an independent group of experienced citizens be empaneled to help drive and ensure that changes are made.
Also, continue to pay attention to what is happening. (Attend future meetings or at least watch Trustee meetings on cable.) Send emails, letters and phone calls to our Supervisor, Treasurer and Clerk. Our elected officials have landed us here because we did not call them to account for poor management practices. We must continue to watch and put pressure on them to act responsibly.
Please share this with your Bloomfield Township friends.
TOWNSHIP KILLS PUBLIC COMMENT ON ISSUES
“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
― Harry Truman [Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”
― Harry Truman [Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”
Township Trustee meetings used to be cozy little events. On a good night, two or three citizens would come to the meetings and perhaps only one or two might stand up to make a comment during the evening. Board discussions were like conversations among friends around the kitchen table. Those were the good old days.
But recently, the township has experienced higher attendance at meetings. Often a dozen people attend and frequently several might comment on a few topics each night. Until this week, each person was allowed three minutes to speak on most topics, unless the leadership was feeling a little salty on a particular subject and arbitrarily banned comment on that matter entirely. We actually timed these comments from a few recent meetings and they added up to less than 30 minutes per meeting. Perhaps more interesting than the LENGTH of the comments was the nature of them....
Bold citizens actually started to ask questions! Of course, the Board took a position that they do not have to answer questions, but rather only acknowledge that they were asked. "Thank you for your comment," is the typical response from Supervisor Leo Savoie. (Last December, when a citizen asked if two payments in the same week for $118,000 each to the same subcontractor were an error, the response was, "Thank you for your comment." When the same citizen returned in January and asked if anyone had looked into the matter, the response was, "Thank you for your comment.")
More people started to pay attention to the insider dealing. Brazen taxpayers started to denounce no-bid contracts and deals with obvious conflicts of interest for those voting on them. The most intrepid among the voters even had the nerve to present a petition from the electorate, calling for an independent audit of skyrocketing water and sewer fees.
Initially, elected officials shifted in their seats uncomfortably, while completely ignoring the substance of the comments. Then, topics were disguised on the pre-published agenda so that interested people wouldn't know to attend. Next, the Supervisor tried a new tactic: lengthy discussions on dry matters which made attendance painful unless you brought your knitting to keep you amused. Still, people came to the meetings. Adjournment to hours-long "private sessions" in the middle of the meetings did nothing to discourage attendance. So insults were tried: Supervisor Savoie ridiculed citizens making comments, calling them "Crazy" and "Unqualified" from his seat on the dias. Still, taxpayers showed up to the meeting and kept politely poking with their pesky questions.
What's a bureaucrat to do? Finally, Savoie and Roncelli arrived at a solution! They would eliminate all public comment on issues, allowing each citizen to speak only three minutes at the BEGINNING of the meeting! Brilliant! No more painful truths highlighted during the sessions! No more accountability called for on specific issues! No more free speech!
So that's what they did on Monday night. They shut down public comment. Welcome to LEO-LAND.
But recently, the township has experienced higher attendance at meetings. Often a dozen people attend and frequently several might comment on a few topics each night. Until this week, each person was allowed three minutes to speak on most topics, unless the leadership was feeling a little salty on a particular subject and arbitrarily banned comment on that matter entirely. We actually timed these comments from a few recent meetings and they added up to less than 30 minutes per meeting. Perhaps more interesting than the LENGTH of the comments was the nature of them....
Bold citizens actually started to ask questions! Of course, the Board took a position that they do not have to answer questions, but rather only acknowledge that they were asked. "Thank you for your comment," is the typical response from Supervisor Leo Savoie. (Last December, when a citizen asked if two payments in the same week for $118,000 each to the same subcontractor were an error, the response was, "Thank you for your comment." When the same citizen returned in January and asked if anyone had looked into the matter, the response was, "Thank you for your comment.")
More people started to pay attention to the insider dealing. Brazen taxpayers started to denounce no-bid contracts and deals with obvious conflicts of interest for those voting on them. The most intrepid among the voters even had the nerve to present a petition from the electorate, calling for an independent audit of skyrocketing water and sewer fees.
Initially, elected officials shifted in their seats uncomfortably, while completely ignoring the substance of the comments. Then, topics were disguised on the pre-published agenda so that interested people wouldn't know to attend. Next, the Supervisor tried a new tactic: lengthy discussions on dry matters which made attendance painful unless you brought your knitting to keep you amused. Still, people came to the meetings. Adjournment to hours-long "private sessions" in the middle of the meetings did nothing to discourage attendance. So insults were tried: Supervisor Savoie ridiculed citizens making comments, calling them "Crazy" and "Unqualified" from his seat on the dias. Still, taxpayers showed up to the meeting and kept politely poking with their pesky questions.
What's a bureaucrat to do? Finally, Savoie and Roncelli arrived at a solution! They would eliminate all public comment on issues, allowing each citizen to speak only three minutes at the BEGINNING of the meeting! Brilliant! No more painful truths highlighted during the sessions! No more accountability called for on specific issues! No more free speech!
So that's what they did on Monday night. They shut down public comment. Welcome to LEO-LAND.
SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY TREASURER KEPES?
|
November 15, 2016
Last night's trustee meeting was jam-packed with controversial topics which could each be the subject of a detailed article. We recommend that you take the time to view the video of the entire meeting, as it may serve as an eye-opening summary of the games being played by the public officials in Bloomfield Township, MI. Another Controversial Development One of the best illustrations of the way our elected officials roll was the topic entitled, "Update of Land Use Study for South Boulevard and Squirrel Road." This was an "informational" topic, meaning public comment was not allowed, according to the rules of Supervisor Savoie. (Nobody else understands why public comment should be precluded on any topic, by the way. What's the harm in allowing someone three minutes to speak?) The summary of a very long and convoluted discussion is that the building department hired "Clear Zoning" to examine the "Master Plan" with regard to a single piece of property, now zoned for commercial use. (By the way -- Clear Zoning was hired without prior Trustee approval, as required by law.) This inspection will tell them whether the Master Plan should be changed to allow multi-family residential construction on that land. Spoiler alert: The township WILL CERTAINLY APPROVE the change in designation on that property, but only after spending a lot of time and taxpayer money appearing to discuss the topic. And when the Master Plan is open, other changes may be slipped in. It's a Sure Thing Why are we so sure that this change for South Boulevard and Squirrel Road will be approved? It is because new Treasurer Brian Kepes owns part of the property and stands to make a lot of money once the property is re-zoned. This topic, and several others, were held until after the election. The study/discussion/ruling charade is intended to give the appearance of propriety to a questionable deal. It could have been easily handled by requesting a zoning variance but by opening the master plan, the township is protecting the owners from the inevitable lawsuits. 150 representatives of the neighborhoods in that area (representing 1500 residents nearby) have already spoken in opposition to the residential development, which will vastly increase the density in their area and bring no value to anyone except the property owners and developers. As usually happens, Savoie shut down their comments last night. He reportedly has told their leaders that he's sure there are many residents who silently support the deal. Another intriguing observation is that this matter was discussed extensively at the Planning Commission meeting last week, although it did not appear on the agenda published in advance. This stealth review kept the matter on the down-low so that the neighbors would not attend and object. Let's Make a Deal It is also interesting to look at the tax history on that parcel. The property received a huge tax cut a few years ago. The owners now pay less in taxes on 9 acres of prime commercial land than you probably pay on your house. So, there you have it. Another deal with conflicts of interest for a township official. And the hits just keep on coming. |
NO-BID DEAL ON BONDS AWARDED TO CAMPAIGN DONOR
September 26, 2016
Tonight the Township Board of Trustees voted to refinance some outstanding bonds. On the surface, this seems to be sound business decision....unless you look into the details.
Here’s the background: In 2008, Bloomfield Township issued $26 million in bonds to pay for the construction of our senior center, fire hall and Department of Public Works building. These bonds could be called by the township and reissued after 10 years if interest rates were lower. By refinancing these bonds now, the Township will get a lower interest rate on the remaining debt and save money.
Sounds like a good idea, right? Well, not quite: there were several interesting aspects to this deal.
First, there were absolutely no pages on the bond deal in the packet.
There was NOTHING for the Trustees or the public to review. As one citizen pointed out: I’d love to do business with this Township – I wouldn’t even have to write a proposal! How can such a decision be made without documentation?
Second, the Board of Trustees approved another no-bid deal.
These bonds should have been offered as a competitive sale to a number of institutions, rather than negotiated deal with only one provider. When you are selling tax-exempt municipal bond issue from an organization that has an AAA bond rating, you don’t even need to advertise. They sell themselves.
However, Supervisor Leo Savoie and Trustee Brian Kepes decided to float the bonds through Fifth Third, exclusively, without any bidding process. This is the same organization that messed up the calculation on the Township’s pension bond issue and unexpectedly demanded a $1.7 million payment the day after settlement. Savoie and Kepes refused to consider competitive bidding over the objections of Trustee David Buckley and Treasurer Dan Devine.
Third, officials voted without disclosing their conflicts of interest.
Savoie and Kepes refused to disclose their multiple ties to Fifth Third and also did not recuse themselves from the vote, despite citizen requests. A few years back, Savoie cut a deal with Fifth Third to pay off millions of personal business debt. His mortgage broker from the bank was transferred to municipal funding, just in time to underwrite a big bond deal in Bloomfield Township. The broker from Fifth Third gets no-bid contracts like this from the township -- and he contributes to Savoie’s campaign. (Would you contribute to a candidate that defaulted on millions in loans?) Kepes has had connections to Fifth Third through his ownership of commercial property that is adjacent to a parcel owned by Fifth Third.
This was obviously yet another a sweetheart deal for Fifth Third and Bloomfield Township while residents (once again) are left in the dark.
Here’s the background: In 2008, Bloomfield Township issued $26 million in bonds to pay for the construction of our senior center, fire hall and Department of Public Works building. These bonds could be called by the township and reissued after 10 years if interest rates were lower. By refinancing these bonds now, the Township will get a lower interest rate on the remaining debt and save money.
Sounds like a good idea, right? Well, not quite: there were several interesting aspects to this deal.
First, there were absolutely no pages on the bond deal in the packet.
There was NOTHING for the Trustees or the public to review. As one citizen pointed out: I’d love to do business with this Township – I wouldn’t even have to write a proposal! How can such a decision be made without documentation?
Second, the Board of Trustees approved another no-bid deal.
These bonds should have been offered as a competitive sale to a number of institutions, rather than negotiated deal with only one provider. When you are selling tax-exempt municipal bond issue from an organization that has an AAA bond rating, you don’t even need to advertise. They sell themselves.
However, Supervisor Leo Savoie and Trustee Brian Kepes decided to float the bonds through Fifth Third, exclusively, without any bidding process. This is the same organization that messed up the calculation on the Township’s pension bond issue and unexpectedly demanded a $1.7 million payment the day after settlement. Savoie and Kepes refused to consider competitive bidding over the objections of Trustee David Buckley and Treasurer Dan Devine.
Third, officials voted without disclosing their conflicts of interest.
Savoie and Kepes refused to disclose their multiple ties to Fifth Third and also did not recuse themselves from the vote, despite citizen requests. A few years back, Savoie cut a deal with Fifth Third to pay off millions of personal business debt. His mortgage broker from the bank was transferred to municipal funding, just in time to underwrite a big bond deal in Bloomfield Township. The broker from Fifth Third gets no-bid contracts like this from the township -- and he contributes to Savoie’s campaign. (Would you contribute to a candidate that defaulted on millions in loans?) Kepes has had connections to Fifth Third through his ownership of commercial property that is adjacent to a parcel owned by Fifth Third.
This was obviously yet another a sweetheart deal for Fifth Third and Bloomfield Township while residents (once again) are left in the dark.
OUR PHILOSOPHY: TOWNSHIP GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY
Citizens of Bloomfield Township, Michigan need information about decisions and changes made by our local government.
Official agendas, board packets and meeting minutes frequently lack any documentation on important choices being made.
This site is dedicated to informing residents about current issues, bringing backroom deals into the light
and increasing the voices of average Township citizens about decisions which impact them.
Official agendas, board packets and meeting minutes frequently lack any documentation on important choices being made.
This site is dedicated to informing residents about current issues, bringing backroom deals into the light
and increasing the voices of average Township citizens about decisions which impact them.
UPCOMING ISSUES TO BE REVIEWED
Watch for updates soon...
The Village at Bloomfield Park
Elimination of an eyesore or another deal for a donor-developer that taxpayers will regret?
The developer knew the legal agreement when they purchased the property. Now they are seeking to change fundamental aspects of the agreement, including the size of the apartments and the types of businesses allowed.
We will give you the full picture soon, so you can decide for yourself whether this is a good deal or a sell-out.
Elimination of an eyesore or another deal for a donor-developer that taxpayers will regret?
The developer knew the legal agreement when they purchased the property. Now they are seeking to change fundamental aspects of the agreement, including the size of the apartments and the types of businesses allowed.
We will give you the full picture soon, so you can decide for yourself whether this is a good deal or a sell-out.
Pension Plan Changes
Closed-door sessions with lots of lawyers have become the new norm for Trustee meetings.
What is being planned for the pensions of long-term employees and will they have time to react to changes? It is clear that major changes are underway, and fast. What do employees need to know, and what are their rights?
Closed-door sessions with lots of lawyers have become the new norm for Trustee meetings.
What is being planned for the pensions of long-term employees and will they have time to react to changes? It is clear that major changes are underway, and fast. What do employees need to know, and what are their rights?
Did Illegal Act Change the Election Outcome?
A "clerical error" was what Supervisor Leo Savoie called his use of private citizen emails for his re-election campaign. "Abuse of office" and "fraud" are labels that others apply to an event in June. Just as absentee ballots were being delivered in the mail, Clerk Jan Roncelli gave Savoie a restricted list of emails. He used it to deliver a message from a URL made to look official -- bloomfieldtownshipelections.com -- with a ringing endorsement of himself and his cronies.
Many believe that this illegal act delivered the nomination to Supervisor Leo Savoie, who won by only 452 votes on a total cast of just over 8,000. This is the subject of complaints to the State Attorney General and the Secretary of State. Hear more about this as news develops...
A "clerical error" was what Supervisor Leo Savoie called his use of private citizen emails for his re-election campaign. "Abuse of office" and "fraud" are labels that others apply to an event in June. Just as absentee ballots were being delivered in the mail, Clerk Jan Roncelli gave Savoie a restricted list of emails. He used it to deliver a message from a URL made to look official -- bloomfieldtownshipelections.com -- with a ringing endorsement of himself and his cronies.
Many believe that this illegal act delivered the nomination to Supervisor Leo Savoie, who won by only 452 votes on a total cast of just over 8,000. This is the subject of complaints to the State Attorney General and the Secretary of State. Hear more about this as news develops...
