Ed Arzouian Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 Why all this shuffling of funds? Water bills to County. General Fund to Water Department. County to General Fund. General Fund back to Water Department. Why is Fiala so concerned? Why are we told there is a $300,000 deficit to make up and then find out the increase will raise anywhere from $1,400,000 to $2,300,000 per year? The statement has been substantiated, hasn't it. The County did send the $700,000 in delinquent water payments to the General Fund, just as we said. Now are told the General Fund had fronted the money to the Water Department earlier. Nobody had clue about that until today did they? The Press & Sun-Bulletin did two or three stories on the County and the delinquent payments and they never mentioned this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 Did anyone in city hall read the mayor's "Citizens Guide to Understanding the Recent Water Rate Increases"? http://www.cityofbinghamton.com/Library/ne...20Increases.pdf There are so many errors in it, I don't want to take a whole day to document them. But I will point out the obvious ones. First off, it has today's date on it, April 18, 2008 so it should have been written based on this date. So let's start: Page 2 paragraph 1, THe delays in billing are totally unacceptable. There should only be a month or two delay between reading the meter and sending out a bill, not an 8 month delay. Also, why bill 3 times a year, setting up a schedule and billing 25% of the people every month means a steady job for meter readers and bill processors. Page 2 para 2: Budget schedule. What good are last years dates. Tell us what this years dates are. Page 2 para 3: Rates for 2008 are set knowing little about 2007 consumption. - Welcome to the real world, Matt. This is what the job of government is. If you can't do it or the people you have in there can't do it, fire them and get out yourself. "A 30% rate increase will be reflected in the Dec 1, 2007 bill". It WAS reflected. At least update the document you released today. That is a sample of the errors, on page 2. There are 6 more pages to go. They are more of the same. Pathetic, lame and incompetent excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 Did anyone in city hall read the mayor's "Citizens Guide to Understanding the Recent Water Rate Increases"? http://www.cityofbinghamton.com/Library/ne...20Increases.pdf There are so many errors in it, I don't want to take a whole day to document them. But I will point out the obvious ones. First off, it has today's date on it, April 18, 2008 so it should have been written based on this date. So let's start: Page 2 paragraph 1, THe delays in billing are totally unacceptable. There should only be a month or two delay between reading the meter and sending out a bill, not an 8 month delay. Also, why bill 3 times a year, setting up a schedule and billing 25% of the people every month means a steady job for meter readers and bill processors. Page 2 para 2: Budget schedule. What good are last years dates. Tell us what this years dates are. Page 2 para 3: Rates for 2008 are set knowing little about 2007 consumption. - Welcome to the real world, Matt. This is what the job of government is. If you can't do it or the people you have in there can't do it, fire them and get out yourself. "A 30% rate increase will be reflected in the Dec 1, 2007 bill". It WAS reflected. At least update the document you released today. That is a sample of the errors, on page 2. There are 6 more pages to go. They are more of the same. Pathetic, lame and incompetent excuses. HUH???!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 There are many kinds of audits. What kind of audit is done? Who/what company does the audit? Where, on the web, are the results of the audit? FOIA it, or does it have to be on the web so that you don't have to do the work before you accuse people of these things? here: http://www.foia.com/ @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 20, 2008 Report Share Posted April 20, 2008 PS: this one is better, from the County webpage: http://www.gobroomecounty.com/legis/LegisFOIL.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 20, 2008 Report Share Posted April 20, 2008 FOIA it, or does it have to be on the web so that you don't have to do the work before you accuse people of these things? here: http://www.foia.com/ @ Transparency is the reason why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 20, 2008 Report Share Posted April 20, 2008 FOIA it, or does it have to be on the web so that you don't have to do the work before you accuse people of these things? here: http://www.foia.com/ @ The FOIA law was passed in 1975, long before the internet every became widely available. In today's world it only makes sense that government agencies make available to their constituents documents that are pertinent and significant to them via a widely available resource. Binhamton should put all of its data on the web. This would make for a tranparency which would reinforce trust in their actions. It is NOT difficult to tranform Microsoft Documents, Word, Excel or Powerpoints into a .pdf file to be placed on the web. There are also many widely available programs which can be used to scan in a document and then transfer it to a .pdf file. Microsoft also makes available, for free, Word, Excel and Powerpoint viewers that can be used to view the original documents thus negating the conversion to a pdf. There are many ways to fix the problems. City hall just has to want to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 Why all this shuffling of funds? Water bills to County. General Fund to Water Department. County to General Fund. General Fund back to Water Department. Why is Fiala so concerned? Why are we told there is a $300,000 deficit to make up and then find out the increase will raise anywhere from $1,400,000 to $2,300,000 per year? The statement has been substantiated, hasn't it. The County did send the $700,000 in delinquent water payments to the General Fund, just as we said. Now are told the General Fund had fronted the money to the Water Department earlier. Nobody had clue about that until today did they? The Press & Sun-Bulletin did two or three stories on the County and the delinquent payments and they never mentioned this. I think it must be a grand conspiracy of mass proprotions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 HUH???!!! I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 I agree. Did you read Ryan document. If you did, it would make a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 HUH? I guess you didn't read the mayor's pathetic excuse for raising the water rates. That explains a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 I guess you didn't read the mayor's pathetic excuse for raising the water rates. That explains a lot. Are you making an accusation that the mayor is stealing moneies from the water fund and padding the general fund with it? @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Arzouian Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 Are you making an accusation that the mayor is stealing moneies from the water fund and padding the general fund with it? @ Stealing is perhaps too strong a term but Ryan is charging everything he can to the Water Fund and drawing down every dime he can to cover his waste and mismanagement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Stealing is perhaps too strong a term but Ryan is charging everything he can to the Water Fund and drawing down every dime he can to cover his waste and mismanagement. And of course you have all of the documenting information to back up your accusations? Of course you don't. You never do. You make accusations - and never have a thing to back them up with. You have lost all credibility. No one believes a word you say any longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 And of course you have all of the documenting information to back up your accusations? Of course you don't. You never do. You make accusations - and never have a thing to back them up with. You have lost all credibility. No one believes a word you say any longer. Facts disprove your claims, Ed is getting quoted more and more often in the media. The more you say he has no credibility the more he is quoted. Were you looking for documentation like this: Water Bill History (form a file available yesterday with the PSB story, date rate, minimum payment) Dec-05 $1.65 $18.50 Dec-06 $1.65 $18.50 Apr-07 $1.80 $20.00 Aug-07 $1.95 $21.50 Dec-07 $2.10 $23.00 Aug-08 $2.10 $23.00 Dec-08 $2.73 $29.30 Apr-09 $2.99 $31.90 Read it and weep, for $1.65 to $2.99, 81% increase!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Facts disprove your claims, Ed is getting quoted more and more often in the media. The more you say he has no credibility the more he is quoted. Were you looking for documentation like this: Water Bill History (form a file available yesterday with the PSB story, date rate, minimum payment) Dec-05 $1.65 $18.50 Dec-06 $1.65 $18.50 Apr-07 $1.80 $20.00 Aug-07 $1.95 $21.50 Dec-07 $2.10 $23.00 Aug-08 $2.10 $23.00 Dec-08 $2.73 $29.30 Apr-09 $2.99 $31.90 Read it and weep, for $1.65 to $2.99, 81% increase!!!!! YOU MADE THE ACCUSATION THAT THERE IS MISAPPROPRATION OF FUNDS. YOU MKAE ACCUSATIONS AND DO NOT BACK THEM UP WITH ANY FACTS OR DOCUMENTATION. YES, WATER BILLS WENT UP, BUT YOU WENT ON AND SAID HE MISAPPRORIATED FUNDS. yOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF THAT. YOU MAKE ACCUSATIONS AND DO NOT COME FORWARD WITH ANY INFORMATION - JUST ACCUSATIONS. THIS IS WHY YOU NO LONGER HAVE CREDIBILITY. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE NO LONGER BELIEVE ANYTHING YOU SAY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Facts disprove your claims, Ed is getting quoted more and more often in the media. The more you say he has no credibility the more he is quoted. Were you looking for documentation like this: Water Bill History (form a file available yesterday with the PSB story, date rate, minimum payment) Dec-05 $1.65 $18.50 Dec-06 $1.65 $18.50 Apr-07 $1.80 $20.00 Aug-07 $1.95 $21.50 Dec-07 $2.10 $23.00 Aug-08 $2.10 $23.00 Dec-08 $2.73 $29.30 Apr-09 $2.99 $31.90 Read it and weep, for $1.65 to $2.99, 81% increase!!!!! Is that not the same percentage (or similar percentage) as the increase in your hometown of Johnson City? and why do you not complain about those increases in a twon you actually live in rather than complain about the increases in Binghamton where you do not live - own property in or pay taxes in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 It has been documented that funds from Broome County that include deliquent water payments are going directly to the General Funds instead of going to the Water Fund. We had been told the two budgets were always kept separate from one another. What remains unclear is why and what is being done with those funds once they get to the Binghamton General Fund. For instance, is the City of Binghamton paying the Water Fund the delinquent payments without giving them the late fees, penalities and interest? Can you tell us that? Probably not, huh... That is why we need an independent audit. We can no longer trust Mayor Matthew T. Ryand and City Council. If the City of Binghamton and Mayor Ryan have nothing to hide they should welcome an audit to set the record straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Is that not the same percentage (or similar percentage) as the increase in your hometown of Johnson City? and why do you not complain about those increases in a twon you actually live in rather than complain about the increases in Binghamton where you do not live - own property in or pay taxes in? Here are the rates in JC: Johnson City $20.00 $1.68 $1.55 discount for greater consumption $1.55 per 100 cubic foot units compared to the currnt $2.10 in Binghamotn and the proposed $2.99, plus JC offers a discount for large volume users. Is Binghamton open for business or not? Will it give industrial users a discount as do JC and about half the water departments in NYS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 It has been documented that funds from Broome County that include deliquent water payments are going directly to the General Funds instead of going to the Water Fund. We had been told the two budgets were always kept separate from one another. What remains unclear is why and what is being done with those funds once they get to the Binghamton General Fund. For instance, is the City of Binghamton paying the Water Fund the delinquent payments without giving them the late fees, penalities and interest? Can you tell us that? Probably not, huh... That is why we need an independent audit. We can no longer trust Mayor Matthew T. Ryand and City Council. If the City of Binghamton and Mayor Ryan have nothing to hide they should welcome an audit to set the record straight. So once agin you make accusations that funds are misappropriated, when in fact you have no information to confirm that. You simply raise the question as if it were fact. The more you open your mouth, the more credibility you lose (not that you had all that much to begin with). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Here are the rates in JC: Johnson City $20.00 $1.68 $1.55 discount for greater consumption $1.55 per 100 cubic foot units compared to the currnt $2.10 in Binghamotn and the proposed $2.99, plus JC offers a discount for large volume users. Is Binghamton open for business or not? Will it give industrial users a discount as do JC and about half the water departments in NYS? I asked what the percentage of increase was - and that percentage in comperable to binghamtons - is it not? This is why you lost credibility, you answer questions by not answering them - you manipulate information in order to make your case to further your agenda. I do not know why you continue when you have been exposed as the blowhard you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 No JC has not proposed to increase water rates by 81% as Binghamton has under Matthew T. Ryan's administration. Furthermore, Binghamton says it is open for business but it offer businesses no discount for large volume use eventhough it also says lower consumption is part of the problem. If low consumption is indeed part of the problem encourage industry to use more. How can one raise a question as if it is fact? A question is a question. Why are Water payments collected by the Broome County going to the General Fund? What is being done with those water payments once they get into the General Fund? Are the fees, penalties and interest being paid to the Water Department or is the City of Binghamton collecting them and keeping them? These are all question that need to be answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 No JC has not proposed to increase water rates by 81% as Binghamton has under Matthew T. Ryan's administration. Furthermore, Binghamton says it is open for business but it offer businesses no discount for large volume use eventhough it also says lower consumption is part of the problem. If low consumption is indeed part of the problem encourage industry to use more. How can one raise a question as if it is fact? A question is a question. Why are Water payments collected by the Broome County going to the General Fund? What is being done with those water payments once they get into the General Fund? Are the fees, penalties and interest being paid to the Water Department or is the City of Binghamton collecting them and keeping them? These are all question that need to be answered. You are correct - JC has not propeosed them - they already implemented them. Of course you know this. You simply try and use words and twist them to fit your agenda. You ask "How can one raise a question as if it is fact?" like this. It has been proported by some that Ed Arourian has been stalking many people in our community. it is known that he has relationships with many law enforcement agencies and personaell and is this why he has not been arrested? has he paid them? witll an investigation be done on this. One has to wonder why the press has not written articles on this and why the police have bee so silent and failed to act on this. He has been arrested for thsi type of thing in the past and it seems that perhaps his political connections have kept him out of jail so far. Stalking is serious and if found guilty he should be jailed, but we all know how these things are plead down when one knows people in power - just like the charges on his last stalking and drug charges were mysteriously dismissed. That should be investigated as well. why has it not been? You know - kind o flike that. leaving the impression that one would like to leave without actually accusing someone of any wrongdoing. But you accuse Ryan of misapropriation of funds - yet you have no evidence put forward at all - zero - zippo - none. You lead with your agenda and try and manipulate people with your bs and nonsense. This is why you have no credibility. none whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Johnson City has not implemented an 81% in the water rate. You have failed to answer the question, is Binghamton open for business or not? Will Binghamton offer a discount water rate for greater consumption as does Johnson City? Why are the water payments collected by Broome Couty going to the Binghamton General Fund and not the Water Department? Answer these questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Johnson City has not implemented an 81% in the water rate. You have failed to answer the question, is Binghamton open for business or not? Will Binghamton offer a discount water rate for greater consumption as does Johnson City? Why are the water payments collected by Broome Couty going to the Binghamton General Fund and not the Water Department? Answer these questions. 1) i DID NOT SAY THEY DID - I SAID COMPARABLE, I DID NOT SAY 81%. BUT OF COURSE YOU KNOW THAT, YOU SIMPLY ATTEMPT TO TWIST EVERY SINGLE THING TO FIT YOUR SOMEWHAT BIZARRE OBSESSION WITH THE MAYOR AND BINGHAMTON - A CITY YOU DONT LIVE IN - OR PAY TAXES IN - OR OWN PROPERTY IN OR WORK IN (EVEN THOUGH YOU PRETEND TO WORK HERE) 2) WHY DO YOU CARE ABOUT BINGHAMTONS WATER INCREASES AND NOT JC'S? 3) CALL AND ASK WHY. I ASSUME (UNLIKE YOU) THAT IT ENDS UP THERE AND THAT IT IS AN ACCOUNTING THING. ARE YOU IMPLYING ONCE AGIN THAT THESE FUNDS ARE MIS-APPROPRIATED? ONCE AGIN IMPLYING THIS WITHOUT ANY FACTS TO BACK IT UP? OF COURSE YOU ARE. THAT IS WHAT YOU DO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.