Comments on: Stamford Ends the Year with a Surplus http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/ Chatting with you about Stamford and beyond. Join in the conversation! Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:33:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Michael http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/#comment-138 Michael Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:08:47 +0000 http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/?p=98#comment-138 I'll start off by saying that I'm an Independent, I'm no fan of either party because in many ways both parties have failed the American people, however, in this case I hope that voters of Stamford will wake up because they continue to vote the same expecting to see different results which makes no sense. Dan Malloy has taxed Stamford to death and Martin, the new Democrat running will be pretty much the same. Wake up people! If you want to see some kind of change for the better then stop voting for the same party over and over! Look at the horrible conditions many of the roads are in, look at how taxes continue to go up and up even on things for the middle-class and the poor. This Independent plans to vote for Pavia because I've given Democrats so many chances and as far as I'm concerned they are full of empty promises. I’ll start off by saying that I’m an Independent, I’m no fan of either party because in many ways both parties have failed the American people, however, in this case I hope that voters of Stamford will wake up because they continue to vote the same expecting to see different results which makes no sense. Dan Malloy has taxed Stamford to death and Martin, the new Democrat running will be pretty much the same. Wake up people! If you want to see some kind of change for the better then stop voting for the same party over and over! Look at the horrible conditions many of the roads are in, look at how taxes continue to go up and up even on things for the middle-class and the poor. This Independent plans to vote for Pavia because I’ve given Democrats so many chances and as far as I’m concerned they are full of empty promises.

]]> By: Joel Gonzalez http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/#comment-132 Joel Gonzalez Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:35:16 +0000 http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/?p=98#comment-132 "Stamford Ends the Year with a Surplus." That's one way to phrase it! Another way to look at it would be to phrase it like this: Stamford surplus shows that its' citizens where "over-taxed". “Stamford Ends the Year with a Surplus.”
That’s one way to phrase it!
Another way to look at it would be to phrase it like this:
Stamford surplus shows that its’ citizens where “over-taxed”.

]]> By: Mike Young http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/#comment-122 Mike Young Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:18:30 +0000 http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/?p=98#comment-122 Compared to NYS, NJ, and Caleefornya, we are in great shape! Compared to NYS, NJ, and Caleefornya, we are in great shape!

]]> By: Paul Steed http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/#comment-119 Paul Steed Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:33:39 +0000 http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/?p=98#comment-119 I would caution anyone from putting too much stock in a Moody's rating (or any of the other rating agencies either). I'm just curious about when the last time was that Stamford had a final (not draft) independent audit done? I would caution anyone from putting too much stock in a Moody’s rating (or any of the other rating agencies either).

I’m just curious about when the last time was that Stamford had a final (not draft) independent audit done?

]]> By: Karen Murphy http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/2009/10/02/stamford-ends-the-year-with-a-surplus/#comment-118 Karen Murphy Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:48:13 +0000 http://blog.ctnews.com/malloy/?p=98#comment-118 If corporations reported their financials like the City of Stamford no company would ever report negative earnings.* The City had $8+ million in claims that it did not put through its P&L. The fact is the City had a loss of $7.7 million in 2009. No where in Moody’s Rating Report does it talk about “surplus” as defined by the City in the Advocate’s letter. The critical number is the General Fund Balance, which decreased by $7.1 million in 2009, from $15.5 million to $8.4 million. For the past three year according to Moody’s, and now for four years, the “city’s financial position has weakened.” At the end of 2008 the City’s General Fund Balance was 3.5% of General Fund Revenues, at the end of 2009 it is 1.5% Capital Fund The Mayor says he reduced expenses. Lets evaluate what occurred in the Capital Fund. Operating expenses increased 100% in 2009 from $8.4 million to $16.7 million. In the 2006-2008 period capital fund operating expenses increased 200+% – from $3.8 in 2006 million in 2006 to $ 8.4 million in 2008. In other words, Capital Fund operating expenses increased more than 400% since 2006. The unanswered question is: How much in operating expenses has been shifted to the Capital Fund and funded with bond proceeds? No wonder our debt and taxes are at the breaking point. Karen Murphy * I assumed that the Advocate just prints the City’s Press Releases in these matters. To compound matters the Advocates does not allow the public to comment but gives the Mayor’s office a blog – go figure. If corporations reported their financials like the City of Stamford no company would ever report negative earnings.* The City had $8+ million in claims that it did not put through its P&L. The fact is the City had a loss of $7.7 million in 2009.

No where in Moody’s Rating Report does it talk about “surplus” as defined by the City in the Advocate’s letter.

The critical number is the General Fund Balance, which decreased by $7.1 million in 2009, from $15.5 million to $8.4 million. For the past three year according to Moody’s, and now for four years, the “city’s financial position has weakened.” At the end of 2008 the City’s General Fund Balance was 3.5% of General Fund Revenues, at the end of 2009 it is 1.5%

Capital Fund

The Mayor says he reduced expenses. Lets evaluate what occurred in the Capital Fund. Operating expenses increased 100% in 2009 from $8.4 million to $16.7 million. In the 2006-2008 period capital fund operating expenses increased 200+% – from $3.8 in 2006 million in 2006 to $ 8.4 million in 2008. In other words, Capital Fund operating expenses increased more than 400% since 2006.

The unanswered question is: How much in operating expenses has been shifted to the Capital Fund and funded with bond proceeds? No wonder our debt and taxes are at the breaking point.

Karen Murphy

* I assumed that the Advocate just prints the City’s Press Releases in these matters. To compound matters the Advocates does not allow the public to comment but gives the Mayor’s office a blog – go figure.

]]>