Pinehurst 2011: Marcum on deficit spending
I finally pinned down mayoral candidate John Marcum and got him to talk in detail about his accusations of deficit spending in Pinehurst village government. (The documents he is referencing can be found here. ):
Brant, Glad you saw the audited overspending in FY10. If you’ll look at p. 20, you’ll see the borrowing of $1.066 million from the general fund, then track it across the page as money is shuffled back and forth between revenue accounts in each quarter. At the end, the “actual” numbers (not yet audited) show more money had to be borrowed for a total of $1.213 M. Of course in addition, the first full year of Pinewild receipts were squandered on a huge surge in operating expenditures of 17% from Fy 10 to FY 11–over two million bucks!!! Hell of a way to run a railroad and this chronic overspending is now built in.
This year, FY 12, once again starts off a million in the hole and will get worse unless the new Council to be sworn in next month can reduce expenditures. Also unless you dig in to the numbers, you don’t see the $700 thousand in unfunded liabilities and the one million in installment debt, since virtually all buildings and lots are mortgage. We’ll never get a windfall again like the Pinewild money and its a disgrace for it to be wasted, instead of paying off these items and preparing for a sustainable future.
What about the figures for fiscal year 2011, on the same page with the FY 2010 actuals, that appear to show revenue of $15,246,058 and expenses of $14,411,793?
You’re looking at the numbers for the beginning of FY 2011, instead of the actual spending that took place during the year. Even those numbers, however, include both the first full Pinewild contribution of $1.5 million and a borrowing from the fund balance of a little more than one million. This is shown at the bottom of P. 2 and at the bottom of the revenue column on p. 20. They’re a little different but show essentially the same thing–Pinewild money gone, and over one million borrowed. Page 20 also shows the actual numbers as the year progressed and an additional $147K had to borrowed at year end (not yet audited) ….Just read the roadmap carefully that I sent you and focus on the borrowed amounts both beginning year and end year FY 10 & 11 on PPs 2 and 20 and you’ll see the borrowing and use of the Pinewild funds. Also look at the current budget which starts off the same way with a million dollars in excess spending.
John – you are distorting the actual budget figures and I hope most reasonable folks will understand local government accounting since it seems you do not.
Nancy, Unfortunately for you, those are the official village budget numbers as audited for FY10 and the adjusted end of year numbers for FY11. They show clearly that expenditures have exceeded revenues for both years even with the arrival of new monies from Pinewild. This is the problem with having no business experience. You can’t understand budgets and government documents, as shown by your misstatement to the League Of Women Voters that our Post office appeal had been dismissed. That was shameful whether it was a deliberate false statement or an inability to read public documents as you later claimed. Choose your own medicine.
John: So you know that I am not a novice, I will share a brief part of my background. I have a BS in Finance from Lehigh University and a MBA from New York University and 35 years of financial service industry experience with banks such as Citibank. The $15,246,058 is actual revenue for fiscal year 6/30/11. The expenditures were $14,411,793 for a surplus of $834,265 for fiscal year 6/30/11. They are not budgeted figures. They are available on the Village web site. The Village financials are audited each year by an independent accounting firm who has given the Village an unqualified opinion. I assume you know what that means. If you cannot comprehend this data I have severe reservations about your ability to effectively govern Pinehurst. By the way, you tout 1,000 people coming to the post office each day. That would be 4 people for every minute the post office was open. Not possible. The post office says 185 people per day. Who is calling who shameful?