In a surprise move that shocked lexicographers throughout the world, the audit firm Kafoury, Armstrong & Co. was forced to redefine the word “proper” in order to describe financial shenanigans perpetrated by the City of North Las Vegas.

The firm audited the City’s infamous “More Cops” program and [...]]]>

More Cops -- All Very Proper

In a surprise move that shocked lexicographers throughout the world, the audit firm Kafoury, Armstrong & Co. was forced to redefine the word “proper” in order to describe financial shenanigans perpetrated by the City of North Las Vegas.

The firm audited the City’s infamous “More Cops” program and concluded that the city had “properly” used funds from the initiative which was designed to provide new police for the city.

Oddly the firm also concluded that at least $1.8 million in funds were inappropriately appropriated to police already on the force, an action deemed to be in “noncompliance,” a noncompliance which was still all very “proper” apparently.

In addition the city made payroll mistakes leading to $85,777 being incorrectly–but “properly” it seems–billed to the “More Cops” fund.

City leaders rushed to praise just how “proper” things were done and to express their surprise out how “minor” were the errors.

“I was confident we had done nothing wrong, and I knew it would come out this way,” Mayor Shari Buck said. (RJ).

A confidence no doubt formed well before the audit was completed and sturdy enough to survive any number of embarrassing facts.

Gregory Rose, the former city manager who was mysteriously removed by Council last year under the cloud of the properly non-compliant “More Cops” program and who is under consideration–for no apparent reason–by the City of Reno for their manager job, was adamant about the city’s propriety:

“Any time you have a person involved in the accounting process, mistakes can be made,” he said. “Those mentioned in the audit seem pretty minor in the overall scope of things.”

No doubt the citizenry of Nor’Town will rest easier in their beds after all these assurances of how “proper” things get done in their community of choice, and how “minor” were any of the “proper” improprieties.

Still, one would think that those who so mysteriously–and expensively–rushed Mr. Rose out of city hall would probably want to send a little note to their counterparts in Reno. Perhaps a little warning? Or wouldn’t that be proper?

[UPDATE: Oh, this is fun. The City is applying for a grant of more funds for "More Cops." Check out item 20 here.]

It was striking that the mayor was unable to cajole even one of her companions on the City Council to vote for Rose. It’s been well known for a while [...]]]> The ouster of City Manager Gregory Rose seems to have been a full-out rebellion against the so far short lived reign of mayor Shari Buck.

It was striking that the mayor was unable to cajole even one of her companions on the City Council to vote for Rose. It’s been well known for a while that there was no love lost between Mr. Rose and council members William Robinson and Robert Eliason, both of whom voted against the lucrative enhancements to Mr. Rose’s contract. (Sun) Richard Cherchio dissatisfaction with Mr. Rose was evident more recently apparently due to the wrangling over the “More Cops” fund. (KLAS)

Nonetheless, the mayor was not even able to convince Anita Wood or Mr. Cherchio to support Gregory Rose. This despite their votes to support his annual performance review in August, 2009. (Sun)

The shift raises the question of just how much political power will the mayor be able to wield. Will the rest of the council form it’s own powerbase and leave the mayor to repeat her petulant phrase from just prior to the Rose vote: “do what you’re going to do”?

So, this ain’t mayor Mike Montandon’s city council anymore. And it may not even be Shari Buck’s.

On another note: The more I think about it, the idea that Mr. Rose should
simply be let go so that the city can get the sorry affair “behind us”
serves the interests of everyone involved–except those of voters. Voters will eventually face the
difficult question, and responsibility, of deciding who will be the best mayor or
councilperson for their ward, and it is extremely relevant to that
question if a candidate aided and abetted Mr. Rose in some potentially
illegal bookkeeping. Voters, therefore, need to resolve the very question
council wishes to avoid: Did Mr. Rose engage in any illegal activities
or not? And if he did, did anyone on council know about it?

Forgetting the affair may be good for council, but it’s not so good for the rest of us.

Yes, after a lovely tree lighting ceremony and cookies, City Council bellies up to the bar today, most likely to fire the current city manager Gregory Rose, hand him his $337,000 in parting gifts (thanks for playing, Mr. Rose!), and pick a temp to fill his [...]]]> AH. Nothing says “Christmas” better than a pink slip!

Yes, after a lovely tree lighting ceremony and cookies, City Council bellies up to the bar today, most likely to fire the current city manager Gregory Rose, hand him his $337,000 in parting gifts (thanks for playing, Mr. Rose!), and pick a temp to fill his shoes until it’s time to play “Name That Scapegoat” all over again. (Agenda)

Now, it’s all fun and games to give Mr. Rose the boot assuming he in fact did mis-appropriate that “More Cops” money. (RJ) Still, it is hard to believe that the folks who are ultimately responsible for the functioning of the city and its budget, i.e., the current mayor and her immediate predecessor, didn’t know anything about it.

And if they didn’t? Then it looks like they failed in their oversight jobs.

Either way, the removal of Mr. Rose should not end the matter. Every Nor’Townie should still be asking: what did the mayor know, and when did she know it? And if she didn’t know it, why didn’t she?

As for her predecessor? Well, “More Cops” will give his opponents in the gubernatorial race something to talk about it, won’t it? How about “Boy Scout Botches Budgets”?

Say, isn’t it odd that the “Budget Presentation” is “award winning”? (NLV) Yep. It’s a Very Nice Budget. As long as you don’t read it.

Sigh. Everybody’s making fun of us. From Jon Ralston’s column about what prominent Nevadans have to be thankful for this Thanksgiving:

$337,000 is  how much it's going to cost Nor'Town to get rid of its current City Manager Gregory Rose. (RJ) City Council will be voting on the "settlement" at the December 2nd meeting, barring postponement.

Mayor Buck is opposed [...]]]> Whoa! Where else do you get $337,000 for messing up? Besides Goldman Sachs, I mean.

$337,000 is  how much it's going to cost Nor'Town to get rid of its current City Manager Gregory Rose. (RJ) City Council will be voting on the "settlement" at the December 2nd meeting, barring postponement.

Mayor Buck is opposed because that's quite a chunk of change in hard times. However, voting against the settlement means that Rose would remain city manager, despite the current ruckus over the "More Cops" money. Rose is alleged to have used "More Cops" money to fund veteran officers when the money was slated for new hires only.

Mayor Buck, naturally, supported the manager's generous severance package back when council handed it to him. (Nor'Town) So, hey, if she doesn't want the city to take the hit, maybe she should donate the money?

Or, how about this? The mayor could take responsibility as Nor'Town's highest official for the "More Cops" mess up and resign. Her predecessor Mike Montandon could, too, by apologizing to the city, abandoning all current and future campaigns for public office, and pay Rose's severance out of his gubernatorial campaign fund.

But, wait, what am I saying? Taxpayers always end up paying for politicians' mistakes. That's been a basic rule of politics since back in the days of Babylon.

“The issue is a simple coding error. It’s just paperwork,” City Manager Gregory Rose said earlier this month. (RJ)

However, the “More Cops” funds, we are told, are meant only to support new hires in an effort [...]]]> So Nor’Town City Manager characterized the use of “More Cops” funds to support cops already on the force.

However, the “More Cops” funds, we are told, are meant only to support new hires in an effort to increase the force. They should not be used as a bookkeeping tool to shuffle funds from one account to another in tough economic times.

The, dare we say, scandal is beginning to make everyone look bad. We learn: Nor’Town Chief of police Joseph Forti knew about the shift of funds, although he has denied it elsewhere. And the assistant chief says they knew about it in early 2009.

So, one wonders, when did Mayor Shari Buck, who’s supposed to be in charge of the such goings on, know about it? Or are we to believe she doesn’t know what’s going on in her City Hall?

We also learn that Assemblyperson Marilyn Kirkpatrick “has long questioned why North Las Vegas hasn’t hired more police officers with More Cops money.”

Really? When did she plan to share those concerns with her constituents?

One thing is clear, though, Richard Cherchio has found an issue for his campaign coming up in early 2011. So, I’m guessing “More Cops” won’t be going away anytime soon. I wonder if the mayor will be endorsing his campaign?

Channel 8 is reporting that Nor’Town City Manager Gregory Rose is on paid leave and may be leaving the city permanently. (VegasNow) TeeVee folk think it’s because of the missing “More Cops” money, but Rose has apparently denied it.

More about missing “More Cops” money:

A raise, of course. (Sun) Just Shari Buck’s way of saying, heckofajob, Greg!

What City Manager Gregory Rose really needs is a trip to the Nevada Ethics [...]]]> So, what do you give a City Manager who sends a vaguely threatening letter which clearly favored the incumbent to Nor’Towners in the midst of a heated campaign?

A raise, of course. (Sun) Just Shari Buck’s way of saying, heckofajob, Greg!

What City Manager Gregory Rose really needs is a trip to the Nevada Ethics Commission. There’s a complaint form and some instructions in case anybody is interested.

One resident who spoke against the zoning proposal because of the "density increases" was unhappy that the decision had "already [...]]]> During the April 4th City Council meeting, the City Council voted 3 to 1 with one absentee to shove high density housing into the Park Highlands area (Ordinance 2357, p. 10 of the action report).

One resident who spoke against the zoning proposal because of the "density increases" was unhappy that the decision had "already been made" long before he and members of his community could contest them.

Mayor Mike upbraided the speaker because he claimed the city council had not really increased the density because the zoning was all consistent with the "Comprehensive Plan" for the area which the city passed in May 3rd, 2006.

Well, let’s play semantics with the Mayor. Yes, the city increased the density from what was typical for the areas neighboring the new Olympia developments. Those tended to be single family dwellings and ranches. And so the city council did it’s usual thing of relying on the apathy of citizens to propose plans that, admittedly, the citizens ignored.

And the discomfort of citizens with the density is hardly new. If you have a look at the minutes for the May 3rd, 2006 meeting, you’ll find–citizens voicing concerns about density in the Olympia development. Even perennial candidate for the Assembly Angelo Carvalho, who hasn’t even bothered to take down his campaign site, had questions about the density. It will be interesting to see if Mr. Carvalho will change his mind about that given his last campaign was heavily funded by monies funneled in from Utah by the mayor. Note that Mr. Eliason was the single nay vote.

Now the Mayor pretends that the "Comprehensive Plan" is engraved in stone tablets, and like an old testament patriarch, he wields it to batter any one who dares voice opposition.

Indeed, timed perfectly to arrive just before the recent Ward 4 election, City Manager Gregory Rose sent out a missive to members of the North Las Vegas Alliance of Homeowners Association and Concerned Citizens–yup, Cherchio’s group–chiding them for daring to question the "Comprehensive Plan" in minutes from one of their meetings.

Why not drag the group before the Ministry of Re-education for thinking thoughts and speaking words contrary to city propaganda, Mr. Rose? And I certainly hope there is no evidence that the Manager sent out the letter at the request of Councilperson Shari Buck. Using city funds on the behest of a City Council member on the eve of an election to frighten political opponents with vague threats from the City Manager’s office, well, surely Nor’Town politics would never sink so low.

Mr. Rose also took the group to task for claiming that a hastily-called City Council meeting was a "surprise." His evidence that it wasn’t a "surprise"? It had been thumb-tacked to the wall of the library in accord with the State’s minimalist open-meeting laws.  Perhaps the City Council should consider an ordinance to the effect that it must give at least a week’s notice for any "special" meetings of the Council.

Plans were made to be changed, and indeed, zonings for lesser densities may be as consistent with the "Comprehensive Plan" as those the City Council supported. The Mayor should break the tablets and start over. And this time, he should listen to his citizens and not the campaign contributions of big developers when deciding the fate of our city.