Print
Comment
Rate
Attention to detail would serve city, save taxpayers' money
Last week's council meeting was a depressing collection of issues that indicate the city needs to pay a little better attention to detail.
The first problem surfaced when it was revealed that the birding trail near the San Pedro Valley golf course, constructed with federal grants, was actually built on land erroneously deeded to Tom Hartley in the settlement of a lawsuit. This problem was inherited by the current administration. The deal to settle the lawsuit was in July 2008 when Martin Roush was the city manager, Thomas Benavidez was city attorney and there were some different people on council.
Nevertheless, Roush and Benavidez apparently failed to order a city survey before signing the settlement. Hartley did order surveys in both 2005 and 2008. The birding trail was erroneously included in the land to be ceded to Hartley. Had the city ordered its own survey, the problem might have been discovered.
Now the city will have to repay thousands from a federal grant for the birding trail because the grant was for development of city land, not private land. And Hartley, obviously keen to keep the city over a barrel, has no intention of correcting the city's error without Benson coughing up things he wants. This will be an ongoing -and expensive - problem.
Secondly, the city purchase of a house and vacant lot adjacent to City Hall came to a screeching halt when it was discovered that the house is riddled with asbestos. One has to wonder at the city's allowing David DiPeso to represent both seller and buyer. DiPeso failed to provide a seller's property disclosure statement on the house, although he did provide one on the lot. Had the city hired its own Realtor, presumably this omission would have been spotted before the purchase went to council for approval.
And while it is not a problem yet, the third issue that has potential for future fights is the council's approving a new human resource administration policy that gives department heads wide latitude in determining how rules will be established and enforced. That is all well and good until an employee in one department perceives unfairness and sues. Although Councilwoman Jo Deen Boncquet noted the problem, she subsequently voted to approve the policy.
Attention to detail is a critical factor in all three issues. Although one lapse predated this administration, we are happy to see that the city manager is now focused on the problem. We hope he can nip it in the bud.
The first problem surfaced when it was revealed that the birding trail near the San Pedro Valley golf course, constructed with federal grants, was actually built on land erroneously deeded to Tom Hartley in the settlement of a lawsuit. This problem was inherited by the current administration. The deal to settle the lawsuit was in July 2008 when Martin Roush was the city manager, Thomas Benavidez was city attorney and there were some different people on council.
Nevertheless, Roush and Benavidez apparently failed to order a city survey before signing the settlement. Hartley did order surveys in both 2005 and 2008. The birding trail was erroneously included in the land to be ceded to Hartley. Had the city ordered its own survey, the problem might have been discovered.
Now the city will have to repay thousands from a federal grant for the birding trail because the grant was for development of city land, not private land. And Hartley, obviously keen to keep the city over a barrel, has no intention of correcting the city's error without Benson coughing up things he wants. This will be an ongoing -and expensive - problem.
Secondly, the city purchase of a house and vacant lot adjacent to City Hall came to a screeching halt when it was discovered that the house is riddled with asbestos. One has to wonder at the city's allowing David DiPeso to represent both seller and buyer. DiPeso failed to provide a seller's property disclosure statement on the house, although he did provide one on the lot. Had the city hired its own Realtor, presumably this omission would have been spotted before the purchase went to council for approval.
And while it is not a problem yet, the third issue that has potential for future fights is the council's approving a new human resource administration policy that gives department heads wide latitude in determining how rules will be established and enforced. That is all well and good until an employee in one department perceives unfairness and sues. Although Councilwoman Jo Deen Boncquet noted the problem, she subsequently voted to approve the policy.
Attention to detail is a critical factor in all three issues. Although one lapse predated this administration, we are happy to see that the city manager is now focused on the problem. We hope he can nip it in the bud.
 |
||
| COMMENTARY: Douglas Port of Entry in immediate need of expansion |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of bensonnews-sun.com.
Nana wrote on Nov 6, 2009 8:35 AM:
" The Benson way. Blame the people who are long gone for the errors of present. If comments are made this newspaper does not want to address, they will not be printed. "
Frank Edward Blanchard wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:20 AM:
" Nana"
You are certainly are right, I have written many opinions and some were printed and some were not. The ones that were not where most likely not printed because of whoever the editing person is on the paper. Did not want what I had written out there. I try to stay within the parameters of the rules issued by the paper.
Interesting how the paper thinks it can override freedom of speech at will. I threatened no one personally, and wouldn't do so anyway. But they must have thought it politically incorrect their thinking". My latest opinion was about the knife throwing incident and events in school. I wrote that last week and have yet to see it put in the paper my comment .
I still believe in my heart a School Principal does not have the right too manhandle students and was not trained to do so. I believe there is an on-campus officer for that business who is trained. The principal's actions were not called for it goes beyond his duties descriptions. That was my opinion
For that opinion I had written"it most likely this one as well will probably not make it in the paper either. Nothing knew about this one-sided abbreviated papers thinking.
Legal see if this gets through. "
You are certainly are right, I have written many opinions and some were printed and some were not. The ones that were not where most likely not printed because of whoever the editing person is on the paper. Did not want what I had written out there. I try to stay within the parameters of the rules issued by the paper.
Interesting how the paper thinks it can override freedom of speech at will. I threatened no one personally, and wouldn't do so anyway. But they must have thought it politically incorrect their thinking". My latest opinion was about the knife throwing incident and events in school. I wrote that last week and have yet to see it put in the paper my comment .
I still believe in my heart a School Principal does not have the right too manhandle students and was not trained to do so. I believe there is an on-campus officer for that business who is trained. The principal's actions were not called for it goes beyond his duties descriptions. That was my opinion
For that opinion I had written"it most likely this one as well will probably not make it in the paper either. Nothing knew about this one-sided abbreviated papers thinking.
Legal see if this gets through. "
Barbara Hartley MD wrote on Nov 5, 2009 5:12 PM: