The Killeen City Council will hold a regular meeting at 5 p.m. today.

On the council’s docket:

  • A vote to institute a new financial policy package as part of City Manager Ron Olson’s overhaul of the city’s money management. Among revisions to the city’s policies is lowered fund balance targets from a range of 22 to 25 percent to 18 to 22 percent to free up money to be used toward capital improvement projects.
  • A vote on whether to accept three tracts of land constituting about 90 acres to continue projects for the Rosewood Drive road extension and hike and bike trail. There is no immediate cost to the city, but annual maintenance expenditures worth $140,000 are projected to begin in fiscal year 2020.
  • A vote to consider an interlocal agreement with the Department of Public Safety for forms and materials.

The meeting begins at 5 p.m. at City Hall, 101 N. College St.

kyleb@kdhnews.com | 254-501-7567

(1) comment

Alvin

This is the personal opinion of this writer.

I certainly hope that this city council will vote on what is considered to be a matter of importance to the citizens of this city in regard to matters of importance. These matters of importance that should be voted down as it is not as reported by this newspaper which are as published by this newspaper in the article: 'Killeen council to vote on financial policies'.

Copy: ' A vote to institute a new financial policy package as part of City Manager Ron Olson’s overhaul of the city’s money management. Among revisions to the city’s policies is lowered fund balance targets from a range of 22 to 25 percent to 18 to 22 percent to free up money to be used toward capital improvement projects.'

Continuation of copy: 'A vote on whether to accept three tracts of land constituting about 90 acres to continue projects for the Rosewood Drive road extension and hike and bike trail. There is no immediate cost to the city, but annual maintenance expenditures worth $140,000 are projected to begin in fiscal year 2020.'

Continuation of copy: 'A vote to consider an interlocal agreement with the Department of Public Safety for forms and materials.' End of copy

I again pose to this newspaper and to the citizens of Killeen the following:


Copy: 'Weak Killeen city fiscal policies were underscored by Houston-based public accounting firm McConnell & Jones in its Sept. 5 report as one of several reasons for a decline in the city’s financial health.'

It can be observed that with the 'Mayor Pro Tem Jim Kilpatrick', who has previously attended to the financial picture of this city in the past that, and I have to paraphrase this, as “I don't want to hold the hand or be in charge of the city managers budget', and now he is the one that is prescribing to the city manager 'just what he should be doing'. In my opinion, he is the 'last one' that should be conducting business for the city of Killeen.

Copy: 'Councilman Jonathan Okray disagreed with Kilpatrick because he did not consider lowering city savings a sustainable or effective way to create revenue.'

I have to agree with councilman Okray that 'this is not the way to bolster this city's revenue picture. It has been some time since I've agreed with councilman Okray, but in this I do agree.

'Part of the financial governance policy change includes an annual review provision set for no later than January 2019. That would direct council members to evaluate yearly whether city financial policies are working.'

And that from the same council member. It is my personal opinion that this type of policy would not only lead to 'weak and unsustainable policy as described by the professional audit contractors, but would tend to drive this city into additional unsustainable and questionable practices and for this reason, the committee of Rivera, Johnson, and Harris are to pull together and produce 'financial governance policy's that are to the good for the city of Killeen. It's your job to see that this city is to perform for the good of the people, so do your job please.

As described in 'other business', this is the continuance of what is to known as a 'boondoggle of immense magnitude'. This tract of land that the 'city has been in negotiations with Killeen Chaparral Development LLC, RSBP Developers, Inc., Gary W. Purser, Sr. 1999 Trust and John Helen Purser 1999 Trust, the memo added.
There is no immediate cost to the city, but annual maintenance expenditures worth $140,000 are projected in fiscal year 2020.' A noted, the 'Killeen Chaparral Development LLC, RSBP Developers, Inc., is offering another 'ruse' in order to try to get this city council to accept what in essence is, 'another attempt to get a bond issue for $46.1 million that would allow the $426 million dollar bond issue that would be required to meet the demands of an outside contractor to build the 3,750 new homes that would be located outside of the city limits'. In this endeavor I urge the city council members to vote 'NO'. Let the 90 acres continue to reside in the hands of this corporation and save the 'annual maintenance expenditures worth $140,000 are projected in fiscal year 2020.'

Copy: 'In other business the council will consider: an interlocal agreement with the Department of Public Safety for forms and materials; clarifying the leasing agreement for golf carts at Stonetree Golf Course; and the city’s quarterly investment report.'

Again, what are the interlocal agreements with the ' Department of Public Safety for forms and materials; clarifying the leasing agreement for golf carts at Stonetree Golf Course; and the city’s quarterly investment report'. Don't give away the farm without at least verifying 'what is in this supportive paperwork. Cross the 'T's' and dot all of the eyes before signing.

Just as a note, 'what are the interlocal agreements with the Department of Public Safety for forms and materials; clarifying the leasing agreement for golf carts at Stonetree Golf Course; and the city’s quarterly investment report'. What is the total money that goes to support the golf course and is it a money making venture or does the city golf course operate in the red????

I must note that this city is working on developing a system in which this city could possibly collapse on itself by voting to reduce the capital needed to pull itself out of a hole. Things like 'voting for the public service armor plating with a cost in the next 5 years of almost $80,000, now the cost for a bond issue of $46.1 million that will entail the expenditure of $140,000 dollars annually, and the story goes on and on. The 'it's only so much money', well that's a cumulative cost 'that adds up'. End of copy.

It is the personal opinion of this writer, 'It must be in this city's best interest for this city council to vote a resounding 'NO' vote on all of these these amendments'.

This has been the personal opinion of this writer and nothing shall be used, in context or without or changed in any way without first notifying, and receiving explicit approval from this writer.
One of the 4.58 % who voted.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.