Mayor defends auctioneering for city
read more recent story comments Reader comments| MHS.1927 Sunday, February 17, 2013: 1:45 pm More from MHS.1927  | Ignorance abounds. |
| nobodyimportant Sunday, February 17, 2013: 2:03 pm More from nobodyimportant | Thumper, are you really suggesting that the city should have secured another auction service, one that would have cost more, netting the city less? Are you serious? Do you not understand how auctions are conducted and the expenses related to them? The state association source quoted in the article that auction services typically run from 10% to 25%. I don't know about your experience, but if you can find an auction company willing to sell your things at 10%, including the advertising, you have struck a great deal. Check around before you jump on the bandwagon looking for a boogy man. Take the very lowest figure and the expenses would have been nearly three times what resulted from the auction held. If I hear you and others right on this blog, you would rather have the city spend more money than necessary to conduct that sale. What kind of crazy thinking is that? I repeat what I posted earlier. There is no conflict of interest unless the person profits from the activity. From what I read, the one lone area that has even a remote possibility for violating the conflict of interest statutes would be if the "expenses and materials" cannot be defended with receipts. I suppose we'll want to bring the full weight of the Attorney General's office and the State Board of Accounts in to check on that possibility. No need to be concerned about the cost of that. Oh wait! We pay for that! Some gratitude for saving the taxpayer money. Ingrates. |
| thumper342 Sunday, February 17, 2013: 9:27 pm More from thumper342 | nobodyimportant, My main concern is how this auction put over $2,000 dollars into your beloved mayor's pocket. City mayors, I feel, should be about progress and general well being of the city and towns-people he represents. I suppose that the decision to bring out of state contractors to replace damaged signs is fair to you also. How is a $2,000+ pocketed profit by the mayor not a benefit from his company's participation in this instance? $2,000+ would benefit me greatly. Follow The Money Part 1 paints a much less rose colored picture than you would have me believe. PHIL DECKARD & ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE & AUCTIONEERING (Auctioneer ID # 7558) said that he would perform the auction for his “cost”. For unknown reasons, no competitive bids were taken for the job of auctioning $86, 407.50 of city property. Although the mayor said that he would do the auction for his “cost”, his definition of cost is troubling. According to official documents obtained from the Martinsville city clerk’s office through the Indiana Public Access Laws, the mayor charged his own city $3,466.01 for a days’ work. After advertising expenses of $583.78 and labor expenses of $290.00, the mayor’s net profit was $2,592.23. Assuming 8 hours of auctioneering, Deckard took home $324.04 per hour. Not bad! According to the invoice (see below) submitted by Deckard to the city, his true cash expenses were only $873.78, not the $3,466.01 that he did in fact charge the city. As mayor, Deckard said he would do the job for his cost. Instead, he did it for his cost PLUS an unspecified overhead fee of 3% fee applied to every dollar that was sold. It would have been preferable and looked better to the public if he had invoiced the city for his verifiable cost of $873.78. Also, this job should have been competitively bid to avoid all appearances of impropriety. As it stands now, there are many questions and rumors that remain unanswered regarding this auction and city procurement processes. Awarding contracts behind the curtain of the mayors office is just bad politics and worse policy. GOD BLESS AMERICA! That is all. |
| AMRFHSD Monday, February 18, 2013: 7:51 am More from AMRFHSD | I am in no way a "fan" of the city government but I'll side with the mayor on this one.He did save us some money I believe and he'd probably be the one to bring in the right buyers round here.Right or wrong you gotta be a hustler to make it in todays world and be sure there's no politician that ain't one.The mayor has bills of his own to pay.He should sell some more of the junk in this fleamarket metropolis including the water dept. |
| nobodyimportant Monday, February 18, 2013: 10:10 pm More from nobodyimportant | Thumper, repeating an earlier post, if the "materials and expenses" did not add up to the amount charged for those items, then your point is valid. But you should also acknowledge that if any other auction company was commissioned to do this job, the total cost of the auction would have been higher.....much higher, netting less net income to the city. In all of your posts, you have hammered as if the public was ripped off by this. DO THE MATH! |
| wake up Tuesday, February 19, 2013: 11:58 am More from wake up | NOBODY people on here just like to type on here even if they thank thay know what they are talking about |
| thumper342 Tuesday, February 19, 2013: 9:47 pm More from thumper342 | nobodyimportant, Saving the community money is one thing, a city official profiting well above what should have been charged is another. GOD BLESS AMERICA! That is all. |
| nobodyimportant Tuesday, February 19, 2013: 11:15 pm More from nobodyimportant | What should have been charged? A usual and customary auctioneer's charge is 10% plus expenses up to about 30% on auctions of this size. Look, I know you and I won't agree on this. I'll leave it at this... I'd rather have the city get about 3 grand more than they would have putting it out for bid. The conflict of interest is a red herring. Now if you can get some auctioneers to line up to do auctions for the city pro bono, I'll sing your praises as a friend of the taxpayer. |
| jimenicholls2 Friday, February 22, 2013: 9:29 am More from jimenicholls2 | It has come to my attention, reading the investigative reporting on http://martinsvillereport.blogspot.com, that the Mayor of Martinsville has seen a raise in his salary, on average, of 10% over the past 3 years. This investigative report also reveals that the Mayor has arranged to personally profit from the auctioning of City property. Mayor salary change from: Year Pay prior year 2010 $49,232 2011 $54,970 +11.7 2012 $60,000 +9.2% For the record, I truly believe that a person should be paid what they are worth. Whether it be $60,000 per year, $600,000 per year, or $6 Billion per year, an individual should be paid what he/she truly earns in the free market; but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about a “servant”. One of our EMPLOYEES in a position that does not produce ANYTHING; but is TAKING our tax dollars and transferring them to their personal paychecks. This sincerely makes my heart heavy, as it does yours, I’m sure. We have friends, family, acquaintances that are without jobs. Good people, of all skill levels, ages, industries, unions, trades, etc. that are truly hurting in the depression we are in… BUT the mayor, with the council’s vote, gives him, on average, a 10% raise every year for the past 3 years!!?? I know as a business owner, an employer and also as an employee, without a doubt, that a 10% annual raise for anyone during the economy of the past 3 years, IS ALMOST UNHEARD OF!! Almost no business is doing this! Except, of course, for government and big banks. The two of which are barely distinct from each other, anymore. Of course, they are in an unholy alliance with each other; but that story is for another day. Brothers and Sisters, do you realize that every dollar of salary the mayor receives is from money that is deducted from YOUR paycheck, in one way or another?? The rest of us that work for a living, producing products and services that are purchased by free and willing consumers, are paid based on our production. What does any government position, or government produce? It is a politically incorrect question; but a necessary one, all the same. As if that is not enough, the mayor has "arranged" deals to personally profit from auctioning city equipment?! It is sad, very sad that this behavior has become "normal". THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR BY OUR SERVANTS SHOULD NOT BE "NORMAL". PEOPLE OF MARTINSVILLE, WE NEED OUR MORAL COMPASS RE-CALIBRATED. If we study even a snippet of history, we can expect this behavior of "those in power". WE GET EXACTLY THE GOV'T WE DESERVE, DON'T WE? SO, WHY SHOULD WE BE SURPRISED?! I SAY WE DESERVE BETTER!! I say we start ACTING like it, too! We need to put real "servant leaders" back in gov't positions, as real SERVANTS! People that are humble. People that are reluctant to lead; but totally capable of doing so. People not afraid to stand up for Biblical and Constitutional principles, no matter how "unpopular" they may be. People that have no desire for the public lime light, fame, glory, power, etc… We need people like our Founders that saw their public service as a true sacrifice, but a temporary one. These people temporarily stepped away from their homestead, family, or business to serve, with no expectation of fame, glory, inside deals, exorbitant pay, etc…They did their job for a term, maybe two, then they went back to their homestead, business, family. That, is how to restore integrity, nobility, honesty in government, by servant leadership. Additionally, what should be obvious for all to see, is the mayor and some of the city council want you to believe they are conservatives or republicans; but they are not true “Conserve”-atives or “Republic”-ans. In no way, shape or form are they “Conserve”-atives or “Republic”-ans. Think about those words, and what they mean. Let that sink in, a minute. Lord Acton was correct: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." WE CAN IMPOSE TERM LIMITS ON EVERY ELECTION DAY, IF WE CHOOSE! PEOPLE OF MARTINSVILLE, I THINK WE KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO DO NEXT ELECTION DAY! |
| GregBader Friday, February 22, 2013: 3:59 pm More from GregBader | Some of you may be right in that another auctioneer MAY have charged more. But then again, another local auctioneer may have truly done it for free, unlike Deckard, who seems to have done a "bait and switch" on the town. Unless you take competing bids, you will never know the truth and there will always be a conflict of interest and ethical questions. Do you Remember the Mayors campaign signs all over town a couple years ago? In big letters it said "HONESTY, INTEGRITY, Phil Deckard". |
| nobodyimportant Saturday, February 23, 2013: 9:04 am More from nobodyimportant | I'm all for getting the city's auctions conducted for "truly free", and if that is possible, I'm on board with that. All of the local auctioneers have done charity auctions, helping not-for-profits raise funds. But the city is not a charitable organization. Good luck getting auctioneers pro bono for government work. |
| nobodyimportant Sunday, February 24, 2013: 8:33 am More from nobodyimportant | An afterthought. There are scads of attorneys in town. Why don't we get them to donate their time? (chuckle) |
| 31 comments found | |
| Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next |
Add a comment
Posting comments on this web site requires you to be logged in. • Create your account• Log in to your account
» more
TABLE OF CONTENTS »
NEWS
Today
Obituaries
Local
Police
Court news
Weather
Business
Property transfers
Area salaries & stats
Education
State
Nation/World
Photo galleries
Videos
SPORTS
Sports
MD-T sports
IU sports blog
Martinsville
Mooresville
Decatur Central
Eminence
Indian Creek
Monrovia
Tabernacle Christian
Fantasy racing league
BLOGS
All blogs
Quit Smoking...Do It
Sci-Fi Sojourns
The Hoosier Scoop
Hoosier Wine Cellar
Gaming Guru
Mellenblog
