No surprises there. The city of amenities claims they are
not out to profit on amenities. Their objective was achieved this year, once
again.
On the Revenue side for the Eisemann Center, parking revenue
was $208,038, Eisemann Center revenues were $2,179,756 and Interest income was
$1,012. Total income was $2,388,806.
On the expense side the parking garage cost about $495,000
for the year, auditorium administrative cost were $4,163,884, miscellaneous
charges were $121,582 and general administrative charge were $655,000. These
costs added together total $4,780,466.
The incomes versus expenses for 2012 have left a financial
black hole for the Eisemann center of about $2,391,660. They lost more than
they took in.
No doubt, some of our city leaders are most proud of this accomplishment.
I hope they are proud. The Eisemann is a fine facility. It, along with the parks, the library, the festivals, the golf courses, make Richardson a desirable place to live and work. I wouldn't be here if it were not for some of them and neither would my business. I'd move to Murphy or some town north of McKinney if I wanted a place without amenities or wanted to avoid being taxed for them.
ReplyDeleteJM
Here is a suggestion, if it is ok for the city to run the eisemann center at a 50% loss and make it up with tax money, let's do the same with the water, sewer and trash. Lower the prices and just make up the difference with tax money. At least that way, it could be written off on tax and the people of richardson would have more to spend and thereby improve the local economy. Goose-gander thing.
ReplyDeleteJM (or Mr. Murphy):
ReplyDeletePaying taxes is one thing while the city losing money or inefficiently spending taxpayers' money is another thing.
So how many Richardson residents are actually using Eiseman Center. I've been there only once.
What has Eiseman Center really achieved so far? Except losing $2MM in 2012 alone?
How many residents have decided to live in Richardson because of Eiseman Center? (I didn't.)
Will some people decide not to leave Richardson because of Eiseman Center. (I won't.)
Last time I checked, you don't have to be living in Richardson to go to Eiseman Center.
>Anon at 2:42 PM
I vote for your suggestion!
David, I have no idea who the "JM" is that posts here from tome to time but it's not me. Please have them change their moniker so there is no confusion. Thanks. John Murphy
ReplyDeleteJM, you heard da man. He would like for you to change your monkier to something people will not be confuse about. I think it is a reasonable request and hope you think so as well.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
Mr. Murphy, I apologize for the erroneous assumption.
ReplyDeleteOops of February 11, 2013 at 9:27 PM
Jelly Medula,
ReplyDeletePride. That's how we got into this mess to begin with.
How can you believe when you receive glory from one another? John 5:44
As long as a person is greedy for honor, he cannot come to faith because seeking honor is a mortal sin.
One who is full loathes honey. Proverbs 27:7
In the same way, the soul that is spiritually "satisfied" tramples on the honeycomb of the consoling Gospel.
Poor, pitiful Richardson
History on this deal is that the original Richardson Improvement Corporation public/private (taxable) bond shady deal went south and the hotel cashed out of it. City was left with a pile of money and no legal way to invest it to cover the coupon rate on the underlying bonds. That's what brought about the "refunding" (refinancing) bond program the Keffler/Slagel administration devised to restructure the debt. They've been calling it "refunding" ever since because refinancing debt is not legal...and immoral. In the end, the once $7-12MM Eisemann Center boondogle loaded municipal debt with an estimated $55MM. It's estimated because the records have been locked up at the city attorney's office. Public information requests and Attorney General rulings have been ignored.
ReplyDeleteIf they use up all the uncapped Hotel/Motel taxes to cover the shortfalls; sweep some bogus quarter of a million to the general fund for who knows what under guise of General and Administrative; then stop the miniscule sweep to debt service; it make for a tough review of what the Eisemann does or does not do. Add to that the non profit entity that collects donor contributions for the Eisemann and sweeps them directly to the general fund. And then add the alcohol sales to the Eisemann-Renaissance Club Corp which holds the liquor license and collects revenues that is never ever mentioned.
ReplyDeleteJust like the Sherrill Park Municipal Golf Course, Inc holds the liquor license for the golf course, there is undisclosed information to gather a true financial picture.
To all those people who like to say the City is well run, you have no idea just like the rest of us. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't.
With all due respect, I see no reason to change my initials. They are a part of my name, are what I use as a hand written signiture, so it's personal. Myself, I do get all the anons mixed up. ;-)
ReplyDeleteJM (not John Murphy)
More thoughts
ReplyDeleteIt seems crazy that in discussions here where most everybody posts anonymously that some are troubled that they confuse messages by me, JM, with those by John Murphy. Different writers and different signatures. Perhaps Mr Murphy could change HIS name since the silly confusion bothers him? Or, perhaps we could ignore the concerns of those who choose not to identify themselves in any way?
JM
JM, doesn't hurt to ask. If you don't want to change your "monkier", that is your choice. Those who don't like your choice will just have to live with it and get over it.
ReplyDeleteThanks. I could just use "J" but then I'd have an even bigger group of individuals that folks would speculate about.
ReplyDeleteJM (and still not John Murphy - who I have the greatest respect for)
William J McCalpin (JM)- many are not confused on who you are.
ReplyDeleteThe real question that needs an answer is what is the total debt figure. The answer would include the off-book unfunded liabilities like pensions and other hidden deals.
ReplyDeleteTexas has allowed this kind of smoke and mirror financial reporting for a long time.
And, Texas has also looked the other way when shady municipal governments need to hide their dirty deeds and do so by cooking the books and internal audits.
The licensed audit firms are not stupid. They carefully compose disclaiming statements, clearly saying it's all bogus on the first couple of pages. Of course, the unwise blow past the introduction and bite into the minutia within. Silly people.