Back on May 6, 1997 a resident named Tom O’Neill told the City Council that he opposed the practice of transferring money from the Water Fund to the General Fund. O’Neill said it’s deceptive and builds mistrust in elected officials. Then Mayor Chris Norby noted that the City attorney was reviewing this issue and would report on it at a future meeting.
Then, in September of 1997, the Water Fund issue rises again as the priorities for Hill Crest Park were being considered. The Water Fund and Redevelopment Fund were being eyed as the primary funding source.
The City’s consultant tried to explain why these funds could be used. His logic? If a new waterline and reservoir were to be installed, many of the other park improvements could be logically tied to the water work.
Marie Whaling and Barbara Marr asked questions about the use of Redevelopment Funds and Water Funds for the park.
Mayor Norby explained that Redevelopment Funds were to be used for alleviating blight. He went on to say that the concerns expressed regarding funding sources are legitimate and that Water Fund monies are for water purposes and expenditures must be related to water and its delivery.