The Money Grab
Fullerton’s illustrious ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee was treated to a marathon “we’re cut to the bone” presentation by the City’s department heads last Tuesday night.
One of the interesting concepts for revenue enhancement, albeit one-time, came from our Director of Public Works Stephen Bise.
It seems that over time, unrefunded “engineering” fees from City permit applicants adds up. Currently, the City has about $700,000 in such fees sitting idly in a Public Works account. According to Bise some of the fees were collected way back in the 1990s. The City Council would have to put its seal of approval on the deal and a notice to the rightful owners of this money would have to be made.
Similarly, funds gathered from contractor bonds and not claimed piles up, too. Bise reckons that ampount is $145,000. Presumably the same process for keeping that dough would be deployed.
This situation begs the obvious question: what responsibility does the City have to notify its customers that they have positive balances; or better yet, why can’t the Public Works Department simply write checks and return the money to its rightful owners before it piles up? There seems to be an unwritten rule that the money belongs in City funds (gathering interest at least) until such time, if any, that the owners request reimbursement. It really is a form of indirect “taking.” These individual amounts may be small, but as Director Bise indicated, are substantial in aggregate.
Apparently Fullerton made a grab of these bond funds a few years ago that had accumulated up to 2016. That amounted to $800,000. The next decade’s worth is now on the table, apparently. Can the Council resist seizing this cash? I wouldn’t bet against it.
As to the process of notification I admit my ignorance. Are such notifications made to the real owners or their heirs and assigns? I wonder. It would be so much easier to put a public notice in a “newspaper of record” where virtually nobody would ever see it; and then put it on a Council Agenda, posted 72 hours before the meeting where even fewer people would see it.
Pretty sure they’re gonna make it hard to claim.
There are probably hundreds (thousands?) of claimants for those engineering fees. No way there would be individual contacts made. The system is obviously used to avoid timely automatic refunds.
Ditto the bonds, although there would be a lot fewer claimants.
Finders keepers.
Possession is nine points of the law. So there you have it.
Thanks for the reminder, there was so much at that meeting that pissed me off that I forgot about this bit of theft.
Did any of you stop to think about the instances where developers submit plans and then stiff the city on employee staff time when they decide not to move forward? Think about that.
This comment is so stupid that only a government functionary could have written it.
That has NOTHING to do with reimbursing the guy whose money it really is. Pathetic.
How can they still the city on staff time when it’s pay upfront?
Maybe if depositor of the bond was better at managing their project they could have requested the money back already instead of letting it sit
So if a guy drops money through a hole in his pocket and tender Elijah Manassero scoops it up, the delicate sprout deserves to keep it?
Comment from City Hall.
cry more
Work more.
Maybe if the receiver of the bond was better at managing the project they could have returned the money back instead of keeping it.
There’s like 2095 bonds or something like that. Seems like a lot of bonds to just park in an account.
Only if you don’t plan on giving any of it back.