Monday, June 27, 2011

PROFIT?

GE&P read the P&C article this morning about Cypress Gardens with great interest and, we must confess, greater confusion. The article provided many valuable facts and figures but the conclusions drawn from this information were right out of the Twilight Zone.

GE&P supports Cypress Gardens as the golden asset to the county that it is. Our only argument is with the manipulation of the facts as presented in this article.

EXAMPLE:

"The county paid off its ($3.5 million) debt from a surplus fund."

FACT:

BC government illegally took this money from the fund balance of the BCW&SA. This administration, using accounting slight of hand, maneuvered these funds, ultimately, into BC's general fund.

EXAMPLE:

"By the numbers, $61,352 estimated profit."

FACT:

The taxpayers of BC are providing $647,000 a year in property taxes to Cypress Gardens. If we are providing subsidies to the expense column, how can these people claim that a positive bottom line is "profit"?

It's time for the misinformation to stop.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Agree the devil is in the details. If this concept reveals a profit then the financial support to the Gardens under the previous administration should have been reported annually as a "profit".

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, Mr. Davis has everyone HYPNOTIZED.

Anonymous said...

Seriously.... Mr. Davis doesn't do anything in the dark.... everything requires Committee work, votes... who are YOU trying to hypnotize,and what is your obsession with hating Mr. Davis?

Anonymous said...

You seem to be obsessed in defending Mr. Davis. In the history of Berkeley County, I don't think you will find as many tie votes broken by the Supervisor. The administration can build buildings to house state employees, but can not buy needed and necessary patrol cars for the Sheriff's office. You must replace a percentage of police vehicles every year. IMO, failing to have an influx of new vehicles into a police vehicle fleet is just plain irresponsible management.

Extending replacement of patrol vehicles increases safety related issues; loss of productivity; increase fuel use; officer morale; increased cost per mile for maintenance; new vehicles cost around 2 cents per mile for maintenance, whereas vehicles with 100,000 approach 6 cents per mile and increase so that around 175,000 miles we are looking at 7 cents per mile. One also should be aware that in police work vehicle on scene idling time adds significant wear to the engine that is not reflected by the odometer reading. This means that a vehicle with 100,000 miles on the odometer could have maintenance cost that would be associated with a vehicle having 150-175,000 miles. Oh! I should not know this because I've been HYPNOTIZED.