Courtesy of Merriam Webster:
pre·var·i·cate/prɪˈverəˌkeɪt/verb
pre·var·i·cates; pre·var·i·cat·ed; pre·var·i·cat·ing
[no obj] formal: to avoid telling the truth by not directly answering a question
▪ Government officials prevaricated about the real costs of the project.
The following email was sent by this publication to Franklin Mayor Tom Taylor on Thursday, October 13, 2011. We also emailed a copy of this email to Franklin City Clerk, Sandi Wesolowski.
Mr. Mayor:
In light of your October 5, 2011, letter to County Executive Chris Able, requesting he veto a Resolution providing for an advisory referendum on the plan by MMSD to pay approximately $41 million to the City of Franklin for the costs related to building the Ryan Creek Interceptor project, I want to remind you of your statements in a September 26, 2010, JSOnline story entitled "Franklin: The final frontier."
Following is an excerpt from "Franklin: The final frontier," by Don Behm:
... Development would follow the pipes, Mayor Tom Taylor said.
The city is seeking nearly $31 million in low-interest Clean Water Fund loans through the state Department of Natural Resources so that it can build a large sewer across the frontier.
Taylor wants to complete it by 2014 - several years ahead of MMSD's projected timetable of 2018-'19 - to launch what he describes as an overdue period of growth for the city's southwest quarter.
Opening much of the land to a building boom would add more than $1.2 billion to the city's property tax base by 2025, Taylor forecast with confidence. The added businesses would take some of the local tax burden off the shoulders of homeowners, he said. ...
My question to you is; if Mr. Abele vetoes the Resolution as you've requested, how will this affect the $1.2 billion increase to the city's property tax base by 2025?
Surely the City has done its due diligence to confirm that this project will indeed truly add more than $1.2 billion to the city's property tax base by 2025.
At your earliest convenience will you please provide me with a copy of this due diligence document?
Thank you for your cooperation.
Fred V. Keller, Co-Editor & Publisher
THE FRANKLIN INDEPENDENT JOURNAL
In a follow-up phone call to the City Clerk we were told that no such due diligence document exists and therefore, by law the City cannot create such a document to fulfill our open records request; and that the mayor’s claim of a “$1.2 billion increase to the city's property tax base by 2025” was based solely on information and conclusions drawn from three documents; the Ticknor Report, the Franklin First Report and the City of Franklin’s Comprehensive Master Plan.
… Pants on fire?!
To verify the mayor's claim, we conducted a search of the City’s website for the Ticknor, and the Franklin First Reports and turned up nothing, which prompted us to send an email to Mark Luberda, City of Franklin Director of Administration on Monday, October 31, 2011, the contents of which follows:
Mark:
Are the following reports on-line on the City’s website?
1. Ticknor Report
2. Franklin First Report
3. City of Franklin’s Comprehensive Master Plan
If they are, I’m having difficulty finding them. Will you please provide me with the links to each of these documents?
Thank you,
Fred Keller
Follows is Mr. Luberda’s October 31, 2011 reply:
Fred,
I don’t believe that items #1 or #2 are on the website. The Comprehensive Master Plan can be found by clicking on “Resources/Documents” from the main navigation bar across the top. It then appears as an option as the fifth option down in the center column.
Regards,
Mark Luberda
It would appear clear to any reasonable person that Franklin tax payers have been sold a $41 million pig in a poke by the mayor and the Franklin Common Council, and by vetoing the possibility for a County referendum on this matter; Mayor Taylor and County Executive Chris Able are complicit in silencing the voice of the people on the matter.
To comment privately on this article or any other aspect of this publication CLICK HERE