It seems that so-called stimulus package funding is being spread around so widely that some of its beneficiaries can't figure out how to spend it as intended.
When it became clear to a few small cities in California's Los Angeles County that they didn't have appropriate transportation projects for their promised stimulus funding, they decided to sell the rights to that funding to other nearby locales at a discount. The selling city's resulting cash would then go into its unrestricted general fund and could be spent on anything the city wished.
Apparently these transactions aren't that unusual in the topsy-turvy world of California state and municipal finance. But it was a, uh, bridge too far for LA County's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). After approving a few stimulus-related swaps (noted in stories here and here), the MTA reversed course and putting the kibosh on those and prohibiting any future deals (noted in stories here, here, and here).
Apparently it hasn't occurred to anyone, including the local media, or the New York Times's Jennifer Steinhauer, that if these municipalities really don't need and can't use the money, US taxpayers ought to be first in line to get it back.
Here's a portion of the coverage from the Whittier Daily News:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials on Tuesday canceled deals that several area cities were poised to make to sell their shares of federal stimulus funds to the highest bidder.
MTA board members allocated a minimum of $500,000 in stimulus funds to every city in Los Angeles County, but had never intended to let cities sell their shares to other cities, board member Richard Katz said.
"That was a misunderstanding on somebody's part," Katz said. "It is our intention that all of the stimulus money be for transportation purposes and transportation only."
In a statement, MTA CEO Roger Snoble said: "Metro is trying to allow some flexibility to the cities, but there is no provision to allow stimulus money to be swapped with general fund money. This is simply not the intent of the Metro board. We will reject anything that is inconsistent with the board's intent."
The MTA plans to allocate $215 million in federal stimulus funds to local cities - a number that could rise to $315 million, pending action in the state Legislature.
Board members acknowledged they authorized cities to swap stimulus funds, dollar for dollar, with other cities in exchange for Measure R funds - the county half-cent sales tax hike approved by voters in November to fund transportation projects.
..... "The cities felt the latitude to do this, and Metro frankly was allowing it within the last week," MTA board member John Fasana said. "But based on the concerns that have been expressed, they decided it might be safer to go back to a strict interpretation. They didn't want some investigation to put any of the money at risk."
..... The cities involved in such deals must now come up with shovel-ready projects or swap their stimulus funds for Measure R funds. Sierra Madre officials already have done so, tentatively agreeing to swap their $500,000 share with La Canada Flintridge for an equal $500,000 in Measure R funding.
"Measure R funding" relates to amounts raised in a 0.5% sales tax increase passed last November. Apparently that money is not as restrictive in nature as the money coming from the stimulus package.
This is an early piece of evidence that stimulus money is being passed around like candy with little if any idea of whether it will, or even can, be appropriately spent. It's likely not the last.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
the poll
March 11, 2009 - 23:54 ET by Wesenis still hot at pmsnbc.com.
http://www.msnbc.msn...
OMG! Is this outrage
March 12, 2009 - 00:11 ET by bigtimerOMG!
Is this outrage going to get any national msm attention from anybody, anywhere!?!
I know, I know...when pigs fly!
TEA PARTY TIME!!!!!!!
You can't seriously expect
March 12, 2009 - 00:35 ET by NL207You can't seriously expect the statists in the MSM to get upset about what the statists in the government are doing, can you?
Howdy NL.. ...Heck
March 12, 2009 - 00:50 ET by bigtimerHowdy NL..
...Heck no...
...Like I said...when pigs fly.
Good job Tom. As a Whittier
March 12, 2009 - 00:24 ET by mastersofdeceitGood job Tom. As a Whittier resident I have WDN set as my home page and read this last night. I was actually thinking of sending it to one of you guys.
For me the bias angle is this: Remember when Bobby Jindal was mocked for possibly not taking the stimulus money? Now let's play What If A Republican or Jindal Had Done It? Taken the money then sold it, you think it wouldn't be news?
Keep in mind the above cities are mostly democrat run.
this is the tipping point
March 12, 2009 - 00:27 ET by candanceOur government has made a fundamental change. Instead of us paying them for services, they believe our money belongs to them even if they have to invent ways to spend it.
American workers will have to earn a billion dollars an hour just to pay off the debt now - on top of buying food and clothing for themselves.
This will not last. Atlas is about to walk away.
Taxpayers get it
March 12, 2009 - 04:28 ET by motherbeltTaxpayers get it back?
<Chris Matthews imitation> HAH!
The rationale is that it's money that technically hasn't been taken from them in the form of future taxes anyway, and it's the government's now, so they can do what they want with it. And the taxpayers can go suck an egg.
They all have the same attitude: our President considers the stock market nothing more than a tracking poll (he can't worry about the day-to-day fluctuations), not realizing that with every fall, real people are losing real money from their nesteggs and retirement accounts.
It's all just a big game to them, like Monopoly, with fake money.
And as you know, it's not even likely the last stimulus bill ! Her Speakerness is already thinking about a second one (BTW Rush predicted this to happen by summer, weeks ago!)
<sound of duct tape ripping off roll>
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
To paraphrase a commercial:
March 12, 2009 - 06:46 ET by ThisnThatTo paraphrase a popular TV commercial I see all the time: It's my money, and I want it [returned] now!
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Of course they don't see this as a problem...
March 12, 2009 - 05:43 ET by JohnMcGrew...and this will certainly be over the heads of at least 50% of the electorate that the statists rely upon to be re-elected. Even after the inevitable inflation that will be somewhere between that of the Carter era and Zimbabwe, they still won't make the connection. They'll still think they're getting their tax cuts.
Seriously Now
March 12, 2009 - 09:19 ET by slickwillie2001There is a surprising portion of the electorate that sees their refund or underpayment of income tax in April as 'whether their taxes went up or down'. They see an income tax refund as a gift from DC. This is 10-20% of taxpayers, mostly democratics. (No understanding of W-4, someone else does it for them probably.)
And yes, liberals have always thought that all the money belongs to them. What portion of your paycheck you get to keep, you keep purely out of their generosity.
You've all heard the saying something like 'when the majority of the people find that they can vote themselves the benefits of the treasury, democracy will fail'. My corollary is -when the democratic-run education system fails so miserably that the citizens don't understand what is going on, democracy will fail.
But what they will not connect is...
March 12, 2009 - 10:44 ET by JohnMcGrew...that most of the Democrat's tax increase will not be seen on their 1040s or W-4s, but through the inflation that will be the result of the printing of over$3-trillion dollars over the next 18-36 months. In addition to that,there will be the higher prices on everything as a result of the cap-and-trade scam that they're telling their followers will mainly be paid only by coal users. (which is almost everybody)
The Democrats know that simply raising taxes on anyone other than the "evil 5%" is not politically viable. But fortunately, their success at keeping public education mediocre and the universities mostly liberal will guarantee that relatively few will be able to comprehend the back-door tax increases via inflation and corporate pass-throughs.
The electorate is clueless at both ends; they believe they can vote themselves benefits, while at the same time not realizing that it will be themselves that will be paying for them, while not even ever fully receiving them after the bureaucratic "heat loss".
Re Carbon scam
March 12, 2009 - 14:17 ET by slickwillie2001Re Carbon cap and trade, part of the sales pitch is as you said, 'don't worry, it's only about that dirty filthy coal'. The fact that cap and trade will hit gasoline and home heating fuels just as hard is hidden from the public. It's true that a bare majority of voters are AGW believers, but when asked in polls how much additional they would pay to fight AGW, a huge percentage of the 'believers' say 'not one nickel'.
And yet, if they use electricity in America, they will pay!
March 12, 2009 - 15:57 ET by JohnMcGrewThere are no products or services that do not require some degree of energy to produce or deliver. Even if they get most of their electricity from windmills or the sun, they will still be needing products and services that require energy that does not. There will be no escaping it.
Out children litterally will be the first American generation to have a lower standard of living than we do. I just hope they eventually realize why.
Reason 3,938,423 why Obama is an idiot.
March 12, 2009 - 09:21 ET by Dave in TexasEverything about this "targetted" stimulus spending is a joke. I guarantee you that long before the bill was signed, cities were diverting funds from completely funded projects that were eligible for stimulus funds, to underfunded projects that weren't eligible. Then they could claim that they have plenty of "shovel-ready" projects that are being held up for lack of funds.
Great ....
March 12, 2009 - 13:57 ET by Tom Blumer.... point.
Dave in Texas
March 12, 2009 - 16:26 ET by jacktheripperI work for a local Gov. and you hit the nail squarely on the head