 |
| DPW Director Jeremiah Shirk |
"As part of the deal, the City will have to pay for extra wear and tear to the vehicles, for fuel over a certain cost and for the infrastructure to have charging stations in-tact," Chapman explained. "At the end of the 7-year deal, the cars will go back to Vision Fleet."
Not exactly, Sandra. You should have read the lease before you did your story. Article 11 of the contract clearly states the city will own the title to the vehicles at the end of the lease's term, which reads: "Upon fulfillment of the City's obligations . . . title to the Rental Property shall vest in the City upon the payment to Vision by wire transfer in immediately available funds . . . the applicable purchase price of one dollar ($1.00) per component." City council members correctly point out the Ballard administration broke state law by failing to put the vehicle lease agreement out to bid, which is actually a rent-to-own agreement. They can call it a service agreement all they want, but if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
10 comments:
There is nothing economical or "green" about these vehicles. The entire program is a sham to steal tax payer funds.
It's a rent to own contract. Do you think this guy actually believes taxpayers save money? Could he possibly be that bad at basic math?
The $1 is called a bargain purchase option. Which is a fairly common term in capital LEASES, when the Lessee transfers title to the Lessor. In the US if a lease has this term, then it must be treated as a capital LEASE. The standards asset that anyone in their right minds would take the bargain purchase option. Of course the standards weren't written with Indianapolis politicians and local leeches in mind...
If this was a private sector company (not tax exempt) lessee (or user under a service agreement) you can be assured under the Indiana Code this transaction is a use of TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY and subject to the Indiana Retail Sales Tax.
If this were what this City moron says it is every John Q. Public would sign a service agreement (for use) and not a lease agreement.We all know the INDOR would state this is subject to Indiana Sales Tax despite the Lipstick title placed on the top of the agreement.
Also looks smells and taste like even a Capital Lease and not a Operating Lease. Wonder how it is being treated in City Financial Statements.
Advance Indiana: Since Ballard broke State Law and bypassed the bidding requirement, what is the remedy? Can he be held personally liable for the illegal contract? Is it a criminal matter? How can taxpayers recover their loss?
Ballard will not take any blame or responsibility for this, this circus clown, Jeremiah Shirk, will be blamed for any wrongdoing, and then later (quietly) will be rewarded with another government job.
Breads and circuses.
This guy is the DPW chief of staff? Looking at his LinkedIn profile I don't see any qualifications that suggest a background in engineering, procurement, leading a large staff, or anything related to running a city's infrastructure.
Regardless, Shirk is probably just a puppet in this matter. He seemed pretty light hearted while being grilled in committee last week. Empty Suit Ballard and his team of spineless overpriced attorneys are the ones who need to be publically grilled.
Have you are anyone done work on compiling a comprehensive list of debts of the city and are there multiple years of this data available for me to to trend analysis? Would like something I could enumerate direct debt. Debts like this lease where a bargain purchase option exists and then guaranteed or tax back stopped debts?
here's a tip...look into shirk's tenure with DPW and when he actually went on the city payroll. He was "loaned out" in his current chief of staff role for quite some time on American Structurepoint's dime.
That's nothing new. DPW, like INDOT, is run by the engineering firms. The people who work at those agencies are their puppets. The revolving door between these agencies and the engineering firms should make that abundantly clear. Prosecutors don't bother themselves with such matters. This is an accepted business practice in Indiana. We can talk about it until we're blue in the face. It isn't going to make any difference. Complain too hard about it, and they will take steps to shut you up permanently.
Post a Comment