Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Caller urges council to heed legal notice rules on revenue bonds, cites HUD reprimand
Summary
A caller at the council meeting asserted that revenue bonds require public notice and a referendum, said refunding bonds need council authorization, and alleged the city's housing department received a HUD reprimand for oversight problems.
During public comment, Malik Shelton addressed municipal finance and oversight, telling the council that revenue bonds require public notice of intent and a referendum and that refunding bonds need a council authorization resolution.
"Revenue bonds do require notice of intent to be put in the newspaper of general circulation, as well as write the referendum for the residents," said Malik Shelton. He also said refunding bonds require council authorization and asserted that the city’s HRD had been reprimanded by HUD for incompetence and insufficient oversight; he said he stood by his claims and that laws back them up.
Shelton named a chief deputy CFO (recorded in the comment as John Neglect) in criticizing city financial practices but did not produce documents at the meeting. Council staff did not provide an on-the-record legal response during the session. The claims involve statutory questions about bond notices and the role of council authorization; verification with city finance staff and the relevant statutes or bond documents would be required to confirm the caller’s accuracy.
