William G. Faust Jr. is a resident of Dover.
At the March 9 Dover City Council meeting, there was an annual report given by members of the Downtown Dover Partnership. The first person to speak was executive director Diane Laird, who gave an update on the partnership. Then, board president Todd Stonesifer indicated that the Downtown Dover Partnership’s funding model includes a mix of grant applications and dollars appropriated from the state bond bill, from which the organization has already received more than $30 million.
With the significant amount of public money involved with this organization, where is the oversight? Who is policing all the funds and donations that are going into the partnership’s hands? One of the City Council members at this meeting asked a question about the partnership being audited, and Ms. Laird stated that there will be an audit this year but by a private company of its choice.
As a taxpayer, I have concerns about this and believe that the state auditor should conduct the audit, to be fair. How do we know if the person who is going to perform the audit for the Downtown Dover Partnership is not a personal friend of the executive director’s or the board members’? In today’s world, I think an enhanced checkup, which tests whether recipients are following state and federal award rules and helps flag any misuse of funds, is important.
Single audits, along with the state and federal compliance supplements, are built to give state and federal agencies, as well as watchdogs, tools to demand fixes and follow up on weaknesses that might lead to improper payments, etc. Recently, we have seen some nonprofits in the city come under heavy scrutiny because of the mismanagement of funds they received from various grants.
I hope that this will not be the case with the Downtown Dover Partnership and that it will provide an audit from the state auditor for the public to review.
Further, I heard questions asked about public safety and crime in the downtown area. As I have written in previously published pieces, the partnership will not succeed if the area is not cleaned up. I can’t see people moving into the new apartment building or parking in the new garage if the same status quo remains.
I ask: Who in their right mind would want to move into a crime-infested area, especially with children? It is unsafe! I heard board president Todd Stonesifer state at this meeting that he believes crime will be reduced once new people move in the area, for they will be the eyes in reporting crime to the police.
I find his statement foolish and hope that the public does not believe in his fantasy world. I have heard on many occasions at City Council meetings that citizens observing crime and illegal activities are afraid to report it to the police.
I served 20 years in the Delaware Department of Correction. Hearing from president Todd Stonesifer that more eyes downtown will improve safety is the biggest joke/lie I have ever heard in my life. If you believe this as a fact, I have a slightly used bridge that joins Delaware and New Jersey for sale.
It was also mentioned that they installed art that will deter individuals from congregating on the steps of a building. This just means that the drug dealers and prostitutes will conduct business in front of the art.
During their report, the group also asked for an increase in funding from the city in the next budget. In the last budget, the Downtown Dover Partnership received $150,000 from the city, and it only wants a mere increase of $25,000. It is only requesting $175,000 in the next budget. I know where the city can trim $175,000 from the budget without much issue or trouble. With state and federal funding uncertainty, we have no extra funds to throw away.
This presentation reminded me of a crooked salesman, working on a used-car lot. However, after much pondering on the report, it also reminds me of “The PTL Club,” run by Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, who appeared on TV, crying and praying for donations to help them do the Lord’s work. We all know how their scam show ended.
The Downtown Dover Partnership is all smoke and mirrors. I feel that the only individuals who are going to make out on the downtown improvements are the individuals running the partnership.
The city takes all the risks, and the partnership group has nothing to lose. If and when this endeavor fails, the partnership can walk away and has lost nothing. Sometimes, due to cancer, you need to remove a body part to save a person. I think the city should amputate the Downtown Dover Partnership from its coffers.
I submit this as a concerned citizen.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
