The Gadfly is a series of letters offering commentary on local issues and published in the Warrensburg Gazette.

Dear Editor

I find the discussion on Warrensburg's capital financing problem interesting, if a bit confusing, especially when they're talking about a 'lease-purchase' arrangement for improvements. I thought a 'lease-purchase' arrangement was something you use if you want to buy something but can't get credit; the seller retains title to the property.

What I don't understand is how this applies to something the City already owns. What the City apparently wants to do is borrow money against future revenues from the capital improvements sales tax, but wants to call the loan something else so they won't have to issue revenue anticipation bonds. They want to put up existing City property, the old MGE building, as collateral for the loan.

The capital improvement sales tax was sold as a 'pay-as-you-go' method of meeting infrastructure needs; if business is booming they can afford to do more, but a Y2K hiccup could reduce sales tax collections. That's why under 'lease-purchase' the City is gambling its financial future on continued growth of sales tax revenue. According to the papers, the City already has financial problems created by unrealistic forecasts of Taj Mahal (Community Center) operating expenses and income. Does it really make sense to put Warrensburg's finances at further risk with a so-called 'lease-purchase' arrangement that is really financial hocus-pocus designed to avoid voter approval for new debt?

Aunt Ida says it may be legal, but it sounds like a scam to her - maybe the City should go to one of those financial counselors to learn how to live within its income

See you at the County Fair.