Monday, March 10, 2008

A Solid Financial Path

Tucson, Arizona. TREO's annual report is available at its web site. The reader can verify the italics from the report here (see page six).

Revenue and expenditures for FY 07 were $4.6 million and $4.2 million, respectively, increasing net assets 51% from the prior year. This was the result of realizing 98% of budgeted revenues and aggressively managing expenses at 82% of budget projections.

City Subsidy: $1.978M
County Subsidy: $1.15M
Corporate Donations (TEP, Raytheon, Click, etc.): $598,000
Company Services: $506,000
Strategic Planning (?): $276,000
Ticket Sales for Luncheons, Dinners: $92,000

The city subsidy included $100,000 for SAIAT and $30,000 for Goodwill Industries. TREO kept every penny of both. The county subsidy included $142,500 for SAIAT. TREO kept $32,500 for itself.

Of the $400,000 positive cash flow reported, $162,500 came from withholding funds allotted for other agencies. Over forty percent of TREO's gain for FY 2007 resulted from taking funds from other organizations. From the report: This was the result of realizing 98% of budgeted revenues and aggressively managing expenses at 82% of budget projections. How to cut a budget 18%: Keep the money you were budgeted to pay to others.

Snell's letter documenting the seizing of SAIAT's funding.

They call it aggressively managing expenses. I call it stealing.

TREO's report asserts: In the second year of operation, TREO’s financial performance continues to be exceptional.

Overall, TREO is on a solid financial path.



Anonymous Anonymous said...

To see it in black and white.

They made $400,000 last year, $162,500 by keeping money they were given to provide to others.

Can someone explain to me why it was TREO that produced those jobs? Didn't the companies that hired the people produce the jobs?

How does TREO make capital investments? Are far as I can tell, they are really good at spending public money on furniture and trips. They have awesome furniture.

3/10/2008 11:20 AM  
Blogger Cigar Man said...

Anon, the numbers they take credit for are just what happens in town. If a company hires someone, expands into new space, builds a building, they count those numbers.

That's why x4mr's post about the certification program is so hilarious. They do take credit for stuff they had absolutely nothing to do with. If x4mr starts his dry cleaning business, TREO will take credit for both the jobs and the capital investment.

You're right about the furniture. Someone remarked about the cubicles, too. They have dozens of empty cubicles. If x4mr charged into the place, it would be very anti-climactic.

He wouldn't be able to find anyone.

3/10/2008 3:10 PM  
Blogger Dustin said...

"He wouldn't be able to find anyone"

yeah, cuz they'd be in barbados checking out econ development in the caribbean.

3/10/2008 3:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The place doesn't exactly project a dynamic image. Empty space, partitions, cubicles, lots of solitude.

Other than Snell, the place is staffed largely by the hacks who staffed OED, GTEC, and the County's Economic Development Dept. for the last 30 years.

I'd like to know why Moulton went back to work for the County.

The Picor's and Bourn Partners-type companies of Tucson could rightly claim credit for recruiting the businesses that TREO takes credit for recruiting--because it is IN THEIR ECONOMIC INTEREST TO FILL THEIR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, WAREHOUSES AND FACTORIES WITH TENANTS! The reason they don't (claim credit and point out that the TREO emperor is not wearing clothes) is that they all feel obligated by their membership in the "club" to go along with the notion that TREO is doing well. So they publicly support it, and don't question TREO's stats. They want to support Regional Transportation (RTA), and Regional Economic Development, so that the next step can be Regional Water, and then Regional Government, so that the power of the liberal Tucson City Council will be blunted once and for all.

3/10/2008 6:09 PM  
Blogger The Associate said...

TREO should give the 162,500 back.

3/10/2008 7:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TREO Naked and Exposed.

Only not the fun kind.

3/10/2008 7:54 PM  
Blogger Cigar Man said...

To the anon that posted at 6:09:


3/10/2008 8:33 PM  
Blogger Robish said...

I wonder how the city council and board of supervisors would like it if all the outside agencies they fund started proudly reporting huge surpluses. Never mind the damning part about de-funding effective agencies in order to achieve those surpluses. The city is facing a $12 million operating deficit, and an agency that it gives $2 million a year to is basically just squirreling away what it can, in the name of moving down a "solid financial path". 99.9% of the non-profits that the city funds do not have the luxury of creating cash reserves.

If TREO spent every nickel of the $162K they withheld from other agencies, on actual economic development activities, that would be defensible on some level. Building a nest egg is not.

The associate is right. They should give it back to the city and county, in the proportions that the two governments fund it.

3/10/2008 10:16 PM  
Blogger The Associate said...

It looks like TREO’s blueprint, is a master plan to pad their bank account. Sort of a reverse Robin Hood take from the poor and keep for yourself, really good business ethics.

3/10/2008 10:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight. Are you guys saying that TREO was given all this money to fund various agencies, and they kept some of it for themselves?!!!

Isn't that illegal? Why didn't the Pima supervisors demand the return of the money? Snell's letter to Huckelberry very clearly says "from $242,500 to $110,000."

TREO kept that money?!

Those are MY TAX DOLLARS!!

3/11/2008 1:45 PM  
Blogger x4mr said...


Dishonest - Yes.
Dishonorable - Yes.
Disgusting - Yes.
Illegal - No.

The city contract only protected Jobpath. They threw the other agencies under the bus. The county demanded a letter if TREO took more than 5% of someone else's funding, resulting in the letter you read.

What might be quite illegal was entering into a contract with SAIAT board members for services identical to those in SAIAT's contract and failing to disclose it. Also, approving if not instructing those exact board members to fire the SAIAT Executive Director and take his place is almost certainly criminal.

The board members missed, so I hit back and kicked them off the board. The whole bloody fiasco is in the "Guardian Angel" chapter of Something Else.

The real time blog entries as the mess occurred are in Feb/Mar 2007 archives to the right.

3/11/2008 3:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since TREO likes to take credit for everything. Are they going to show up and take credit for the loss of 140 jobs in Tucson with the closure of Hart and Cooley Inc.?

3/14/2008 12:43 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home