[manchambo]

Originally Posted by kcgreene

That's not how book-keeping is done on PPP capital projects. When bond referendums are involved stuff doesn't work like that.

Spoiler!

Anyone with any knowledge of how municipal capital bonds and public-private partnerships work knows that those funds are separate from everything else for legal and ethical purposes, and that money isn't put into said accounts regarding capital improvements until after approval of the project and that money used towards or as escrow towards capital improvement projects/bonds/ etc for accountability and transparency purposes. Even the most basic knowledge of bookkeeping tells you that you're wrong, and that if they didn't have that basic knowledge of bookkeeping; there were even larger issues that probably require criminal charges at that point since public bonds were involved and there is potentially misrepresentation to vested interests. Mixing accounts often ends up leading to lawsuits or criminal charges because things are misrepresented or you are committing fraud in essence by claiming you have more money set aside after expenses than you actually do.

Just... No... in no world does the stadium story make sense unless Bowlen is committing fraud by misrepresenting accounts.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, in the 90s, laws were different than they are now, but even if that wasn't standard practice in a scenario like that then, its still highly unethical and misrepresenting in the best case scenario as you described to dip from certain accounts to move money into others when referendums are at play. (I ended up putting the bit of a explanation in spoilers to take up less room... not worth it considering he seems to lack critical thinking skills)

Let’s try to figure out what you’re on about. The deal required the Broncos to contribute 25%, a total of around 100 million.

Is it your claim that it would be “fraudulent” for them to set aside money for that contribution? Let’s say they set aside fifteen million a year for the three years leading up to the bond initiative.

How would that be fraud?