County Budget Based on Fiscal Chicanery
- Details
- Hits: 4563
For most of us conversations about the county budget are about as interesting as watching paint dry. The $1.78 billion budget passed last month by the Board of Legislators demands attention if only because we are among the county taxpayers left picking up the tab when revenues fall short of expectations, as they almost certainly will this year. A look at this budget will tell you that the money is not there to begin with. That’s a very big problem because we can't run a deficit like the federal government.
The board, led by Ken Jenkins (D Yonkers), produced this budget to one up County Executive Rob Astorino. After 12 years of skyrocketing taxes, the board, with most of the same players in place, would have you believe they underwent a collective conversion on the road to Damascus and have emerged as fiscal conservatives.
Astorino was elected a year ago with a mandate to cut the budget, and the final budget adopted by the board calls for a more than 2% tax cut. So even if the board’s motives were suspect, where’s the problem?
The problem is this: the 2011 budget adopted by our county legislators is very different from the one that Astorino proposed. He spent the better part of his first year in office peeling back layer after layer of Spano-era bureaucratic excess in an effort to determine essential programs and jettison the rest.
The board’s budget somehow performs the feat of adding back the programs Astorino cut from the budget, yet still promises a 2+% cut in taxes. How is that possible? By creating phony revenues and borrowing from the reserves — that’s how.
Many examples of this practice can be found in the 2011 county budget, but I've limited myself to three of the most egregious.
1. To cut $10 million from the budget, the board factored in NO raises for county employees in 2009, 2010, or 2011, even though six of the eight county unions are working with expired contracts and five of those six are subject to binding arbitration. When has an arbitrator ever awarded a union no raise over several years, let alone five unions? It won't happen — and the board knows this — yet they voted for it anyway. I call that dishonest.
2. The board predicted that revenue to the Labs & Research Department would increase by $1.5 million because of “enhancements” to the department’s business plan. The “business plan” hasn’t been written yet, let alone enhanced, and the board used the same story last year when it claimed the department would generate an additional $2.7 million in revenue. That money never materialized. What are the odds this year’s revenue will?
3. Astorino prudently canceled the county’s contract with the state to administer Section 8. It simply cost more to administer than we were reimbursed, leaving us short about $500,000 a year. In addition the county is responsible for the non-reimbursable retirement benefits, such as lifetime health care, for the county workers assigned to the program. Canceling the contract meant 38 layoffs. The board restored all 38 positions — with no contract. Go figure.
There are many other dubious calculations in the board’s budget but these alone should give you a sense of the integrity of the document.
In all fairness I contacted our legislator Judy Myers about the revenue projections in the budget. She got right back to me and pointed out a number of things in Rye and the surrounding communities funded by the money they put back in, which would be fine I suppose in a better economy. Myers, however, was unable to provide me with any facts to support her assurance that the revenue projections relied on real money.
This isn't a Democrat/Republican thing. Astorino called out the democratic majority on the board and he's right - they were responsible. However, fiscal chicanery favors no party as the newly elected Republican county executive in Nassau tried the same stunt — cutting taxes without cutting spending — and it blew up in his face, leaving Nassau with a bond rating in the cellar. Rockland’s credit rating was recently downgraded as well, primarily because its budget contained similar fantasy land assumptions. Clearly, as arcane as these details may seem, shoddy budgets have serious consequences long term.
When I say it’s not just an inter-party conflict, that’s not to say Ken Jenkins and his Democratic majority don't take particular delight in sticking it to the golden boy of the GOP, only that it’s clear from our 2010 State legislative session that even one-party rule doesn't necessarily mean civility, let alone accord, among politicians.
No, the Board of Legislators did this not because they're Democrats, but because they're politicians. The entire board is up for reelection this year and they're betting that you'll remember the tax cut and not the inevitable shortfall when the “projected revenues” don't materialize.
Will the elections in Westchester this year follow the statewide ones last year, where, even though there was political upheaval across the country, in New York we returned the same self-serving lifers to office? The outcome of this budget might be a factor — if we're paying attention.
Charmian Neary is a bored housewife and former political operative from Rye New York who is much better at politics than homemaking.
Support the Weinberg Nature Center
- Details
- Hits: 3861
Lena Crandall read the following letter at the Scarsdale Schools Budget Forum on January 19 on behalf of the Friends of the Scarsdale Parks. Dear Members of the Scarsdale Board of Education: The Friends of the Scarsdale Parks is aware of the working relationship between the school district and the Weinberg Nature Center, which is a village-owned park adjacent to Saxon Woods, a Westchester County park. There is great potential for outdoor science programs and sustainability studies throughout this vast public preserve. Please continue to provide both staff time and budget resources for programs at Weinberg. It's an investment that will benefit not only our students, but also the community at large.
The Friends similarly recognize the educational value of the organic gardens at all of our schools and also recommend continued support.
Thank you,
Lena Crandall
Dorothy Kroenlein
Co-Presidents
Why Steroids Are Dangerous
- Details
- Hits: 3912
Here is a monthly conversation starter from the Scarsdale Taskforce on Drugs and Alcohol. Ask Your Kids: Do you know what anabolic-androgenic steroids are and why these drugs are dangerous? Answer: Steroids are used to build muscle but they are illegal when used without a prescription from a doctor. Some teens abuse steroids not knowing that there are very dangerous side-effects such as prematurely stunting growth, accelerated puberty changes and abnormal sexual development. Adolescent girls in particular may suffer from severe acne, excessive body and facial hair, deepened voice, disruption of the menstrual cycle, and permanent infertility.
The Scarsdale Task Force on Drugs and Alcohol is a community action group made up of concerned individuals, representatives of the schools, the Village, local, social and civic organizations and religious institutions. The Task Force educates youth and adults about drugs and alcohol, helps people develop drug-free attitudes and habits, and recommends resources to those whose lives are affected by drugs and alcohol dependency. Learn more at: http://www.scarsdaleschools.org/DATF
A Call for Open Government
- Details
- Hits: 4265
Dear Mayor Stevens: Where is the open government Scarsdalians expect? On Thursday, January 6th, you scheduled a Board meeting for discussion of the SCC. Shouldn't you have expected a large turn-out and therefore have held the meeting in Rutherford Hall?
It took less than 10 minutes for you to figure out that the attendees that evening couldn't legally fit in the Trustees' Board Room and you moved us to the larger hall.
But, more importantly there were no cameras/video recording made and no newspaper reporter taking notes.
As it turned out, the meeting was attended by at least 30 people who had many reasoned and factual points against the SCC financial projections.
In addition to your fiduciary responsibilities you have an obligation to conduct meetings of this importance for all to be able to review the next day.
It is strange that you are proceeding so hastily and semi-privately. Since this SCC issue is of such public importance, it is ironic that this meeting went on without the Village at large being a witness.
We would appreciate if you would reply to our e-mail of last week, asking you to inform us as to what you are planning to do next. If indeed you and the Board do not recuse yourselves completely from this SCC issue, due to personal conflicts of interest, you owe our community another public hearing for the sake of transparent government before you proceed.
The Village taxpayers have already shouldered $12,000 for SCC mailings in addition to $35,000 for last years’ consultants. Before you commit any more tax dollars for the SCC project, the public should be made aware of any additional expenses in a public forum to be held in the next few weeks.
Sincerely yours,
Jeannie and Bernard Mackler
ECC Objects to Greenburgh Tax Hike
- Details
- Hits: 4584
To Supervisor Paul Feiner and the Town Board of Greenburgh; I’m writing this open letter on behalf of the Edgemont Community Council. We wish to express our disappointment at the town board’s recent passing of the 2011 budget. The new budget calls for a 7% increase in overall spending, funded by drawing down on the fund balance, borrowing, and tax increases — 4.5% for unincorporated, which includes an almost incredible 87% increase for the town entire.
Our new governor, Andrew Cuomo, has made it clear that he plans to implement an austerity budget in Albany and is proposing a 2% cap on property taxes. Early indications are that the legislature will support him.
But in the Town of Greenburgh, austerity is a foreign concept:
- The Edgemont Community Council made numerous suggestions for cuts in the budget; almost all were ignored.
- There was no set-aside to pay for damages in the Fortress Bible lawsuit, creating a potential, gigantic hole in the 2011 budget. There was also no set-aside for the cost of revaluation or the millions of dollars needed to remediate the pools at Veteran Park .
- Instead, you voted to draw down fund balance to reduce a substantial double-digit tax hike to 4.5% and thereby cynically postponed making the truly hard decisions about town spending until after this year’s town board election.
- Borrowing will fund payments required by tax certioraris — meaning future taxpayers will have to pay off current operating expenses, a very poor way to manage the budget.
- And the impending 2% cap was ignored.
Both the Edgemont School District and Greenville Fire District have managed to keep tax increases very close to the 2% level in recent years; both districts should be able to manage if the tax cap is passed. Even Westchester County , with strong bipartisan support, not only met the 2% cap, it actually managed to cut property taxes for 2011.
But even though every other taxing district in the state of New York seems to have answered the clarion call this year to reduce spending and keep property tax hikes below 2%, the Town of Greenburgh has not.
Although the town budget has already been passed, the Edgemont Community Council therefore urges the town board to reconsider its spending to meet the 2% tax cap for 2011. Given the state of the economy, it’s the prudent thing to do even if the cap never becomes law. And under no circumstances should the town meet a 2% tax cap by borrowing money to meet operating expenses. That idea was even rejected last month at the county level. That kind of irresponsible financial gimmickry fools nobody.
We note with great dismay that, at a time of financial extremis and when other municipal authorities nationwide are undertaking to rein in spending, when stripped of this year’s one-shot gimmicks, the Town's budget (and tax-burden) continues to grow at an effective rate of over 15%.
This is an extravagance that residents cannot afford. Town officials should be focused instead on reducing spending to manageable and sustainable levels — not on justifying higher taxes while also drawing down on reserve fund balances and pursuing unprecedented borrowing to fund tax certioraris and other known, current expenses.
The need for the Town of Greenburgh to start holding the line on spending has become all the more important given Governor Cuomo's goal of imposing a 2% cap on property tax increases. The Governor's goal is laudable and, whether or not enacted into law, the Town should undertake to live within its means — and the means of its residents.
Geoff Loftus
Member of the Board of Directors
Edgemont Community Council
