Mayor, Boykin Reject 30% Tax Increase to balance budget.

Hits: 0

 


 


WPCNR COMMON COUNCIL CHRONICL EXAMINER. By John F. Bailey. April 15, 2009: The Mayor of White Plains and the Common Council President are agreed that the way out of the city revenue shortfall is not through a massive tax increase. The two disagree on how to make up the deficit.


 



Acting Budget Director, (back to photographer)addressing the Common Council and Budget & Management Advisory Committee Tuesday evening. Cutting,not taxing, was the Common Council mantra.





After a three-hour walk-through of the new budget provided by the Acting Budget Director on the 2009-10 $160.2 Million Proposed City Budget last night at City Hall, Mayor Joseph Delfino, the outgoing Mayor of White Plains, told WPCNR he would not support a 30% Property Tax increase to balance the city’s “fund balance-balanced” budget at current spending and service levels (even though the Mayor has no political stake in the fall election).The Mayor said his administration has created a series of revenue-raising policies, he recommends to the Council to plug the $11 to$12 Million, give-or-take-a-million budget gap.


 


Benjamin Boykin, Jr., the Common Council President, asked the same question by WPCNR, about raising taxes 30%  said “Absolutely not,” saying the answer to avoiding filling the city projected $11.4 Million revenue gap by drawing down fund balance to about $5.5 Million was cutting expenses.


 


Pay Now? Tax Cut as Revenues Improve? 


 


If the $650,000 to $700,000 home in White Plains faced a 30% tax increase it would lift the tax bill in 09-10 beginning in July from $2,724 to $3,700, a $1,000 tax increase. Of course the council could choose to raise half the amount by property tax (increase of 15%) cutting the tax increase on the average $700,000 home to $500, and raise the balance elsewhere.


 


Neither Mr. Boykin nor any other member of the Common Council in attendance at the first of a series of  raised the issue of police and fire unions and the city in binding arbitration, that at WPCNR’S last information on this situation, was that the city was  getting police and fire union approval of an independent arbitratration firm  who had been selected by the city.


 


The head of the city Civil Service Employees Association was observing from the back of the Common Council Chamber.


 


Sheehan Says…Maybe the unions should be Advised…


 


The issue of the union arbitration  was raised twice by Budget and Management Committee member, Timothy Sheehan. Sheehan suggested that the Council might acquaint the unions with the possibilities that a binding arbitration award in the 3 to 4% increase area could raise wages at the expense of union members losing jobs. Sheehan did not say union positions should be cut, instead he pointed out that this was a danger of a binding agreement presenting  to the city and its workers.


 


 Any binding arbitration result is predicted by the Mayor’s office to result in 3% to 4% labor settlements the next two years setting the pattern for the other two unions in the city.  In going over expenses in the budget the Council repeatedly expressed doubt on whether the numbers were realistic, worried over whether the deficit would be greater.


 


WPCNR projected on this week’s White Plains Week television program, which may be viewed on www.whiteplainsweek.com  that  the city can continue funding a 3%-4%  labor settlement across all four unions, continue present level of services, and fund the present budget with a straightforward 30% property tax increase. The tax rate would rise from the Mayor’s budgeted 4.9%  $154.70 per $1,000 to $200 per $1,000 of assessed value that would inject the budget with $13 Million in revenues based on the current city assessment, and protect against any further erosion of city revenues.


 


The city could scale back that tax increase in future years as prosperity and a booming economy returned to the city. Last night, at least two city leaders, Mr. Delfino and Mr. Boykin flat-out rejected the taxing way out of the city revenue shortfall.


 


Rereading the Budget Book in 30 Pages.


 


In the first of a series of weekly meetings, (the next is April 21 at 5 P.M. when Parking, Public Safety and Planning Department expenses will be reviewed),  Council members grasped at budget-cutting moves out of the blue: Councilperson Malmud wanted to know how much was spent by commissioners attending professional meetings. Mr. Boykin demanded of the Acting Budget Director, David Birdsall, “scenarios” of what 5% salary cuts across Commissioner and appointed employees ranks –not union positions– would save.


 


The Council raised questions of what was included in the Acting Budget Director’s projections.  


 


Sales Tax Receipts Soft. Sales Down 25%


 


 The Council and Budget and Management Committee meeting in joint session were told sales tax receipts for the third quarter were up 1.8% for the year (projected by WPCNR as being $34,588,645 through March 31, with three months in the fiscal year to go). Paul Wood, the Executive Officer for the Mayor, said when asked the exact figure, said that was a “verbal” from the state.


 


Tom Roach, the councilman, was a consistent voice for budget cutting, rather than raising another  sales tax increase to help cut the deficit in half (by adding another $5.2 Million inh, according to Birdsall), saying, “I and others believe any tax is inflationary.”


 


Looking at the Record.


 


In 2007-2008, through the first three quarters of the fiscal year,  the city received $33,977,058 in sales tax, without the ¼% increase that went into effect July 1 of 2008. 


 


This means that third quarter city sales tax collections are only project to about $10,225,723,  The city  had $24,362,922 in the till the first half of this fiscal year as of December 31. The current quarter (if up 1.8% year to year) appears to be down about $1 Million from the third quarter of last year, even with the extra ¼%. Overall  that computes to City Sales subject to sales tax, appearing to be down 25% in the third quarter..


 


In the final quarter of Fiscal Year 2007-2008, the city received $11,485,331 in sales tax without the 1/4% increase now in effect, translating roughly to $600 Million in sales. If that number from last year’s fourth quarter is met, the city will collect $46.1 Million in sales tax for the year.


 


If  retail sales stay at the same level as last year’s 4th quarter, $600 Million, the city will collect about $13,500,000 in the final quarter and collect $48,088,645 for the year, clearing the sales tax target of $47.3 Million forecast in the 2008-2009 budget, and clearing the $47.3 Million budgeted in the 2009-2010 budget.


 


But, if sales remain soft..


 


But if the city retail sales stay off 25%, that means only $550,000, 000 in sales level, that computes to a  $12,375,000 sales tax handle, creating a sales tax for the year of approximately $46,963,645 – slightly less than the $47.3 Million forecast for this year.  There is an outside chance that the $47.3 Million level might not be met.


 


When the sales tax increase of 1.8% was told the Council, Councilman Glen Hockley took the opportunity to point out the Council failure to request an additional 1/4% last spring when they had the chance. “What it is about is peoples’ jobs and peoples’ services.”


 


How real are the projections?


 


The question was raised by Benjamin Boykin about how real projections were, considering the loss of Fortunoff, Circuit City and Filene’s. Paul Wood, the city Executive Officer, offered the information that Best Buy and Raymore & Flanagan, he had been told, were considering leases in the City Center.


 



Councilpersons Rita Malmud,left,and Benjamin Boykin.


 


Rita  Malmud expressed concern about the reserving a percentage of department expenses  not to be spent until later in the year, the budget-labeled “reserve of 5%(about $7.5 Million) of budgeted departmental expenditures providing  a buffer for fund balance.” Malmud said she wanted much more detail by department on what expenses made up this 5%. Birdsall said he would provide that. Mr. Boykin suggested why not cut the departments by that amount?


 



 


At this point, Commissioner of Planning Susan Habel (above)  took the podium from Birdsall and explained that the City Charter provides the basis for executing just this kind of strategy. The council requested a copy of the section of the Charter.


 


Malmud said previously in this decade the city has been very conservative in its budgeting, and implied that holding departments back from spending money budgeted was something  “We’ve never done before.”


 


Mayor Invites Council to Make the Cuts


 


The Mayor, who spent parts of the meeting walking about the council chambers, appearing to stretch his legs, as Birdsall painstakingly weaved through the budget,  told Mrs. Malmud,


 


 “Then don’t do it.  Don’t do it that way.”


 


Boykin, flailing his arms, said raising his voice, “Why not do it  (cut the departments) upfront?”


 


Pat Austin, a member of the Budget & Management Committee said “expenses must be tight.”


 



 


Tom Roach mentioned he has been getting e-mails saying ‘the (tax) increase must be cut…” and later, “there must be cuts in the long term, to put the city in a manageable budget position in future years.”


 


Mr. Boykin, in being greeted with slide after slide giving general information on how off the revenues were, asked rhetorically, “Are we comfortable with it?”


 


Rita Malmud wanted more detail from Mr. Birdsall because she wanted some assurance that the revenues were “not just wishful thinking.”


 


 


Birdsall said the city, in creating the budget had made “ (revenue and expense) trade-offs based on all potential sources of what’s out there.”


 


Salaries should be looked at


 


Austin, the committee member, said salaries constitute 70%of  the budget, and asked Mr. Birdsall to “give us scenarios (on job cuts).”


 


Mr. Roach raised the issue of whether possible arbitrated  union salary increases for unions were included in the budget. Birdsall did not specifically say they were or were not, and could not say whether the separate “Reserve for Financing line” budgeted at $6.1 Million for 2009-2010 would cover the full amount of salary increases expected to be paid. He again said he would provide more detail.


 


Tax Certs– more to come? No Info.


 


Mr. Boykin raised the question if the city knew how many more tax certioraris were in the pipeline (and presumably, the effect those certs would have on assessment). Birdsall did not have that number, but promised to get it for a future meeting.


 


Revenue Revivals. Cut Targets.


 


On the ways the Mayor’s Office said were strategies to raise money to avoid fund balance depletion, again Birdsall did not have the numbers on what sale of firehouses 4 and 5 would bring, but did provide sales figures for the price of new taxi medallions( they plan to sell 30 mediallions at $50,000 apiece, non-transferable, Paul Wood said) and towing medallions ($15,000). Mr. Wood said medallions were being transferred on the open market for prices from $75,000 to $90,000.


 


 Birdsall and Mr. Wood said revenue projections, especially for leasing of city municipal garages would be provided in more detail at a future meeting. Mr. Boykin referred to an April 9 Wall Street Journal article reporting how meter fees had gone up in Chicago after meters had been transferred to a private company. The Mayor, said, “well they simply made a mistake.”


 


Ms. Malmud and Councilman Dennis Power each expressed interest in the $142,000 in direct costs the city is still providing the White Plains Performing Arts Center in the2009-10 budget. Mr. Wood said he would get details.


 


Mr. Boykin said he was looking forward to asking “Moroni, (Al, Parking Department Commissioner) why he hired more people.”


 


Mr. Roach, who discussed the need for cost-cutting cordially with the Mayor, said what was needed was expense “triage,” that the city had to “budget like a real family has to.”


 


Jim Benerofe, covering for suburbanstreet.com and Don Hughes both recalled that this was the first time in years that the council had raised so many pointed questions during the first presentation of the city budget.


 


Despite its duration, three hours, the meeting was characterized by the following omissions:


 



  1. There were no projections included of what different arbitrated settlements with unions might mean to the city salaries going out through 2010-2011, 2011-2012,  and the present budget ability to cover those settlements into the future. (These projections were not asked for, either.)

 



  1. There was no specific detail on what real persons had lost their jobs through cuts made to date by the city and specific dollar savings. This has been asked for repeatedly by the media and council members, but was not provided last night.

 



  1. No councilperson voluntarily suggested cutting their $36,471salaries which would save the city $218,826 in wages.

 



  1. There were no tax increase projections made to show how higherproperty tax increases than 4.9% with varying interplay of revenues might solve the deficit.

 



  1. There were no certiorari projections or prognostications from the City Tax Assessor on the impact on the tax roll that another $5 Million drop or perhaps larger $10 Million drop in the assessments would mean to tax payers.

 



  1. There were no projections of increased pension fund contributions required in 2010, though Birdsall noted that they could be substantialas much as 50%. (The council requested more on this matter.)

 


Of interest, Beth Smayda and David Buchwald, unannounced but nominated the City Democratic Committee Nominating Committee for Common Council, were taking notes in the audience. Assemblyman Adam Bradley, announced candidate for Mayor was not in attendance, but perhaps he had a monitor of the proceedings in the audience.


 


Mr. Sheehan told WPCNR after the meeting that he had been invited by the Republican Party to run for Mayor, but he had not made a decision as of yet.

Posted in Uncategorized

White Plains Considers District Wide Registration. Spends $42,000 Year Checking

Hits: 0

 


 


WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. By John F. Bailey. April 14, 2009 UPDATED April 15, 2009: Superintendent of Schools Timothy Connors presented Dr. Anne Lillis, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Services Monday evening, who reported on the scope of how many students are found attending White Plains schools illegally.


 



 


 


 


Connors said that White Plains has followed residency checking procedures that have been used by Mount Vernon Public Schools for “years.” It has been suggested that White Plains go to a registration procedure for all students each year, similar to what Mount Vernon Public Schools use. Connors said it would be up to the White Plains Board of Education to institute such an annual destrict-wide registration. Currently only newcomers to the school system are registered new every year. Connors prefaced Dr. Lillis’ report on “the numbers” with the statement, “We do a lot of things right.”


 


Dr. Lillis, in her report said of 1,345 students registering for the first time through April 1, 2009, 38 were investigated and found to be non-residents.  In cases investigated this year, she said 70 non-resident children were discovered.


 



 


Dr. Anne Lillis, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Services, said Mount Vernon executes many of the same checks White Plains now uses.


 


She said all new registering students with the district come through the Newcomers Center. Each parent or guardian is required to provide:


 



  1. A homeowner document with the home address on it, and a utility bill.
  2. A landlord affidavit,(attesting to resident).

 


She said that in 2008-2009  through April 1, 1,345 new students came into the White Plains district, which included 600 kindergarten students,475 in Grades 1 to 12 and 270 students for preschool or special classes.  A total of 165 were found to be  questionable, of which only 38 were found to be non-residents and sent to other districts.


 


During the course of the school year 141  cases of suspected non-residency came to the district attention and were investigated. Of those, 44 were found to be non-resident families who had 70 children who were not residents


 


. The cost to investigate, she said was a total of $42,000.


 


Lillis said that in Mount Vernon and Edgemont, (an apartment-heavycommunity), there were no private investigators used, while White Plains does use a private investigator in caseswhere residence is questionable to check residencies.

Posted in Uncategorized

Honeywell Selected as Energy Auditor, $1.9 M in Cert Refunds Approved

Hits: 0

 


WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. By John F. Bailey. April 14, 2009: During the course of its business meeting Monday, the Board of Education approved the selection of Honeywell as the contractor to conduct its energy audit of district buildings. The expected savings for the district was $12.4 Million, with district payment for the improvements coming out of those savings, Assistant Superintendent for Business, Fred Seiler said. Honeywell would construct and install the devices and improvements resulting in the savings,and financing would not be forthcoming until 18months after the improvements had been up and running and producing the energy savings. Seiler said this would be about 2011.


 


The district also approved $1,911,027 in certiorari refunds on the following condominium properties: Juniper Walk Condominium, Summit House, Copper Beach Condominiums, JDJ Apartments, Robert Tolchin G&W Properties, 32 Apartments, South Broadway(110-112 South Broadway, 77 West Post Road, White Oak Condominium, 15 Quinby, 101 Old Mamaroneck Avenue. It tabled approval of a Ridgeway Country Club settlement,  $78,973  pending further review. The latest round of certioraris settled by the city,cost the city $609,655 in certiorari refunds and, more significantly, $971,600 in assessed value.


 


School Decisions Roundup Follows…


In other action….


 


New Furniture


 


The Board approved a contract to purchase $545,000 in new furniture to furnish the new Post Road School, scheduled to be completed in July, and $542,918 for Church Street School window replacement. Seiler said some of the old furniture would be used elsewhere in the district, but most of the former school furniture would be auctioned off.


 


Refunding High School Bond


 


The Board authorized a refunding strategy on the $28 Million White Plains High School Project which, by taking advantage of today’s 2-1/2% interest rates would save the district bond serviceon the 5-1/2% rate those high school bonds issued in 2000 are costing the district.  Seiler estimated the district would save $3,000 a year.


 


MTA TAX REPRIEVE?


 


In other action, the Superintendent of Schools Timothy Connors said that the $330,000 in Metropolitan Transportation Authority tax included in the proposes 2009-2010 School Budget looked for awhile last week, as if the tax would be pulled by the state legislature, but at this point it is uncertain. Connors said he expected the legislature to take the MTA tax up again this week. Even should the MTA tax not be enancted,Connors said the money collected would be used for other expenses in the school budget at the discretion of the Board.


 


Strategic Plan Revisited


 


Connors announced the Core Committee responsible for guiding the District “Strategic Plan” would meet May 20-21 to address the progress of the Strategic Plan. Connors said that his designated successor, Dr. Christopher Clouet would be unable to attend those meetings because Clouet would be out of the country on a prior education commitment. Connors said Clouet would be in the district over the next month at times to acquaint himself with district issues involving the strategic plan. Connors said the Core Committee is looking for a parent from the community to serve on the Core Committee and two students.

Posted in Uncategorized

Teacher Mediation Moves to Fast-finding. Amount of Raise Stumbling Block.

Hits: 0

 


 


WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. By John F. Bailey. April 14, 2009: The Board of Education announced at its regular meeting  Monday evening that school district labor negotiations with the White Plains Teachers Association, after three mediation sessions with a New York State Public Employee Relations Board appointed mediator had been “unsuccessful,” would now move to a “fact-finding” phase. Peter Bassano, a member of the Board Finance Committee said the salary increase in a new contract was the lone remaining issue. Privately, he told WPCNR the Teachers’ union was “out of touch” with economic conditions in the city.


 


 



Peter Bassano of the Board of Education, said that another  state-appointed mediator would be appointed to meet with the two groups, which would present their positions and assemble “facts,” supporting their respective positions.


The mediator then recommends a settlement. The recommended settlement and both sides’ facts  would be made public. The mediator-recommended settlement, would be non-binding, and the school board and the district would have to consider it or reject.


 


Bassano told WPCNR that the major block is the amount of salary increase. He said that the step increases based on years of serviceand academic degrees have been agreed upon,  the amount of raises across the salary schedule is the roadblock.


 


Bassano: 2 to 3% step increases received this year. Administrators Agree to Freeze.


 


Bassano reported that all teachers this year, working without a contract, have received their step increases based on academicdegree progress and longevity, equal to 2 to 3% of salary, and in dispute is any additional merit increases.


 


Bassano said, “The teachers union is out touch with the economics of the City of White Plains and its community.”


 


Bassano also told WPCNR that the Assistant Superintendents (in the Superintendent of  Schools “cabinet”) and  the Assistant Superintendents’staffs and management personnel and support staff had all agreed to freeze their salaries in the 09-10 year in the district. The freeze on wages comes after a substantial series of salary increases in the current school year budget.


 



 


Teacher Union Head Says Teachers Not Consulted


 


 


Bassano’s remarks, made as part of his report on the BOE Finance Committee, came at the close of the business meeting,  after White Plains Teachers Association President, Kerry Broderick had taken the podium during the public comment session to denounce the district for not consulting the teachers on where layoffs (of teacher personnel) would take place.


 


Broderick said WPTA and CSEA members were never brought to the table to discuss the 20 teacher firings, 1 administrator and 24 assistant cuts. “They treated us as an afterthought,” she said. She accused the district of “doing a fine job of protecting (their) pet projects, and not consulting with who it affects (teachers) in school classrooms.”


 


WPCNR asked Mr. Bassano if it was true teacher cuts were made without consulting teaching staff.


 


Bassano commented, “I don’t know for sure, but I would want decisions about programmatical changes made based on an objective and data driven evaluation of the program by the administration.  This is not a real issue because there were few program cuts.”


 


Bassano said layoffs were made “solely pursuant to union guidelines in the collective bargaining agreement: They are layoff based on seniority: Last in – first out. No regard for performance or effectiveness in the classroom.”


 


Mr. Bassano said the district had offered to work with the teachers to provide incentivized  retirement, “If we got enough takers, it would have saved jobs, put cash in the pockets of some retirees and saved the district considerable money over the next few years. The offer has been on the table for months.”


 


Bassano told WPCNR the incentivized retirement offer was withdrawn in March when negotiations were stymied: “We asked to sever incentivized retirement from the salary negotiations and move forward with retirement incentives. The union refused, choosing to keep this as a bargaining chip. This prevented the saving of teaching jobs and the saving of money for the district.”


 


Bassano said Broderick misstated the one Administrator elimination, pointing out that the position of Athletic Director was eliminated by merging Athletic Director and Physical Education/Health Director.

Posted in Uncategorized

Lowey Gets White Plains Schools Stim Money– But Will Not Affect 09-10 Budget

Hits: 0

 


 


WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. By John F. Bailey. April 13,2009: Congresswoman Nita Lowey notified the press today that she had secured  $1,504,218 in Federal Recovery monies for the White Plains City School District. This included $1,013,275 in funding for Individuals with Disabilitiesin Education Act and an estimated $266,455 in Title I funding for disadvantage students.


 


Asked if this money could be applied to the new 2009-2010 $185.9  Million School Budget, White Plains Superintendent of School Timothy Connors told WPCNR  no officials on the state or the federal level have told the school district how and when these monies would becoming and what they could be applied to. Connors told WPCNR the new money would apply to the 2010-2011 Budget. “If you find out, John, please tell us,” Connors said who was going over the information with Assistant Superintendent for Business, Fred Seiler, when contacted by WPCNR.


 


Lowey’s release said that Westchester County educationaid was projected to decrease 5% without the federal stimulus funding.

Posted in Uncategorized

State Hit on Con Ed 2%of Utility Revenues.Latimer Only NoVote

Hits: 0

 


 


WPCNR THE POWER NEWS . By John F. Bailey. April 13, 2009:  The New York State Department of Budget has not been able to respond as of late this afternoon for a clarification on appropriations law S59B and A159, which contain the legislation enacting a $283 Million assessment on Consolidated Edison revenues this year, and assessments on all utilities in the state except telephone utilities.


 


Reading of the bill indicates to WPCNR that the assessment injecting new funding into the Public Service Commssion is 1%, and an additional  1% into the general fund. The $283 Million assessment on Con Ed and 1% – on all utilities across the state, with the exception of telephone companies is contained on pages 55 to 59 of the law.


 


 


Assemblyman George Latimer of Harrison told WPCNR he voted against the bill in which the utility assessment was contained. Latimer said that there was no “breakout” provided to legislatorsnof what Westchester gas and electric customers would pay in additions to their bill as a result of the new assessment charge. Latimer told WPCNR he voted against the bill because the charge “is not based on (customer’s) ability to pay and not pro rated on their ability to pay.”


 


The law amends Article 18-a of the aising the portion of the legislation funding the Public Service Commission as follows: “The total amount which may be charged to any public utility company under authority of this subdivision for any state fiscal year shall not exceed one per centum of such public utility company’s gross operating revenues derived  from intrastate utility operations in the last preceding calendar year.”


 


The legislation, in addition, amends Article18-a with an additional 1%charge, to wit:


 


“The temporary state energy and utility service conservation assessment shall be equal to two percentum of the utility operations in the last preceding calendar year, minus the amount, if any, that such utility entity is assessed pursuant to subdivisions one and two of this section (the public service commission funding) for the corresponding state fiscal year period.”


 


Latimerdescribed the text of the legislation as “quite dense.”


 


The complete legislation in all its “density” can be read on the New York Senate website, if you go to section “NN”, and read pages 55 to 59 on the following URL:


 

Posted in Uncategorized

It’s Opening Night

Hits: 0

WPCNR  VIEW FROM THE UPPER DECK. APRIL 13, 2009: The New York Mets open new CitiField this evening on Opening Day with temperatures expected in the 40s wasting as it turns out, a beautiful day. So, in celebration of the best day of the year, Opening Day, WPCNR revives this original ode to the best day of the year.



WRIGLEY FIELD, 1975


Photo, WPCNR Sports




OPENING DAY is better than Christmas Day,
When you look out the window and you know they’ll play,
Whether dreary gray or billiant spring sun’s ray
Opening Day means the Big Show is back today.


 


In decades past, Opening Day was for fanatics starved,
Eager for the sharp crack of ash on horsehide carved;
The flutter of pennants snapping in northwest winds
Atop ramparts of inviting arches of walls, and sculpted friezes wistfully escarped.


Fans lucky to get away with ducats
Marveled at grown men in boys’ flannels and sharp whites pristeen,
Back to play in April’s warm zephyrs in NY blazened caps,
Dashing specks of white warming up on the sprawl of the greenest green.

Motor cars panting in good-natured traffic jams on Major Deegan,
Or down
Yawkey Way, on 35th and Shields or Waveland’s jam.
Through windows you see first glimpse of the storied Park,
The place where ball is played, where ghosts of Ted, Babe, Duke
Mel, Spahnie, Whitey, Mickey, Willie, Yaz, Minnie and Sandy lark.

Paying a White Plains fine to park, passing stogie smoking old men
at the same gates for a hundred years,


Now out into the street
You go, aroma of roasting chestnuts, pungent cigars sweet,
Cries of “scorecard heah” “programs,heah”  shout out, neath light towers to heaven.

Fans in cap and uniform, little boys and girls gawk in awe hoping to make the Anthem
Never seeing such sheer walls, topped with the legend “GameToday 1:30 PM.”
Clutching slim cardboard tix to Section 14 Upper Deck up to the turnstiles
Festooned with souvenirs more dear as diamonds, beyond, the lure  of endless aisles.

Into the press of crowd, the grizzled usher, RIPS YOUR TICKET.
Turnstile turns, clicks, and into the castle of ball you go
Into the rotunda greeted with magic signs dazzling the senses —
UPPER LEVELS SECTIONS 1 to 39, 2 to 40

Hawkers shout –Voices of Flatbush — colorful books in hand


“Yearbook heah,” “Dodger Yearbook here,” “Hot dog, heah,” 
Assail your ears up the ramps you walk to the sign “NEXT HOMESTAND”
Out the suspended catwalk where sliver of green,first glimpse of the magic sphere
Into the sunlight splaying the vast rake down of the mighty suspended grand stand.

Spread out are knights of the diamond in white hues
Cavorting, snapping throws across immaculate red clay
As majestic fungos CRACK!  sending spheres soaring to filling bleachers a mile away,
Bunting flutters from the deck’s rails red, white and true blues.

Old glory unfurls on high pole in center field
Colorful signs deliver manly flavor of the only real game,
GILLETTE To Look Sharp, The Red Sox use Lifeboy, Schaefer It’s A Hit
Hey, Neighbor Have a Gansett, White Owl Cigars, Hit Sign Win Suit

From old familiar walls, to Gladys Gooding on the organ
Friendly old green scoreboard displaying
Today’s games around the big leagues BETTER THAN CNN
CHI CLE BOS DET, CHI STL, NY WAS make you king for a day.
Two Bits for scorecard, usher wipes your seat, ballpark fills your heart.

Penciling in the lineup 42 2B, 1 SS, 14 1B, 4 CF, 39 C, 6 RF, 23 LF 19 3B 36 P
Smell of beer, peanuts and salty pretzels entice
The air is nippy, warm rays sink into your face feels nice,
Starting pitchers wheel and deal, kicking high on sidelines fueling expectancy

Men in blue, arms folded solemnly conduct the home plate regimen
Casey, Ralph , Walter, Joe and Sparky exchange lineup cards and knowing
Ground rules by heart they go over them for ritual’s sake.
Announcer entones “Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen,


Welcome to the friendly confines.”




“Please rise for the playing of our national anthem,”
The stadium organ note by note  peels  baseball’s theme
Rising on the breeze, uniting do-rag and ball cap,
Fedora, ponytail and bouffant  in the spirit of the great game.

Grass is never greener than on Opening Days
 Strikes are louder, long drives bound gleefully to the wall up the alleys
Beers with THICK creamy heads, taste crisp cold and mellow gold blaze.


 Smashes laser through short and in the gap igniting  raucous rallies


 


Magicians without wands start 6-4-3s,


Backhand sure hits losing their caps


“Oh what a play’s” crackle on WGN with  “CUBS WIN’S”


Jack and Mel, Vince, Red, Curt and Murph are back at the mike to turn mundane days Into joy with a ninth inning elixir and “happy recaps”


Thunderous ROARS accolades the 2-out winner again creating big kids’ grins.

Posted in Uncategorized

Albany Raises Con Ed Sessment 857%, Costing Westchester/NYC Customer s $283MILL

Hits: 0

 


WPCNR THE POWER NEWS By John F. Bailey April 10, 2009. Consolidated Edison revealed to The  CitizeNetReporter this week that the state legislature voted to increase Con Ed’s Assessment to $283 Million  in 2009-10, which will raise Westchester and NYC area residents utility bills an as-yet-unspecified amount in a few scant months. The assessment must be paid this year.


 


The state assessment is a straight cash payment decreed in the new state budget. Con Ed  is faced with an increase of 857% up from $33 Million the state charged Con Edison this year.The assessment increase affects all utilities’ intra (within) state revenues across the state and pours billions into the state General Fund for unspecified use “related to energy.”


The Con Edision assessment  will raise all Westchester and metropolitan area customers’electric and gas bills an as-yet undetermined amount in your Con Ed or Electric Supply Company bills  this year.


 


 How the charge will be applied will be considered by the New York State Public Service Commission April 21 in Albany at a hearing which may be viewed on the internet at the Public Service Commission website at   http://www.dps.state.ny.us/webcast_sessions.htm


 


The “secret” assessment Revises Article18-A of Public Utilities Law, In S59B, A59 Bills.


 


 The Assessment is a new charge Con Ed customers will be facing  in addition to a possible decision to  increase the Consolidated Edison “Delivery Charge” that could increase that charge on your utility bill approximately 15%, according to Consolidated Edison’s filing and preliminary PSC findings, Jim Denn of the Public Services Commission Press Office confirmed to WPCNR.


 


Con Edison asked last year for a 15% increase in the Delivery Charge, or cost of delivering electricity and gas to their customers, a year later they have asked to increase that original $654 Million request to $819Million in the first year of the increase. The Public Service Commission Legal Judges have recommended a $632 Million increase, slightly less than 15%. On April 21, the Public Service Commission will attempt to split the difference. 


 


A 20% increase in the Delivery Charge  for example, in the current White Plains electric bill where the kilowatt hour electric charge is 7.55 cents, would increase the Delivery Charge for White Plainsians to 9 cents per kwh. On usage of 648 kilowatt hours in a month this would increase your delivery charge to$58.32 this month as opposed to $48.90 – a $10 increase on a light electric month, possibly considerably more in high use summer months.


 


Legislature Changes Up the Utilitity Assessment — Pours Part into General Fund


 


Last year  the state assessment on utilities throughout the state  previously had consisted of  1/3 of 1% of intra (within) state revenues. In the new state budget of 2009-2010 passed with much fanfare by the Governor, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Leader Malcolm Smith last week, that assessment, formerly simply a revenue raiser to  support the Public ServiceCommission has been divided into two parts, according Public Service Commission spokesperson, Jim Denn, speaking exclusively to WPCNR Thursday afternoon.


 


The Bill, A00159, which included the 857% assessment increase, was passed in the Assembly and passed in the Senate, as S59B. Westchester Assemblypersons Adam Bradley,Richard Brodski, Sandy  Galef and Mike Spano voted for the bill. Only Assemblyman George Latimer voted against it according to the New York Assembly website.


 


Mr. Denn said Part 1 of the Assessment will charge up to 1% of a NYS utility intrastate revenues “for sercices that would go to operation of the Public Service Commission and other related entities.”


 


Part 2 funnels “another 1% (of  a utility’s intra “within” state  revenues) to the state general fund for energy-related purposes.” Mr. Denn could not define “energy-related purposes.”


 


 


Denn said the PSC will determine how the new $283Million Con Ed assessment will be applied to future 2009 consumer bills in the April 21 hearing. When the assessment would be added, and what increment it would add to the customer bill has not been determined.


 


Split between Con Edison and ESCO customers.


 


Bob McGee, spokesperson for Consolidated Edison told WPCNR Wednesday  that the state increased Con Ed’s assessment cost an additional $250 Million, up from $33 Million in 2008-2009.McGee wrote in an statement issued WPCNR Friday morning, “Not all the money Con Edison will be collecting is Con Edison customer money. A portion of it is being collected from ESCO (Electric Supply Companies), so the gross (assessment increase) figure appears to represent 800% or more increase, while for Con Edison customers it’s really a 500%increase.”


 


WPCNR emphasizes that the dollar amount,  whether it is isolated out in the electric bill as a separate charge, included in the kilowatt hour rate, or in the Delivery Charge, and how much per month it will be for the individual customer has yet to be determined by the Public Service Commission. They will consider that April 21. The 500% figure mention by Mr. McGee does not mean the electric or gas bill is going up 500%.


 


 


Impact


 


Mr. Denn  of the Public Service Commission told WPCNR, “At the end of the day, it’s going to impact the rate payer’s bill.”


 


Denn said that since the new 2-Part Assessment was just installed into the budget last week, it was a new issue the Public Service Commission would consider along with Con Edision’s Delivery Charge request, “and how best to accommodate these (new) charges.”


 


 


Meanwhile…back in the State Assembly…Fixed Electric Rates Probing


 


The WPCNR report of the new assessment, the scope of which is to be determined, comes at   the time Associated Press reports today that an Assembly Committee is looking in to alleged “over charging on electric bills and is seeking evidence of conflicts of interests and collusion among New York producers.”


 


Meanwhile…back in the Governor’s Office…Utility Customer Rights Protection


 


The Assembly “investigation” parallels a news release from Governor David Paterson distributed to the media, in which the governor announced “a major consumer outreach effort to remind New York residents who are struggling with utility bills of their rights and “protections” regarding service termination and reconnecting utility services.” That release may be viewed at http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0408092.html.


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Bob Fitzsimmons Fundraiser Postponed at WBT

Hits: 0

WPCNR STAGE DOOR. From Westchester Broadway Theatre. April 9, 2009:  The Special Performance to Benefit The Bob Fitzsimmons Memorial Scholarship  Fund previously scheduled on Tuesday, April 21, 2009  has been postponed. We will reissue a Press release when a new date is announced! 

Posted in Uncategorized

How Should the Common Council Fund Missing Revenue in 09-10 Budget?

Hits: 0

WPCNR MR. AND MRS. AND MS. WHITE PLAINS POLL. April 9, 2009: Well the $160.2 Million 2009-10 City Budget as hammered out by the Mayor’s Office is in. It predicts a $12.4 Million gap between expected revenues and expenses and suggests various remedies for making up that gap. The budget as is calls for a 4.9% city tax increase upping the city property tax of the average White Plains $650,000 to $700,000 home $134, and the tax on the $450,000 home about $110. However, the budget proposes using $12,400 of fund balance to fund expected arbitrated union settlements and revenue shortfalls from parking, mortgage recording taxes and licensing and permit fees, among other shortfalls based on current trends. What the budget does is fund expected union contracts with money it does not expect to receive, and instead uses fund balance to do that.


If city economy does not uplift spectactularly the city will not have the revenue or the fund balance in 2010-11 to pay the expected union settlements, if revenues remain on the current track. The city needs the revenues (projected at $138 Million for 2009-2010  to  rebound beyond the 2007-2008 level of $141 Million ( which saw the zeneith of the White Plains Renaissance and the highest sales tax ever received by White Plains –$45.7Million) in 2010-11 to find that $12.4 Million in fund balance to break even in 2010-11. The city needs at least $155 Million in revenues to balance the 2010-11 Budget if expenses remain at present levels $148 Million, considering inflation. Is this New York State in microcasm?


Well Mr. and Mrs. and Ms. White Plains what would you do? Tell the Common Council what they should do with this year’s budget — how does White Plains avoid going broke in 2010-11?  You decide from the following suggestions:


1: Property Income Tax Increase to Keep Pace with Expenses:  WPCNR projects that to make up the $12.4 Million deficit in the 2009-10 budget, the council could decree a tax increase of 30% which would generate $57 Million on the present city assessment roll of $285.2 Million. It would be good to make the tax increase this year (even though it is an election year), simply because assessments will decline significantly next year — perhaps as high as $10 Million if past trends are an indicator of what the certiorari lawyers have up their sleeves.


So the time to get a big bang on the tax increase buck –is now.  If the $650,000 to $700,000 home in White Plains faced a 30% tax increase it would lift the tax bill in 09-10 beginning in July from $2,724 to $3,700, a $1,000 tax increase. Of course the council could choose to raise half the amount by property tax (increase of 15%) cutting the tax increase on the average home to $500, and raise it elsewhere. What do you think?


2. Commuter Tax– White Plains could slip a tax on persons living outside White Plains who work in White Plains.  The mechanics of this might be explored. This way the residents of White Plains would be spared a significant (see # 1) tax increase.  Should this be explored?


3. Fire Commissioners and Management: The 37  appointed officials in White Plains earn collectively $5,000,000 — should a large portion of  this staff be asked for their resignations — to save money in 09-10 — allowing the new administration to appoint a leaner city administration?


4.  Lease City Institutions: The budget as published suggests leasing city municipal garages, selling property, and WPCNR suggests perhaps privatizing the City Library…at least NOT spending $600,000 on the window replacements. What do you think about leasing the garages (to bring in an estimated $30 Million up front?)


5. Raise Sales Tax Another 1/4%: The Administration has suggested this as a means of raising the approximately $4.5 to 5 Million in money that would conveniently cover the 2009-10 labor settlements. How do Mr. and Ms. White Plains feel about this option raising the sales tax? (The council has tabled this option until May).


6. Surcharge Penalties for Filing Certioraris. A new wave of certiorari filings for the last three tax years is on the way, if this past January is any indication, especially for commerical properties. Should the city enact surcharge for every certiorari filed, as a cost of evaluation of each challenge? Should businesses collectively in the city be charged a percentage of any settlement (to preserve city services of course), and realtors be charged a fee for homeowners filing certioraris. Just a few suggestions. Anyway should some kind of Certiorari Penalty Surcharge on all businesses be explored by the city to replace lost revenues from assessment reductions.  


 


 

Posted in Uncategorized