Strong Third Quarter for White Plains Single Family Homes.

WPCNR QUILL & EYESHADE. October 18, 2012:

 

White Plains Single Family Home Closings for the third quarter of 2012 were up sharply — 41% more than the third quarter of 2011, and up 140% over the 2nd quarter of this year.

 

In July, August, and September, 72 homes sold compared to 51 in the same time period last year, according to Mike Graessle of the Better Homes and Gardens/ Rand Realty agency in White Plains.

 


The median selling price of a single family White Plains home closing in the third quarter was $637,125, up 9% from $585,000 a year ago– the average selling price $693,634 up 12%. Single Family homes closing in the third quarter stayed on the market about 6 months before selling.


 

Condominium sales were down 8% from last year’s third quarter, and down 34% from the second quarter of this year. The average selling price was down 35% to $388,873 compared to $592,844 in last year’s third quarter.

 


Co-ops faired better, sales up 16% from last year and 19% from the 2nd quarter of 2012. Co-op sale rices were up slightly, averaging $189,051, compared to $184,676 in the same quarter last year. The median sales price was down 6% to $168,500.

Posted in Uncategorized

Hudson Valley Employment Up 1% Year-to-Year. Education/Health Major Fields

WPCNR LABOR WIRE. From the New York State Department of Labor. October 18, 2012:

 

For the 12-month period ending in September 2012, private sector employment in the Hudson Valley Region increased 7,000 or 0.9 percent. Employment gains were strongest in educational and health services (+6,300), followed by professional and business services (+2,800), trade, transportation and utilities (+2,500), financial activities (+1,200), and other services (+600).

 

Job losses were centered in the following industries: natural resources, mining and construction (-4,100), manufacturing (-1,800), and information (-600). The government sector shed 1,600 jobs over the year.

 

In September, the Putnam-Rockland-Westchester labor market area was the driving force behind total job growth in the region’s private sector. The lower Hudson valley area’s private sector employment grew by1.3 percent or 6,100 jobs, accounting for almost 90 percent of total jobs gained in the region. 

 

Overall, educational and health services, the region’s largest private sector employer has continued to perform well, expanding over the period by 3.4 percent or 6,300 jobs; its largest over the year increase since 1999. Meanwhile the region’s manufacturing sector recorded its largest over the year decline in nearly 2 ½ years, shedding 1,800 jobs or 3.7 percent of its workforce.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized

County 2013 Outlook Bleak–Layoffs Possible if No Labor Concessions.

WPCNR COUNTY CLARION-LEDGER. From the Westchester County Department of  Communications.(EDITED) October 18, 2012:


 


A month before the release of his proposed 2013 budget, County Executive Robert P. Astorino today reaffirmed his pledge not to raise county property taxes or raid the county’s reserve fund next year and appealed to the county’s employee unions to help him minimize layoffs by agreeing to contribute to the cost of their health care.


 


“Here is the stark reality: Our revenues do not keep pace with automatic spending increases,” Astorino said at a news conference where he described the challenges of balancing a budget that, without spending cuts, would have an $86 million hole next year due mainly to state-mandated costs that will go up automatically on Jan. 1. “The job before us is to figure out a responsible way to maintain services at a cost affordable to taxpayers.”


Astorino must submit his proposed 2013 budget to the Board of Legislators by Nov. 15. The board then has until Dec. 27 to adopt a final spending plan. Under county law, the budget must be balanced.


 


The Westchester Business Council issued a statement supporting the County Executive’s policy, saying:


 


“The Business Council of Westchester strongly supports County Executive Astorino’s call for serious and, if necessary, round the clock negotiations with the county’s largest unions. As today’s budget preview clearly demonstrates,county government is facing its own fiscal cliff. Failure to address the issues at hand jeopardizes the fragile economic recovery under way in Westchester. Fiscal uncertainty is not conducive to business stability and growth. It also sends the wrong message to businesses we need to attract to Westchester. We can ill afford to see our business base erode.


 


The time is clearly at hand to address headon the rapidly escalating cost of union healthcare benefits. Employees in the private sector have had to make sacrifices by contributing more to their health care benefits. It’s time for the county’s unions to make the concessions necessary to preserve their jobs and the fiscal health of the county. Raising taxes is not an option.


 


We support the County Executive’s fiscally responsible approach and his call to the largest unions to work with him.  Further, we urge the County Board of Legislators to adopt a balanced budget for 2013 with no fiscal gimmicks that would risk the County losing its AAA bond rating.”


           


 


Since taking office, Astorino has cut county spending by $100 million and the county property tax levy has been reduced by 2 percent.


            Plugging the $86 million shortfall could require as many as 800 layoffs, or a 16 percent reduction in the workforce. Astorino said such a number is unacceptable and he would propose some measures to bring it down. However, he said he would need help from the unions as well.  


            As he has done repeatedly, he urged the Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA), the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)  and the three other county unions (the Superior Officers of the PBA, the New York State Nurses Association and the District Attorney’s Investigators PBA) currently without contracts  to agree to his “jobs for savings” plan, where they pay a portion of their health care costs as a way to save jobs.


 



     


            Health care for employees cost the county about $120 million this year and is projected to increase to $125 million in 2013. Three other county unions have, through collective bargaining, already agreed to contribute to their health care: Teamsters Local 456, which represents middle-level management; the Correction Officers Benevolent Association (COBA); and the Corrections Superior Officers Association (SOA). Also, non-union managers at the county, including Astorino and his staff, have been paying for health care since Astorino instituted the reform shortly after taking office.


            Astorino said that the county and representatives of the CSEA – the county’s largest union with approximately 3,300  members –  will be meeting with a state mediator next week to try to resolve the contract. The CSEA’s last contract expired Dec. 31, 2011, and because of the state’s Triborough Amendment remains in effect until new terms are negotiated and ratified.  


             “I urge them to use all available resources and efforts to reach an agreement that preserves jobs and  services,” he said. “Layoffs hurt everybody. Health care contributions can provide significant savings, which can greatly reduce the number of layoffs we are facing.”


            County Legislator and Republican Minority Leader Jim Maisano of New Rochelle, speaking on behalf of his caucus, said: “It is the best interests of everyone in Westchester County that our unions settle contracts with health care contributions before a budget is submitted next month.” 


            In preparing his proposed budget for 2013, Astorino said that he was following the same approach that was adopted on a bipartisan basis with the Board of Legislators for the current budget:  No increase in the county property tax levy and no use of the unrestricted reserve fund.


            “Taxes are off the table,” he said. “We are already the highest taxed county in the country. Raiding the reserve fund is a non-starter because that would jeopardize our triple A credit ratings. If we are downgraded , our borrowing costs go up and running county government becomes more expensive. Our focus is on preserving the most essential services and bringing down costs to pay for them.”


            In addition to layoffs, Astorino said there were other options available to partially address the $86 million shortfall, but none of them are ideal. These include:


·        Departmental cuts –  Every department is looking at ways to reduce spending, but this inevitably means some service cuts.


·         Borrowing – The county can borrow to pay for pensions and tax certioraris (court-ordered property tax refunds), but the money has to be paid back with interest.


 


·        Discretionary spending – Also under review is the money the county spends to fund outside non-profit cultural and social agencies, such as libraries, museums and after-school programs.


            “The job is to determine – in an objective way – what are the most essential services and what are the smartest and least painful ways to pay for them,” Astorino said.  


            Driving the costs for next year are a variety of programs with automatic increases that will take place Jan. 1. These include:


·        The county’s share of Medicaid –  the federal and state mandated program to provide health care for the poor – will go up $8 million (to $224 million).


·        Employee pension costs would go up $12 million (to $91 million). This is a state mandate.


·        Employee health care would go up $5 million.


            These increases will not be offset by new or rising revenues. The county’s portion of the sales tax is projected to generate about 3 percent more next year  – but not a sufficient amount to offset the mandated costs in spending. State and federal aid is expected to be down slightly.


            Money raised from the county property tax will remain the same at $548 million, based on Astorino’s continued pledge that he will not raise the county property tax levy.


 


STATUS OF 2012 BUDGET


            In his review, Astorino also discussed the county’s current budget of $1.697 billion. With three months to go, Astorino said the county has a $15 million shortfall, which is less than 1 percent of the total budget.


            To close the gap by the end of the year, Astorino said he will limit any new hires, defer some spending and liquidate some departmental accounts that have surpluses at the end of the year.


            “There is work to do,” he said, “but I am confident that we can end the year with a balanced budget and that means a balanced budget without drawing down reserves.”


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Decision Reversing Bradley Conviction Centers on Judge’s Exclusion of Witnesses

WPCNR WHITE PLAINS LAW JOURNAL FOR THE RECORD. October 18, 2012:


The decision of  Appellate Judges Ruth C. Balkin, Ariel E. Belen, L. Priscilla Hall and Robert J.Miller reversing the conviction of former Mayor Adam Bradley of White Plains, for attempted assault 3rd degree, harassment, 2nd degree,2 counts and criminal contempt, 2nd degree in a domestic dispute involving his wife– by a 3 to 1 decision issued Wednesday concludes that


“Upon reviewing the record here, we are statisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence. However, given the circumstances of this case, we conclude that the defendant was deprived of a fair trial.”


“…we conclude that the Supreme Court improperly precluded the defendent from adducing testimony which showed that his wife told others that the bedroom door was accidentally closed on her hand. The proffered testimony was in ‘substantial contradiction’ to his (Bradley’s) wife’s testimony that the defendent intentionally slammed the door on her hand and that she never told anyone that her hand had been caught in the bedroom door accidentally, and it was, therefore, sufficiently inconsistent to be relevant to the issue of the wife’s credibility. Furthermore, testimony as to whether the defendant’s wife told others that the bedroom door was accidentally closed on her hand was not related to a collateral matter at all, but rather, it went directly to the heart of the most contested aspect of the case — the defendant’s (Bradley’s) intent. Under the circumstances present here, the preclusion of such material and exculpatory evidence deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Accordingly, the judgments must be reversed and the matters remitted to thr Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a new trial.”


Presiding Judge Ruth Balkin dissented, writing, “The foundation necessary for impeachment of a witness by prior inconsistent statements on a material issue is straightforward and long settled. The impeaching party must first ask the witness if he or she made the prior statement. A general question about prior statements is not sufficient; the witness’s attention must be directed to the time and place of the prior statement, the person to whom it was made and the substance of it…If the witness denies or claims not to remember, having made the prior statement, the impeaching party may then present extrinsic evidence of it.”


“In this case, the defendant’s claim pertains to prior statements the complainant allegedly had made to three people, two civilians and a detective. On cross-examination, defense counsel asked the complainant whether she had ever told “anyone” that the incident on February 28th (2010) was an accident or whether she was not sure how it happened or was confused about what had happened. Defense counsel failed to specify the dates the complainant was alleged to have made these prior statements or to whom they were made. Thus the foundation for extrinsic evidence of the alleged prior inconsistent statements was inadequate. Therefore, contrary to the holding of my colleagues, the trial court did not err in precluding the defendant from eliciting, as (witness) impeachment evidence, testimony from the two civilians and the detective about the complainant’s alleged prior inconsistent statements.”


Judge Balkin’s written dissent also observed,


 “My colleagues hold that the evidence was admissable not only as impeachment of the complainant, but also as affirmative evidence that the defendant did not act intentionally. In other words, although the proffered evidence was admittedly hearsay, my colleagues hold that the defendant’s right to present a defense overrode the rules of evidence. I disagree. It is true in some circumstances the right to present a defense will override the hearsay rule. But those circumstances are rare, as examination of the cases cited by the majority makes clear; most of the reversals concerned erroneous exclusion of reliable hearsay evidence that another person had admitted committing the crime for which the defendant was on trial.(cites cases) None involved the situation presented here, that of a complaining witness who allegedly made prior statements inconsistent with material parts of her trial testimony. In this common situation, settled rules allow defendanyts to present extrinsic impeachment evidence after laying a proper foundation. But that extrinsic evidence is admissable so that the jury can properly evaluate the impeached witness’s trial testimony; it is not “proof of what happened.”  Fundamental as it is, the right to present a defense “does not give criminal defendants carte blanche to circumvent the rules of evidence.” (cites cases.)


The entire decision may be reviewed at www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_06971.htm

Posted in Uncategorized