Feiner: Wal Mart Health Benefits Law Endorsed. Chides Town Board on Police

WPCNR’S THE FEINER REPORT. By Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner. May 10, 2006: The Greenburgh Town Board unanimously approved the Fair Share Health Care resolution calling on the State Legislature to approve plans to level the play for responsible local employers that struggle to compete against large profitable corporations like Wal Mart that doesn’t provide decent benefits to their employees. 


(More) 


The proposal covers all businesses with 100 or more employees in the state, except those in agriculture and manufacturing. It also covers building service workers in buildings with 100,000 square feet of office space or 50 residential units. The law will require large employers to pay $3 per hour towards health benefits.



I am pleased that the Greenburgh Town Board followed the lead of the Westchester County Legislature in approving the resolution calling on Albany to take action.  One in five New Yorkers who is eligible for health insurance is unable to afford it.


On the subject of Police Investigation of government officials:


DON’T BE FOOLED.


The e mail sent out to the e list yesterday by Town Board members is a smokescreen to cover up the improper use of police for political purposes. During my tenure as Town Supervisor I have tried hard to keep the community before major actions are taken unless that information jeopardizes the town in any way. The e mail I distributed did not jeopardize our bargaining position. 



 POLICE SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES- EVER



Yesterday’s statement by the Greenburgh Town Board members does not and can not excuse the fact that the Board adopted a Resolution on April 28, 2006 to authorize a police investigation to purportedly determine who provided e mails to a resident of the Town when I had informed them, as they now admit “prior to the board authorizing the investigation” that I had provided the e mails. The resolution, which in minute detail, claimed to recount the events supporting the investigation, materially and deliberately omitted this disclosure because it would have made it obvious on its face that there was no need for an investigation by Town Board employees or the Police Chief. Also, the e mails in issue, one of which I drafted did not contain, discuss or solicit any legal advice. 


As  the Board knew that I had provided the e mails, there was no basis for a criminal investigation to determine if the town’s e mail system had been hacked. If the Board wanted to investigate our computer system they could have conducted the investigation with administrative personnel, not the police. Further, the Freedom of Information Law and its exemptions were inapplicable to this matter because no filing for information had been made and, even if there had been a filing, there was no applicable “present or imminent contract award” exemption as the Board had not decided upon the nature and scope of any proposal. Therefore, the purported legal grounds supporting the resolution were illusory.


 


None of the e mails were referred to in title or text as being privileged or confidential. In the past, when the Town Attorney’s office wanted e mails to be confidential the Town Attorney’s office  has used the following language:


 This electronic mail message contains information that (a) is or may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, CONFIDIENTIAL, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, AND (b) is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) named herein. If you are not the intended recipient, an addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to an addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, using, copying or distributing any part of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely from you computer system.


Thank you.


 


 Susan A. Mancuso    Town Attorney   Town of Greenburgh    


   177 Hillside Avenue   Greenburgh, New York 10607  


  914.993.1546       fax 914.993.1656  


Our Town Attorney did not intend the e mail that I had shared with a resident to be confidential. Otherwise he would have included the above language in it.  In addition, the e mail sent to members of the Board was also sent to two non members of the Town Board.



I publicly released the contents of the Police Chief’s findings after giving the Board, the Town Attorney and the Police Chief notice that I would do so if I did not hear from them by a specific time and date. No communication was received by anyone before the time passed. Further, the Police Chief’s report did not contain anywhere on the document the words “privileged and confidential.”


I will continue to do everything I can to obtain the best value for the town in any commercial transaction and I will continue to respect the law and the very important concept of open government. I hope the Board will never again resort to the adoption of Resolutions that misstate the facts and the law and the improper use of the police department for political reasons.


PAUL FEINER


Greenburgh Town Supervisor

Posted in Uncategorized

Hold On! Council Wants to Talk About the Budget Just a Little Bit Longer.

WPCNR CITY HALL CIRCUIT. May 10, 2006: Tonight’s city budget meeting has been cancelled, City Hall confirms. No reason has been given for the cancellation. Benjamin Boykin, Councilman, speaking to WPCNR did not give an reason for the budget meeting being cancelled, and said he was putting the finishing touches on the City Budget & Management Committee recommendation letter this afternoon, but declined to reveal the committee recommendations. Asked if the council was seriously considering a butcher job on the budget or a gourmet chef’s fillet of the Mayor’s $146.3 Million budget, Boykin said the decision on the budget would be made May 17, without answering the question, or even saying the council was considering “cuts.” He said they were trying to cut the tax rate.


Thomas Roach, another Councilperson noted to WPCNR that there was “no rush” and there were still some questions left unanswered, but Mr. Roach declined to say if cutting the budget was on the table. Asked if a freeze on administration wages was being considered, Roach declined to comment. Mr. Boykin was asked if wage freezes for Commissioners and non-union Managers was on the table, and refused to comment one way or another, saying that was a personnel matter. However, the Mayor’s plans for wage increases for all his commissioners are usually withheld from the Budget Book purposely every year and it is only through efforts of tenacious reporting that the raise increases are extracted from the media-shy City Administration. Raises for the City Hall “brain trust” have averaged approximately 4% a year since Mr. Delfino came into office. A similar wage increase this year would cost about $600,000.


The Budget Committee meeting originally scheduled for this evening will be held May 17 at 6 P.M.

Posted in Uncategorized

City’s Captains Ships Pass In Night on Sea of Financial Icebergs


WPCNR Quill & Eyeshade. Commentary By John F. Bailey May 10, 2006:  Tuesday evening, the Mayor of White Plains was reported going to a civic association meeting to discuss neighborhood issues. Meanwhile, in another part of town, not too far away the Superintendent of Schools addressed other neighborhood associations on the school budget.

 WPCNR notes this was a missed opportunity for both leaders to have a public town meeting of the minds as they sail on a financial sea afloat with financial icebergs:


 

 The Captains of the two “ships of the city,” the School District Titanic and the City Hall as the Carpathia (the Titanic rescue ship),  could have taken last night as an opportunity to entertain possible solutions to steering around their twin financial icebergs:


The first iceberg is the Mayor’s “roll-over-and-play-dead, never-met-a-certiorari-I-didn’t-grant” response to certioraris the last six years that lower the city assessibles.


The second iceberg is the school district reluctance to trim staff, attack its bureaucracy, and trim the automatic 7% increase they deliver every year minimum in the school budget.


No, that did not happen in White Plains last night.


The Mayor and Superintendent met in separate sites in the same city. Much as the Titanic wallowed for two and a half hours before sinking while the ship California, a mere 3 miles away from the Titanic ignored the distress calls, and five other ships within two hours’ sail, passed her by. Only the Carpathia, 40 miles away steamed to Titanic rescue.

Neither Captain of the two city ships seems particularly interested in working to a joint solution to the laissez faire budget trends of either financial ship.


One City Captain, the Mayor, keeps kowtowing to certiorari-filers and entrepreneurs and does not jawbone them, let alone extract a quid pro quo that protects city taxpayers. But his administration does document his record of success. Recently statements have been made that the city  has had 1,000 businesses have come to the city. Could we have a list, please? Who are they, where are they?  

 

 While the other Captain, the Superintendent of Schools, has yet to institute an aggressive program to cut school district budget growth. Both Captains seem to be imitating each others’ spending policies, while feeding taxpayers into the boilers of their respective city financial engines. The question is when will they run out of coal (taxpayers)?

Now what could be gained by a public meeting of Superintendent Connors and Mayor Delfino? You never know. 


Can the Mayor show some numbersmanship to take hold of his budget? It continues to grow unchecked due to blind faith in development falling short of expectations, while the development creates new spending needs that outpace development benefits.


Can the Superintendent embark on budget projections and spending cuts in anticipation of city certioraris before rather than after the fact — with timely information from the Assessor’s Office? Could a certiorari “giveback” penalty be enacted by the city fathers to make cert-filers think twice before “cert-ing”?


Could the city, rather than balancing budget by selling off assets, cut its budget just a tad? One day before Decision Night, the Common Council has not announced any cuts in the budget. Let alone a freeze in administration salaries. Perhaps a token cut might be made? Perhaps we could lop off a street sweeper, one commissioner car?


The city, though appears to be taking its cue from the School District 25 year traditional habit of spending and the city is playing great catch up ball.

The City combined operating budget for 2006-2007 is $146.3 Million. It’s growing at 5.2% a year 2% over the inflation rate. This means by 2007-2008 we can expect a city budget of $154 Million, and by 2008-2009, a budget of $162 Million, just about what the school budget is now. 


This is what happens when you spend more than your revenues and bet on the next big check, borrow for the future against the present.


The School Budget will break $200 Million in two years.


In a projection issued February 27, the school district predicted it will spend $178 Million in 2007-2008.  At least the school district does do projections.
 

Now let’s take this into 2008-2009. The School District Salaries, according to the Assistant Superintendent for Business office will hit the $104 Million mark in 2008-2009, with fringe benefits hitting $42 Million, and the rest of the budget based on conservative 3% inflation will put the 2008-2009 budgets at $189 Million.


However the district 2008-2009 projection appears understated, because it assumed a 5% per annum increase and 6% per annum increase in transportation and utilities — both sure to escalate with the unforeseen escalation in fuel costs in recent months. The 2008-2009 projection is a very generous budget prediction on debt service. The $189 Million 2008-2009 “Budget” lists debt service with no allowance for new certioraris in 2008-2009, and leaving out any mention of the capital improvements bond issue in documents presented to the Annual Budget Committee.


Only astute ABC-ers who looked at the Capital Improvements  debut service financials and added them to the Budget projection got this subtlety.

The school debt service would climb from approximately $6,000,000 in 2006-2007 to 10.6 Million in 2008-2009 if the school district floated the full $66.7 Million bond. That adds $4 Million to the rosy scenario budget, lifting it to a minimum $193 Million in two years.

 
This does not include any new certioraris the school district does not know about.


It is not inconceivable that rising expenses will bring additonal budget increases well beyond those February projections in order to keep the School District Titanic steaming ahead with a full compliment of crew that will kite the 2008-2009 budget over $200 Million. It is interesting to note that if that happens the budget will go from $165.8 Million this year (2006-2007) to $200 Million in two years.  

Think about this: The School Budget is compounding at about $15 Million a year. There is talk on the Board of Education about trimming. The Teachers Union head has talked about paying more health costs. (The Next School District Iceberg: the Teacher contracts expire at the end of 2007. That will most surely hit the $200 Million mark.)

Something’s gotta give. Something’s gotta give. Something’s gotta give.


When both the city and the school district increase spending when revenues are, in the school district case, dwindling, and in the city’s case, not rising as fast as they would like, something or someone has got to give. 

 Usually it is you and me, the taxpayer. Are the financial Captains and the School Board members and Common Council members going to take a look, together?


City and school district financial policy is flooding red ink all over the city books, despite contrived surpluses by counting loans as revenue, by desperation bonding, fire sales of land, and assurances that development will save the day. Maybe it will. It has not so far.


Plugging the monetary gash in the side of the School District Titanic with tax increases, stopgap borrowing, while the Carpathia of the city government steams in circles instead of coming to the rescue is aggravating the revenue situation for both city and school district.


Both revenue sources are drying up on the city and the school district. It does not take a Ph.D. or an MBA to figure that out.  Because the Ph.Ds and MBA’s have not figured it out. All you have to do is look at your tax bill. 

 As the Mayor is fond of saying, and some councilpersons and school board members echo, “it all comes out of the same pocket.” Well it is our pockets.

 In the future, the city has to find some way to stop the certioraris.


The city has to extract an infrastructure tax of some kind with new development.


The school district must cut..  


The entire city has to wake up and smell the coffee that development has to be done, but you have to extract a fair amount of taxes out of the developers.

The real increase in city development  has only risen $7,587,000 a year since 2002-2003 when the city sales tax collected was $34, 413,400 a year in sales tax, for 2005-2006, if all goes according to plan we will hit $43 Million — that’s a rise of $9 Million a year (and yes, Paul Wood, there are mortgage taxes and permit fees — paid once). That’s not adjusting for inflation.


 The city gained $2.6 Million in PILOTS this year. The school district saw roughly $8.5 million in PILOT payments from the development for 2006-2007 but has gotten killed by certioraris that the city has not fought. Has this development helped the School District?


The School District received $6 Million in PILOTS in 2004-2005, $7.2 Million in 2005-2006 and budgets based on city figures, will receive $8.8 Million in PILOTS in 2006-2007. That is $22 Million in PILOTS. But, water is still pouring into the bowels of the School District Titanic.


Because the $22 Million in PILOTS in the two years and upcoming in 2006-2007 has been wiped out  by certiorari assessment losses to the tune resulting in a $23 Million increase in school taxes in the same three years.


The PILOTS are a wash because of the certiorari drain of $21 Million those three years. Perhaps the city negotiated PILOTS just a tad too generously?


The Mayor says there is nothing he can do about the certioraris. That is not the answer. Together the two captains should get their ships together soon with the commercial businesses that are creating these financial icebergs because they can. You can hardly blame them.


The question the two captains have to engage is when do the tax increases become too much for the well-meaning and generous White Plains taxpayers to bear? When will the populaces who believe all the city hall and school district hand-wringing and finger-pointing, realize what is happening and why?


Do they care?


As Superintendent Connors said Tuesday evening at the Council of Neighborhood Associations, “everything is relative,” noting that the same things were said about the budget twenty years ago.


 

Posted in Uncategorized

Police to Auction Off 23 Abandoned, Scofflaw Vehicles May 20

 


WPCNR POLICE GAZETTE. May 9, 2006: The White Plains Department of Public Safety will auction off to the highest bidder 23 motor vehicles that police have impounded as either abandoned or belonging to scofflaws.


 


The auction will be held  Saturday, May 20 at 10:30 A.M. Minimum bid is $60. Vehicles are sold as is. The auction will be held at the police impound lot on Ferris Avenue between Wardman Street and Westview Street in White Plains. A spokesperson for the Department of Purchasing describes the vehicles as being makes from the 80s to the 90s, the newest being a ’99 model. They include  a Ford Explorer, a Saab 900, A Jimmy, a BMW, and a pickup truck.


 


Sales under $400 require payment at time of successful bid. Sales over $400 require a 25% deposit,$400, whichever is greater payable the next business day at the White Plains Department of Purchasing.  Payments should be made in cash, certified check or money order. Deposits are not refundable. Vehicles may be viewed one-half hour before the auction starts.


 


 

Posted in Uncategorized