Hits: 0
WPCNR BACK ROOM BULLETIN. News & Comment By John F. Bailey. May 4, 2009: Sunday’s far-reaching Keith Eddings Journal News interview with Democrat Mayoral nominee Adam Bradley, in which Mr. Bradley levels a number of charges that lame duck Mayor Joseph Delfino is submitting a budget that understates the city deficit is striking, in that Bradley is not running against Joseph Delfino.
Bradley and the present Common Council can slash the budget all they want now.
What Delfino recommends now — should not be used as an excuse to perpetuate financial make-believe, and collectively moan and groan a year from now when the city faces financial ruin.
His budget makes a difference, especially if the council accepts it as is. The council needs a reality check here, as they go into tonight’s hearing on the City Budget.
The Council is approving Adam Bradley’s budget – not Delfino’s – since Delfino is not going to be living with it – Adam Bradley, though, will be living with it.
Bradley and the Council next year will have nobody to blame except themselves if the budget goes through as presented tonight.
In the excellent Jennings interview, Bradley declines to give his formula for bringing the “deficit” under control.
However there is no commentary on the constipation in the budget — the binding arbitration the city and the unions are entering into, or have entered into, or may enter into. No one seems to know for sure.
For that matter the city going to binding arbitration with the unions is a convenient Common Council cop out. If the council tells the public a year from now that they had no choice but to go to binding arbitration and that’s why they have to raise taxes and parking fees, or cut services, that just will not wash.
The binding arbitration the city may or may not have entered into already for the unions (no one will say), sets a scenario up for a total Democrat-lead city next year to blame Delfino for the 3.5% labor settlement likely from the arbitrators.
But the council can put a stop to this – if the unions have not already agreed to an arbitrator.
City Hall has been mum on whether or not the unions have accepted the city choice of arbitrator yet.
Tip to Unions: better agree to that arbitrator like now, because the longer you delay, the city may just change its mind on arbitration.
If I’m in the union, I have to ask, demand you get anyone, even Scoop the News Duck in there to arbitrate, just start arbitrating or we could be jaw-boned back into talks!
Where is the Common Council on this? They’re hiding behind the Charter of the city, which grants the Mayor the right to negotiate. But, shouldn’t the council intervene when the arbitration flag of surrender is raised?
Any arbitrator decision granting the unions a 3% across-the-board increase (compatible with recent settlements countywide) will eliminate any use of undesignated fund balance in 2010-11 because there won’t be any fund balance, it will already be “designateed” and “burned.” They’ll have to sell City Hall to pay the unions.
What’s left at the end of 2009-10 will only be $5.3 Million, just about what would be needed to fund a round of 3% raises in 20010-11. Then you’ll be looking at tax increases of well over 30%.
Should be fun watching the Democrats fire union personnel next year, shouldn’t it? It will not be pretty.
But, perhaps the city is using the wrong strategy?
A Yonkers-like injection of stimulus for the city to preserve jobs may save the Bradley administration down the road. The economy could turn around. After all,
Bradley in the Eddings interview says more (budget-cutting) must be done. He says he’s been counseling with the Democrat council members giving them his thoughts. So obviously Bradley must have some ideas.
Well, now is the time. Let’s have them. Now is the time to cut or raise taxes.
I figure the council has to slash about $2 Million of the budget at a minimum, and $5 Million ideally to fund the union raises if the binding arbitration “cop out” strategy is followed – instead of negotiating the unions down using jobs as a ploy.
Of course there is the biting the bullet: Run in a 30% tax increase to eliminate the alleged deficit, and gives the city a chance to come back as the economy limps through 2009.
You can also roll in a tax rebate, or cut taxes substantially next year to relieve the tax payers.
A 15% tax increase this year is a good middle position. It hedges your bet and preserves fund balance use and funds the coming arbitration settlement.
But, WPCNR asks why doesn’t the council do the tax thing?
Bradley is not running against anybody except perhaps his own fellow Democrats, whom he says he is advising of his thoughts on the budget.
If the Democratic Council does not slash and burn that budget or increase taxes, and the economy does not come back locally in White Plains, including the housing market, they will sow the seeds of financial havoc aplenty next year.
Do not forget the declining real estate prices on homes – that will only create more assessed value carnage – lowering city revenues – necessitating a tax hike next year of considerable proportions — in the city budget and (shudder) the school budget.
You just know the commercial properties are already getting their second round of certioraris under way. They are licking their chops and simmering those books.
Bradley needs some major budget cuts now – as a precautionary measure.
But blaming Delfino is not going to wash, next year.The Democratic Council went along with all the budgets and decisions that created the present situation. They cut a “whopping” $500,000 last year out of the Reserve for Financing. What prudence! How tough they were.
Ironically, the Common Council now is being presented with cleaning up its own mess, created by years of being walked through the numbers, never asking hard questions, never telling Commissioners “no.”
Delfino is out in 7 months and 27 days.
He is a lame duck.
The council needs to take over his budget big time, and slash the heck out of it, otherwise I can hear the wailing now: “If Delfino had managed finances better, we would not be in this mess. If we had a municipally experienced Budget Director, yada…yada…yada.”
Spare us the rhetoric, Councilpeople!
Let’s hear you tonight. Bring something to the table.
The mess is yours because you approved it every step of the way.
To date the council has shown admiration in the budget meetings for all the presentations and have not asked one tough question in the sessions this reporter has attended. Only Tom Roach, the councilman has shown any sense of budget urgency. Mr. Boykin has expressed concern the deficit may be more than predicted.
Concern must be taken out of the lineup and replaced with action!
Ask not what you can do to keep your $36,471 a year, but what you can do for your constituents.
How about, the council saying – no more cars for commissioners or anyone.
How about the council saying 10% wage cuts across the board.
The tough question I would ask would be – how will arbitration settlements in line with settlements in the area – effect the budget in year 2010-11? No one on the Council has asked that question publicly of the Mayor and his budget “strategists.”
The current Mayor has 7 months and 27 days before possibly retiring to his condominium in
The Mayor has presented a budget. He has had his commissioners parade in and tell the council how much they have cut – but in general terms. We have not seen the total number of laid off positions across all departments – yet.
When is the Council going to demand such a list of firings?
When are we going to have a total of millions cut from the administration? A little transparency, please?
When will the council have the leadership to demand the cuts that have to be made?
Now is the time for the Common Council to come to the aid of the Mayorally-annointed, Mr. Bradley, before the city faces economic Armageddon one year from now.
That’s when the assessment decline doubles to $10 Million, you have to cut union staff sharply, and plead with Mr. Bradley’s successor in Albany for a bailout. But, maybe that is the ultimate strategy?
Perhaps Mr. Bradley might want to reconsider that run for Mayor. He will be mopping up the Delfino red ink.
He’s going to get it.
It appears the Republican Party in
Tim Sheehan has told WPCNR he is considering running. But, why spend your own money on your own campaign when the numbers are overwhelmingly Bradley? Sheehan is too smart to be suckered in when the numbers of voters just aren’t there.
Now if Glen Hockley should rise from the Democrats’ Burial Ground and snag the Working Families Party or Independence Party nomination for Mayor or both – that could make things interesting and give Tim Sheehan a chance – or even Bob Hyland. Hockley might get union support, split the vote enough to sneak Sheehan in. But,most likely this will not help Sheehan either, since the lead Demo usually wins on the numbers anyway.
Or have the Republicans silently decided to clear the way for Bradley and not nominate anyone for Mayor seeing Bradley as unbeatable?
Anyhow – Joseph Delfino has 7 months and 27 days and the Common Council should realize and remember the damage to
The Lame Duck is starting now to put together his last big deals, cementing the Delfino legacy very quietly — shapping the course of White Plains for decades.
The Mayor is setting up a Winbrook “gentrification” project that will gut the West Side of White Plains for years to come while rewarding architects, planning firms,and consultants of the city.
If the federal government ends up buying out properties up and down Lexington Avenue, it will create a windfall for over 100 owners of property up and down Lex for years.
The Mayor is slipping through a tidy little item (# 78) Monday night that sets Winbrook in motion under the guise that in order to get stimulus money from
But, why does Winbrook have to be changed to residential/commercial? Some one tell me?
Because assisted senior living, middle income housing, personal service and professional offices and commercial retail are envisioned in the zoning proposal and the Request for Qualifications which went out last week from the White Plains Housing Authority.
The item, number 78, IS innocuously third to last on the agenda for referral Monday night that proposes zoning Winbrook commercial as well as residential, and expanding Windbrook to include both sides of
This project will dominate the Bradley Administration for years to come. And put
What is to prevent, HUD and the Federal Government super consultants from telling the Housing Authority: look, this idea of building new buildings first so the folks can move into the new buildings, does not work and is too expensive. We can’t do that. If you do not relocate them so the project can be designed all at once and built all at once, we’re not going to fund the project.
You can put any conditions you want, but as Eliot Spitzer learned when he tried to give drivers licenses to illegals in
People of Winbrook should be well aware of that.
What’s pathetic is the planners, engineers,and consultants being used on the Winbrook project which just serviced officially last week, are not even minorities consulting on what is clearly a minority section of town.
But wait, I forgot, if you’re white in
The excuse for the quickie zoning change is to have the work on rebuilding Winbrook be eligible for “stimulus” money – i.e., shovel-ready.
The project (Winbrook) is not shovel-ready by a long shot.
The stimulus “rush” to push this zoning change is a sham, in my opinion — to ram through zoning and make one last killing for the well-connected, the sycophants who suck up tax dollars under the guise of public projects.
Another project the Mayor may be pushing through is privatization of the
There is all sorts of “creative stuff” and “enduring legacies” a creative lame duck can create in 7 months and 27 days.
Is the George W. Bush “Reign of Recession” so quickly forgotten?





