Town Board Meeting tonight...

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 at 6 p.m. in Butler Hall. Agenda now online!

FILM - a developer's point of view...

In today's Observer Dispatch there is a guest editorial written Dr. Palumbo regarding the recent decision by town officials to keep the FILM money that has been collected since the 1990s. Dr. Palumbo reportedly paid the town $62,600 of Fees In Lieu of Mitigation (FILM) to develop a medical building.

According to a November 20, 2009, Observer Dispatch article:

Since September, when officials learned the money might have to be returned, they have searched for ways to spend it.

That brings up an interesting question, if you have to search for ways to spend the money, why did you collect it in the first place? By the meaning of the words themselves, Fees In Lieu of Mitigation, it seems to imply that you are collecting monies because you need to mitigate a known adverse impact caused by the proposed development; so why didn't the town use the money that was collected long before the 'drop dead date' of the signed agreements? The town can't even find some of the agreements; what does that say about accountability in the Town of New Hartford?

The fact that, according to Heather Mowat at a recent town board meeting, the lawyer hired by the town advised the town board to not disclose the letter at this point leaves one to believe that the opinion is just that "one lawyer's opinion", open to interpretation. Could they fear that a possible lawsuit might be lurking in the wings? We have yet to see a court case in NYS clearly defining whether or not it is legal to collect these fees. The closest thing we have been able to find was a court case in Guilderland regarding the collection of Impact Fees; the Town of Guilderland lost the case.

If you are a developer looking to build in the Town of New Hartford, would you pay the FILM money without seeing a copy of the opinion that the town paid for?

Strikeslip has more on Dr. Palumbo's guest editorial, Fees In Lieu of Mitigation...

Private Police Deals...

We thought it might be interesting to once again visit the See Through New York website to obtain the salaries of police from other local towns and villages. We looked at Whitestown, New York Mills, Yorkville and Whitesboro and compared them to the Town of New Hartford Police. For New Hartford Police we listed both the total reported salaries [Actual column] on See Through New York and the base pay [determined by multiplying the hourly rate per town board minutes times 2,080 hours per the police contract].

Here is a pdf version of our spreadsheet. The salaries are listed highest to lowest for each department.

Strikeslip has more thoughts on the the New Hartford Police contract deals to provide taxpayer-funded police patrols and vehicles to select private entities, Private Police Deal in NH - A 3rd Angle...

Police Patrols for Private Entities...Part 2

Did you happen to read the second article in today's Observer Dispatch regarding Police Patrols...Police Patrols for Private Entities 'Fairly Regular'?

According to the article:

Many agencies give extra protection to private entities for a fee, said Richard Carey, deputy director of the state Association of Chiefs of Police.

“I think it’s done pretty much across the state on a fairly regular basis,” he said.

We were curious as to how much of each officers pay could be contributed to pay over and above their regular pay so we did a spreadsheet.

Per the current ...Police Contract, police officer wages are based on 2,080 hours per year. So we took the 2008 hourly wage reported in the December 2007 Organizational Town Board Minutes [graphic in our previous blog] and multiplied that hourly wage by 2,080 hours to determine each officer's regular yearly wage.

Next, we visited See Through N.Y. to determine the gross pay of each officer from April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2009.

We then subtracted the regular pay from the reported yearly gross pay to see how much more than the regular pay each officer actually received and sorted the list of officers by the amount of extra pay received; from highest to lowest. We weren't able to calculate the part-time employees because we didn't have the exact number of hours they regularly work.

As you can see from the graphic below, Sgt. Robert Philo makes the most [$27,446.60 more]over and above his calculated regular pay. Chief Philo's contention that:

...officers who did the contractual services usually are newer to the department.

seems to be questionable. The officers who made the most over and above their regular salary are definitely not newcomers to the NHPD. Click on graphic to view larger print:
Obviously, this is not a clear indication of which officers are working the special patrols because there may be other factors that determine the amount of extra pay an officer receives; it needs to be studied further by the town board.

Anyway, according to the second story in the Observer Dispatch:

The Sheriff’s Office charges about $62 per hour per deputy, he said [Undersheriff M. Peter Paravati]. That cost covers the deputy’s hourly rate, as well as a prorated portion of benefits including workers compensation, Social Security and health care, he said.

That's a far cry from the $30 an hour that New Hartford charges. The thing that struck us is the fact that according to the Oneida County Sheriff website:

The starting salary for a Deputy Sheriff - Patrol in 2006 is $34,638, with a maximum salary for a senior deputy of $46,545. The starting/senior salaries for 2007-2008 are not determined as of March, 2008.

Look at the regular pay for New Hartford Police; even the lowest paid officer makes $41,371.20 as regular pay and yet New Hartford charges $30 an hour for private patrols; less than half of what the Sheriff's Office charges.

According to the article:

The Utica Police Department recently stopped providing police services to events that are not sponsored by the city in some form, city officials said.

“It’s a decision we have made based on potential liability that the city might face should something occur during one of these private security events,” Utica Corporation Counsel Linda Sullivan Fatata said.

Hmm! Liability...that's another good reason for the town board to reconsider whether or not these patrols should continue.

The reporter also contacted Whitestown Police Chief Donald Wolanin; he said:

Whitestown Police Chief Donald Wolanin said there were few private events in his jurisdiction, but his officers do sometimes patrol school sporting events.

When his officers patrol events at a school, they are paid by the school, not his department, he said.

“It keeps us a little out of it, and it doesn’t affect my budget,” he said. “It’s one of the few chances our police officers have to make some extra money.”

Interesting...while these special patrols may be 'fairly regular', New Hartford seems to be the only area department that expects their taxpayers to foot the bill for private entities.

We have no problem with police officers making some "extra" cash, the problem is that is shouldn't be at the expense of the already overburdened taxpayer.

No Offense Chief Philo, but your facts don't add up...

According to the article in today's Observer Dispatch:

St. Luke’s and Sangertown each reimburse the town $33 an hour for patrols. Marquee’s rate is the amount of the officer’s pay — including overtime — plus $20 per night for the car, Philo said.

Interesting $33 per hour for patrols at Sangertown and St. Luke's. Did the police department raise the rate absent town board approval just like they signed a contract for services without board approval?

According to the Town Board resolution passed on December 29, 2008, the rate is $30 an hour. Up to that point the rate had been set at $22 per hour; we blogged about it back in January 2008 when we first noticed that the rate was no where near the actual cost and taxpayers were making up the difference. Our blog was probably why the town board finally voted to raise the rate in December 2008 [don't let them fool you, they read our blog].

Here is the excerpt from the Town Board Minutes:

REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF
THE TOWN OF NEW HARTFORD, NEW YORK,
HELD AT BUTLER MEMORIAL HALL ON
MONDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2008 AT 6:00 P.M.

Police Patrol Rates – Sangertown Square Mall & Faxton-St. Luke’s Healthcare

After review with the Police Chief, Councilman Payne offered the following Resolution for adoption; seconded by Councilwoman Krupa:

(RESOLUTION NO. 336 OF 2008)
WHEREAS, the Town Code, Chapter 25 thereof entitled Police Department, Section 25-4 provides for Rates and Charges with regard to police patrols at the Sangertown Square Mall and Faxton-St. Luke’s Healthcare; and

WHEREAS, the initial rate established was Twenty-two Dollars ($22) per hour for police services and provides that a renegotiated rate shall be established by resolution;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the New Hartford Town Board does hereby increase the hourly rate to Thirty Dollars ($30) per hour for New Hartford Police Officers working assignments at Sangertown Square Mall and Faxton-St. Luke’s Healthcare, effective January 1, 2009; said monthly rate to be reimbursed to the Town on a monthly basis.

Upon roll call, the Board members voted as follows:

Councilwoman Krupa - Aye
Councilman Reynolds - Aye
Councilman Woodland - Aye
Councilman Payne - Aye
Supervisor Reed - Absent.

The Resolution was declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

Chief Philo also said in the OD article:

Also, the work always is done as overtime and does not take away from normal town patrols, Philo said.

Overtime?? Now that's interesting to note! Here are the 2008 hourly wages of the police officers as reported in the town board minutes of December 28, 2007 [click on graphic for larger print].



The lowest hourly wage for 2008 was $19.89 an hour. The NH Police Contract expired on December 28, 2008; negotiations are currently taking place. Let's figure in a 3% yearly raise; that would make the 2009 hourly wage for this officer $20.48. Now figure that wage at overtime [1-1/2 times] equals $30.72 an hour. Looks like even if only the lowest paid officer is used for the patrols, the taxpayer is picking up some of the cost since the town board has set the hourly reimbursement rate at $30. That $30 doesn't even fully cover the overtime wages of the lowest paid officer not to mention the benefits, i.e. the employers share of social security, pension, workers comp, etc. How about pay on holidays...isn't that paid at double time?

According to the article Chief Philo said:

...officers who did the contractual services usually are newer to the department.

Chief Philo, isn't that your brother [Police Sargeant Robert Philo] pictured in the article as he is checking in at St. Luke's; one could hardly call him a newcomer to the NHPD [guess the operative word in your quote above is usually]. According to our figures Sargeant Philo is paid $30.78 straight time. That means he makes $46.17 per hour overtime and that does not include the cost of his benefits or the cost of the patrol car. The Town of New Hartford only charges St. Luke's $30 an hour.

The Observer Dispatch article says:

But the town isn’t footing the bill for this security. Instead, the Police Department contracts out its officers to patrol private entities — a practice that brings in nearly $60,000 a year.

Hmm...$60,000 revenue a year. That's interesting! Here is a page from the 2010 adopted budget showing the anticipated revenues for the New Hartford Police Department. The only revenue we see is a total of $37,560 for St. Lukes and Sangertown. Where is the rest of the $60,000 of revenue...where is the revenue from the Marquee?

And what about town board approval? The article says:

Philo said he didn’t think it was necessary for him to bring the contract, which has brought the town about $13,500 since it was established, to the board because he believed the situation was temporary.

Could you expound on that Chief Philo? Where does town law say that a contract to allocate public property and monies can be signed without town board approval if it is a temporary situation? We also don't see any indication in the contract signed between the Lt. O'Neill and The Marquee Cinema that this is a temporary contract.

The OD reporter, Elizabeth Cooper, notes that:

Though its opinions are not binding, the Attorney General’s Office has been clear in its objection to police departments’ contracts with private entities.

An opinion dated June 14, 1974, said the practice goes against the state Constitution.
“I know of no statutory authority allowing a town to provide police services on contract for private persons or organizations,” the opinion states.

Officials from the Attorney General’s Office provided the opinions last week but did not comment on the issue.

We believe that the Attorney General is referring to the Gifts & Loans Clause of the NYS Constitution, Article 8, Section 1:

No county, city, town, village or school district shall give or loan any money or property to or in aid of any individual, or private corporation or association, or private undertaking, or become directly or indirectly the owner of stock in, or bonds of, any private corporation or association...

Didn't a violation of that provision of the NYS Constitution cause the demise of one or two public officials in the 1990s?

A search of the web found the rates charged by the Middlebury Connecticut police [document dated June 28, 2009]. If the town of New Hartford figured their rates based on the same expenses as detailed in this document, it wouldn't be a violation of the Gifts and Loan Clause because there would be no cost to taxpayers.

Guess the only thing to do is put this in the "court of public opinion".

Should the New Hartford Police Department be selling their services to private corporations at taxpayer expense, particularly when taxpayers are facing a 46% tax increase and another double digit increase in 2011? We would love to hear your comments...

"U" taken out of the picture...

Four (4) years ago, "U" were no longer welcomed as a participant in your town government.

First it was the town website [Councilman Payne's wife is the chair of the town communications committee and Councilman Payne is the board liaison with no town resident on board].

Or how about the disbanding of the Citizens Budget Committee when Earle Reed was quoted as saying "My philosophy is, that residents don't have all the information we have."

Then there was the $5.6 million of bonds that they tried to sneak by "U" and the illegal closing of the stormwater meetings.

We also finally were made aware of the secret panel that was negotiating the business park deal behind closed doors.

Councilman Payne even proposed a resolution to keep "U" quiet at town board meetings. When Councilman Payne included the Town Board Protocol resolution on the agenda at a recent town board meeting, a resident questioned whether or not it would be discussed that evening. Councilman Payne stated that it would not be discussed that evening, but an updated resolution will be brought before the board at the Organizational Meeting. Got news for you Councilman Payne, you won't be at the next organizational meeting; your term will have already expired.

We were recently sent further evidence of the town keeping "U" out of the picture. The sign at the corner of Court Knolle and Imperial Drive was recently replaced:



There were other signs that "U" were not welcome; but "U" get the picture.

Now four (4) years later, "U" are left to wonder what happened because no real clear explanation has been given to "U". At this point, the Town of New Hartford is in serious financial distress and the town board recently adopted a town budget for 2010 with a 46% town tax increase that "U" will have to pay because of their mismanagement of your tax dollars.

On January 1, 2010, the makeup of the town board will change when a new town supervisor and Ward 1 Councilman will be sworn in. Will "U" be brought back to New Hartford town government? Councilman Woodland and Councilwoman Krupa certainly have good reason to start bringing "U" back; they will need "U" to vote for them come election 2011. Let's hope that the new town board will give "U" a "sign". If not, "U" need to be prepared to stand up and demand it!

We will be watching...

2010 Adopted Town of New Hartford Budget

We are providing a copy of the 2010 budget that was adopted by the current town board on November 18, 2009 with a vote of three to two. Councilwoman Krupa and Councilman Woodland, both up for reelection in 2011, voted "nay". Councilman David Reynolds, the only councilman returning for a second term starting in 2010 voted "aye" as did "retired" Councilman Robert Payne and Town Supervisor Earle C. Reed [who opted not to run for a second term].

One new part of the 2010 adopted budget is that the New Hartford Police Department is now a separate fund. Page 17 of the budget shows the appropriations and page 18 shows the anticipated revenue.

You will notice that under Other Tax Items on page 18, there is no anticipated sales tax revenue; however, there is $2,602,161 of property tax that pays for the Police Department. Obviously Chief Philo was mistaken when he told Peter that his department is paid for with sales tax revenue.

We will be blogging more about the budget after the holiday. Have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Mis-Management Letter...

As reported in today's Observer Dispatch article, Firm criticizes town’s oversight of cash from departments: State auditors expected this week in N. Hartford Barone & Howard's 2008 Management Letter has finally been made available; just in time for next year's audit.

According to Ms. Mowat at last night's town board meeting, auditors from the State Comptroller's Office in Syracuse have arrived and are in the process of going over documents and financial records of the Town of New Hartford. Perhaps this year Santa Reed will be the one getting a Holiday surprise...

Copy of the 2008 Management Letter from Barone, Howard & Co, CPAs, PC.

Town Board Meeting...

tonight, Wednesday, November 18, 2009 at 6:00 P.M. in Butler Hall.

Agenda now online!

Flawed Logic...

"If you had a residence here 10 years ago, you are paying $29 more than you did then...$29 more!"

How many times have we heard that phrase from Budget Director Heather Mowat? Earle Reed also incorporated that phrase in his Observer Dispatch Guest Editorial. According to Earle:

In today’s dollars, a home assessed in New Hartford in 1999 at $150,000 paid $300 in town property taxes for all town services we enjoy, such as police protection, beautiful parks, a library, a senior nutrition site and road maintenance. In 2009, that same house paid $329, or just an increase of $29, a 10 percent increase over 10 years. It wasn’t reasonable to believe that the town could continue sustaining inflationary increases in salaries, benefits and utilities without having similar increases in revenues and thus began the progression of utilizing the town’s fund balance instead of raising property taxes.

$29 dollars...kind of makes it sound like we shouldn't be complaining at all. But wait one cotton pickin' minute...the house that was assessed for $150,000 ten (10) years ago in most cases has had their assessment raised 2 or 3 times in the last 10 years and is now assessed at $200,000.

We are sure most people remember that back in 2003 about $110,000,000 of assessed value was added to the assessment roll. That was the year that the New Hartford Central School had the audacity to propose an increase in the school tax rate and the voters turned it down the first time through. In 2004 & 2005 more assessed value was added to the town roll.

Yes, that same house even though the owner never did a thing to it saw an increase in assessed value; that is, of course, unless the owner was "lucky" enough to not have their assessment increased.

To prove our point, we will use Supervisor Reed's example of a house assessed for $150,000 in 1999. If the tax rate was $2.00 per thousand 10 years ago, the town property tax on the $150,000 house was $300 in 1999; just like Earle said.

In 2009, after 3 years of reassessment and a new property assessment of $200,000, that same house paid $438 in town property tax based on the 2009 tax rate of $2.19 per thousand. That's not a 10% increase...that is a 32% increase over 10 years ago.

However, we all know that the tax rate for 2010 is now proposed to be $3.36 per thousand so that SAME house that paid $438 town property tax in 2009, will now pay $672 in town property tax...that's $234 more in ONE year...making it a 54% increase in one year on top of a 32% increase over the last 10 years.

So with the proposed 54% increase in 2010, that same home assessed for $100,000 in 1999 is now paying 45% more town property tax than they paid in 1999.

Of course, we can understand why Supervisor Reed and Heather Mowat might fail to take the reassessments into consideration. Mr. Reed has never had his house reassessed...so his property taxes never increased until 2009 when the tax rate increased. As for Ms. Mowat; she doesn't live in New Hartford so she was never affected by the reassessments.

Bottom line folks...spending needs to be controlled and it hasn't been for the past 4 years. Contracts are being signed without board knowledge, secret meetings are taking place pledging taxpayer dollars, overtime is being handed out to those who do not qualify, fund balance has been used so that taxpayers would not notice the increased spending and developers are in bed with the politicians. How dare they try to justify their 54% tax increase by using flawed logic...there is NO justification for the past 4 years of mismanagement...

Just the facts ma'm...

A comment was sent to us regarding the contract for the Marquee Cinema and we want to address it on our blog because many people probably are not aware of how the town budget is put together. In part, Peter wrote:

I spoke with the police chief after the meeting last night. If I understand him right, he explained that, the police department is paid for with sales tax revenue not by property tax. The reason for this is that all things that are partial town services are financed by sales tax.

The Chief may or may not be partially correct; the last we knew Budget Director Heather Mowat was checking to see if sales tax revenue can be used to offset the cost of the police dept. To date, no sales tax revenue has been used to offset the police appropriations on any budget we have seen since 2003.

Some history...Under NYS law, sales tax revenue has to first be used to offset budgeted Part-town expenses. Villages receive their own share of the sales tax revenue that they use to offset their village expenses; therefore, they cannot share in the sales tax revenue for the town.

There are two actual part-town accounts in the Town of New Hartford - General Part-Town [Zoning, Planning, Registrar, etc.] and Highway Part-Town.

For the 2010 budget, the expenditures relating to those two funds total $3,897,486 less total revenue for the two funds of $612,050 [to include $90,000 of rainy day fund balance]. $3,285,426 of sales tax revenue has been budgeted to offset (balance) expenses in the part-town funds.

Sales tax revenue has been projected to be $5,000,000 in the 2010 Preliminary Budget. So after first applying sales tax revenue to the two (2) part-town funds, that would leave a total of $1,714,574 of projected sales tax revenue to be used for other purposes.

At a recent town board meeting, Budget Director Heather Mowat stated that she is waiting for a decision from the State Comptroller's Office as to whether or not any sales tax revenue can be used to offset the Police Budget. Ms. Mowat has not reported back on that subject, but we found a State Comptroller's Opinion online.

The opinion says:

Tax Law, §1262(c), as amended by L 1984, ch 850, provides that, if a town and all villages within the town elect to receive their shares of county sales tax in cash, the town shall apply its share to "reduce taxes levied for part-town activities". If any balance remains, the town may apply the remainder for any of the following purposes or any combination thereof: (a) to reduce general town taxes; (b) to reduce county taxes levied in the area of the town outside the villages; or (c) to finance part-town activities.

The comptroller's opinion further states that:

The term "part-town activities" is defined for this purpose to mean, in pertinent part, "(a)activities of town government, including highway programs, which are chargeable to the area of the town outside of villages ..." (Tax Law, §1262[f][4]).

Although the Village of NYM does not pay for the police budget, the Village of New Hartford does, so it would therefore make sense that the fund would not be considered totally part-town. How could the town allow only one of the villages to share sales tax revenue? Therefore, only (a) above applies - to reduce general town taxes; meaning those taxes collected from all residents in the Town of New Hartford whether they reside in a village or not.

So is Chief Philo correct in saying that sales tax revenue covers his department's expenses? We can tell you that since 2003, no sales tax has been used to offset the Town Police budget. At the moment, there is no sales tax in the 2010 Preliminary Budget to offset Police expenses. We can only wait and see what opinion Heather Mowat receives from the State Comptroller. Clearly, even if the sales tax can be used to offset the police budget, after applying the revenue to the two part-town funds as required by law, there is not enough sales tax money left to cover the entire New Hartford Police Department budget for 2010 which totals $2,656,788 after applying departmental anticipated revenue.

So now let's take another look at the Marquee contract. What is wrong with it you might ask?

For one thing, the overtime pay for the officer is being paid out of the budget under salary [Police Personal Services], however, the 2010 Budget does not reflect the revenue side of the equation.

Here's the 2010 Preliminary Budget...does anyone see AA-2773-6 Pol Sp Patrl Marque Cinema [the account the money is being deposited in] listed as a revenue account? So where is the money being spent...certainly not to offset the overtime pay, not to mention the employers share of social security, the added pension, workers comp, etc. There is absolutely no accounting for the money received from the Marquee Cinema in the 2010 budget. Therefore, your tax dollars are being used to offset the cost of police services and a police car to a private property owner. How's that make you feel?

For another thing, there was never any town board approval given to the Police Dept. to sign this contract; it appears that town board members didn't even know that the police were doing this special patrol. We only found out about it because of a report we were given through the FOIL process. Then there is the question of how Lt. O'Neill has the authority to sign a contract for the use of town police services and a patrol car in the first place.

We have been told that there will be an explanation given at a future town board meeting. We can't wait to hear it! Hopefully, we will also hear about the contract that was reportedly signed for New Hartford Police services at St. Elizabeth Hospital in Utica.

Strikeslip also wrote another blog on the topic - Private Police Deal in NH - Another Angle...

Planning a vacation?

Don't leave town until you "rent" a New Hartford Police Department car to sit in your driveway or outside the front of your home!

For $20 a day you too can contract to have a police car parked outside your home just like the Marquee Cinema. [Patrolman on overtime duty costs extra; however town taxpayers will pick up the incidental costs such as increased pension benefits, social security, worker's comp, administrative costs, etc.]

For more information, contact Lt. Tim O'Neill of the NHPD. By the way, this apparently doesn't need town board approval because no one on the board seems to be aware that these services are being provided! You also don't need to be located in New Hartford to contract with the NHPD; or so we have been told.

Read more on Strikeslip's blog - Private Police Deal in New Hartford