Piermont's Tentative Budget or the Trend Continues

Unify Piermont (unifypiermont@live.com)

Piermont’s Tentative Budget or the Trend Continues

The Village Board held their first Public Hearing on the tentative budget for 2010-2011 on April 6, 2010. The Mayor announced a proposed increase in the tax rate of over 12.8% and of over 6.5% in the amount to be raised by taxes. While Unify Piermont is not convinced either of these numbers is 100% accurate, they are directionally correct.

And they are clearly unacceptable. Recent newspaper stories concerning school budgets have all emphasized two things. The first is the extreme cutback in state aid due to the continuing economic crisis and the second is that all of the school boards are holding tax increases to less than 2%. They are finding ways to cut costs.

A recent article in The Journal News was headlined Spring Valley mayor’s proposed budget holds line on taxes by across-the-board government cuts, some job eliminations and the use of surplus revenues. There are no across-the-board government cuts, no job eliminations and very little use of surplus in the Piermont proposed budget.

The Village Board continues its pleas of we can do nothing as everything is out of our control and the problem lies in Albany. Well, one might ask, if you can do nothing, why do we need a Village Board?

It is worth noting that at the turn of the century Village taxes were under $2 million. The tentative budget proposes taxes of over $4 million just as Unify Piermont projected in a previous blog. It has been suggested that the potential of a reelection challenge for the first time in many years lead to the temporary hiatus we experienced last year. True or not, the steep upward trend continues once again in this year’s proposed budget.

It should also be noted that the proposed budget makes no explicit allowance for the on-going PBA negotiations which have now gone to binding arbitration. No governmental entity has ever been remotely successful in binding arbitration. So, eventually these “chickens will come home to roost” and two more years of catch-up salary awards will have to be covered.

If you are still employed in this economy, we would not suggesting telling your boss you “can do nothing” to reduce costs or your company will soon be reducing costs by eliminating at least one position.

The Village Board seems to have forgotten that they are serving at the pleasure of the taxpayer’s of Piermont. They are, in essence, our employees and we need to tell them to reduce costs, not give excuses.

It is worth noting that the Village underwent a reassessment last year. Many homes remained flat and with the proposed tax rate of $5.76/thousand their Village taxes will increase almost 13%. The average assessed value reduction, Village wide, was 4.7%. At the proposed tax rate this results in a 7.5% increase in your Village taxes. Does 7.5% seem reasonable in today’s economy?

The next budget hearing and the date for adopting the final budget is April 20 at 7 PM in Village Hall. If you are as concerned as we are, please attend and make your views known. A copy of the tentative budget can be obtained from the Village Clerk during normal business hours.

This message was prepared by Unify Piermont which is dedicated to returning responsible, representative government to Piermont.

Unify Piermont is a group made up of village residents from all areas of the village, and from all political parties. We need to create a local village government that will address the problems created by the current and previous administrations.

General Election - November 3, 2009

Unify Piermont (unifypiermont@live.com)

General Election – November 3, 2009

As a non-partisan group of Village residents dedicated to returning fiscally responsible government to the Village, Unify Piermont believes that what Piermont needs, more than anything else, is a viable opposition. As Todd Gitlin, an American sociologist, political writer, novelist, and cultural commentator has noted “Right now, we have no possibility of politics because we have a one-party state.” Unfortunately, this applies to Piermont in the November 3rd General Election.

In Piermont we have had a one party system for a number of years. This has lead to a paternalistic “we know what is best for you” attitude by several administrations. Valid concerns expressed by residents about their ever increasing taxes and about the level of village debt are ignored. These same administrations have also encouraged a divisive environment, pitting people from one section of the village against people from other sections, labeling them “Hillsiders” or “Landing people” rather than “Piermonters”.

Earlier this year (March 3, 2009) the Village Board had a presentation by one of its members called Cost Containment and New Revenue Generation which attempted to answer two questions:

Why do my taxes keep going up?
Why doesn’t the Village Board do a better job of controlling costs?

It is 31 pages and has some very nice charts and graphs, but essentially says taxes will continue to go up and we cannot control costs. These are unacceptable answers to the taxpayers in Piermont.

In terms of Cost Containment, the report said nothing can be done, the “barriers to cost containment by the Village exist at the State level, and have to be addressed at that level.”

A recent editorial in Our Town addressed the problems local government face with regard to binding arbitration and noted local boards should not “take the easy way out”, should not pass the buck back to the New York State Legislature and should get “serious about changing the system”.

The answers in Piermont on March 3rd were the state has to do it, we can do nothing. In other words, exactly what the Our Town editorial was decrying as “taking the easy way out”.

No campaign literature has been issued by this year’s slate of candidates for the Village Board. They have not bothered to develop a platform since they are running unopposed. Since the Trustee who gave the presentation is running for re-election along with the Mayor who applauded his hard work, Unify Piermont assumes their platform continues to be “we can do nothing”.

A “Do Nothing” platform is unacceptable. Therefore, Unify Piermont will not endorse any of the candidates for Mayor or Trustee.

Unify Piermont continues to hope that the political process will bring forth viable alternatives to the continuation of the taxing and spending policies of the past ten years. Hopefully, 2010 will see the return of opposition politics to Piermont. In the meantime, Unify Piermont will continue to monitor and report on the performance of the Village Board.

Unify Piermont is endorsing Judge Laura Weiss who has and continues to serve the best interests of the Village and all of its residents. Unify Piermont urges Piermont residents to vote for Laura Weiss and to withhold their votes for the Mayor and both Trustee candidates sending the message that “do nothing” is not an acceptable approach to the problems the Village faces.

This message was prepared by Unify Piermont which is dedicated to returning responsible, representative government to Piermont.

Unify Piermont is a group made up of Village residents from all areas of the village, and from all political parties. We need to create a local Village government that will address the problems created by the current and previous administrations.

Democracy is not Welcome in Piermont

Unify Piermont (unifypiermont@live.com)

Democracy is not Welcome in Piermont

Some of you may have received a letter in response to our recent posting on the Democratic Caucus. Just so we are clear, Unify Piermont has never advocated turning “our Village into another Nyack”. We are not surprised at this recourse to scare tactics by those desperate to hold onto power. Apparently, our suggestion that registered Democrats actually participate in the Caucus and make their opinions known was seen as a potential threat. The terrified response proves the point we made that Democracy is not welcome in Piermont.

They should have read it more closely. It was clear that no judgments have been reached, no candidates officially named, no positions made public and it was too early to form opinions and give endorsements. A day or so later, we also posted information for the Republicans.

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, dammed lies, and statistics.” Benjamin Disraeli

The mailing also claimed that village taxes have increased an average of only 2.58% during the past two years. As is so often the case in statements by this Village Board, this is only approximately correct. The actual increases average 3.13%, but let us not quibble over this minor error.

Of more importance is the selective use of the past two years as the time frame for the measurement. There would be no Unify Piermont if Village tax increases had averaged 2.6%, roughly inflation, over the past ten years. An average increase of 2.6% would be acceptable to most village residents assuming that it wasn’t coupled with an even more massive debt load. And, our current taxes would be $2.7 million rather than $3.8 million.

As the author of the letter knows full well, the 6.2% over two years is comprised of 5.5% in the first year and 0.7% in the current budget. The current budget reflects unrealistic assumptions regarding police salaries, a large appropriation of surplus built up in the past to be used in an election year, the pressure of Unify Piermont against another large tax increase and a somewhat belated recognition of the recession.

“Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.” Franklin D. Roosevelt

The lawsuit mentioned in the letter and linked to Unify Piermont by implication has nothing to do with Unify Piermont. The lawsuit substantially predates the formation of Unify Piermont and was driven by broken promises by the Village Board to provide all residents with the same services for the same level of taxes. To do otherwise would not be “fair”. Ironically, the author of the letter suggested that Piermont Landing sue the village if the village did not provide full services with the revaluation.

For Unify Piermont, the entire Village includes “the hillsiders”, the “Landing people”, indeed all of the Village, not just selected roads and streets. So, yes we do have a fine, well equipped DPW, but they do not keep all of the streets in the village “free of snow & ice” nor do they maintain “the entire Village’s appearance.”

This message was prepared by Unify Piermont which is dedicated to returning responsible, representative government to Piermont.

Unify Piermont is a group made up of village residents from all areas of the village, and from all political parties. We need to create a local village government that will address the problems created by the current and previous administrations.

Piermont/River Villages Republican Club

Dear Fellow Unify Piermont Supporter,

We have been asked to post the following information by the local Republican Club:

The Piermont/River Villages /Republican Club cordially invites you to attend a Mixer being held by the Club.
Date: Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2009
Time: 7 pm
Place: Cornetta's Restaurant, Piermont Ave., Piermont

Dinner and no-host bar.
$30 per person - payable at the door

Many of the Republican/Independence Party candidates will be there. It will be an excellent opportunity to speak with them directly and to voice your concerns over taxes, and over other issues.

Please contact me for information or questions. Please also contact me to confirm that you will attend.

I look forward to seeing you there!

Anne Putko
President
Piermont/River Villages Republican Club
putkoa@aol.com
www.rvgopclub.blogspot.com

Democratic Caucus

Dear Fellow Unify Piermont Supporter,

We have been notified that the Democratic Caucus is scheduled to be held on Thursday, September 10, 2009 at Village Hall. Registration is at 7:30 PM with the Caucus to commence at 8 PM.

We further understand that the candidates expected to be nominated are the incumbents, Mayor Chris Sanders (who lives on Piermont Avenue), Trustee Mark Blomquist (Ash Street) and the current Planning Board Chairman, Steve Silverberg (Harbor Cove).

While it generally does not happen, there might be nominations from the floor, and these candidates will not be final until after the Caucus. Since the candidates have not yet announced their platform, Unify Piermont is unable to determine at this point if they intend “business as usual” or if they intend to address the significant issues existing in Piermont.

In our opinion, many of the excessive spending issues, every increasing debt levels and onerous tax burden imposed on the residents of Piermont over the past ten years can be attributed to the fact that we are a “one-horse” village. There has only infrequently been any opposition to the Democratic candidates. One-party government does not provide any checks and balances.

We are not yet aware of when or even if the Republicans will be holding a caucus or if any other political party candidates will declare themselves.

We intend to consider an endorsement when all of the candidates are known and their positions made public. Until then, we urge our members who are Democrats to attend the September 10th caucus and make their opinions known.

Together we can make a difference.

Unify Piermont

Spending Per Capita - Piermont vs. Nyack

A Village Trustee recently sent Unify Piermont an article describing Nyack’s tax increase for next year at 9.5%, presumably to be compared favorably with Piermont’s .39% tax increase.

Nyack’s budget is $5.1 million, Piermont's $4.8 million.

Another Trustee estimated at a public meeting that Nyack pays Orangetown $1.2 million for police services, so let’s add that to the $5.1 million.

Based on the latest Census Bureau estimates, that means the Nyack residents are paying $926 each for Village services including police protection. The same number in Piermont is almost double, $1,845.

In the latest budget, Piermont increased spending at 3.44%. Unify Piermont did some projections. It will take Nyack until 2023, another 13 years, to catch up assuming Nyack increases spending 9.5% each year and Piermont keeps its spending increases to 3.44%.

If you can still afford to live in Piermont in 2023, you will have the satisfaction of knowing that Nyack’s taxes are finally higher. However, there are several points to keep in mind:

1. Since 2000, Piermont’s spending has increased 88%, an average of almost 9% annually under the current and previous administrations. So the chance of 3.44% for the next 13 years is slim unless we elect a Village Board with more concern for the taxpayers in Piermont.

2. Why 0.39% for Piermont this year and 9.5% for Nyack? Well, one answer might be that Mayor Shields has announced he is not running for re-election. Is Mayor Sanders running again?

3. Since the last official Census in 2000, the Census Bureau estimates that Nyack’s population has increased and Piermont’s has declined. Obviously, if this trend continues it will take longer for Nyack to catch-up. Piermont taxpayers may have to wait until 2030 to be on par.

The answer to the problem is obvious; Piermont spends too much for our population base. Since we can’t grow our population, we need to cut spending and/or combine services with sister villages.

This message was prepared by Unify Piermont which is dedicated to returning responsible, representative government to Piermont.

Unify Piermont is a group made up of village residents from all areas of the village, and from all political parties. We need to create a local village government that will address the problems created by the current and previous administrations.

We need your help, your input and your involvement. If you share our concerns about Village taxes, Village debt and the lack of any meaningful communication from our Village Board; than e-mail us at unifypiermont@live.com with your name and address or leave a message at 845-613-7675. We will notify you when a new posting goes up on our website at http://www.unifypiermont.blogspot.com/.

A Review of Police Salaries in Piermont

UNIFY PIERMONT (unifypiermont@live.com)

A Review of Police Salaries in Piermont

A recent article in The Rockland Express discussed police salaries in Clarkstown, Ramapo and Orangetown. It indicated that the entry-level base salaries are respectively $61,905, $40,418 and $43,475. While Piermont has only experienced police officers, it did get Unify Piermont thinking about our Police budget.

We have previously published a blog identifying the eight full time police personnel as the top eight wage earners in Piermont. We thought that further analysis might be interesting since the Village Board seems incapable of doing anything about this, our largest expense (see blog on functional budget).

Excluding the Chief and the Part-time Policeman, the other seven officers received $697,000 in base salary in 2009, an average of just under $100,000. Excluding the Sergeant, the Patrolmen earned an average of $97,600.

Vacation, holiday and longevity pay added another $82,000 or almost $12,000 a man. While these items are treated separately for municipal budgeting purposes, in reality they should be considered as part of base pay. So the average Piermont Policeman, excluding the Chief and the Part-time Policeman, earned an average of just over $111,000 before overtime.

Overtime added another $85,000 to the Police budget or another $12,000 per man. By Unify Piermont’s calculations, this was just under 1100 hours of overtime. The thought occurred to us, if we are paying so much in overtime, perhaps we need more part-time policemen.

Obviously, some overtime is required. Our police officers are very professional and they are not going to stop in the middle of writing a ticket, pursuing a suspect or interrogating a witness because it is the end of the shift.

On the other hand, we have a part-time patrolman who worked just over 900 hours last year for $22,000. One would assume that overtime is frequently required for special events. Unify Piermont understands that the Rockland Sheriff's Department has a voluntary Sheriff’s Deputy Reserve Force, comprised of 100 trained volunteers, that in some cases can be called upon for support for special events. Has the Village investigated this?

It would seem that there is a potential for some savings in overtime, if the Village Board wants to achieve it. Unify Piermont expects that this suggestion, as with so many others over the years, will be dismissed without careful consideration, but as the lottery saying goes “Hey, you never know”.

One last observation, although the Village consistently budgets for $69,000 in police overtime, it always runs over that.

This message was prepared by Unify Piermont which is dedicated to returning responsible, representative government to Piermont.

Unify Piermont is a group made up of village residents from all areas of the village, and from all political parties. We need to create a local village government that will address the problems created by the current and previous administrations.

We need your help, your input and your involvement. If you share our concerns about Village taxes, Village debt and the lack of any meaningful communication from our Village Board; than e-mail us at unifypiermont@live.com with your name and address or leave a message at 845-613-7675. We will notify you when a new posting goes up on our website at www.unifypiermont.blogspot.com.