Edgemont Community Council Calls for Reconsideration of the Greenburgh Budget
The following Open Letter was read by Geoff Loftus, Edgemont Community Council president, at the Public Comment portion of the Nov. 9 Greenburgh Town Board Meeting: The Edgemont Community Council (ECC) met on November 7, 2011 and voted to ask the Town Board to please reconsider the 2012 Budget – as proposed we believe this budget has some fundamental issues:
The 2012 Budget requires a $1.8 million draw down from the fund balance to keep the increase in taxes down.
We would like to know the specifics and probability of the $250,000 sale of town property, as a similar item for $550,000 in the 2011 budget has not materialized. The 2012 Budget also assumes increases in revenues from rental fees but offers no explanation why these fees should more than double and triple.
The proposed Budget appears to inflate revenues by including hundreds of thousands of dollars in grant revenue for such items as conservation programs, a study of Hartsdale Avenue and community development, but with no corresponding expenditures required for these grants. Even if the town's contribution is zero, it must still spend the funds and that spending should be listed in the Budget.
The 2012 Budget calls for cuts in insurance. We remember when the town had to pay out a substantial sum when a tree killed a motorist on Central Avenue and the Town was under-insured. Also, the proposed Budget has substantial cuts in contingency lines which means the town may have to dip further into fund balance should anything unforeseen arise.
We believe the proposed Budget makes use of some questionable accounting approaches and assumptions instead of cutting costs and creating a reasonable fiscal path for Greenburgh's future. Instead, in this proposal, we still have:
- Redundant recreation departments with duplicative commissioners, staffs, facilities and costs.
- A Town-run after-school program when every school district already has its own program.
- A Town SWAT team when the county has one – no one else seems to feel the need of their own SWAT team.
The budget calls for a few job cuts, but the budget message says the jobs will be restored if the unions agree to Town demands. Problem is, the budget seems to assume the unions will agree because there's no provision for any increase in wages.
The ECC calls upon the members of the Town Board to reject this Budget and go back to work – to produce a budget that will move Greenburgh into a healthy fiscal future.
Sincerely,
Geoff Loftus
President, The Edgemont Community Council
Comments (6)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Edgemont taxpayer, November 18, 2011
"Concerned Edgemont parent" doesn't know what he or she is talking about. The idea of selling school property as part of a plan to incorporate Edgemont as a village was injected into Caroline Tzelios ill-conceived race for a position on the school board by opponents of incorporation who seized on the issue in order to turn the school board race into a referendum on incorporation. Tzelios herself went along with it. Tzelios should have known better. For one thing, she has children in the school and knows that the idea of selling school property near the nature center has been a project engaged in every year not by high school seniors, but by seventh graders.
Tzelios and her zealous anti-incorporation supporters elected to politicize that project, and in the eyes of those who knew what the school program was about, they all looked pretty silly. As for EVEC itself, it made no recommendation on incorporation but looked at costs associated with various assumptions about services and facilities that might be desired or required.
All Marc Ackerman is saying is the obvious: that a village mayor and trustees elected by the people of Edgemont might make very different choices than those that EVEC decided to make. For example, EVEC assumed that a village of Edgemont would acquire land to build a village hall and, on that basis, concluded that Edgemont would have to spend millions of dollars in upfront infrastructure costs.
But an elected village mayor and board might decide it is cheaper to rent space instead; after all, that's what the Village of Rye Brook did when it incorporated back in the 1980s. It didn't decide to build a village hall until more than 15 years had passed. Incorporation deserves a healthy discussion of the pros and cons, but the ad hominem attacks and needless politicizing of school board elections only makes those opposed to incorporation sound shrill and frankly, embarrassingly ignorant.
Tzelios and her zealous anti-incorporation supporters elected to politicize that project, and in the eyes of those who knew what the school program was about, they all looked pretty silly. As for EVEC itself, it made no recommendation on incorporation but looked at costs associated with various assumptions about services and facilities that might be desired or required.
All Marc Ackerman is saying is the obvious: that a village mayor and trustees elected by the people of Edgemont might make very different choices than those that EVEC decided to make. For example, EVEC assumed that a village of Edgemont would acquire land to build a village hall and, on that basis, concluded that Edgemont would have to spend millions of dollars in upfront infrastructure costs.
But an elected village mayor and board might decide it is cheaper to rent space instead; after all, that's what the Village of Rye Brook did when it incorporated back in the 1980s. It didn't decide to build a village hall until more than 15 years had passed. Incorporation deserves a healthy discussion of the pros and cons, but the ad hominem attacks and needless politicizing of school board elections only makes those opposed to incorporation sound shrill and frankly, embarrassingly ignorant.
-
- +5
-
-
written by 1931 and the way forward from papa paul, November 18, 2011
just to clarify - it was in 1931 that greenville (edgemont) sought to become part of scarsdale.
among other things, if edgemont became part of scarsdale it would most likely have to assume the debt obligations of scarsdale while still paying off its share of those in greenburgh.
another strategy for edgemont would be to consider joining an existing village in greenburgh (again, not an easy thing for many reasons) or seeking a complete realignment within the town to have it become part of a new town made up perhaps of some of the other villages.
another option is to push for term limits for town board members. until recently the ecc had term limits. scarsdale has them. yonkers has it.
finally the 2 year term of the supervisor is an absurdity. it is not onlyl an incumbent protection plan, but, it forces any candidate to run for office everyday and so we get government by press release instead of the sober strategic thinking that someone in office for a four year term would bring.
among other things, if edgemont became part of scarsdale it would most likely have to assume the debt obligations of scarsdale while still paying off its share of those in greenburgh.
another strategy for edgemont would be to consider joining an existing village in greenburgh (again, not an easy thing for many reasons) or seeking a complete realignment within the town to have it become part of a new town made up perhaps of some of the other villages.
another option is to push for term limits for town board members. until recently the ecc had term limits. scarsdale has them. yonkers has it.
finally the 2 year term of the supervisor is an absurdity. it is not onlyl an incumbent protection plan, but, it forces any candidate to run for office everyday and so we get government by press release instead of the sober strategic thinking that someone in office for a four year term would bring.
-
- -3
-
-
written by 1931, November 18, 2011
in a move primarily backed by real estate developers, edgemont (then mostly known as greenville), sought to become part of scarsdale. it was rejected by the scarsdale trustees.
the real issue is mr feiner (a former scarsdale resident). he is the problem and not the problem solver. he ran in 1991 on a term limits platform and is now in office 20 plus years with no end in sight. among other failings, he has stalled a property revaluation which hasnt been done in greenburgh since the mid 1950s.
as for edgemont leaving greenburgh, outside of becoming its 7th village (a long shot), such a notion has as much chance as enactment of 9-9-9 or the departments of energy, education and commerce being abolished. one might add that after 10 years of study, the villages of portchester and rye brook have been unable to figure out if they want to get rid of the town of rye.
the focus in edgemont (and greenburgh) should be to find candidates to run against feiner and his rubber stamp crew on the town board. the longer a career politician like feiner is in office, te weaker he becomes. his sale date may be coming to an end especially if the town loses the appeal in the fortress bible case and the town's taxpyayers are on the hook for millions of dollars because feiner violated the constitutional rights of that religious community.
the real issue is mr feiner (a former scarsdale resident). he is the problem and not the problem solver. he ran in 1991 on a term limits platform and is now in office 20 plus years with no end in sight. among other failings, he has stalled a property revaluation which hasnt been done in greenburgh since the mid 1950s.
as for edgemont leaving greenburgh, outside of becoming its 7th village (a long shot), such a notion has as much chance as enactment of 9-9-9 or the departments of energy, education and commerce being abolished. one might add that after 10 years of study, the villages of portchester and rye brook have been unable to figure out if they want to get rid of the town of rye.
the focus in edgemont (and greenburgh) should be to find candidates to run against feiner and his rubber stamp crew on the town board. the longer a career politician like feiner is in office, te weaker he becomes. his sale date may be coming to an end especially if the town loses the appeal in the fortress bible case and the town's taxpyayers are on the hook for millions of dollars because feiner violated the constitutional rights of that religious community.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Edgemont Resident, November 14, 2011
Lets stop dancing around the subject and just do what we all know needs to be done: Alloow Edgemont should join the Town of Scarsdale. The 2 populations are more closely aligned with each other than any other area in the county, the services are just as good and those in Edgemont could preserve the one thing that defines the community: the school! Financially it would help both sides and should contain the ridiculous rise is taxes. Future politican issues will be reduced (notice I didn't say eliminated) since both communities have a similar demographic. Finally, consolidation makes sense as a general principle. Private enterprises do it all the time; why can't municipalities?
Its hanging out there, lets just get it out on the table and discuss.
Its hanging out there, lets just get it out on the table and discuss.
-
- +2
-
-
written by A Concerned Edgemont Parent , November 13, 2011
Marc Ackerman's reference in an earlier posting to "private agendas" by a "small number of Edgemont community members (who) attempted to portray the (school board) election as a referendum on Edgemont incorporation" reflects a distorted recollection of the facts. Let me remind everyone of what took place.
It was the Edgemont High School itself which provoked the discussion of the sale of school property and "villagization", and NOT community members. During the school board election cycle, the Edgemont high school seniors were given a project to publicly debate whether or not Edgemont School property should be sold to those seeking to incorporate Edgemont, for municipal purposes such as a Village Hall, a Village police station and a Village jail. Contrary to Marc Ackerman's assertion, this issue was NOT raised by any Edgemont community members.
The issue was not merely theoretical but was probably prompted by the actions of Bob Bernstein, one of the leading advocates for incorporation, who had engaged in behind the scenes negotiations to buy property immediately adjacent to the High School for the municipal purposes mentioned above. When HIS "private agenda" failed, and his plans came to the public's attention, he tried to disguise his objective by saying something to the effect that he was "just kidding", but he apparently was taken quite seriously by the high school.
But Bob Bernstein was not kidding when he started conducting clandestine meetings in the community trying, once again, to drum up support for his ill conceived incorporation idea, a plan not supported by the Edgemont Village Exploratory Committee which thoroughly explored the incorporation issue and decided against recommending it. This conclusion was supported by the facts found in the EVEC report, that incorporation would result in over a 30% increase in our taxes, as well as the fact that the community would have to acquire property for use as municipal facilities such as those mentioned above, which was what Bob Bernstein had apparently attempted to do.
If school property was to be sold for any purpose, including to support Edgemont incorporation, it would require the approval of the School Board members. Those running for the School Board included Gerald Stoughton, Tom McCormack, David Stern, all fine, dedicated, civic minded members of our community. In the past David Stern had spoken out forcefully in favor of incorporation. None of the other candidates had made their views on the issue publicly. Given these highly unusual facts, it was not unreasonable to expect those running for the School Board to publicly state their position on the possible sale of school property for any reason, including to support a Village incorporation effort.
Once these facts came to light many people were equally concerned that the SBNC had not asked each of the candidates during the vetting process exactly what their position was on this critical issue. The fact that Marc Ackerman would even criticize some of our friends and neighbors for seeking a full and open discussion of this issue undermines his entire argument in support of the current nominating process.
It is hard to believe Marc Ackerman, or anyone else, would think asking the candidates for their position on this issue to be inappropriate, particularly since the SBNC had not done so. If it was appropriate for our high school students to discuss it does anyone really think it was inappropriate for the School Board candidates to be asked to discuss it? In the future EVERY candidate for the Board, as well as everyone seeking to serve on the nominating committee, should be asked to fully address this issue and specifically state their position publicly. I hope Marc agrees.
A Concerned Edgemont Parent
It was the Edgemont High School itself which provoked the discussion of the sale of school property and "villagization", and NOT community members. During the school board election cycle, the Edgemont high school seniors were given a project to publicly debate whether or not Edgemont School property should be sold to those seeking to incorporate Edgemont, for municipal purposes such as a Village Hall, a Village police station and a Village jail. Contrary to Marc Ackerman's assertion, this issue was NOT raised by any Edgemont community members.
The issue was not merely theoretical but was probably prompted by the actions of Bob Bernstein, one of the leading advocates for incorporation, who had engaged in behind the scenes negotiations to buy property immediately adjacent to the High School for the municipal purposes mentioned above. When HIS "private agenda" failed, and his plans came to the public's attention, he tried to disguise his objective by saying something to the effect that he was "just kidding", but he apparently was taken quite seriously by the high school.
But Bob Bernstein was not kidding when he started conducting clandestine meetings in the community trying, once again, to drum up support for his ill conceived incorporation idea, a plan not supported by the Edgemont Village Exploratory Committee which thoroughly explored the incorporation issue and decided against recommending it. This conclusion was supported by the facts found in the EVEC report, that incorporation would result in over a 30% increase in our taxes, as well as the fact that the community would have to acquire property for use as municipal facilities such as those mentioned above, which was what Bob Bernstein had apparently attempted to do.
If school property was to be sold for any purpose, including to support Edgemont incorporation, it would require the approval of the School Board members. Those running for the School Board included Gerald Stoughton, Tom McCormack, David Stern, all fine, dedicated, civic minded members of our community. In the past David Stern had spoken out forcefully in favor of incorporation. None of the other candidates had made their views on the issue publicly. Given these highly unusual facts, it was not unreasonable to expect those running for the School Board to publicly state their position on the possible sale of school property for any reason, including to support a Village incorporation effort.
Once these facts came to light many people were equally concerned that the SBNC had not asked each of the candidates during the vetting process exactly what their position was on this critical issue. The fact that Marc Ackerman would even criticize some of our friends and neighbors for seeking a full and open discussion of this issue undermines his entire argument in support of the current nominating process.
It is hard to believe Marc Ackerman, or anyone else, would think asking the candidates for their position on this issue to be inappropriate, particularly since the SBNC had not done so. If it was appropriate for our high school students to discuss it does anyone really think it was inappropriate for the School Board candidates to be asked to discuss it? In the future EVERY candidate for the Board, as well as everyone seeking to serve on the nominating committee, should be asked to fully address this issue and specifically state their position publicly. I hope Marc agrees.
A Concerned Edgemont Parent
-
- -5
-
-
Write comment
I can never solve it by trying to make it smaller, but if I make it big enough, I can begin to see the outlines of a solution."
this appears to be the problem with edgemont incoporation (which runs 100% against the move in new york state for municipal consolidation).
for example, wny not think about extending incorporation to parts of unincorporated harsdale?
many other villages have two school districts within their border (dobbs ferry for example where about 10% of the village lies within the ardsley school district).
if you want to guaranty another 100 year discussion of edgemont incorporation, then incorporation advocates should just keep doing the same thing year in and year out while expecting different results. that, as another president (bill clinton) observed, is the definition of insanity.