ROTTERDAM Board OKs budget plan 4 councilmen given a raise BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter
Town Board members approved the 2008 preliminary budget Wednesday and in the process gave themselves a raise. The four town councilmen will each receive an additional $5,000 under the new budget. The raise is a 50 percent increase from the $10,000 board members have been paid annually and is their first pay increase in more than 15 years. To compensate for the increased salaries, board members also supported a budget amendment shifting an additional $20,000 they anticipate collecting through fines, fees and forfeited bail. Overall, the budget amounts to the same $19.9 million in the tentative version and doesn’t alter the projected residential tax rate of $3.36 per $1,000 of assessed property value. Owners of commercial properties will pay $5.59 per $1,000 under the dual tax rate. Residents owning a home valued at $200,000 can expect to pay roughly $671 in town taxes, based on general and highway fund spending. “None of this has impacted the present budget,” board member Joe Signore said of the raises. “None of this has impacted the tax rate in the 2008 budget.” The budget calls for a total tax levy of $9.46 million, down $205,962 from the current budget. Board member Diane Marco voted in favor of the amendment, acknowledging that the raises wouldn’t go into effect until after she leaves office Dec. 31. She said the increase is necessary to help attract a broader pool of candidates for the board, “We have not had an increase since 1991,” she said. John Mertz also voted in favor. Board member Robert Godlewski and Supervisor Steve Tommasone both voted against the amendment. The pay raises for the board will not affect the supervisor’s position, which will pay the same $16,000 salary as this year. The preliminary budget also includes a $5,000 raise for the assessor’s position, which was already slated to receive a $2,225 increase over this year’s salary. Assessor John Macejka Jr. now draws a salary of $57,750 for the six-year appointed position. The increase was noted in a range of salaries when the town recently advertised for the assessor’s position, which is up for reappointment. All four councilmen approved the assessor’s salary increase, with Tommasone the only dissenting vote. Tommasone argued the increase would lock the town into paying the raise instead of negotiating with the appointee. “I don’t agree with this at this time,” he said. “This is not an increase for the individual, it’s an increase for the position.” Board members also took away modest raises for the elected positions of highway superintendent, town clerk, receiver of taxes and town justice. Both Godlewski and Tommasone voted against the amendment.
The preliminary budget also includes a $5,000 raise for the assessor’s position, which was already slated to receive a $2,225 increase over this year’s salary. Assessor John Macejka Jr. now draws a salary of $57,750 for the six-year appointed position.
This is the raise I would clearly question, cause I really don't know what the hell this guy actually does! I realize that the raise goes to the 'position'....but I wouldn't have done anything until a new person was appointed.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Bumble, at the meeting it was stated that the town is taking applications for a new assessor and the raise is not necessarily going to our present assessor.
Now THIS is an assessor! Niskayuna Town Assessor Amy Houlihan is earning her keep. She actually works with the residents. I hope they 'appoint' an assessor who actually works like Niskayuna's does!
Quoted Text
Niskayuna gets assessment data Property owners can review information to be used for revaluation
By PAUL NELSON, Staff writer First published: Wednesday, November 14, 2007
NISKAYUNA -- Data collection is done with and residential property owners can now review information about their homes that the town will use to come up with new values. The one-page form, which went out by mail about two weeks ago, included the square footage, style, and number of rooms in the house, according to Town Assessor Amy Houlihan. The document condenses data from a survey residents filled out with the results of an exterior inspection.
The assessment has so far been relatively smooth, Houlihan said.
There has, however, been some confusion regarding what constitutes a finished basement on raised ranch and split level homes.
The assessor said homeowners should make any changes to the paperwork if they see anything they consider inaccurate before sending it back.
The deadline to turn the paperwork was Tuesday.
And residents can also call up Houlihan to schedule an interior inspection or if they want their property measured.
As of last week, she had already done just under two dozen, mostly related to the condition of the house, Houlihan added.
Upon getting back all the information back, Houlihan and her staff working with a consultant hired by the town, will then input any changes into a computer system and reinspect properties, if necessary.
From there, the town and firm will take a look real estate sales in the town within the past two years "to make sure they are viable sales."
Then by the middle of December, they will begin running preliminary fair market values through a computer system based on comparable home sales. Houlihan and the workers with the firm will visit every neighborhood in town to verify the computer generated data.
"The computer can only do so much, so we will physically go out to the right of way to verify that similar houses are assessed at about the same," Houlihan added.
A workshop will be held before disclosure notices are mailed out on March 1.
The disclosure statement will contain the fractional value of the current assessment and the preliminary new full value as well as the final net change.
Informal hearings for any homeowners who want to contest their new assessment will be done by appointment and the town has plans to open a resource center for anyone with questions.
The new assessments will be available by street, neighborhood and type of homes, Houlihan said. Residents can also mail in complaints.
A tentative town assessment roll will go out May 1 with the final town assessment roll to follow two months later, Houlihan said. Between that time, there will be a grievance period before the town Board of Assessment Review.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Here's one more distinction. The assessor position is full-time. Board members are part-time. One is more of a livelihood you could say. My view is if you're inclined to be a board member it's more about serving than being compensated. I fully recognize they commit tremendous amounts of time and effort so I'm not saying they don't work hard. They're just in the wrong line if they want to get paid for it.
And here's the another thing about this. I assume there is a major difference in responsibilities as far as the difference between the Town Board Members and the Supervisor. I would assume that Steve Tommasone does much more than the rest of the board does. Before this raise, he was getting paid 60% more than the rest of the board, which, if he's doing the extra work, would be expected.
Now, how is someone to think that they should be doing so much more work for just $1,000 per year, a 6 2/3 % rate above what just any other member of the board does? I think that, yes, it will help to get more people interested in the board seats, but it will also push interest away from the Supervisor position, unless something is done for that position.
Let's hope the new board members (as well as the incumbents and those awaiting their next chance for reelection) actually earn this money.
Posted on: 11/21/07 Jennifer Farnsworth, Contributing Writer email: news@spotlightnews.com
Rotterdam town board members will see a 50 percent pay increase next year, after the board approved, 3-to-2, the change in salary. At the Wednesday, Nov. 14, meeting, they also approved the preliminary 2008 budget, which will not change because of the pay increase.
“I am voting for the pay increase because there has been none since 1991. Keep that in mind,” said town council member Diane Marco.
Marco said that although she will not run for re-election, she still believes the increase is merited.
“It’s necessary to have the increase to allow for a broader pool of candidates for positions on the board,” said Marco.
Board members Robert Godlewski and town Supervisor Steven Tommasone voted against the increase.
Board members Joe Signore and Jon Mertz said they felt it was time for the increase. Signore told the board that the increase will not cost the taxpayers any more than the anticipated tax rate of $3.36 per $1,000 of assessed property value. The budget is currently at $19.9 million.
“Right now, our budget will reflect a tax increase levy of $9.46 million. This is actually a decrease from last year of over $200,000,” said Signore.
The pay increase, which will total $20,000, will come from variety of sources, including fees, fines and forfeited bail money.
Town assessor John Macejka Jr., will also receive an increase of $5,000, bringing his salary up to $62,750. Several other staffing changes include establishing the position of economic development coordinator for the town. Tommasone said funds have already been allocated for this position.
Godlewski questioned whether there was a need to establish a salary amount without first hiring a person for the job.
Tommasone said, for budget purposes, the board is more comfortable with allocating anticipated amounts.
“We have accounted for the salary for this job. We now have about a dozen qualified candidates and are in the process of narrowing it down,” said Tommasone.
Several residents from the Westhill area of Rotterdam also spoke out during the public hearing portion of the meeting about the preservation of what is referred to as the “green belt” of this wooded area around Rotterdam Square Mall. William Ross, of Juniper Drive, said that protecting the land from any further development is what he feels the majority of his neighbors desire.
“One of the greatest draws is the green belt and open space in this area; it is what made me purchase my home. Rumors over septic and water concerns are simply not valid. There is no evidence of failed septics, and the water is great. This area needs to be kept as is,” said Ross.
I have mixed feelings on this whole issue. I say 'no raise' yet in the scope of things, all town positions have a salary range, so why should Rotterdam be any different....right? What I totally disagree with is the people appointed to these frivilous committees that get paid a few hundred bucks here and a few hundred bucks there. Most of these committees are absolute nonsense anyways.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I believe this is the issue that will be subject to a Permissive Referendum. Don't let this get by you. It may be similar to the law we pushed for referendum in the City of Schenectady.
ROTTERDAM Board must pass local law before approving raises, attorney advises BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter
Town Board members will need to adopt a local law next year before they can legally approve the raises for themselves that they included as an amendment in the budget last month, Rotterdam’s town attorney advised Monday. Because the initial 2008 budget didn’t include the raises, the only way to grant them later was to pass a local law, Town Attorney Gerard Parisi said. The local law is subject to a permissive referendum, meaning it could be challenged by a petition containing signatures from 10 percent of the number of residents who voted in the last statewide election, 2006. Town officials voted 3-2 last month to amend the budget to give each board position a $5,000 per year raise. Both Supervisor Steven Tommasone and Councilman Robert Godlewski voted against them. The increase is a 50 percent hike from the $10,000 board members have been paid annually and was their first pay increase in more than 15 years. Both Godlewski and board member Diane Marco — who favored the raises — will leave office in January. Newcomers Michael Della Villa and John Silva will join incumbents John Mertz and Joseph Signore as board members receiving the hike in salary. The pay raises did not affect the supervisor’s position, which will pay the same $16,000 salary as this year. Board members also took away modest raises from the elected positions of highway superintendent, town clerk, receiver of taxes and town justice; the raises had been budgeted but were cut back to their original levels in the adopted budget. Godlewski took issue with the raises during the board’s last meeting in November. He said the laws of New York governing towns prohibited the board from changing salary figures for each board seat, the town clerk and highway superintendent. “Because the salaries are fixed in the public hearing for the preliminary budget, that says you can’t make an adjustment,” he said Monday. But Marco disagreed. In previous years, she said, the board adjusted salaries using the same process. “They’ve never done it [by local law] through the eight years I’ve been here,” she said. “Every year, it’s been done by amendment.” The board is expected Wednesday to discuss a local law allowing the raises and to schedule a public hearing for it on New Year’s Day. Parisi said a law could be passed at the close of the public hearing, but would have to wait 45 days to take effect. If the local law is not passed or is overturned by a referendum, the $20,000 worth of raises would remain unspent in the budget. Board members provided for the raises by approving a budget amendment adding additional money they anticipate collecting through fines, fees and forfeited bail.
I believe this is the issue that will be subject to a Permissive Referendum. Don't let this get by you. It may be similar to the law we pushed for referendum in the City of Schenectady.
There's an article in today's paper.
Pat, I thought the same thing, but I knew it would be an involved process that I didn't have spare time to contribute to. Not at this time anyways. But I do commend Mr Parisi for bringing it to light. He seems to be a little bit more on the ball than the Schenectady attorneys, huh?
“Because the salaries are fixed in the public hearing for the preliminary budget, that says you can’t make an adjustment,” he said Monday. But Marco disagreed. In previous years, she said, the board adjusted salaries using the same process. “They’ve never done it [by local law] through the eight years I’ve been here,” she said. “Every year, it’s been done by amendment.”
It doesn't matter how it gets done, that is just a smoke screen.....THEY ALL EAT AT THE SAME TROUGH......it's a ride and very very very few find it duty....and if it is duty it is only for their own backyard/neighborhood(proven in the past) not the town as a whole, obviously......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
