Well, Michael, we'll just have to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and get it done, right?  Maybe have days where people go out walking, getting petitions signed.  Set up at the mall or some of the grocery stores.

Probably also be good to have someone canvas the outlying areas, too.  

All good ideas BIGK.  I've got an idea too but don't want to reveal it in this forum lest somehow it be thwarted.  (I've always been a little wary and paranoid about revealing too much strategy in public beforehand.  It just makes it harder if they know how you're coming after them.  I like surprises.)

Just call the board of elections and they will give you the number of voters who voted in the last election.

Quoted Text

It will be surprising indeed if some indignant Rotterdam resident doesn’t mount a petition drive to overturn these raises.

This is the open door!!

It isn't the WHY they are proposing a raise it is the HOW. I also know that we are all busy with our normal everyday lives, not to mention that it is the week before Christmas. But if anyone is really serious about this petition, this week is key. There is no need to go door to door. Although it may be a benefit. Just park yourself out in front of the mall entrances, Wal-Mart, Rite Aid or any other lucrative business at this time of the year. And then there is always the media attention this will create.

The petitions must be done correctly or they will be null and void. If anyone is interested, I believe that I can obtain the correct petitions that would be used to collect signatures. However, I can't help in collecting signatures, but you can bet that I would if I could. I have my mom home now on a wound vac 24/7 and can't leave the house. But I will help in any way I can.

JoAnn if it's done the way you suggest right now there will be enough signatures on the petition in a few days. I have always believed that it was wrong for a legislature to vote themselves a raise when someone else had to pay for it. Wouldn't it be nice to go to work tomorrow morning and have all the employees of the company you work for vote themselves a raise and let it become the companies problem of how to pay for it.

Quoted from 16

Well, Michael, we'll just have to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and get it done, right?  Maybe have days where people go out walking, getting petitions signed.  Set up at the mall or some of the grocery stores.

Probably also be good to have someone canvas the outlying areas, too.  

I believe it is 10% of the Rotterdam votes in the last election only.

http://www.spotlightnews.com

Quoted Text

PUBLIC HAS SAY ON RAISE (ROTTERDAM)

Posted on: 12/19/07
Ross Marvin, Spotlight Staff
email: marvinr@spotlightnews.com

The Rotterdam Town Board will hold a public hearing at 1 p.m. on New Year’s Day at town hall to discuss the adoption of a local law that would increase members’ salaries by $5,000 next year.

If passed, the law stipulates that board members will earn $15,000 in 2008, up from their current salary of $10,000.

“There hasn’t been an adjustment in 17 years,” said board member John Mertz, who noted that the raise would not apply to Supervisor Steven A. Tommasone, who earns $16,000 annually. “This is a period in Rotterdam history where the demands of the town board have increased, and while other positions have been adjusted accordingly over time, the board’s has not.”

According to Mertz, the new salary would be more competitive with what board members in similarly sized towns are currently making. Mertz cited Guilderland and Malta as two examples where board members earn salaries of $19,860 and $15,000, respectively.

Last month, the board voted 3-to-2 to amend the supervisor’s preliminary budget that did not include the raises. In order to amend board member salaries, the law stipulates that the town has to adopt a local law and hold a public hearing. If the law is not passed or overturned, the $20,000 budgeted for the raises for the four board members would remain unspent in 2008.

The local law would be subject to a permissive referendum. This means the law could be overturned if the board was presented with a signed petition containing the names of 10 percent of residents who voted in the 2006 statewide election.

Tommasone and board member Robert Godlewski voted against amending the budget last month. Godlewski also cast the lone vote against the call for a public hearing.

“The law says that once salaries are set in the notice of public hearing for the preliminary budget that they cannot be adjusted,” said Godlewski. “And, it’s simply not the right time to raise the salary of the board in Rotterdam.”

According to Town Attorney Gerard Parisi though, the call for a public hearing is standard legal procedure after the preliminary budget has been set.

“Since the salary is set in the preliminary budget, it can only be changed through the passage of a local law,” said Parisi, referring to the provision of Rotterdam town law.

Both Godlewski and board member Diane Marco will leave the board at the end of the year. Marco, who served on the board for eight years, voted in favor of the raise.

Michael Della Villa and John Silva will take their places on the board in January, and the two new board members might be welcomed with a pay raise. Parisi said that the law could be passed at the close of the public hearing on New Year’s Day, though it wouldn’t take effect for 45 days.

The $20,000 budgeted for the increase would be provided through fines, forfeited bail, ticket fees and other revenue from the justice courts, said Mertz.

When this town is run like Guilderland and the laws are enforced, storm water and drainage issues resolved, developers held accountable for their mistakes, and a responsible plan for future development is adopted and followed then a raise will be warranted.

Or here's an idea, how about something less than a 50% raise?

Bump it up for each of the next couple elections maybe, go 1-2k per election until it's at the level that you wish.  Also, once you get the businesses in that all the studies have been getting done for, then maybe we'll have the extra money in the budget for this and it won't have to be pulled out of fines that you don't know if you're going to collect or not.

Good idea BigK, as long as it is done BEFORE an election AND included in the budget. And I also believe that the public hearing for this proposed raise should be rescheduled for AFTER the 1st of the year. Not on New Years Day!

I don't believe this is about how much the raise is.  It's about proper procedure.  It's about transparency.  Simply put, they botched implementation.  It wasn't discussed publicly before, during, or after the election.  Their intended fix is holding a public hearing on New Year's Day?  It's ludicrous!

I intend to make the hearing unpleasant.  To pass the law, they're going to need a vote from one of the newcomers.  I intend to make that proposition an unpleasant one too.  I never thought I would see the day that the very 1st order of business for a newly elected official would be to give himself a raise.  That's a ballsy move.  And if it's not political suicide, I'm moving into the woods!  

Oh yeah...if they pass the law, I'll mobilize for petition signatures.  I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.

Here's my blog post from the other day before the Gazette editorial was printed:
http://rotterdamny.blogspot.com/


Holiday Antics

It appears Town of Rotterdam officials are not immune from working on holidays after all. After a full year of turning a blind eye to holiday wood-clearing shenanigans in Masullo Estates, the Town Board is adopting the strategy itself. They’ve decided to hold a public hearing regarding their controversial pay raise…on New Year’s Day. Of course, the public hearing is only a result of not adhering to the law when they awarded themselves a raise by amendment a few weeks ago. Happy New Year…at least if you’re a councilmember.

A public hearing for this matter is totally appropriate. Holding it New Year’s Day, on the other hand, is totally ridiculous.

Let’s keep the record straight anyway. Supervisor Tommasone didn’t include council raises in the proposed budget and voted against the amendment. Outgoing board member Mr. Godlewski also voted against it. Congratulations to both of them.

Mr. Mertz, Mr. Signore, and the outgoing Ms. Marco voted for the raise.

What I’d like to see at this point is for the 2 new council members, Mr. Della Villa and Mr. Silva, to have to cast a vote on the raise now. Remember, they ran for office and were elected to that office on the expectation of the previous $10,000 salary. If nothing else, I’d like to see them have to vote. I don’t want either to be able to accept the higher salary but blame someone else for getting it. These 2 guys ought to be against any raise and vote accordingly. Do the math and the vote swings 3-2 against an increase.

The argument will be made that somehow they deserve the raise because it’s been so long since they received one. Sorry, but from where I come from, raises are merit-based. Public service was never intended to be rewarded monetarily. These are difficult times for residents as they struggle to absorb ever mounting financial burdens beyond their control. We should all be tightening our belt together. $20,000 may not seem like a lot of money as a percentage of the budget but it’s still real money – better applied to almost any other need.

If Mr. Mertz and Mr. Signore don’t like their present $10,000 compensation – good news – they’re up for re-election next. The big dogs are beginning to look a little smaller.

Posted by Michael at 2:18 PM 0 comments
Friday, December 7, 2007

“There hasn’t been an adjustment in 17 years,” said board member John Mertz, who noted that the raise would not apply to Supervisor Steven A. Tommasone, who earns $16,000 annually. “This is a period in Rotterdam history where the demands of the town board have increased, and while other positions have been adjusted accordingly over time, the board’s has not.”

According to Mertz, the new salary would be more competitive with what board members in similarly sized towns are currently making. Mertz cited Guilderland and Malta as two examples where board members earn salaries of $19,860 and $15,000, respectively.

Can someone explain to me why it has to be competitve with what a surrounding community is paying?  Any compensation for any employment should be merit-based.  Period.  This is public service.  Don't like the compensation?  Don't seek the position.

I could poke holes in this kind of logic all day long.  It could easily be argued the board has been overpaid for the last 17 years based on performance.  I wouldn't have made the comparison to Guilderland...they're doing it better than Rotterdam ever has.

Can anyone in the media get a comment from either new board member?  I already knew what Mr. Mertz thought.

(See...this is why I started a blog so I wouldn't be replying to myself multiple times... )

Is it possible that the reps had this strategy right from the beginning? Perhaps IF they mentioned the raise during the budget process and during the election campaign, the dems would have jumped all over it an put it in a negative light. I mean this is POLITICS we're talking about here! However I do disagree with a public session regarding this raise issue being on New Years Day.