Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY COUNTY
Legislature to vote on sales tax agreement tonight
BY MICHAEL LAMENDOLA Gazette Reporter

    A proposed sales tax agreement gives towns and the city slightly more money during the next four years, but it also increases the risk Schenectady County will come up short for its own needs, officials said.
    The Legislature scheduled a special meeting tonight to vote on the proposed agreement. The City Council approved the agreement Monday night, 4-3.
    The former sales tax agreement expired Nov. 30.
    Under the tentative agreement, the towns will receive no less than $7.8 million over the next four years and the city no less than $11 million — the amount they received under the old agreement.
    In addition, the towns will continue to receive another $3.3 million annually through a slice of the sales tax that funds the Metroplex Development Authority. Their share is 0.3 percent of one-half percent, with the rest going to Metroplex for its economic development operations.
    “There is a risk to the county if there is a guarantee of over $18 million, plus $3.3 million under the Metroplex portion,” said County Attorney Chris Gardner. “Next year will be a tough year for sales tax.”
    A major change in the tentative agreement is the removal of a provision to share extra sales tax revenues with the towns and the city if a certain threshold were reached.
    Under the proposed agreement, the county gets to keep all excess more than $83.5 million in sales tax receipts. The county expects to collect $83.9 million this year, the first time since the agreement was made in 1990, but county officials are pessimistic about collecting the full amount.
    To balance this loss, the towns get to retain increases on the 0.3 percent of the Metroplex sale tax funding formula.
    County Legislature Majority Leader Gary Hughes, D-Schenectady, said, “They fully participate in any sales tax growth. If sales tax collections go up, they get more.”
    The city will receive an additional $25,000 per year for four years under the agreement, regardless of changes in sale tax receipts.
    Sales tax has grown between 3 percent and 4 percent annually in the county, but county officials are predicting the amount to decline in coming years as a result of the recession.
    Hughes called the proposed agreement fair: “The towns are held harmless and the city is guaranteed a threshold that won’t drop below $11 million.”
    He said the county is looking at extra sales tax revenues in coming years to deal with anticipated cost shifts to local governments from the state government. “Clearly, the state strategy is to push costs downhill, and we need to address that,” he said.
BLANCHFIELD OPPOSITION
    City Council member Mark Blanchfield opposed the agreement on the grounds that it excluded the city from sharing in extra sales tax revenues. He also thought the city could have increased the amount it collects from sales tax above its current limit of 1.5 percent.
    The city can impose a 3 percent sale tax but can only retain 1.5 percent. The county would keep the other 1.5 percent. The county already keeps a further 0.5 percent of the sales tax, and Metroplex receives a further 0.5 percent. The total county share of sales tax, therefore, is 4 percent. The state imposes another 4 percent.
    Gardner said the city would need $733 million in taxable sales annually to generate the $11 million it current receives. In the past, when the city had its own sales tax, the tax generated $9 million.
    Blanchfield was unable to convince a majority of the council to support him, however. “If we had more sales tax, we could reduce property taxes. I was looking for a chance to share,” he said.
    The $11 million the city receives in sales tax represents 14 percent of the city’s $70 million.............................................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar01304

Anybody know the results of this (in)action tonight?

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY COUNTY
Legislature approves sales tax agreement
BY MICHAEL LAMENDOLA Gazette Reporter

    The Schenectady County Legislature approved a new four-year sales tax agreement Thursday night that gives a little extra to everyone but not a lot to anyone.
    Legislators approved the agreement, which runs to Nov. 30, 2012, along party lines, 8-3, with three Democrats and one Republican absent.
    The agreement guarantees $11 million to the city of Schenectady and $7.8 million to the towns and villages in sales tax receipts each year. The towns and villages also receive approximately $3.3 million through a portion of the sales tax that funds the Metroplex Development Authority.
    The city will receive an extra $25,000 per year, on top of the previous year’s $25,000, for a total of $250,000.
    The towns and villages will benefit from any growth in the Metroplex sales tax formula. They receive one-third of one-half of 1 percent of the sales tax. Metroplex receives the remainder, which totals around $7 million.
    If sales tax revenue grows by 1 percent annually, the towns and villages will receive an extra $125,000 on top of their regular share, said county Legislator Tony Jasenski, DRotterdam. Consequently, should sales tax revenue decline, they will have to absorb the loss on the Metroplex side of the formula.
    The county gets to retain any excess over $83.5 million in sales tax receipts. The prior four-year agreement required the county to share this excess with the city, towns and villages.
    The county projects collecting $83.5 million in 2009, but officials are pessimistic about collecting the full amount due to the recession.
    Some City Council members tried to block the agreement because it removed the sharing clause. But on Monday, the City Council approved the agreement 4-3.
    Schenectady County Legislature Minority Leader Robert Farley, RNiskayuna, said the agreement did not go far enough to help the towns and villages. “They are getting the same amount in real dollar terms that they got four years ago. Meanwhile, their costs have increased,” he said. “The county is taking from the towns.”
    Farley and Legislator Angelo Santabarbara, R-Rotterdam, said several supervisors told him they opposed the agreement. No supervisors attended the meeting.
    In a phone interview after the meeting, Princetown Supervisor Nicholas Maura said none of the supervisors are thrilled with it. “The increases are not indexed to anything and it has been going down about $15,000 over the past four years, but we do count on it,” Maura said. “But it might work out on the Metroplex side if there is growth.”
    Legislator Joseph Suhrada, RRotterdam, said the agreement “gives a very dangerous group of people more money to waste,” referring to majority Democrats.
    Majority Leader Gary Hughes, DSchenectady, called the agreement fair and said the towns and villages will “grow their share” if sales tax receipts increase. He called the deal with the city a compromise.
    Hughes said the county needs sales tax revenues to pay for the library system, the nursing home and, “in short, for services people need.”
    The county expects.............................................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar01303

Quoted Text

  Farley and Legislator Angelo Santabarbara, R-Rotterdam, said several supervisors told him they opposed the agreement. No supervisors attended the meeting.

Why weren't the supervisors at this meeting? The supervisors from each town should have attended that meeting! They should have rallied their towns people to attend as well to show solidarity and the non-acceptance of this sales tax change.

Even though each town has representation at these meetings, we all know that the county legislature, as it presently stands, is ineffective at best. And although Mr. Suhrada and Mr. Santabarbara represent the town's concerns and best interest, they are also ineffective due to the present political climate.

Our supervisors need to become more active, vocal and involved at the county level and attend these meetings. Rene is the only one who I can remember that has attended these meetings and voiced her concerns. Where are the rest of them?

Quoted Text

Our supervisors need to become more active, vocal and involved at the county level and attend these meetings. Rene is the only one who I can remember that has attended these meetings and voiced her concerns. Where are the rest of them?

I agree that of the many meetings of the County Legislature that I have attended, Rene is the only one who I have seen in attendance.  After having witnessed the lack of consideration and responsiveness afforded by the County Legislators to Rene's stated concerns, I suspect that all of the Town Supervisors may have become frustrated by and disenchanted with those in the majority party.  

Interestingly, I have never witnessed Schenectady Mayor Stratton in attendance at these meetings.  His absence and the latest "scuffle" over the tax revenue sharing agreement between the Schenectady City County and the county, one must question the adage that "Working Together Works"

I had a town board meeting last night and could not attend the meeting.  Although it would have done absolutely no good, I would have liked to be there.
By the way, if I become any more active than I am, my husband will divorce me. (No smiley face or eye wink, I'm serious)

Not to mention.....by the way of wallstreet showings and mainstreet showings......I'm sure we are just 'blowing smoke'......it's a good effort....
but a cake needs a levening agent to rise.......

the amount will be moot when there is nothing to get nothing from........