|
Hmm, well said
Councilman Reynolds! Assessment debacle---Seems like I have heard that term before, can't
remember where. Oh yeah, I think it was on this site! Been
reading any good websites lately, Councilman? Can we count you as Councilman #2 that
is willing to admit that
there is a problem with the reassessments that were done in 2002, 2003 and
2004? I hope so, because the Village of New Hartford that you represent
is just as much a mess as the rest of the town. And you are darn
right--many people did dispute the hike in their property values.
Unfortunately though, not everyone did, because not everyone had their property
values raised, did they Mr. Town Supervisor?
Friends I hope you read the article in the Friday,
October 20, 2006 Observer Dispatch entitled "Leaders push N. Hartford
Borrowing". Town Officials stated that
taking certain expenses
out of the town's general operations could well give the town bond rating a
needed boost. Well there is a
good reason for borrowing if I ever heard
one! Is that like if I have a lot of credit cards and I use my credit cards a lot
instead of paying cash, my credit score will
improve? Where I come from, we used to call it "robbing
Peter to pay Paul". How about when you can't afford to pay back the
"bonded" expenses
without finding another source of income--say like raising taxes? And
if you so badly need to borrow to help the town's bond rating, why not start
by making sure that everyone, not just a few, are fairly assessed so that
everyone pays their "fair share" for all these "must-haves". What a
concept!! When can we see some "borrowing" to reassess the town
and fix that "assessment debacle"?
And how about the fact they plan
to publicize the highlights of the plan in coming weeks.
So is that after the 30 day window for permissive referendum? Do they
think town residents are idiots? Why didn't the Town Board start with the
publicity right from the beginning? And how about a mile of new sidewalks? Raise your hand if you have been promised to
get your old sidewalks repaired and have been given the runaround.
According to the Observer Dispatch article, Councilman Payne says
"people have been clamoring for it."
"We've hear it in surveys, we've heard it on the street," Payne says. Guess it all depends on who you talk to, doesn't
it Councilman Payne?
Then there's $2 million for stormwater management that will
address about one half of the town's stormwater runoff problems. Which half would that be? And
are the rest of the town residents who do or maybe don't have stormwater problems supposed to
be happy about this spending to "cure" half of the problems? Couldn't you at least provide a plan
of action? Didn't we already bond to fix stormwater problems
once before? And how
about a policy--will you be fixing problems on private property and how
will you determine what areas are tended to first. I bet everyone with
problems thinks their problem should be first. We'd like to see a
policy so we can tell if someone is getting "special" treatment.
Consolidate Town Offices? Just how many offices do
think you will be able to fit in that building--any plans yet? And
are you sure it will only cost $500,000 for renovations or is that "a stab in the dark?"
"Everything tells us this will be good news for the Town"
according
to Mr. Reynolds in the Observer Dispatch article. When
will that "good news" be made public in the form of definite plans?
According to Mr. Reynolds, once again in the Observer Dispatch article,
referring to the 2004 town-wide reassessment,
"that controversy damaged the public's trust in government's efforts
to manage public funds". Well, first of all Councilman
Reynolds, the 2004 reassessment, like the 2003 and the 2002 reassessment, wasn't
really town-wide. Several properties seemed to be "overlooked". Isn't
that right Supervisor Reed?
Second of all, don't you think that the
fact that very little information is given out to the public and even FOIL
(Freedom of Information Law) requests are delayed for over 2 months before
the information is turned over; the
fact that Town Board Meetings are now scheduled for 6:00 p.m., a time when
most people are having dinner; the fact that agendas always seemed to be
changed at the last minute after they have already been made public; the
fact that town residents don't seem to need to be part of government anymore and
the fact that executive sessions are called and then after the public leaves,
the regular Town Board meetings are reconvened--don't you think that might
also have something to do with the mistrust
residents have in the current Town Board? Or how about "pot shots" on the
"official" town website, a taxpayer-funded site, by the way; or blocking emails so residents can't send an
email to you, or ....
Email us! |
