Thursday, December 8, 2011 3:09 PM
Message body
How to Cut the New Rochelle City Budget by Peggy Godfrey
At the public hearing there were plenty of suggestions about how to cut the New Rochelle City budget. Only because the projected health insurances costs were lowered by New York State was the City Council able to avert layoffs of firemen, crossing guards and a recreation supervisor at the Doyle Senior Center. Vincent Dunn thanked the City Council for restoring the Senior Center position.
Many suggestions that would help to lower the City's tax rate were presented by Robert McCaffrey. Since the time he purchased his house his taxes have doubled and are now more than his mortgage payments. The City in his view should create an incentive such as a complimentary dinner at a local restaurant to recognize City employees who think of ways to save the City tax money. Further, since he only generates one bag of garbage, his collection schedule could be changed to once a week. Generally street cleaning in many neighborhoods could also be changed to a once a week schedule. A panel of citizens he also stated could be appointed to make more tax saving suggestions to the Council.
The next speaker, Diana Mason, expressed outrage over the increase in the refuse fee. This fee is presently $66 and the budget proposal raises it to $223, an increase of over 238%. She wants the fee eliminated, adding that all the crossing guards are not necessary, especially for Isaac E. Young middle school students who can cross themselves. She and her husband live in a two family zoned house so must pay a double refuse fee. Tenants in commercial property they own will have to be given a surcharge for this fee and may move out. As a compromise she is willing to accept less services, suggesting, for example, she could sweep her street. Council in her view should "think outside the box" and bring in businesses to generate taxes rather than residential development to the City.
Much applause was noted as James O'Toole, a frequent speaker at public hearings, said, "Every year the Fire Department is threatened with loss of jobs." Continuing, he said he was tired of the Council threatening vital services, such as Fire Fighters and Crossing Guards. He suggested reducing City Council's and the Mayor's salaries to their previous levels to generate revenue for the City. Then he said the budget should be presented in October, not November "so we know what you've done in the last four years" (before the election this year). The question that then could be asked he said is, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" emphasizing more Police and Firemen are needed. As an example, he said when he walked home one night recently he had a knife "put to his gut."
When a million dollar loan to the City was brought up in connection with the GreeNR program which could have a potential to raise future taxes, Mayor Noam Bramson said this was not correct. At the end of the hearing Councilman Richard St. Paul clarified that a million dollar grant to winterize the City Hall was obtained through Congresswoman Nita Lowey, but the City was required to match the grant which they did by borrowing the million dollars. Bramson then added that this money would achieve six figure savings for the taxpayers.
After the meeting Councilman Lou Trangucci who has taken a thoughtful view said this money is part of the GreeNR program. "If the savings don't amount to how much they say it is going to benefit the city, the money would have to be made up by the taxpayers."
The Council may vote on the budget on December 13.
In the December 15 issue of the Westchester Guardian
Diana Mason might want to check her math
Great write up Peggy & thanks.
Diana Mason might want to check her math though because if the garbage TAX had gone up only 70% the city would be charging $112.20 however the new rate is $223 which means we're being hit with a much much much higher increase than 70%. My calculator says 238% (the amount of the increase $157 divided by the pervious years tax $66).
Thanks. I have corrected the error.
Thanks for pointing out the error. I appreciate your interest.
how about……..
How about property owners become responsible to rake and bag leaves themselves instead of making large,unsightly,dangerous(shrinks size of street) and always a danger of burning leaf piles in streets.By doing this first of all neighborhoods look better and it saves manpower and fuel costs.It also relieves wear and tare on machinery.The same machines we rely on for snow plowing.Really, are we that spoiled that we cant rake our own leaves.It takes as much effort to push them in the street as it does to bag. I realize its seasonal but by the time the city gets to all the piles,chances are snow will cover them.Also on windy days the leaves blow all over anyway.If you ask me this should go before anything.
That sounds good but it’s
That sounds good but it's going to cost me & every other homeowner a lot of time (to fill the bags v. bringing big loads to the street) & money (to buy the paper bags & I'll need well over 100) that I don't want to spend (neither the time or the money).
Why not just switch to 1 day a week pick-up? Or how about we give all city employees a certain assessment credit on their property taxes if they participate in a new volunter wing of the FD? A way to pay people but not pay them and also get something done.
sounds good but
How does giving an assessment credit save money? What is a new volunteer wing of the FD? Can you explain.
NR could also save money by ………………………………
My idea would be to suppliment the paid FD w/volunteers that are current civil servants & in order to entice them to sign up, the city would give out tax credits through exemptions for FD service. Why target city servants, because they're always in the city and could drop everything to respond to an emergency/fire.
We'd save money because the city could probably let go alot more than the 6 they were comtemplating and save on the salaries, medical & pension benefits.
I'm really just making a suggestion and am looking/thinking outside the box for ways to cut expenses without hurting the must have services: fire, police, garbage collection & road repairs. The rest of our services are nice to haves and could easily be eliminated without major disruptions to the must have services.
NR could also save money by NOT borrowing to pay our share of the county tax which is due in April but NR borrows the money until its collected in June.
NR could also save money by finding adequate storage for its road salt which is currently stored outside and washes away when it rains.
I hope Noam & Chuck are reading & listening. These guys are really falling down on the job when they constantly go to the FD to balance their budgets. Where's the courage Mr. Mayor? If this were his household, he'd be in foreclosure and if this were his business, the out of business sign would be up.
The problem with cutting the FD is that everyone's homeowners insurance rates will go up (at least that's what I hear) so that it costs us more in the long run. A pennywise, pound foolish policy.
Either we do it or they do it. Still costs us!
The problem is that many of the people that did bag stopped out of frustration. There has to be some middle ground plan that brings both options into play. Planning and execution come into play on every level of city operation. Either way leaf collection, snow removal, filling pot holes and more are going to cost us. It is how planning and scheduling are executed that makes a plan work properly and cost effective. How do you react when there is a problem and you need to change that plan. There was a total lack of communication once the storm hit and crews had to clean up the damages. In the after math of the cleanup there was no message sent to residents as to how the leaf collection would take place. My neighbors didn’t know whether to bag or not. They wound up creating bigger piles of leaves that left nothing for the trucks to pick up when they resumed pick up on Saturdays. Waste of manpower, money and frustrated neighbors. If we don’t take care of the little things, how will we handle the bigger problems down the road? Everything we do or don’t do has a cost.
Go back to basics
Peggy, My point was that there are more cost effective ways of doing the everyday things better. Not cut garbage collection. All departments should look at the task that needs to be done from all sides. Use common sense along with communication, good time and job management skills. If everyone looked at things as if it were their own money I am sure things would be different. For example in the fall when it is cooler and the leaves need to be picked up, don’t use extra man hours for the entire thing. Cut garbage collection to once a week and use those manpower hours for leaf pick up. On the short holiday weeks I don’t need another garbage pickup two days later. Some people may, but I don’t. Same goes for the unexpected snow fall and extra clean up. Do we need our residential streets swept every week during the summer? No one wants to do the little things anymore. I pay taxes why don’t they do it. There needs to be a reality check across the board for the city and the citizens. The city services are not our house maids. They are there to provide safety, security and certain quality of life services. Not to pick up what we wouldn’t do ourselves. Give up the gym membership and bag your own leaves, mow your lawn and cleanup in front of your house. We will all get healthier and save money at the same time. It's time to get back to basics and be a little creative. Every little bit helps