np fact check (consolidation): 2012

Bob, The Committee wants me to include in our report a list of all our meetings. don't have it. Can you reconstruct it from the meetings you taped. Just need the dates. Thank you. Dave

12.15.2012

FC email: Mtg and Proposed Final Rpt of Committee

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: sallymrhoads@gmail.com; sabfinance@aol.com; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org; yalescribe@att.net; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org
Subject: Mtg and Proposed Final Rpt of Committee
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 19:43:37 -0500

-->

To All; Since I have not received any objections the next mtg of the Committee will be held at 7:00 PM Tuesday December 18th in Susan Zimet's office. Attached are the charts I have developed based upon the last meeting and charts dated 12/10. I had to make some modifications to that data as we had not included the fire taxes raised by the town and paid to the Village. Also since the Town was late making their payment to th e village it looks like the Village got two town payments in the 2011 Village calendar.
        The Agenda for Tuesday
                  A. Explanation of charts and letter by D. Lent

                  B. Distribution of other committee reports and discussion on their reports.

                   Scheduling of follow up mtg if necessary

Dave
.

12.12.2012

FC email: Analysis of Zone Reports

________________________________________
From: David Lent [mailto:dslent30@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 1:00 PM
To: sally Rhoads; susan zimit; IRA MARGOLIS; Ross Pollack; nancy branco
Subject: Analysis of Zone Reports

To All: I've been analyzing the 2009 Police Zone Reports . Data is Attached. As I expected there are two areas of very high activity. Downtown New Paltz ( Bounded Main St to the Bridge and on + property wide) and the area in the Town form the Village line to the thruway and on property wide. Also the data is highly impacted by extensive security checks. These seem to always be the same property. Town today and the community in the future should consider taking some action against high offenders. Will kept you up to date with additional analysis.
Dave

12.10.2012

2012-12-10 finance committee with commentary

2012-12-10 Finance Committee Meeting

Commentary by Mike Russo, Town resident

January 23rcd, 2013

00:03:40
Didn't make it to the Village Board meeting tonight but I listened to a bit of the 12/10 FC meeting where the committee reviews their final figures "to make sure everything ... is copasetic." At 4:07, Sally says

"... Nancy and I on Friday added complete footnotes, so that the explanation for what we did is there."

The brief single sentences in the Notes column of the Expenditures spreadsheet is supposed to be 'complete footnotes' and apparently adequate explanations. We know that Sally and Nancy have worked with professional-grade reports for years, so how could they possibly think that these brief phrases are 'complete' footnotes (aside from the fact that technically they aren't footnotes at all)?

00:05:40
Committee reviews the group of lines represented by A1340.1 Budget, A1325.1 Treasurer's Office, and A1430.1 Personnel/Payroll, which jointly show a savings of $68,935. Dave questions this, asking:

"that's sufficient to handle all of that operation?"Sally: "yep"Nancy: "yeah, it's just moving their bodies into this office..."Dave: "...all I'm questioning is, you know -- trying to be devil's advocate a little bit, okay -- we're talking about total savings of ... $67,000 between that combination..."

The exchange continues and Nancy suggests breaking out the contractual costs because that would explain help the difference, but Sally and Dave say no, that'll make it more confusing. [though actually it would help]. Nancy then says:

"because their actual salaries, per Susan, are covered in that $74,000"Dave: "okay"

Had they actually looked at the contractual expenses associated with those lines, they would have seen that all combined contractual doesn't COME CLOSE to adding up to $68,935 in savings -- in fact, it's only about $4,000 each for town and village. So what about the other $60,000? How many of those bookkeeper bodies are not being moved into the new office, but are actually going to be pink slipped?

Note about Dave Lent: In the videos I've watched, Dave often questions things, but he doesn't stay with it -- he ends up just consenting. I wish he had looked deeper when he thought the numbers didn't make sense, because his instincts were correct. His role in the FC committee was more facilitative -- that is, until the FC committee presented its findings when he unfortunately was willing to be front man for their sketchy work. In a different work group, without Susan and especially Sally driving hard for deep savings, I think Dave would have reached more sound conclusions.

01:55:00
Question: Can the sewer #6 situation be effectively and cost-efficiently solved in any other way than through consolidation? Perhaps there is significant cost savings with that aspect. This topic was discussed at the FC 12/3 meeting at 1h55m.

12.07.2012

FC: WATER AND SEWER RATE IMPACTS FROM CONSOLIDATION

From: NancyBranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
To: dslent30@msn.com
Subject: RE: WATER AND SEWER RATE IMPACTS FROM CONSOLIDATION
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 15:57:47 +0000

-->

Dave,

SUNY pays village rate.

Current outstanding Village Debt water and sewer:

Sewer- $ 84,700.00 (will be paid off in 2013/2014 budget)

$320,000.00 (shared cost with Woodland Pond) sewer rehab project Henry W Dubois) village portion outstanding $160,000.00

Water-$1,765,000.00

Nancy

From: David Lent [mailto:dslent30@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 10:27 AM
To: Nancy Branco
Subject: WATER AND SEWER RATE IMPACTS FROM CONSOLIDATION

Nancy, As I mentioned in my phone message I had an idea this morning as to how to address the impact of consolidating the water and sewer districts. Since the present cost to the town(outside of payments to Village) is only 5% of village costs and therefore minor impact, if I just change the percentage each area is responsible for and compare to what it is responsible for now and after consolidation and then determine the percentage change I got the info needed. Have done on the sheet I've attached. I assumed SUNY would continue to pay 150% rate. I assumed there is still outstanding debt on the Water Plant.
PLease get back to me as soon as you can. I've also revised the final report and want to get to the committee as soon as possible so they can review and suggest changes.
Dave

FC: PROPOSED FINAL REPORT OF THE JOINT TN/VILL CONS. COMMITTEE

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: sabfinance@aol.com; sallymrhoads@gmail.com; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; yalescribe@att.net; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
Subject: PROPOSED FINAL REPORT OF THE JOINT TN/VILL CONS. COMMITTEE
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:05:15 -0500

-->

To All: Attached is my latest draft of a proposed final report. Ross - If you haven't done it yet you need to A2130 (Landfill revenues savings to 2K and change 2011 merge column and also expenditures line A90508 total proposed expenditures should reflect the $164,856 deducted. When change done send to the Committee.
I welcome your thoughts and changes, as long as they aren't to drastic.

Dave

12.03.2012

2012-12-3 finance meeting with commentary

2012-12-3 Consolidation Finance Committee Meeting

Commentary by Mike Russo, Town resident

January 20, 2013

00:08:10
[Mayor] Jason [West], I can understand how [Village Treasurer] Nancy [Branco] was there in a technical and facilitative role, and not to opine on what consolidation savings would occur. But she was part of the committee, presumably present at every meeting. In the 12-3 meeting video, she refers to her "old notes" in trying to look up how they arrive at certain figures previously (8m10s), and she comments that she has "notes on everything" (9m20s). So, it sounds like she could help us out by looking at those notes and telling us (1) when the various problematic line items were discussed, and (2) making explicit what her notes say about what was discussed with those line items. Go to that video and listen to minutes 6 through 10, where the committee discusses safety inspections and see how Nancy's role plays out as she tries to clarify what the group had previously decided about consolidation savings.

00:21:00
At around 21:00, there's discussion around questions of methodology, and even a vague passing mention of the Building and Grounds costs.

00:38:50

A minor item but points up a semantical issue: as per 12-3 video 38m50s, A8160.4 refuse and garbage shows up as a $2000 expense reduction but it is directly offset by a loss in revenue shown on A2130 Landfill Revenues. So that $2000 as part of the $1,625,258 is a reduced expense but cannot be referred to as savings.

00:41:20

Watch this: An extended discussion of DPW lines at 12/3 meeting starts at around 41m (though it takes a minute to get underway). Nancy points out the EXACT arithmetic error that I pointed out at the 1/15 meeting and at some point even comments that taxpayers will wonder why the numbers don't add up right.

Sally's email gives no information about the actual ways that savings will be achieved. We have a mish-mosh of information when we compare what Susan said at the 11/5 meeting (above), Sally and Susan said at the 12/3 meeting and what Susan said at the 1/15 T/V meeting (some of which was utterly in contradiction to her last comments of the 12/3 meeting). As for whatever portion of the savings is attributed to the joint buying of salt and macadam, we sure don't need consolidation to do that.

In the 12/3 meeting, it sounded like specific details existed on how the $520,077 in savings would be generated. Those details may or may not have gotten to the whole FC, but it does seem to have existed between Susan, Sally, Bleu and Chris. And there's those comments at the meeting 48m20s by Susan about how Chris got concerned about the $520k number but she sat down with him and reviewed the figures and "they were able to build back up to that number." Then Ross asks "the same number?" and Susan says "pretty much."

Hopefully, we'll get a full response from KT's very detailed inquiry that she sent to Chris.

00:47:00
[Town Supervisor] Susan [Zimer]'s comments from 47m to 48m20s relate to the methodology inconsistency and she references the Town's [Highway Department] cuts in 2013 without making any qualification to it being anticipatory of merger. She seems concerned about how to present the [Highway Department] savings claim but [Deputy Mayor] Sally [Rhoads] insists that it should remain as is.

00:48:20
Susan and Sally then discuss their meeting with [Village Superintendant of Public Works] Bleu [Terwilliger] and [Town Highway Superintendant] Chris [Marx]. Susan mentions that Chris came back to her later, asking about how they came up with the high $520k number (48m20s). But Susan then says she reviewed the figures with Chris and "they were able to build back up to that number. The committee appears to be working with a separate sheet that breaks out the various DPW [and Highway Department] lines and calculations.

00:53:00
At 53m the discussion shifts to the A9060.8 Hospital/Medical/Dental Insurance line, where the committee is simply putting in a 10% reduction in cost. At the time of the 12/3 meeting, the Expenditures sheet reflected a savings of $1.36 million, not $1.62 million.

01:39:00
An interesting 3-min exchange about the rushed timeline going forward to referendum. Russ Pollack shows up as a voice of reason on this matter, though all agree that the report as of that date is not yet a finished product. If I understand Sally's description of the methodology used for the DPW/Highway lines correctly, they subtracted 2012 Village expenditures and 2013 Town Budget expenditures from the sum of 2011 Town and Village expenses, and the resultant figure is $520,077.

01:53:00

Question: Can the Sewer District #6 situation be effectively and cost-efficiently solved in any other way than through consolidation? Perhaps there is significant cost savings with that aspect. This topic was discussed at 1h55m.

03:06:30
But if the 2013 Town budget assumed they would do without hiring a new Water & Sewer expert (as Sally said at the 1/15 meeting (at 3h6m30s),and instead would use the same water and sewer contractor as the village uses, than how come we aren't seeing in the Savings column, an increase in cost, i.e. negative savings, for water and sewer contractual expenditures? Would the water and sewer contractor be willing to bundle in the Town sewer responsibilities at no extra cost?
-- update: Actually I realize I can't tell this because I don't know all the codes included in the 520,077. It's on that sheet that Sally handed out but she didn't give me a copy. Would this be in the SSA, SSE, SSF, SWA, SWB, SWC, and SWD funds? I don't see an appreciable change in the lines of those funds from Town Budget 2012 to Town Budget 2013. I guess I have to wait for the breakout schedule that hopefully will come from the Fiscal Committee.

00:48:40
Also in regard to the DPW issue, Sally said in the 12/3 meeting (at 48m40s) that she sent Chris and Bleu,

"The outline of the results of our discussion and what was what and where was where, and he [Chris] did not call me so I'm going to go with the results of the discussion."

So it would be helpful if the FC provided us with that document. Or at the very least, Jason should receive that document via his FOIA request.

01:20:40
The issue of apportioning an unequal burden of police costs to Village District #6 is discussed. The extended exchange immediately follows after Dave Lent points out that tax cuts for town taxpayers would be quite modest (even using the FC's outsized claims of cost savings). Dave then states "However, this in my mind, is the perfect timing to consider if we want to try to allocate the police costs more to those responsible for creating the need for police..." All agree about redistributing police costs in some way, but there is a difference of opinion on whether the extra burden should be on every taxpayer in District 6, or only commercial properties (including any rental properties, which would require a change in the assessment rules).

01:22:47
About tax rates: Something I missed in my previous comment about this video segment is that I believe Sally is pushing for the idea of taxing rental properties at a higher tax rate through the community, not just in Village District 6.

01:36:52
Later in that same discussion at 1h36m52s: Susan says:

Not the specifics, but if the concept is written into the overall plan, the people of the town residents outside the village might be more willing to vote for this consolidation because they are going to see a government that is thinking about the fact that they've been getting taxed for god-knows-how-long , in their mind unfairly -- I don't care if you agree with that or not, but in their mind, unfairly -- you're giving them a reason to say there's value to this new government because it's going to correct the inequities, so therefore support it.

Well, this seems to me pretty much out-and-out crossing the line from the job of estimating potential savings due to consolidation, to talking about how to package and sell the idea. Is that a problem for anyone else? Am I making too much out of this aspect, being that politics is politics so no surprise, who would expect anything but? To me, if they are supposedly doing an objective, unbiased internal study in lieu of contracting an outside accounting firm, then this crossing the line is tantamount to yet another (the fourth) breach of an accounting principle, that of Neutrality.

Neutrality: Information contained in financial statements must be free of bias. It should reflect a balanced view of the affairs of the company without attempting to present them in a favored light.

01:47:00
Another example of overt bias in presentation intent: 12/3 meeting 1hr47min. Dave Lent points out that with consolidation, those town property owners who pay for water will receive a major discount in their rates, while those water users in the village will pay a slightly higher rate. At 1h48m25s, Sally says to Dave:

"I'm going to insist that you exploit and emphasize the decrease and benefit to the town users."

The word "exploit" has no business showing up in a meeting that purports to be for the purpose of objective analysis.

02:06:24
Important segment of 12/3 meeting. At 2h6m24s, Ross argues that a rush to referendum may be a mistake - if referendum fails, another one cannot be held for four years. He worries that with the current timetable, the public may not have enough time to receive and understand the information. (He also contended this same point earlier in the meeting.) Sally and Susan argue against his point. At 2h7m24s, Susan states:

"Come May, Stewart Glenn leaves the board. Brian Kimbiz leaves the board. You can't have a board that is totally against consolidation. Within a year, my term is up. You don't know what's going to happen with the next supervisor; if they're going to support it. So basically we are at a moment in time when we have a lot of people who are committed; we have the support of both boards to move this forward. If we don't grab the opportunity now, and we wait longer than April 1st, then you're dealing with a bunch of unknowns and as far as I'm concerned, kiss it goodbye."

02:25:19
(DPW/Highway-related) Another critical segment at the end of the 12/3 meeting. I have transcribed the full exchange:

Susan Zimet

"Because of the reductions we've already made in the town government, it's already aligning itself -- we've already absorbed some of the changes --"

Ross Pollack

"making the process much softer --"

Susan Zimet

"that's exactly right -- so the process now of merging the two governments because we've been making reductions in the town government and merging our departments, it's almost in a way a first step to this bigger merger that actually makes the potential to merge these governments without any layoffs that much more viable because we're already done. --"

Dave Lent

"Susan, may I suggest that, and this is not a fact but a probability, but if in fact if the merger is not the end result of this situation, then some of those reductions may have to be changed and new people hired -- "

Susan Zimet

"I can say that the reductions that are reflected in here from the town -- those reductions are here to stay."

03:07:55
Susan's contention above at the 12/3 FC meeting "those reductions are here to stay" is in direct CONTRADICTION to her statement at the 1/15 Town/Village meeting at 3h7m55s.

She lists out many vacated positions that were not planned for rehire in the Town 2013 Budget, and says "So every decisions that was done in the 2013 Budget was done with the eye towards hopefully we can consolidate."

Then she says "I can assure you that if we do not consolidate, next year's budget, we might see people added back to the budget because that assumption is off the table, gone, and we'll make certain assumptions in the Town Board, how we present our next budget based on the fact that consolidation is no longer on the table and the status quo will not be acceptable."

12.02.2012

FC: Re: Consolidation Committee

From: SABFinance@aol.com

Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 00:09:56 -0500

Subject: Re: Consolidation Committee

To: dslent30@msn.com

The chief said he had it for me

In a message dated 12/1/2012 10:05:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dslent30@msn.com writes:

Ira: Can we get the 2009 report? Dave

From: SABFinance@aol.com

Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 20:21:43 -0500

Subject: Re: Consolidation Committee

To: dslent30@msn.com

He is having trouble with the 10/12 report. I will bring what he has on monday

In a message dated 12/1/2012 10:48:28 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dslent30@msn.com writes:

Ira: I think that the information is coming together and except for a few open items expect to finalyze our report on Monday. Susan and I spoke to Ken Bond on Friday and he answered many questions.

We also called the Chief and he told us that there were about 40 zones. You had requested a map of zones and we need that for Monday night. He also had a complete break down of calls for 2009 and he was working on Oct 2012? We also need one or both for Monday night. Please follow up with chief so we can have them. Thank you.

Dave

=

=

FC: Consolidation Committee

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: villageclerk@villageofnewpaltz.org; mayor@villageofnewpaltz.org
Subject: FW: Consolidation Committee
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:59:51 -0500

-->

From: SABFinance@aol.com
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 00:09:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Consolidation Committee
To: dslent30@msn.com

The chief said he had it for me

In a message dated 12/1/2012 10:05:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dslent30@msn.com writes:

Ira: Can we get the 2009 report? Dave

From: SABFinance@aol.com
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 20:21:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Consolidation Committee
To: dslent30@msn.com

He is having trouble with the 10/12 report. I will bring what he has on monday

In a message dated 12/1/2012 10:48:28 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dslent30@msn.com writes:

Ira: I think that the information is coming together and except for a few open items expect to finalyze our report on Monday. Susan and I spoke to Ken Bond on Friday and he answered many questions.
We also called the Chief and he told us that there were about 40 zones. You had requested a map of zones and we need that for Monday night. He also had a complete break down of calls for 2009 and he was working on Oct 2012? We also need one or both for Monday night. Please follow up with chief so we can have them. Thank you.
Dave
=
=

FC email: Joimt Tn/Vil Fiscal Consoidaiotn Mtg Monday Dec 3

From: sally rhoads [mailto:sallymrhoads@gmail.com]

Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 7:23 AM
To: David Lent
Cc: IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit; Ross Pollack; nancy branco
Subject: Re: Joimt Tn/Vil Fiscal Consoidaiotn Mtg Monday Dec 3

Good Morning All,

While I agree the pressure is on, I think we can get it done. However, Ken Bond's firm has not been hired, a contract signed or payment agreed to. This must be done first.

In your report proposal I would like to see the underlined portion amended. To promise no employee terminations when we know there are duplications in the Clerks' office, Financial offices, Building department etc. is not correct. We also need to add the recommendation of a hiring freeze on vacated positions.

We need to state where the police will be located and to receive from the Town proof of rental agreement which has not been verified.

Item B does not justify the statement that the present Village users will see an increase. How do you come to this conclusion. All users benefited bare the cost, so if I am a user and am added in I bare some of the cost. If I have misunderstood this needs clarification.

Sally

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 10:34 PM, David Lent <dslent30@msn.com> wrote:

To All: The pressure is on. The Village and Town must approve a specific date for referendum by Dec 20th That means we must have our report by Dec 13th at the latest. With Ross's latest updates and some small info I need for Nancy I can finalize impact on Town/Village Tax rates. I expect to get these to you before the meeting.
   In order to accelerate our process I've started a proposed report (see attached). Big ? is whether we want to propose and to what extent
a BID for a portion of the Police cost.

              The Agenda for MOnday.

     A. Review impact (rates) for Joint Consolidation
             (Discussion and understanding)
     B. Schedule needed to do to make 2013 State Budget Cycle ( 1 mil in 2013) S. Zimit

     B. Review of Police Zones, Decision do we want to recommend it, what zones should it include, what percentage of Police cost.

     C. Review Draft of Committee report.

     D. Still need projected water and sewer rates.

Dave

12.01.2012

FC email: Joimt Tn/Vil Fiscal Consoidaiotn Mtg Monday Dec 3

From: David Lent [mailto:dslent30@msn.com]

Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 10:34 PM
To: IRA MARGOLIS; sally Rhoads; susan zimit; Ross Pollack; nancy branco
Subject: Joimt Tn/Vil Fiscal Consoidaiotn Mtg Monday Dec 3

11.19.2012

FC: Joint Tn/Vil Consolidation Mtg

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: bobusiavideo@mac.com
Subject: Joint Tn/Vil Consolidation Mtg
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:46:07 -0500

-->

Bob, Sorry for the late notice, but we are having a mtg tonight in Susan' Office at 7:00 PM. Hope you can make arrangements to tape. Thank you. Dave

11.16.2012

FC: JOINT TN- VILLAGE FISCAL COM. MTG.

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: sabfinance@aol.com; sallymrhoads@gmail.com; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
Subject: JOINT TN- VILLAGE FISCAL COM. MTG.
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:59:06 -0500

-->

To All: Attached is an update to my file I previously sent. Found a couple errors. Also will have a comparison on income for Monday. Agenda will be to review our previous calculations based on 2011 Town and Village and see if we want to make any changes. Then review Kevin's committee input for possible changes. If the committee decides it advisable will then go to developing a Town and Village only budget.

MEETING WILL BE IN THE SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE AT 7:00 PM

dAVE

11.14.2012

FC: TN/VIL FISCAL MERGE COMMITTEE

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: yalescribe@att.net; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; sallymrhoads@gmail.com; sabfinance@aol.com; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
Subject: TN/VIL FISCAL MERGE COMMITTEE
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 16:20:01 -0500

-->

To All: Remember we have a meeting next Monday, Nov 19th at 7:30. Will let you know where the meeting will be before the end of the week. Attached is a chart showing the data on expenses from Ross's 11-06 report with the Tn 2013 Budget. This will be helpful when we make the 2015 budgets for Town and Village as separate entities. On Monday I want the committee to re-look at the proposed merged budget and see if we want to make any adjustments.
Dave

11.05.2012

2012-11-5 finance committee with commentary

2012-11-5 Finance Committee Meeting

Commentary by Mike Russo, Town resident

January 20th, 2013

00:00:00
FC meeting starts right off with a discussion of the $520k DPW/Highway savings -- it sounds like this figure has newly arrived, at least to Dave Lent. Dave questions various aspects of this savings figure. Susan says that water and sewer was never discussed in the meeting between her, Sally, Bleu and Chris. She says that savings was identified in the purchasing of salt, in equipment such as the village being able to use town trucks for snow removal instead of contracting out, and in other contractual services. It did not include a reduction of staff or benefits. However, it sounds like the 2013 Town budget reductions are already included in the $520k savings.

00:08:40
At 8m40s the discussion turns to the HR report.

Since this meeting is many weeks prior to 12/3, discussion about the figures and the numbers themselves are still in development. This meeting is just prior to when the New Paltz Times (11/9/2012) quoted Sally as saying that the committee has

"come up with right now $1.4 million in savings" if merger occurs."

FC: do we have a meeting tonight?

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org
Subject: RE: do we have a meeting tonight?
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:18:29 -0500

-->

Yes: We do at 7:00 PM in Village Hall. Dave

From: supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org
To: dslent30@msn.com
Subject: do we have a meeting tonight?
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:13:19 -0500

-->

Susan Zimet

Supervisor of the Town of New Paltz

1 Veteran's Drive

New Paltz, NY 12561

845-255-0604 x1

fax 845-255-4084

10.26.2012

FC: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: sally_rhoads@excite.com
Subject: RE: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 12:29:53 -0400

-->

Sally: my e mail shows the report blocked. Dave

Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:23:28 -0400
CC: highways@townofnewpaltz.org; roperc@hvi.net
To: dslent30@msn.com; sabfinance@aol.com; yalescribe@att.net; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; NancyBranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
From: sally_rhoads@excite.com
Subject: Fwd: RE: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

Hello All,
 
You all received Chris' email regarding Town space which I forwarded to you. Here is Bleu's for the Village.
 
See you Mon. night at 7 in Susan's office?
 
Sally
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: "Heather Nielson" [HeatherNielson@villageofnewpaltz.org]
Date: 10/26/2012 09:05 AM
To: "Sally" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>
Subject: RE: TOWN  SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007
 
Note: Original message sent as attachment

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: HeatherNielson@villageofnewpaltz.org
To: sally_rhoads@excite.com
Subject: RE: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:05:27 +0000

Good Morning Sally,
 
Here are approximate numbers for the Village.
 
Village Hall-
2 meeting rooms
3 offices
Building Department offices
Upstairs aprox. 2,496sq ft
Downstairs 840 sq ft
 
Annex- 
5 offices
Copy room 
Server room
Aprox. 2,100 sq ft
 
DPW Garage-
Truck bays
Hallway
Lunch room 1 office
Record storage
Store room
Aprox. 5,800 sq ft
 
Pole barn- aprox. 2,880 sq ft
 
Fire Station #1-
Truck bays
2 offices
Meeting room
Lounge
Kitchen bunk room
Aprox. 6,798 sq ft
 
Let us know if you need any further information.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Sally [mailto:sally_rhoads@excite.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:21 PM
To: DPW
Subject: Fwd: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007
 
Hi Bleu and Heather,
 
At last night's meeting we discussed space needs and what space we currently have. Chris is doing the DPW, Community Center, Youth center old PD, Court , and whatever else the Town has. I have attached the 2008 report done when the Town was looking for police space.
 
Would you be so kind as to tell me and I will forward to the committee what space we have now owned by the Village including your building the Fire department and the rest of Village Hall room by room even if not occupied by a body. I guess its square feet for each room/space.
 
Thanks so much.
 
Sally
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: "David Lent" [dslent30@msn.com]
Date: 10/23/2012 10:21 AM
To: "sally_rhoads@excite.com" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>, "IRA MARGOLIS" <sabfinance@aol.com>, "susan zimit" <supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org>, "Carol Roper" <roperc@hvi.net>, "nancy branco" <nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org>, "Ross Pollack" <yalescribe@att.net>
Subject: TOWN  SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007
 
Note: Original message sent as attachment
)�4)��E

FC email: space

From: sally rhoads [mailto:sallymrhoads@gmail.com]

Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 12:11 PM
To: dslent30@msn.com; SABFinance@aol.com; yalescribe@att.net; Susan E. Zimet; Carol Roper; Superintendent of Highways; Bleu Terwilliger; Nancy Branco; Heather Nielson
Subject: space

Hello All,

I thought it would aid our planning if I tried to come up with an organizational need for space to go along with what Bleu and Chris reported regarding space we have.

I am sure I have left some needs off so if you could let me know what I have neglected I would apprciate it.

Sally

FC email: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

-----Original Message-----
From: Sally [mailto:sally_rhoads@excite.com]
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23 AM
To: dslent30@msn.com; sabfinance@aol.com; yalescribe@att.net; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; NancyBranco@villageofnewpaltz.org
Cc: highways@townofnewpaltz.org; roperc@hvi.net
Subject: Fwd: RE: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

Hello All,

You all received Chris' email regarding Town space which I forwarded to you. Here is Bleu's for the Village.

See you Mon. night at 7 in Susan's office?

Sally

-----Original Message-----
From: "Heather Nielson" [HeatherNielson@villageofnewpaltz.org]
Date: 10/26/2012 09:05 AM
To: "Sally" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>
Subject: RE: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

Note: Original message sent as attachment

<mime-attachment>

10.25.2012

FC: Joint Town.Village Fiscal Committee

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: sabfinance@aol.com; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; sally_rhoads@excite.com; yalescribe@att.net; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org; bobusiavideo@mac.com
Subject: Joint Town.Village Fiscal Committee
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:25:07 -0400

-->

To All; The next meeting of our Committee will be October 29th at 7:00 Pm in Susan Zimit's office. Dave

10.23.2012

FC email: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

From: David Lent [mailto:dslent30@msn.com]

Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:21 AM
To: sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit; Carol Roper; nancy branco; Ross Pollack
Subject: TOWN SPACE NEEDS PER ALFANDRE 2007

To All: This is Town space needs per Alfandre report. Susan , please forward to Chris Marks. Thank you. Dave

10.21.2012

FC email: DPW budget

From: sally rhoads [mailto:sallymrhoads@gmail.com]

Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 8:15 PM
To: dslent30@msn.com; SABFinance@aol.com; yalescribe@att.net; Nancy Branco; Susan E. Zimet
Cc: Bleu Terwilliger; Heather Nielson; Superintendent of Highways
Subject: DPW budget

Hello All,

Bleu, Chris, Susan and I had a very good and enlightening meeting regarding our finance consolidated budget project.

Without going into great detail Bleu and Chris recommended and we all agreed the best way to approach this was to use the total 2011 actuals and come up with a total DPW/Building figure. Then compare these figures to the Villages 2012-13 DPW/Building budget total and the proposed total 2013 Town budget. We decided not to break out code categories, but rather use a total. Suffice it to say many $ were in odd places in past town budgets- the best being Spring cleanup was in the Supervisor's line. No one told Susan when she ran that her job description included donning the overalls for Spring cleanup. I can tell you Chris and Susan must have spent an inordinate amount of time finding budget lines and putting allocations in their proper places. Thank you both. And thank you Bleu and Nancy for the great job you do.

So I have compiled the figures accordingly, but we recommend just using one figure called DPW/Building. This means Ross our going back and pulling anything we have in the spreadsheets related to this.

Chris and Bleu I am going to list the categories and code # that I used. I have included personnel, equipment and contractual, if applicable, for all the categories I list. If a category is in both budgets such as snow removal I have put a T/V, if only Village a V and if only Town aT. Will you both be so kind as to check me and make sure I didn't miss a category that belongs in. Likewise, that I did not include something that does not belong.

Bleu I included storm sewers in our total, but Chris I could not find anything, but a special fund called drainage so I included no $ amount for the Town.

I just did Town vs. Village as opposed to showing A/B Town, A highway or B highway

Categories I included: 16201,4 Building T/V 81401,4 Storm Sewers V

16401,2,4 Garage T/V 81701,4 St. cleaning T/V

33101 Traffic control T/V 711101,4 Rail trail T/V

50101,4 St. Administration T/V 365004 Demolition of unsafe buildig T

51101,4 Maintenance of StreetsT/V 51201,4 Bridges T

51421,2,4 Snow Removal 51122 Perm Improvements T

54101,4 Sidewalks V 51301,2,4 Machinery

71101,4 Parks T/V 51401 brush and weeds T

88101 Cemetery T

Village 2011 Town 2011 Total 2011 TV Merged Savings

Actual Actual

624,330 2,075,606 2,699,936 2,179,859 $520,077 (Yeah and Congrats Chris and Susan !)

The 2012-13 Village budget is 497107, The proposed Town 2013 budget is 1,682,752. The difference from total 2011 is the savings above.

See you all tomorrow night and again thank you Bleu and Chris for your help and guidance.

Sally

10.14.2012

FC email: JOINT TN/VILL FISCAL CONSOLIDATION MTG

From: yalescribe@att.net [mailto:yalescribe@att.net]

Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 11:38 PM
To: David Lent; sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimet; nancy branco; ross d. pollack
Subject: Re: JOINT TN/VILL FISCAL CONSOLIDATION MTG

Here is the spreadsheet we've been working on, now broken into three pages. Sally, Nancy and I have tried to incorporate the various changes and numbers discussed in our prior meetings. While the document is in no sense "finished," it has come a long way since you saw it last. The "2011 Combined" column -- in red on the expenses page -- relects what we think a coterminous Town/Village, had it existed in 2011, might have saved over the actual spending of the Town plus the actual spending of the village (the orange column. That number is a bit more than $1,181.000, and that is before headcount reductions (other than elected officials) and the concomitant savings in salaries and "fringes," which run 30% or more of salaries. So far, we estimated the coterminous T/V
would have an increase of about $82,500 in revenue, as well. -- Ross

From: David Lent <dslent30@msn.com>
To: "sally_rhoads@excite.com" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>; IRA MARGOLIS <sabfinance@aol.com>; susan zimit <supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org>; nancy branco <nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org>; Ross Pollack <yalescribe@att.net>; bob fagan <bobusiavideo@mac.com>
Sent: Tue, October 9, 2012 10:46:21 PM
Subject: JOINT TN/VILL FISCAL CONSOLIDATION MTG

To All: Reminder Next meeting will be October 15th at 7:00PM in Susan Zimit's office. Dave

10.08.2012

FC: Possible Changes to your Report

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: yalescribe@att.net
Subject: Possible Changes to your Report
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 15:51:32 -0400

-->

Ross: Have been going thru your report, my what a tremendous amount of work. Thank you. I found a couple of I think errors which is in attached list. Dave

FC email: Possible Changes to your Report

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: yalescribe@att.net
Subject: Possible Changes to your Report
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 15:51:32 -0400

-->

Ross: Have been going thru your report, my what a tremendous amount of work. Thank you. I found a couple of I think errors which is in attached list. Dave

9.30.2012

FC: Joint Tn/Vil Fiscal Consolidation Mtg

From: dslent30@msn.com
To: supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; sally_rhoads@excite.com; sabfinance@aol.com; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org; yalescribe@att.net
Subject: Joint Tn/Vil Fiscal Consolidation Mtg
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 18:58:13 -0400

-->

Reminder to All: Meeting Oct 1 at Village Hall. 7:00 PM
Dave

9.25.2012

FC email: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

From: Nancy Branco [mailto:NancyBranco@villageofnewpaltz.org]

Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:06 AM
To: yalescribe@att.net; David Lent; sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit
Subject: RE: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

Good Morning to All.

Fund explanations regarding meeting last night;

Village Budget:

A1989.4- Other Government

Public Access coordinator and taping of meetings

A3989.4- Safety/Health

Lease repeater from Town, Village share $191.50 per month

A6989.4- Community Development

Grant Writer expenses

If I have missed any other funds that were in question for the Village please let me know. The above are the three I wrote in my notes.

Thanks, Nancy

From: yalescribe@att.net [mailto:yalescribe@att.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 1:20 PM
To: David Lent; sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit; jean gallucci; Nancy Branco; bob fagan
Subject: Re: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

I agree, Dave, that such a refocussing conversation would be helpful, and I think our immediate objective is your option b) "what ]the unified 2011 budget] would have been ... if we had been consolidated [at that time]." I think I'll eliminate the "average" column in my spreadsheet -- since we rarely think half of the combined is the correct amount -- and replace it with place for our estimate of that 2011 number.

After we have that task done, it be be easier to apply your percentage formula (and any other considerations you think applicable) to grow each number to its 2014 or 2015 value. -- Ross

From: David Lent <dslent30@msn.com>
To: "sally_rhoads@excite.com" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>; IRA MARGOLIS <sabfinance@aol.com>; susan zimit <supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org>; jean gallucci <jpgallucci@gmail.com>; nancy branco <nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org>; bob fagan <bobusiavideo@mac.com>; Ross Pollack <yalescribe@att.net>
Sent: Tue, September 18, 2012 10:47:29 AM
Subject: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

I think we made good progress at last night's meeting however there is a lot of work to do so that is why another meeting in scheduled for 9/14 with another a week later.

In going over in my mind the activity of the meeting I think we need to start off next meeting redefining what is our objective. I feel there is a difference of opinion as to wjether we are preparing a probable 2015 separate budget for the Town, Village and what it would be if the community consolidated or what would have been the 2011 budgets if we had been consolidated.

Following this discussion and agreement then we will review what we accomplished last night and see if it conforms and the continued on the review, analysis and resolution of what Sally and Ross have done .
Dave

9.18.2012

FC email: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

From: yalescribe@att.net [mailto:yalescribe@att.net]

Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 1:20 PM
To: David Lent; sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit; jean gallucci; nancy branco; bob fagan
Subject: Re: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

After we have that task done, it be be easier to apply your percentage formula (and any other considerations you think applicable) to grow each number to its 2014 or 2015 value. -- Ross

From: David Lent <dslent30@msn.com>
To: "sally_rhoads@excite.com" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>; IRA MARGOLIS <sabfinance@aol.com>; susan zimit <supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org>; jean gallucci <jpgallucci@gmail.com>; nancy branco <nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org>; bob fagan <bobusiavideo@mac.com>; Ross Pollack <yalescribe@att.net>
Sent: Tue, September 18, 2012 10:47:29 AM
Subject: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

FC email: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

From: David Lent [mailto:dslent30@msn.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:47 AM
To: sally_rhoads@excite.com; IRA MARGOLIS; susan zimit; jean gallucci; nancy branco; bob fagan; Ross Pollack
Subject: Next Fiscal Town'Village Consolidaiton Meting Sept 24th in Supervisor's Office

9.17.2012

FC: Calendar Year 2011 comparison for the Village and Town, focussed on the Village General and the Town A & B budgets.

From: yalescribe@att.net [mailto:yalescribe@att.net]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 12:23 AM
To: Sally; sabfinance@aol.com; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; jpgallucci@gmail.com; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org; dslent30@msn.com
Subject: Calendar Year 2011 comparison for the Village and Town, focussed on the Village General and the Town A & B budgets.

As Sally indicated, here is my first cut at the Calendar Year 2011 budget comparison for the Village and Town, focussed on the Village General and the Town A & B budgets. These are the numbers culled from those budgets from Sally and me.

You will see notes on the right margin and the rest of the spreadsheet sorts revenues and expenditures by New York State Code. I have tried to list on the same line budget items for all three budgets that have the same NYS Code.

To be sure, some codes appear only in the Village Budget, but not the Town Budget; or in the Town Budget, but not the Village Budget; or in the Village Budget and in the Town A, but not the Town B, or vice versa.

I have highlighed in YELLOW items that appear in all three budgets, and in BLUE those items in one of the Town Budgets and the Village Budget.

Study of these numbers, plus the important question of headcounts per task or department, should form the basis for our Model Budget. Conceptually, that final document will come together by reasoning what a merged budget would show for these 2011 numbers -- and then adjusting that for the cost differences expected in 2014 (or c2015, if that's the year we pick).

I will fill in more Code descriptions in the next draft and am also planning to integrate the relevant CY 2011 Town numbers into the CY 2011 Village Budget numbers and format furnished to me by Nancy Branco.

Thanks.

Ross

From: Sally <sally_rhoads@excite.com>
To: sabfinance@aol.com; supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org; jpgallucci@gmail.com; nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org; yalescribe@att.net; dslent30@msn.com
Sent: Sat, September 15, 2012 8:15:10 PM
Subject: Re: Location of Next Monday (Sept 17) Joint Finance Consolidation Meeting

Here are all the merged Town/Village I have done.

Ross will send the Village General and Town A & B

Ira has the spreadsheet of salaries by name and dept. I think if we apply plus 30% (?) we will have the benefits as well.

Susan in doing all of this Ross and I have several concerns which I think only you will know the answers to. The Comptroller reported that for 2010 the Town had 74full-time, 42 part-time and 51 seasonal employees. Yet the 2011 annual financial report shows only 47 full-time and 28 part-time paying into the state retirement system. In order to figure this out could you bring a copy of July, 2012 's monthly report to the State Retirement System.

Also, the Fund Balance year end 2011 seems high, could you bring a copy of the Town's bank statement covering all accounts.

Could you bring a copy of the Town's police building rental contract with C2(whatever its name is).

Do you have and can you bring the Town's 2012 budget and worksheets?

Since the annual report does not have any notes with it could you find out or do you know what the big $ amt. is for in the Trust and Agency acct.?

Thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: "David Lent" [dslent30@msn.com]
Date: 09/12/2012 02:38 PM
To: "sally_rhoads@excite.com" <sally_rhoads@excite.com>, "IRA MARGOLIS" <sabfinance@aol.com>, "susan zimit" <supervisorzimet@townofnewpaltz.org>, "jean gallucci" <jpgallucci@gmail.com>, "nancy branco" <nancybranco@villageofnewpaltz.org>, "Ross Pollack" <yalescribe@att.net>
Subject: Location of Next Monday (Sept 17) Joint Finance Consolidation
Meeting

Note: Original message sent as attachment