public comments by guy kempe

At the request of KT Tobin and Steve Greenfield, I have reviewed the following documents available to the public on the VoNP website:

• Year 2011 Revenues with DPW grouped, 12-20-2012
• Summary of 2011 Actual Expenditure Village/Town
• Village Town Water and Sewer Rate Anysis (Based on 2012 Rates)
• Town and Village Tax Rates Base on 2011 Actuals and 2012 Taxable Value
• Tax Rates for Town and Village [Note: Village represents approximately 25.6% of Town Taxable Value]
• Attachment 3 A-2009 New Paltz Police Cals by Zone
• Police Zone Activity-October 2012
• Space Needs for a Merged Government
• Town and Village Space Report
• Report of Town /Village Fiscal Consolidation Committee to the Joint Boards and Community
• Tax Rates if Consolidated (Rev 1/8/13)
• Tax Rate Comparisons (Sumarized) With Recommended Police Benefit District Included

In addition, I reviewed Part G. Work Program - Project Description; Goals & Objectives; Project Area; Background & History, and; Component Tasks – from the High Priority Planning Grant Application for Efficient & Effective Government which funds the study of potential municipal merger.

Based upon these documents, I see cases where the assumptions they made are totally off base. For example, the cost of administering a single payroll [A1430.1] will not decrease in any significant way, as payroll costs are based upon a fixed escalator based upon the number of employees. As suggestion that a handful of staff reductions (mostly electeds) will result in the proposed savings of almost 60K are a distortion.

On the matter of professional services, while the village and town do spend some money on legal expenses [A1420.4] related to each other, the estimate that these services cost almost 84% of the legal services they currently use is an exaggeration. Present engineering services required in each municipality will remain the same.

As Michael Russo pointed out, any one-time-only reduction seen in the 2011 budget from reductions [A3120.1&2&3] in force due to retirements etc, has nothing to do with proposed future savings of $300,000.

In 2011, combined expenditures for the Town and Village in the areas of Central Communication [A1650.4] Central Printing [A1670.4] and Data Processing [A.1680.4] amount to $145,011. There is no explanation how consolidating these expenses to Data Processing [A.1680.4] will result in costs of only $70,000.

As I recall, the town and village shared a contract with NYCOM for a repeater [A3989.4] and eliminating this duplication will plausibly result in a savings of $2000 per year.

The assumption that there will be reduced insurance costs because there are fewer municipal buildings [A1910.4] resulting in $10,000 savings is not based on anything specific I see in the proposal.

In my opinion, the costs of zoning board [A9010.1] planning board [A8020.1] and the professional / admin services required to address applications will not be reduced $48,665 because there will not be one fewer application in either town or former village based on consolidation, nor will the costs of administration or review be curtailed.

It is my understanding that DPW and Town Highway have for many years shared equipment and costs wherever possible, and it is unlikely that added reductions of costs of significance could result from government merger.

In my opinion, the community could achieve most of the desirable benefits of merger by simply establishing an Intermunicipal Water/Sewer Infrastructure board to set rates and policies for the system, and by establishing a Special Police Protection (taxation) District to share the costs of added services in the commercial district (“Zone 6”.) Also, in my opinion, the documents I reviewed suggest the community has failed to meet the "project goals and objectives" described in Part G Work Program of the planning grant.