Friday, June 13, 2008

New Jersey also looking at abolishing county gov

NJ looks to Massachusetts to map end of county government

Reformers seek Senator Moore’s guidance

MONTCLAIR, NJ, November 30, 3005 - Civic activists and municipal leaders in Essex County, New Jersey have been frustrated by the increasing burden of county government in their state. They organized the Essex County Committee to Change County Government, and they want to know how Massachusetts was able to eliminate or reform county government in all but six of the original fourteen counties in the late 1990’s.

The League of Women Voters of the Montclair Area and the Change County Government Steering Committee will co-sponsor an educational meeting entitled "The Massachusetts Experience: Ending County Government” on November 30th. Massachusetts State Senator Richard T. Moore will be the featured speaker at the forum in the Cedar Grove Township Town Hall sponsored by the League and the Committee to Change County Government. Senator Moore, who chaired the Legislature’s Committee on Counties in the late 1990’s was, along with then-Senate Ways and Means Chairman Stanley Rosenberg, the principal architect of legislative efforts to abolish county government in the Bay State.

Moore’s and Rosenberg’s efforts saved property taxpayers in many parts of Massachusetts hundreds of millions of dollars in unfunded pension liability and elimination of county spending. It eliminated an archaic and unnecessary level of government that dated back to colonial times. Since 1999, in addition to being relieved on millions of dollars in pension funding, the thirteen Worcester County towns in Moore’s Senate District have saved an estimated additional $170,000 that would have been assessed if county government was still in business. “This savings meant real reform for local property taxpayers in my district,” Senator Moore explained.

Senator Moore’s visit to New Jersey is part of that state’s efforts to reform or abolish county government. The Change County Government Steering Committee has been investigating the desirability and possibilities involved in effecting a change in county government. The formation of this committee was sparked by the recent ballot referendums to study secession from Essex County in the communities of Montclair, Milburn, Verona and Cedar Grove.

For the past year, official representatives and other leaders of several towns within Essex County, New Jersey have been meeting monthly to discuss how they can better coordinate efforts to stabilize taxes and improve services in the 21 Essex County municipalities with an emphasis on the size and cost of county government. Many of the towns have been looking at this issue via referendums and legal action.

The Massachusetts efforts at reform and the abolition of Worcester County are relevant issues for study by people in New Jersey. Essex County, New Jersey has about the same size population as Worcester County in Massachusetts. New Jersey is often compared in size and population to the Bay State.

In his remarks, Senator Moore will explain his leadership role in county government abolition. As the new Chairman of Counties after his election to the Senate in 1996, Senator Moore, a Democrat, joined with Republican Senator Arthur Chase in a bi-partisan push to abolish or reform county government. Encouraged by Senator Stanley C. Rosenberg (D-Amherst) then-Chair of the powerful Senate Ways and Means Committee, Senator Moore initiated the first serious efforts to abolish county government. The fact that Moore’s own Worcester County and neighboring Middlesex County were on the verge of bankruptcy added fuel to the fight.

Although Senator Chase left the Senate in an unsuccessful run for County Treasurer and Senator Moore moved to the chairmanship of another committee at the start of the 1997-1998 session, the issue of county government abolition had been firmly established. Senator Moore agreed to work with Senator Rosenberg to promote abolition of county government in the new session and newly- elected Senator Stephen Brewer (D-Barre), who succeeded Moore as chair of Counties Committee, agreed to work with Rosenberg and Moore on the reform initiative as the new term unfolded.

Subsequently, with Middlesex and Worcester Counties on the verge of bankruptcy, Senator Rosenberg decided to make abolition of counties a major theme of the Senate’s FY 1998 state budget. He used a bill filed by Senator Moore to abolish county government to provide a framework for the budget rider. Senator Moore, along with Senator Brewer, worked on refining the language of the budget sections dealing with county government reform.

After a long, and sometimes arduous, legislative battle, the political landscape was redrawn as all but three of the original 14 counties were abolished or dramatically changed. Middlesex, Worcester, Essex, Suffolk, Hamden, Berkshire, Dukes and Nantucket county governments were abolished. Franklin and Hampshire counties were reorganized into locally directed councils of government, Barnstable County government was converted to the Cape Cod Commission. Only Plymouth, Bristol and Norfolk counties were unchanged.

New Jersey leaders want to learn more about the effects of abolition of county government as well as the other forms that were created such as the council of government and the Cape Cod Commission. At the meeting, Senator Moore will also discuss a report that he prepared detailing the political process, the obstacles, and the options for reform.

More information on Senator Moore’s issues can be obtained by checking his web site

Adobe Acrobat required. Download the free reader, here

Senator Moore's Presentation: Usefulness Outlived - The Collapse of County Government in Massachusetts


Anonymous said...

The New Jersey effort to abolish county government is centered in Essex County for good reason -- the largely white wealthy suburban towns there don't want to keep paying for the rising cost of social services needed to support the poorer mostly African American and Latino families that live in the City of Newark, which is also in Essex County.

In fact, New Jersey's county government is really only a burden in those New Jersey counties that need to raise a lot of taxes to support those in need, and nowhere else.

The situation here in Westchester is quite different. Social services are paid for not from property taxes, like much of it is in New Jersey, but from the state income tax, which Albany distributes to the counties. Therefore, unlike Essex County in New Jersey, we in Greenburgh aren't taxed by the county to pay for social services for poor families and individuals who live in the Cities of Yonkers, Mount Vernon, New Rochelle,White Plains and Peekskill.

On the other hand, take a look a Feiner's Greenburgh, which taxes only residents in the unincorporated part of the town to pay for social services the town itself provides to needy families and individuals throughout the town, including in its villages.

Exempting Greenburgh's historically white wealthy villages from those costs isn't any different from exempting the white wealthy suburban towns in New Jersey's counties from having to pay for the costs of providing social services to the urban poor.

Maybe that's why Feiner likes the idea so much.

Anonymous said...

I think it would be wiser to first take a look at the purpose of Greenburgh's existence - the reason for its initial creation as a township and the rationale for maintaining the same structure today.

I live in Unincorporated Greenburgh, and I feel bad for the villages still being unnecessarily tied to and taxed by Greenburgh. Also, the reasons for the existence of Unincorporated Greenburgh as a sparsely settled rural area no longer exist. We should have been incorporated into three villages or one city decades ago.

Let's evaluate ourselves before tackling others.

Anonymous said...

All options, including the abolishment of county government, should be analyzed. The goal: Reduce our taxes.

Anonymous said...

County taxes in Greenburgh have been relatively stable, accounting for about 10% of our property tax bills, with increases in the single digits.

On the other hand, Greenburgh's taxes, at least in unincorporated Greenburgh, are out of control. This year's increase was 21%. Next year's increase is projected to be at least 17% according to Feiner's citizen committee report (funny how Feiner never released that report to the public) and the town comptroller says that 17% figure is too low.

So what's Feiner doing about all this. Rather than focusing his attention on Greenburgh's problems, which is what he should be doing, he instead changes the subject to a matter that, when compared with Greenburgh's problems, is not really a problem at all -- Westchester County.

Residents of Greenburgh, and especially those who live in unincorporated Greenburgh, should let Feiner know that they are not fooled by this latest publicity stunts of his.

No Feiner, all options, including abolition of county government, should NOT be analyzed. County government is not the reason for Greenburgh's problems. In any respects, many think you are the reason.

Residents of Greenburgh, particularly those in unincorporated Greenburgh, should be looking for leaders who can deal with what to do about Greenburgh's perpetually dysfunctional government which cannot seem to figure out how to address that most basic of local governmental functions -- how to deliver municipal services as cost effectively as possible.

Anonymous said...

Dear 6/14/08 1:41 PM,

Who says that the Town Comptroller says that the 17% figure is too low? What's your support? Only if you are Bob Bernstein. Stop hiding Bob.

Anonymous said...

I don't know whether Bernstein contributes to this blog or not. I know for a fact though that he did receive an e-mail from Mike Kolesar on May 29 telling him that the 17% estimated increase in next year's taxes is too low.

Kolesar's e-mail suggested that Bernstein distribute the e-mail to "other interested parties" and I guess that includes me (which is how I found out about it), and I bet a whole lot of other people.

Thanks Bob.

Anonymous said...

Feiner is paid to look after the Town. That is what he should spend his time doing. Our budgetary problems are horrific. 20%+ last year, and my guess, another large one next year.

Anonymous said...

If we did not see the handwriting on the wall with this year taxes we need a good eye doctor.
The prediction of higher taxes for the coming year was established before Kolesar became our comptroller.
How many times did some of the speakers at town meeting insist that changes be made in the police the center and above all the DPW and the Rec and parks dept.
Did the board pay attention NO.
Now we have another large amount being thrown our way that is money for the comprehensive plan.
Did we need this extra expense at this time?
Sheehan's baby should have been put aside until there were funds available.
They are spending next years money and they keep saying that they are trying to save.
Do they think that the public will stay silent after this great tax hike.
Anyone with half a brain can see that the town board is full of it.
They know dam well that there is no way that taxes will be lowered to make a big change.
Yes the change will be for our pockets that will be hurting for maybe the next two to three years.
Will abolishing county government help, yes that will be a blessing because of all the duplication of services and taxes BUT we would have to have great representatives representing us in the town.
Right now the county is the middle guy and we know if we want to save money the guy in the middle must go.
Let's face it the county government representatives have been arround too long .We definitely need a big change .Check your newspapers and see what investigations are going on with county government.
They have been in charge too long.

Anonymous said...

Do Away with the Greenburgh Police
Dept.! Let the State take Over

Anonymous said...

"Greenburgh's perpetually dysfunctional government which cannot seem to figure out how to address that most basic of local governmental functions ..."

Much of the reason is that Unincorporated Greenburgh is choosing to still operate under an antiquated structure that was legally designed for sparsely settled, rural areas (the purpose of "unincorporated-ness"). Clearly that is not who we are today, so why don't we incorporate into one city or three villages or, at the very least, have a professional manager for the unincorporated sections of the township?

ed krauss said...

Now I know New Jersey is also looking at abolishing county government.


Isn't that what Mr. Feiner is paid to do? Yes, so are the other four, but I don't hear anything about them spending their time on this fool's errand.

We, especially unincorporate, are hemorrhaging with double digit tax increases, looking at adding to an already bloated library construction tab, and many mine field mines we know nothing about. Since we can't leave the library unfinished, that's a cost we'll have to bear, somehow. The tax increases, on the other hand, will have to be carefully analyzed- not only by the Town Board who got us into this mess in the first place- but by a committee chaired by Mike Kolesar, our comptroller and a knowledgeable man when it comes to finance, and other similarly qualified people. Most importantly, the ongoing modis operandi of the Feiner administration-"listen attentively and do as you please," must change...this is not a request, but a mandate! Their- thecommittee's- suggestions should be aired, and viable suggestions should be incorporated into the next budget. NO IFS,ANDS OR BUTS.

The Board's (many different Boards, Feiner and Juettner on all of them) have proven incapable of understanding finance. They've had 17 years to remedy their mistakes, and failed to do so. So their decisions are more, much more than suspect.

What we need is SUBSTANCE, and we'll forego the STYLE.

As to:abolishing county goverment, and other extanious tasks, let's no longer tolerate them. If Mr. Feiner wants a "Don Quiote" quest, let him take an unpaid leave of absence and pursue anything he wants: peace in the Middle East, no nukes for Iran, solving the gas price crisis, natural disasters in Myanmar or bike riding cross country to raise money for worthy causes...something like the Greenburgh Library and the oppressed tax payers of this town.

Anonymous said...

Ed, your comments are well taken, but give up, no one on the Town Council cares about the B budget. And I would suggest to the Village people that, as they control the votes, if they want to minimize lawsuits etc., they tell teh council they had better get control of costs.

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous 6/14/08 4:48 PM,

Thanks Bob? Are you kidding? Thanks to the Comptroller for sending the email in the first place. What has / did Bob do after receiving the email? Please tell me. Did he inquire of the Comptroller why the Comptroller made this statement? Something tells me he did nothing. What subsequesnt email(s) have you been copied on and exactly what did they say?

Sorry friend, but the credit for this one goes to the Comptroller, what's his name.

Anonymous said...

I don't think the comptroller, Mike Kolesar, gets much credit here. Sure he sent Bernstein an e-mail enclosing the citizen's budget report predicting a 17% increase in next year's town taxes, sure he told Bernstein that he thought the projection was too low, and sure he told Bernstein that he'd explain why. That's all in the e-mail that Bernstein circulated to a lot of us.

But Bernstein also told us that Kolesar was invited to explain to the Edgemont Commmunity Council why he felt the projection was too low, but after initially saying he would come, Kolesar sent Bernstein an e-mail saying no, he was too busy, that the Town Board didn't want him speaking to civic associations in any event, and that, as per instruction from the town board, if residents want any information about where things stand with the town budget and projected tax hikes for next year, they should file a FOIL request. Bernstein circulated that e-mail too.

If this buck passing when it comes to town taxes is what passes for candor in town government, it's time residents of unincorporated Greenburgh started looking for new leaders. Bernstein seems to know what he's talking about. I wonder if he'd be available.

Anonymous said...

Oh well we can all see that the town board has so much to explain as to what they are hiding from the residents.


The residents have the right to know what is happening with the town and with there money.

This board must be blind if they are not seeing how many homes are up for sale .
Just check on Ardsley rd. from Central ave to Sprain rd. there are seven homes for sale.

Anonymous said...

The seven houses for sale on Ardsley Rd are because those people can't stand the people in Edgemont anymore!!

Anonymous said...

I will second that .The reason is they never minded their business when it came to development .
The only thing they they wanted was parks and more parks and because of this taxes reach the sky.
The Edgemont civic assoc. never mind their business.
They have ruled the town board to almost total destruction plus their demands make it impossible to live in the area.
They constantly go after store keepers for one reason or another and what happens the store keeper leaves.
If someone wants to subdivide their property to build another house they are out full force at the zoning and planning voiceing their opinion.
May I ask who runs this town.The town board or the civic association.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 9:55 doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

There have been no public parks acquired in Edgemont since 1974. There are 8 civic associations in Edgemont, which has a population of 7,000. The Edgemont Community Council is not anti-business. It supported the successful application this year of the Candlelight to expand its business. And it has not "gone after" any Edgemont storekeepers. Edgemont's civic associations have from time to time objected to illegal subdivisions in already congested neighborhoods. They were always approved despite the objections.

Anonymous said...

The civic association of Edgemont rule town hall to the fullest.
i'm selling my home because I'm looking at the taxes which will be double diget for years to come.
Another reason is that it is the dirtiest in Westchester this should never be.
Edgemonts big mouths don't bother me at all. I just stay away.
As for the school well you can get a good education where ever you go. It is up to the student to excell or fail.
I'm happy to see the govenor put a cap on school taxes.
There is a man that realizes how the public has been cheated out of their money.
Since when does an education in a public school cost almost fouteen to fifteen thousand a student per year????? Well that's Edgemont.
Give us a break.
Governor Patterson thank you we need more people like you in office that looks at how the public is being taken over a barrel.
If the teachers salary were equal to what they get in the city our taxes would be much lower.
Our teaches are being paid higher than they deserve.
Has anyone checked out teachers salary individually in Edgemont?
They make much more than college professors is that fairto the residents..


Anonymous said...

Teacher salaries in Edgemont are at the bottom third in Westchester. Student cost per pupil in Edgemont is also in the middle range.

Anonymous said...

Edgemont schools ranked number 28 nationwide in the most recent US News and World Report survey. Edgemont's school budget passed this year by the highest margin in Westchester County.

Anonymous said...

What you all hate is that despite its unincorporated status, Edgemont is a real community.
The 7 homes for sale in "Ardsley" aren't really in the Village of Ardsley, they are in the Ardsley School District. The result is they have outrageously high school taxes and absurdly high Town Outside the Villages ("B" Budget) taxes. The Town hasn't protected them because they aren't represented anywhere by anyone - so they get neither services nor low taxes - a (Paul) Feiner idea!

ed krauss said...

It is absolutely incredible. Mike Kolesar e-mails a preliminary Town budget to the president of the ECC, and he's not praised for his civic mindedness and willingness to practice open government while others just give lip-service by preaching it. For this he is ripped, by someone from behind a white sheet, for obeying a mandate from his bosses.

Why is the coward, the piously hypocritical detracter, even permitted to voice an opinion about this guy who puts his job on the line while the PUSILLANimous Punk who doesn't even have the b---s, with absolutely nothing to lose, complains about him not showing up at an ECC meeting.

It's equally troubling to me, that the ECC president, who should be thanking Kolesar for bucking "procedure, by giving him the wear-with-all to talk intelligently about the potential upcoming budget, practices Simon and Garfunkel's '60's gold record,The Sound of Silence.

No good deed goes unrewarded.

If it were me, Mike, in the future I'd send them directions to the Town Clerk's office, with instructions on How to FOIL.On second thought, let them find out for themselves.

Anonymous said...

We must remember that if you are an honest person representing the residents of Greenburgh the job is not for you.
To get attention you have to be crooked.
Kolesar you're doing a good job.At least you can walk with your head high because the only thing that you are stating are the facts of a town that is and will be in more trouble than we have now.
With some people you cannot be up front . The least some know the better off we are.

Anonymous said...

Ed Krauss doesn't know what he's talking about.

He criticizes the ECC president for not thanking Kolesar for sending him a copy of a "preliminary town budget." What nonsense. Had Krauss shown up at the ECC meeting, which he sometimes does, he'd know that what Kolesar had e-mailed the ECC president was not a copy of a "preliminary town budget" but a copy of the report of the citizens budget committee. That's a report which anyone can see because it is a public document.

What was troubling to those who attended the ECC meeting was Kolesar's e-mail saying the numbers in that report were too low, that he'd explain to us why, and then his last-minute e-mail saying he wasn't showing up after saying he would,saying he's too busy, he doesn't want to set a precedent of showing up at civic association meetings, and that the town board had directed that any information about the town budget be provided only by FOIL requests.

If Krauss thinks that's the kind of open government we should all be proud of, he doesn't know the meaning of open government.

What's more, by Krauss not showing up at the ECC meeting, which is his prerogative because he's not an ECC director, Krauss had no idea what was discussed by any of the ECC directors that night about the town budget, let alone what was said on that subject by the ECC president.

So who the hell is Krauss to be opining about what was said or not said at a meeting he himself didn't bother to attend? There was no "Sounds of Silence." Far from it. There was a lot said on this subject by many of the directors, none of them were wearing "white sheets," and all of their comments were "on the record" and recorded in the ECC minutes which, when approved, will be posted online with all other ECC minutes.

If Krauss wants to be constructive, he should ask his friend Kolesar why he thinks the 17% projected increase in the citizens report is too low, and then tell us what he says. If Kolesar can't speak for himself, maybe his mouthpiece Krauss can speak for him.

Those of us who actually pay property taxes in this town would like to know.

Anonymous said...


At the same time that Mike apparently informed the ECC that he was limited in his communications, he also apparently posted a very pro-Village, anti TOV message on the Ardsly website.

krauss 1 ecc 0 said...

correction, he posted a balanced and factual statement about the giveaway of the old town hall site to the unincorporated greenburgh library - a transfer of a multi million dollar parcel without any public hearing or legal opinion as to its legality.

at the last town board meeting, tim lewis conceded the parcel was simply taken by the library in the absence of any board resolution allowing it to do so.

isnt the ecc disturbed by this?

so far we have only heard sounds of silence.

Anonymous said...

Kolesar's anti-TOV rant was contrary to law and common sense.

Kolesar thinks the town gave away land owned by the town to the Greenburgh Public Library. What village residents, including Kolesar, don't seem to understand -- and this is shocking for a public official like Kolesar - is that the Greenburgh Public Library is not a separate legal entity. It is owned by the town entire.

Kolesar seems to think that because there is a state statute which says that the library's building and furnishings must be paid for by the people of unincorporated Greenburgh, that the library itself must be owned by unincorporated Greenburgh, as if unincorporated Greenburgh were a separate municipality all its own. It's not. Unincorporated Greenburgh is not a legal entity. It can't legally own anything.

As Tim Lewis explained two town board meetings ago, land owned by the town can be used for any municipal purpose. So, when it was decided to use the land from the old town hall for the library parking lot, it was perfectly legal for the town to use the land for that purpose.

And because the state statute which created the Greenburgh public library doesn't say anything about who pays for the land upon which the library sits, there was no legal basis for requiring the taxpayers of unincorporated Greenburgh to pay anything to the "town entire" for that land.

And contrary to the know-nothing post from Anon at 6:04 am this morning, there was no legal need for any town board resolution to do any of this.

There was therefore no "giveaway of the old town hall" by anyone here. For a public official like Kolesar not to understand something as basic as this should be disturbing to all residents of the town, not just those living in unincorporated Greenburgh.

Anonymous said...

If the old town hall was given to the library as was previously stated without a total approval of the town board and also without the knowledge of the publis,tell me what kind of a crime was committed.
This situation makes things even worse with the lies told during the renovation of the old library.
How can anyone give away property that belongs to the people to a private concern and to boot it could have had a buyer that would have paid taxes.
We have big lawyers in this town that could come up with a good answer.
The library and the town are and have been playing games.
We have to get to the bottom of this before the library requests other favors.

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute before we start trowing names at each other Paul you and the town board must clarify what is legal and what is not concerning old town hall.

Herb Rosenberg said...

There is an expression that a friend of mine used -- first he lies and then he swears to it. That expression describes some of the comments made about the old Town Hall being given to the Library's use as a parking lot.

Here is the law on the subject:

It is not correct that the statute regarding the Library requires only that residents of the unincorporated area to pay for the Library building, but not the land. That is not correct. Chapter 642 laws of 1960 states, after authorizing the establishment of a public library, that the “town is hereby authorized to raise money by tax, to equip and maintain such library and to provide a building and rooms for its use.” Equipping and maintaining covers the entire operation of the library and it precedes the athorization to provide a building and rooms for its use. Providing a parking lot is part of the maintaining of the library. The statute goes on to say "Such tax shall be a charge upon the taxable property of that portion of the town of Greenburgh which is outside the limits of the unincorporated villages of.....[all six villages]" The "tax" -- whether it pays for operations, land, buildings, and whatever is necessary to "equip and maintain" the library -- is required to be charged to the B budget. This means that if the town decides to give the use of the land to the library, the A budget must be compensated or else the cost is not charged to the town outside villages.

I know that this is a thorny issue and will make unincorporated area residents unhappy, but the law is there and one doesn't have the discretion to ignore it just because one doesn't like it.

Anonymous said...

Hey judge you seem quite happy to give it up the rears of the residents of the unincorporated areas everytime you make a statement.
I'm glad that you are not on the bench anymore because your judgements would only be one sided for the criminal.

thx judge - now what? said...

judge rosenberg - how do we stop this illegal land grab?

can we call the district attorney to report a grand larceny?

Anonymous said...

Rosenberg doesn't know what he's talking about.

If the state legislature back in 1960 had wanted unincorporated Greenburgh to compensate the town entire for the cost of any land that a Greenburgh library would occupy, it could have said so. But it didn't.

Instead, when it came to deciding what unincorporated Greenburgh should pay for, the law spoke only of the cost of (1)providing a building, (2) its rooms, and (3) equiping and maintaining it.

Because the law does not say what Rosenberg wants it to say, he says covering the cost of equiping and maintaining the library means paying for the land too if the land is to be used for a library parking lot.

This is nonsense, as the town attorney made clear two meetings ago, and needlessly divisive.

What Rosenberg also leaves out is that after the statute authorizes the town to charge only unincorporated Greenburgh for the cost of the building, its rooms, and equiping and maintaining it, there is an entirely separate provision dealing with the land.

It merely authorizes the town entire to acquire real property for the purposes of such library. It nowhere states that unincorporated Greenburgh should be taxed for the cost of such land.

Rosenberg's lies and distortions convey to people the false and misleading impression that the library is either some kind of private entity or unincorporated Greenburgh entity that got something for nothing from village taxpayers.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Greenburgh library is owned in its entirety by the town of Greenburgh. The statute Rosenberg refers to merely requires unincorporated Greenburgh to pay for its building, its rooms, and to equip and maintain it -- nothing more.

Furthermore, the land in question was acquired in the early 1960s by foreclosure. Some of it was used for the old town hall, and some of it was used for the library. No one back then gave any thought to requiring unincorporated Greenburgh to compensate the town entire for the use of the land.

A municipality is not permitted to give away its land unless it can no longer be used for any municipal purpose. Using the old town hall property for the library's parking lot is a proper municipal purpose.

Herb Rosenberg said...

I knew that when I wrote the post about the 1960 law it would unleash those who use invective rather than logic. That is why I began with the comment that my friend made about someone lying and then swearing to it. If Anonymous 10:08 gets off by making stupid comments, then so be it.

But Anonymous 10:19 writes about the statute itself, and from the parsing of half-phrases and selective recounting of history, it seems almost certainly to be the work of Bernstein (and the expected denials won't matter).

I am not going to get into a debate about law with Mr. 10:19 on this blog. I will simply say that if it is Bernstein, as I am quite certain that it is, he has knocked my statements about the law for several years, but when the court issued its decision it agreed with me and said that Bernstein was trying to get the Town to violate the law. Both prior Bernatein lawsuits have died, and the third will die soon. Enough said.

I doubt very much that the Town Board has heard the last of this.

formal legal opinion needed said...

it is crystal clear that the town board held no public hearings, passed no resolutions, and failed to enter into any agreements regarding this parcel.

the intrepretation of the statute propounded in opposition to that of judge rosemberg would mean the town could simply give away any parcel it owns to the library. thats absurd.

the town board should obtain a formal legal opinion as to the legality of what was done here preferably from the attorney general's office.

rosenberg has been right in the past. seems he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt here.

Anonymous said...

Why does Rosenberg respond to arguments on this blog by making personal attacks against Bernstein? The Town Attorney was the one who rejected Rosenberg's arguments about the library, not Bernstein. I saw the Town Attorney do so when I watched the town board meeting a few weeks ago. His comments about the library statute can be viewed on the Internet.

I also don't understand what Rosenberg says about the Bernstein lawsuits. According to the Scarsdale Inquirer, Bernstein has asked the Court of Appeals to allow him to appeal the Taxter Ridge ruling on constitutional grounds. Does anyone know if the Court has ruled on that request yet?

The Inquirer also says that Bernstein has amended his second lawsuit. Does anyone know if the court has issued a ruling on that suit yet? And what's this about there being a third suit? I didn't see anything in the paper about that.

bernstein 1 said...

actually bernstein won the right to sue on appeal regarding his right to challenge who pays for taxter ridge.

although he lost in the appellate division (after winning in the lower court, he has appealed to the court of appeals.

so bernstein 1 is alive.

ed krauss said...

Who the hell is Krauss, 6/16/08 11:01PM?

He's someone who uses his name to allow posterior cavaties like you to rant non sequiturs and oxymorons, protected by gallant anonymity.

I made no derogatory comments about ECC, nor would I. What was said at the ECC meeting, or not said, had nothing to do with what I said about the coward- possibly you, who trashed Mike Kolesar; and your president (not "W" of course) who said nothing about the information he received -as well as a great deal of FOILABLE information Kolesar provided him in the past.

The fact that ECC was disappointed because the very FOILABLE 2009budget, along with an explanation of why Kolesar thought the 17% was was an understatement, is not a Greek tragedy worthy of trashing him.

Are you upset because someone didn't come with a morsel on a silver platter? Especially when all of the sought for information could have been gotten without Kolesar having to put his job on the line.

I wonder what a braveheart like you would have done in a similar situation?

That's a rhetorical question. You're not even brave enough to sign your name, so putting your toe in "tepid water," would be a Herculean expectation from a "WHITE SHEETED" coward like you.

Yes white sheeted, just like your fellow travellers in the south who remained anonymous while wreaking havoc.

If I'm wrong, show your face. Be a man...unless you're a women.

How badly do you want to know why 17% is light? If you reveal your name, I'll tell you why.

Do we have a deal? I didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

What's wrong with Krauss and Kolesar?

If a group of residents is predicting a 17% increase in town taxes next year for unincorporated Greenburgh, which seems to be the case,and Kolesar thinks that number is too low, which also seems to be the case, Kolesar has a public duty as town comptroller to speak up and say why.

And who really believes it will cost Kolesar his job to explain to the public why he thinks unincorporated Greenburgh is going to get hit with another 20% tax increase next year?

It certainly didn't cost Kolesar his job when he complained publicly last week about unincorporated Greenburgh not forking over money to compensate the town entire for the cost of land for a library parking lot, even after the town attorney said there was no legal basis for unincorporated Greenburgh to pay anything for it.

So why all of a sudden will it now it cost Kolesar his job to tell unincorporated Greenburgh taxpayers what he thinks is the truth about next year's tax hike?

How weird is that? Krauss obviously thinks it okay for Kolesar to keep his mouth shut about the most important issue in the town because, after all, it's more important (in Krauss' opinion) that Kolesar not lose his job than what we pay in taxes.

Sorry Ed, but the coward here is you. The public is entitled to the truth, and it evidently isn't coming from either Krauss or his buddy Kolesar. What's truly bizarre is that Krauss, who usually has his head screwed on right, doesn't seem to think there's anything wrong with this. Doesn't he realize that his friend Kolesar is being made to look foolish -- not by residents who want to know the truth about what they may have to pay in taxes next year, but by a town board that's evidently trying to keep him muzzled?

Anonymous said...

Krauss seems to think ECC's president should have said something publicly about certain information he received from Kolesar.

Wake up Ed. While you were ranting, ECC's president was quoted on the front page of the Journal News on Monday complaining about this year's 21% tax increase and next year's "projected double digit tax increase." Maybe you missed it. It was under the banner headline, "Edgemont residents hire their own security."

The ECC president also gave out quite a bit of information at last week's ECC meeting which he said came from Kolesar. So Ed, what exactly is your point?

Anonymous said...

The housing Authority may or may not pay taxes but they have a Greenburgh cop patroling the area for free at tax payers expense.
The residents in Edgemont had to hire a retired police person {maybe from Greenburgh]to patrol the area since it has become a high crime area.
Boy instead of this town moving foward with all the tax money that is allocated to the police dept.the town is going backward.
This is a disgrace that they have to hire their own security.
Thanks a lot chief you're doing a fine job not protecting the people that butter your bread but to those that insist that they have no butter.

Anonymous said...

Oh so the residents in Edgemont have hired their own security to fight crime.
The expense should be deducted from their taxes.
Fairview gets it for free so this area should be compensated also.
Edgemont should start crying poverty maybe they could get something for free.
Boy what a sad turn of events.

hal samis said...

The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars (Bernstein, Krauss, Kolesar, Rosenberg) but with our Town Board whose truth faked and redacted quality is known throughout Greenburgh.

Gentlemen, we are all on the same side (truth, justice and the american way) and the strategy of the Town Board is to foster "divide and conquer" among the opposition.

It should be apparent to all that the Town Board does not want to let the cat out of the bag until the very last moment. That way they can continue to fund their "pet" programs and then act unaware when this dalliance catches up to them in October. Already this year they have added their little bit to taxpayer insolvency by quietly voting to renew the Arts Council ($60,000 for hanging pictures in Town Hall and running a poetry contest), Energy Czarinas ($30,000), Dog Park ($ varies), Police Department promotions ($$$ backdated, $400 overtime for attending ceremony), Police Dog dental work ($3,000), hiding the cost of the cybermobile driver in the Community Center budget...and coming to a Town Board meeting near you is the pressing issue of $4,000 to renew the quarterly sculpture display at the Hartsdale train station.

But this is chump change as to what really can be done if the Town Board wants to make some fungible changes. Meanwhile, in pursuit of this they intend to wander the streets like a lost tribe in pursuit of the holy grail (the elusive answer) which apparently "lies" hidden in some homeowner's basement. How convenient to conduct this show away from the Town Board meeting and its camera to record what is said from the dais and from the podium.

Having a quotable record just isn't in the cards for taxpayers.

With the whole summer unbooked at Town Hall, why doesn't the Town Board conduct Public Hearings on the forthcoming problem? Why wait until the last minute budget crunch and its business as usual rush to approve the budget by the drop dead date. Note that they played this song already this year when staging the one-day, close the record tomorrow adoption of the capital budget.

Of course, now that the Town Board has unleashed the secret weapon (disputed, reasonably) that the budget can be amended during the year, the urgency is somewhat alleviated knowing that the Town Board can decide to travel that road again.

So in the wide open stretch between July 9 and August 27, I look forward to the Town Board conducting several PUBLIC Hearings, in camera, on the most pressing problem facing the Town Board, the hiring of the Community Center Director notwithstanding. And guess what, not all five members of the Town Board need be present so vacation away.

Who knows, perhaps by summer's end the Town Board will even be able to find out if the Library has found the money to pay for furniture, flooring, landscaping, technology etc. After all, the Town Board insists on being the last to know. Odd too that with all the posts about naming rights, renting space in the library and grants, that the Town Board, the Library Board and their toady, Al Regula, all insist in chorus line that "everything's ok at the ballet".

So, campers, the problem is not within our bunk. Color war is the diversion that it the creation of the Counselors. This year, let's be smart enough to turn the tables on the administration. Otherwise, you'll be finding out that the cost of name tapes is going up 17% despite the Town Board's sincere effort to "keep the increase under double digits".

Shooting the messenger may be fun but apparently not as much fun as shooting one's own foot. Ouch!
But wouldn't it be more productive to aim at the target?

ed krauss said...

You win. I give up. Maybe there would be a meeting of the minds if, as I've suggested in the past, the Comptroller's office whould be an elected position. If the Receiver of Taxes is an elected position, then the significantly more critical office of Comptroller should also be.

NYC and NYS have Comptrollers elected, so why can't Greenburgh? Then, if you don't like the job he's doing, you vote him out of office.

We have no quarrel. All of us deserve to know ALL the information which effects or may effect our lives.

However, as I've stated in previous postings, the information is there for you to FOIL. So, in less time than it takes you to question which way my head is screwed on or whether Kolesar looks foolish, you can fill out a FOIL request and have the information you want...unedited, unabridged, complete as presented and annotated by the Comptroller to the Town Board.

Difficult? NO WAY!

Inconvenient? SLIGHTLY.

So why not take that extra step and stop labelling?

Anonymous said...

The problem here in this town is when someone tells the truth he is labeled as a nut.
Koleasar is unearthing many things in his examination of our books.
These figures should have been in full balance every year
It's a crime that the previous comptrollers had no intention to do the right thing.
Now we have a hands on person who is there to make an honest change and someone on the board plus some of the public are against him.
The problem is that we have been lied to throughout the years that we the public don't know who is right or wrong.
Let's pay attention to Kolesars' findings.So far he's been doing a good and honest job.
I'm starting to think that because he is stepping on certain peoples' feet they will not acknowledge his
findings. We have been living in the dark for too long.
We need the truth and we need it now.
This board and the previous ones have done what they saw fit to suit their fancy,not thinking about the residents.
Now we have a big daddy watching every penny and guess what the board does not like it.
Well you know what THATS' TOUGH.

Keep checking Mike maybe you could start a system to put this town where it should have been many years ago.Someone said in a previous blog That you would be the only one with B---S to set this town straight.
Good job.

Anonymous said...

Would someone please tell Ed Krauss what a FOIL request is?

Asking Kolesar for his opinion as to why the 17% projected increase for next year is too low is not something one can get from a FOIL request. FOIL only covers town records. The opinion of a town comptroller is not a town record.

Give it up, Ed. If Kolesar's got something important to say about next year's taxes, and he apparently does, he should do the right thing as town comptroller and come right out and say it, for goodness sake.

Anonymous said...

Do you think if Kolesar comes out with the truth will the town board back him up,or will they do another coverup.
In due time I'm sure that the comptroller will come out with his findings so everyone can see for themselves.
I won't be suprpised if the projected budjet is the same as this years because no one wants to cut costs.
No matter what the requests are by the town board to department heads
nothing will be done.
THe dept. heads got their way all these years and nothing will change .
Let's see what The comptrollers office comes up with their findings and then take it from there.
I'm looking at a twenty percent hike.

hal samis said...

Dear Cretins (genus anonymous)

In preparing a budget projection for 2009, everything at this point in time is merely the Comptroller's opinion or "guidance" if you want to goose the definition.

He neither knows what the various Town Departments are going to request or be granted and nor does he know for certain the revenue items -- although these may in turn be the guidance provided by entities apart from the Town: the County and the State.

Nor does he know tomorrow's closing price of Apple or General Motors or Citigroup or a barrel of oil.

Or the result of any of the outstanding 800 cert applications.

Any paperwork the Comptroller has or has not produced is the result of his intuition with what "facts" or inputs as may be currently at his disposal.

To ask if his verbal opinion is different from his written opinion is an insult. And, were it so, why would he be so stupid as to answer?

As for the numbers produced and foilable, it is my understanding that this is the report of the budget committee -- also merely an opinion.

In any case, keep shooting and maybe you will yet succeed in killing the goose.

Anonymous said...

Samis -- If Kolesar has something in writing explaining why he thinks the citizens budget committee's projection of a 17% tax hike for next year is too low, it is of course FOILable. Do you know whether he does or not? If he does, have you gotten it yet?

If he doesn't have anything in writing explaining that, then it's just his verbal opinion, which is not FOILable.

Which is it? Why is this such a state secret? Don't YOU think the public should know?

hal samis said...

Is it a State secret?

Or are you just lazy?

Why not actually FOIL for yourself?

Ask for written Comptroller opinions regarding the report of the Citizens Budget committee.

If they exist, you will get them or, you are entitled to an explanation why they cannot be provided. If they do not exist, you will be told "no such document(s) exist".

Nothing like doing a little work yourself.

And no, I don't know as my interest at the moment is not about the budget but the final stages of the Library expansion AND the death of Public Comment at Town Board meetings.

Viva Kolesar said...

Kolesar is the first Comptroller that Greenburgh has had in my lifetime who is (a) professional (b) competent (really competent)(c) serious about putting Greenburgh's financial house in order and (d) unafraid of letting the facts out.

Instead of trashing him, the small group of anonymice who bitch about everything should be shouting Hallelujah. They should also pray that he will be permitted to stay around, instead of being replaced by the kind of nonentities that we have had.

If the Town Board doesn't like what Kolesar says and tries to shut him up, that is the best news because it shows that he is actually doing the job that a Comptroller should be doing.

Anonymous said...

You are so wrong, the Town had Eleanor Mc Donald, Nora Mc Avoy,
Anne Marie & Doreen, why do you think they all left, do you think it could have been constant interference from "non-professionals"??
Kolesar will be no different when it comes to dealing w/the department heads, each & everyone of them will have more than enough justification for there budget proposals-- especially the bloated
Police proposals-- the Board & Paul will give Kolesar the % they can live with & have him "back into that number"!!! Until Paul & the Board give the power to the Comptroller, (whomever it is) to say NO!!! just like Eleanor Mc Donald had, nothing changes!!!!

Viva Kolesar said...

To 8:01 Anonymous

You don't understand because you are full of anger at Feiner and the Town Council and so you don't see or hear.

Eleanor McDonald was a political hatchet person for Tony Veteran and she had no professional qualifications. Nora McAvoy was a long-time employee who succeeded Giselle Knight. Nora had no particluar professional expertise but she could handle the job because times were easier. Same with Anne Marie Berg and Doreen. It was all about making the budget at a time when revenues were high and expenses were low. I don't know why they left, and it may be because they were unhappy with the Supervisor and the Town Council, but their contribution to the public's knoeledge was zero.

Jim Heslop was a disaster. No professional training, no imagination, and no guts. He quit just when it became obvious that the bad news was catching up with us.

If Kolesar had been Comptroller earlier we wouldn't have had the misreporting of the Westhelp money, and that is just one example. Kolesar is speaking truth to power, even if the Town Board doesn't want to listen. But the truth is coming out, and because Kolesar is telling it there will be a reckoning.

Spend your time criticizing things that should be criticized, instead of dumping on a refreshing addition to the town government.

Anonymous said...

The previous comptrollers were hog tied by some one on the board.
Some had ties with commissioners so they had to keep the peace .
Some didn't know their ass from their elbows when it came to accounting.

Now we have some one who is not afraid of anyone nor does he have any ties with the board or commissioners and some have something to say about his performance so far.

Like they said he should have been aboard a few years back with his method of hands on we would not have been in this boat.

When all is said and done make sure that you send him a thank you for being up front and honest.

Anonymous said...

I saw the rerun of the work session today,what an eye opener .
How could this town try to cover up for the housing authority?
I think the board votes in the commissioner without a good backgroung check.
I blame the commissioners for running a bad departmentbut above all I blame the town board for letting them get away with stealing the taxpayers money.

Anonymous said...

It was brought to my attention that the two most money eating problems in this town are in Fairview that being the center and the housing authority.
Is our town board sleeping or are they gluttons for punishment.
Why do you allow this to go on and on without taking the necessary steps to remedy the situation.

Do you need another audit to correct the situation?

juettner a joke said...

lets not forget that diana juettner has been on the board since 1991 and her record is pathetic.

her neglect of her duties as town board representative to the library will cost everybody millions.

juettner is a fiasco and must join her pals eddie may barnes and steve bass in 2009.

Anonymous said...

Why nothing posted here since the 12??

CONTACT: Press Office
(518) 474-4015 FOR RELEASE:
June 12, 2008

DiNapoli: Officials Overcharged Residents and Did Not Get Necessary Approvals for Greenburgh Sewer District

Proper state approvals were not obtained and the public was not notified when Greenburgh town officials authorized a nearly quarter million dollar cost overrun for Sewer District #4, according to an audit released by state Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The audit also found that due to miscalculations by town officials, certain residents have been over charged since 1992. Others have been under charged.

“Officials must take care not to bypass normal approval processes when it comes to spending the public’s money,” said DiNapoli. “This is particularly true in cases when the people directly affected – the taxpayers – are supposed to be updated about a project’s progress.”

The audit covers the period of 1979 – when the district was first constructed – to 2007. The unauthorized cost overrun occurred after 1982 when several payments were made between 1983 and 1989.

Auditors found that town officials:

Did not obtain the proper approval from the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC), or notify District residents, when they expended an estimated $220,000 in sewer district construction costs;
Did not implement appropriate internal controls to ensure that town officials updated benefit units when residents subdivided or improved their properties;
Over charged certain district residents by $26 for the 2007 annual assessment, and auditors estimate that the average resident would have saved $427 during the period 1989 to 2007 on sewer assessment charges; and
The town failed to charge five District residents for assessment charges since 1988.
DiNapoli recommended that town officials:

Obtain the Comptroller’s approval before authorizing cost overrun expenditures;
Develop internal controls to ensure that sewer assessments adequately cover capital costs;
Clearly explain to the public the need for sewer assessments and hook-in fee changes;
Accurately assess charges to sewer users; and
Review the town’s other 18 sewer districts to be sure similar problems don’t exist there.
Town officials for the most part agreed with the Comptroller’s recommendations and indicated they would take corrective action.

Anonymous said...



Anonymous said...

That's BS and you know it.
He has unearthed plenty that was mishandled by the town and especially the previous comptroller.
What are you afraid of ?
Do you think that he will unearth some of your wrong doing while you are working for the town?
He was hired to do a job and so far it's great. If he started to step on peoples toes I suggest you wear a metal tip to your shoe.
Just remember what has taken place here in Greenburgh with the mishandling of monies throughout the years cannot be undone in a short time.
He will come up with many facts and figures whether we like it or not but THAT IS HIS JOB.
He will not be retireing for many years to come and what business is it of yours if he works up until that day.
What are your plans?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the update Mike.

ed krauss said...

To 6/18, 12:48
I'm glad I didn't revert back to my South Bronx upbringing, and all the 4-letter words at my disposal after reading your stupid, obviously ignorant comments.

To wit:

"Tell Ed Krauss what a Foil request is."

"Why the 17% is low, is not something you get in a FOIL."

"FOIL only covers town records."

Before you shoot (your mouth off) you should always least with some factoids, so you don't show how dumb you are.

(1) I know what a foil is. You obviously don't. Yet "under cover of darkness" you try to edify me with zeroes.

(2) What the Comptroller said about why the 17% increase is low, is withot question FOILABLE.Try it.

(3) FOIL only covers town records. You A--Hole what the Comptroller says in an open meeting, IS a town record.

(4) GET OFF YOUR LAZY ASS, FOIL the information you seek. And when you get it, get off Kolesar and my ass. As an anonymous blogger no-one will know who you are, or maybe a teeny weeny apology?

AS to posting on this blog, your freedom FROM speech, is RULE ONE.

Don't render an opinion unless you have the guts to stand behind it and use your name.

Kolesar has done more to help this town in a short 6 months than all the the people like you EVER have or EVER will.

This town has NEVER had a professional financial guy/Comptroller as good, dedicated and open (save telling ECC) as he is. Regarding the faux pas vis-a-vis ECC,it's still information available to them.

Another anonymous warrior stated "What is more important, Kolesar keeping his job, or the townfolk knowing why the 17% is understated?"-parphrased but accurate.

Are you FU--EN kidding me? Martyrdom is a worthy attribute if "someone else falls on his sword," worked for the Kama Kazis, and is now working for the homocide bombers in Israel, BUT would the Audey Murphy who asked that question, look in the mirror and ask him/herself what (s/he) would do? That decision would flow at the speed of light-NO WAY.

So why pass judgement on Kolesar's courage when you show none at all?

And, by the way, calling me a coward makes as much sense as too many of the rest of the reckless postings on this blog

I'll bet our supervisor and his 4 co-conspirators, are loving this.

So I'll leave them with a thought. When the "fit" hits the "sham," and it will, sooner rather than later, there won't be enough rubber suits to cover any part of you. Two 20 percenters in a row will finaaly rid us of 60% of the problem (BOARD), and the next time the oher 2 run, the short term memory of the Greenburgh electorate will be Ginko Balobaed.

Adios, Paul, your reign of error is coming to an end, and none too soon.You can fool some of the people some of the time, and some of the time is over.

Ditto balance of Board.

Anonymous said...

Krauss is obviously loyal to his buddy Kolesar, but he'd be a lot more effective, and sound a lot less hysterical, if for once he'd stop ranting and produce the friggin document that he thinks records what Kolesar supposedly said.

And for the record, Ed, what Kolesar may have said in an open meeting is not FOILable, unless someone wrote down what he said or Kolesar was reading from something he himself put in writing. Only "records" are FOILable, and unless there's a writing, it ain't FOILable.

Instead of playing this silly cat-and-mouse game, why doesn't Krauss just tell us what the document says? You really expect us to believe that's gonna get Kolesar fired? For what?

Anonymous said...

Stop putting the blame on Kolesar for the upcoming tax increase for the years 2009.

The increase was repeated over and over again at town meetings and it was also said that it would likely be the same as we have this years or somewhat higher.

Kolesar was not the one to make this statement.
He has showed the board so many errors that were previously made by those before him with the blessing of the town board.

Check with Kolesar to see what he found out in the short time since he became comptroller .
After you see the facts start putting the blame where it belongs.

He is doing the job that he was hired for.
We had enough whimps as comptrollers and now that we have someone with BIG B---S to show the residents where the errors were made in the spending of our tax dollars and also to face up to the town board with his findings some of you don't like his method of doing things.
Well that's tough...

Anonymous said...

Kolesar supposedly said the 17% projected tax increase for next year is too low. It would be really helpful to know why he thinks that. But the town board apparently won't let him say why, his friends say he'll get fired if he says why anyway, and there's some debate going on over whether one could find out why by filing a FOIL request.

If the news is bad, or worse than we've been told, it's unlikely to be Kolesar's fault -- so don't you think it makes sense to hear the news now, while there may be still time to do something about it?

Anonymous said...

Kolesar must have found plenty of discrepencies in examing the books that the town board decided to keep the finding a secret.

When was the last time that the entire board was up front with the residents.

You can't blame Kolesar for the tax hike because it was mentioned at town meetings over and over again that there would be another large increase in taxes for the coming year.

Kolesar was hired to do a job which is proven to be considered an investigation in so many ways.
When he dicovers an oversight he has to get to that department head and ask why.
Well I guess many do not like that they are being questioned about their spending practices.
Sorry that's his job.

If the department heads have nothing to hide why is it that they cannot be asked questions and above all answer honestly.
In this town it seems that honesty went out the window.
We should thank Kolesar for bringing to light a lot of things that don't add up and we hope that he can prove to the board that something has to be done asap to save taxpayers money.
We know that no one wants to be told of any wrong doings in their town but if the books reveal
some errors they should not be hidden from the residents.

Kolesar has a job to do the same as anyone on the board.

Anonymous said...

No one's blaming Kolesar for next year's tax hike, at least not yet, but if he knowns about ways the tax hike could be reduced, but continues to keep his mouth shut about them for fear the town board might fire him, you can be sure Kolesar will be just as deserving of blame as the town board will. If Kolesar's got something to say, he should just come right out and say it. I'm not buying this BS that he's uncovering all sorts of wrongdoing. If he knows about ways to reduce the tax hike, but won't tell us, then the wrongdoing that's being uncovered is his own.

Anonymous said...

There has been some mishandling of funds.
The person to ask is Feiner .
He has the answers to all the questions that have been asked at every meeting.
Don't put Kolesar in the hot seat.
If the board doesn't want to answer our questions how could Kolesar answer.
They should all sit down to explain what the findings are and what they mean to the residents.
Did he not come foward with the overtime that was received by some in the PD .This was mentioned at a town meeting.
Was anything done or said after it was brought to light NO?????
Did he not find out that the housing authority owes aalmost one half million dollars what has been done to get restitution.The fight goes on.You said I said.
The board is playing games because they realize that they have been sleeping all this time giving away our money and services without investigating.
Take the library they always got what they asked for but now the picture has changed. Why?
When our pockets are getting emptied we have to be heard.
It took a bond of nineteen million plus to get residents mad as to how much money is needed.
The library will not even be completed with all the furnishes because they don't have the necessary funds to do so.
Did the town listen to the public no so how do we expect them to listen to the comptroller especially when their minds are already made up.

Anonymous said...

Kolesar won't last. He tells the truth. Only people like Al Regula last with the Town.

Anonymous said...

Regula should be given the heave ho before he causes more problems with his lies.

Does the board think that he [Regula] runs a good department.
If there ever was a good cover up is in his department.
Where does all the money go?
Why so much overtime?
He never answers complaints.
The woman that answers his telephone is the most ill mannered person that is working at town hall.
The two deserve one another.
She too should be let go. She has a job to serve the public not to turn people away.