About a year ago I presented the Town Board with a proposed fund balance policy.The draft was never approved or rejected. How much surplus should the town keep? The bond rating agencies have suggested that the town approve a fund balance. The lack of a fund balance could impact future bond ratings -especially since the Town Board has been cutting into fund balance in the past to keep taxes lower.
I hope that the policy could be adopted before I release the proposed 2008 budget. Copies of the draft policy will be sent to anyone who requests one. Please e mail me at pfeiner@greenburghny.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
46 comments:
saw the NYT article too...
Why is Feiner blaming the town board for dipping into the fund balance?
In his proposed budget for 2007, Fefiner avoided a tax increase in in the unincorporated areas by taking $5.1 million out of the B Fund's accumulated fund balance. The prior year he avoided a tax increase in the unincorporated areas by taking $4.7 million out of the B Fund's fund balance.
After the town board tinkered last year with Feiner's proposed budget, the town board voted unanimously -- Feiner included -- to take a total of $5.8 million out of the B Fund's fund balance -- all in the name of avoiding an election year tax increase.
Now the town's outside auditors are saying this practice of dipping into town reserves to avoid a tax increase has got to stop.
But it sure looks like Feiner is as much to blame for the current situation as everyone else.
All of the fund balance numbers are available on the town's website for everyone to see.
Could someone tell me does Feiner work on the Budget all by himself.
He did have a comptroller who was supposed to be qualified in this system,right or wrong.
Feiner is not a CPA or an accountant.
He is asking for assistance right now to assist him with the budget the cost is only $5000,00 but as usual His highness Sheehan is against it.
The comptroller is leaving so the supervisor needs some advice as how to proceed to save us some money.
What's wrong with this picture.
Sheehan wants things to go wrong as far as wrong could go so as to blame the supervisor for a high tax hike.
If funds were taken from one budget to satisfy another Feiner did not do this on his own.
As someone said at the town hall meeting he has qualified people on staff in the comptrollers office.
RIGHT OR WRONG.
If he has competent people on staff in the controllers office then why does he need to spend an extra $5000 for help?
And if there is no one competent in the controllers office, why the hell not?
If one saw the most recent campaign contribution filing for Edie Mae Barnes, one would see the name of Myer Sigal, who gave her $500, her largest gift. Could this be the same Myer Sigal, who is the new head of the Ethics Board?
Why, after a mere 16 years in office has the question of a fund balance policy suddenly become worthy of the Supervisor's attention?
Is this another example of the prevailing attitude that so long as he was free to tinker, Mr. Feiner eschewed guidance - but now that there is some oversight - he feels a need to codify his mismanagement? As one commentator has pointed out, he is neither an accountant nor a CPA - but he has successfully driven several honest controllers out - and paid them off with Town funds, insuring their silence with non-disclosure agreements. Let's put Mr. Feiner under oath about the Town's suddenly surfacing financial woes...
Why does Troy have a letter allegedly signed by Feiner assuring him (Troy) that the zoning issue on Dromore Road will be "...taken care of to your satisfaction after the election..."?
Wait a second did you ever think that the previous comptrollers quit before the S--t hit the fan.
What ever went wrong with that dept.did not start today.
And what is wrong pre-dates Sheehan, Bernstein, McNally and any of the usual suspects -
It dates back to Paul and his rubberstamp PAULITBURO during the Town's "golden age".
I knew that the anti-Feiner clique had no respect for the truth. But I didn't think that they would sink so low as to fabricate a letter which does not exist, and to use quotation marks to make it look authentic, as does the writer at 9:04 AM. The last time that I remember anything like that is when Joe McCarthy waved alleged lists which were not lists at all.
That is libel, pure and simple. I hope that Feiner traces that malicious fakery and takes legal action.
Paul have 9:04 comment checked out by KApica.
Sheehan did just that some time ago.Remember!!!!!
We know that this is an outright lie, Maybe it is Sheehan trying to cover his tracts after he ordered Stellato to have the zoning map changed.
An investigation is needed for the comment of 9:04.
If it could be checked out it should, to see who this liar is.
Could it be Bernstein and Sheehan and McNally?
Most likely it is Bernstein. he has shown that he has no morals or professionalism, and it is his kind of dirty trick.
to 9:04
My position has been consistent: I want the land preserved as open space -to protect the nature center. I do not favor rezoning the property for additional development.
PAUL FEINER
If the 9:04 post is real, and not a hoax, it would have had to come from one of the Troys or from one of their lawyers.
It is curious that the 9:04 post states that the letter was "allegedly" signed by Feiner. There would have been no reason for any of the usual anonymous Feiner bashers to make up a phony story about a Feiner letter, and then say he "allegedly" signed it.
The use of the word "allegedly" suggests that there was a conversation between the Troys and Feiner in which the Troys threatened to release the letter publicly if Feiner did not honor his commitment to give them the zoning change he promised them post-election.
Feiner may have said if they did release such a letter, he'd deny having signed it. That may explain why the word "allegedly" was used.
Feiner's posted response is therefore quite odd. If he never wrote any such letter to the Troys, why didn't he come right out and say so?
The 4:07 blogger writes just as Bernstein writes. He makes up suppositions,and then bases further suppositions on those suppositions.
He starts with "if the 9:04 post is real and not a hoax" and then goes on to create a twisted argument based on its "reality."
But what if it is a hoax, as it surely is. There is not the slightest evidence that there is such a letter. The original 9:04 post uses the word "allegedly." Who alleges it? Probably the same liar who is always alleging things that have no basis in fact, and we all know who that is.
So the liar goes on to say that "Feiner may have said" and "that may explain." Yes, and the cow may jump over the moon.
I guess with the current Town Council about to lose its clout, the Bernstein bunch think that they have no choice but to become even worse than they have been.
If the letter exists, the Troys will surely release it if they don't get what they want. Stay tuned. Let's see if they do.
I am certain the 9:04 post is a hoax, or any attempt to draw attention away from the real situaiton.
Even Feiner wouldnt put a quid pro quo in writing.
I have never and will never take any action -in writing or verbally- that will have a negative impact on the Greenburgh Nature Center. One of the reasons why I am so offended about Bernstgein's efforts to turn the property into a municipal building is because the traffic, development would have a major negative impact on the eco system at the center.
no letter exists.
Do municipal buildings really have more of an impact on a neighborhood than, say, 37 residential units?
Thirtyseven residential units means at the very least 37 vehicles entering and exiting the premises on an nearly 24 hour per day basis.
Thirtyseven residences will have a very negative effect on the GNC - so, does that mean the Supervisor will unequivocally fight for the property remaining R-20?
"no letter exists"
how about a memo or an email?
have the troys denied it too?
How can Samis know that?
Is he, as Bernstein has been accused of, acting for the Town? Shouldn't a definitive denial come from either Troy or the Town?
Sorry Hal - your denial as a private party has no weight.
If people had to deny every lie that Bernstein and his friends throw out the lies would never end.
That's their trick. They makes up a lie and then they attack the denials as being evidence of "where there is smoke there is fire." That's the kind of thing Senator McCarthy used to do. It stank then andd it stinks now.
It seems to me that when some anonymous person "alleges" that a letter has been written and writes supposed language in quotation marks, then that person pought to produce that letter, or better evidence of it than saying that something is "alleged."
But will it stop? Not a chance. That kind of garbage is all these people have to live for, now that they have lost political power.
Just answer the question, how can Hal Samis know. The conspiracy theory can wait. Does Samis have firsthand, inside knowledge or not?
Maybe someone asked Troy. Maybe Samis did. It really is an easy thing to do considering that the smear posting was nonsense to begin with.
Let the smearer produce some evidence and not just smear allegations. Nobody has to answer smears.
I love this blog. Bernstein used to do his dirty work --a whispering campaign. Now his whispering is done on the blog. We are able to respond. We are able to correct Bob's make believe accusations.
Was Samis "authorized" to PERHAPS contact (an assumption for certain)the Troys? Who authorized him? The PAULITBURO - did Fairview get a vote?
To 9:16. Nobody needs an authorization to do anything. If Samis called Troy he has an absolute right to do it. So do you, you dope. You might actually learn some facts, instead of falling for Bernstein's garbage. Does Bernstein need an authorization to lie? No. All he needs is his personality.
I called the Developer whom I met for the first time at a Town Board work session which, if memory serves correctly, was, per the Agenda, to discuss the then proposed moratorium. The Developer was the only new face in the room and I introduced myself.
I represent no one and my personal interests as are well known favor private property rights (Ayn Rand) over those of the assumed "public good".
Samis can talk to Troy but Bernstein can't?
What very interesting planet are you from?
Samis didn't participate in a secret illegal meeting with the Town Council and Troy, and Samis didn't make demands, as Bernstein did, for land transfers and major Greenburgh policy matters, while cooperating with the Town Council which was threatening a moratorium. Samis only asked a question.
Do you see the difference, or are you too dense?
If it wasn't illegal for Samis to meet with Troy, it wasn't illegal for Bernstein either. Town Board members can have illegal meetings, private citizens can't. Orare you too dense to grasp the LAW must apply fairly and consistently to all citizens?
Samis was not looking to steal the land for himself as was Bernstein and McNally for their newly founded realestate company,
Samis and any other citizen has the right to ask questions of this developer since the crooks involved refuse to swear under oath,and answer any questions directed to them.
Samis has the right because his name was mentioned together with the supervisor at the onset of the meeting by Sheehan and Bernstein.
Had both of them [Samis and Feiner] had any idea of this illegal meetings all deals were off.
If my name was mentioned I would have made the same call.
To 3:12. I didn't say that it was illegal for Bernstein to meet. I said that he participated in an illegal meeting.
But I guess you are too dense to understand the difference between Samis asking Troy a question and Bernstein participating in an illegal meeting the piurpose of which was to make Edgemont pay for a village hall they knew nothing about by way of a transfer of land under Bernstein's control.
Other people understood. That is why Feiner and his team swept the election.
"Making Edgemont Pay" seems to be what it is all about -
Edgemont can't "pay" for a village hall because there is no village of Edgemont. There isn't even a post office designated Edgemont.
Stop and use your intelligence for a minute - if Edgemont becomes a village AND if Bernstein wins his lawsuits, Edgemont will still have to pay for Taxter Ridge, TYCC and the rest of the Parks and Recreation facilities BECAUSE, (ready for this) when Bernstein wins, ALL villages will have to share in the burden with the unincorporated areas WHERE TAXES WILL GO DOWN because the costs of town-wide parks and rec will be spread over a larger tax base!!!!
Gentlemen?
1) Whether Edgemont has to pay for Taxter Ridge does not exclude Edgemont from incorporating -- if in fact anyone other than Bob and a few friends are in favor of the idea. If Edgemont became a Village, they would need some space for municipal use. My premise was that if an office building were built on the Dromore parcel (as per what was thought to be possible at the time), then the rental income from the balance of the building would support the "gift" of a floor to Edgemont for Village Hall use. And if Edgemont did not become a Village and had no use for the space, then there would be more space available to rent at market rates.
2) "Samis" did not attend any meetings with the Developer; the phone works just fine. But the difference between my contact with the Developer and Mr. Bernstein is that I did not try to buy the property; I did not draw up any papers for such purpose; I don't claim to represent any entity other than myself; I didn't attend any "secret" meetings with the members of the Town Council present.
And were I to attend any similar meeting, neither would I prevent the Developer from having his attorney present; nor would I make it a prerequisite that the Town Supervisor not be told and, just in case I start talking to myself some day, I would also not insist that "Samis" not be told about what went on.
3) The shared interest between myself and the Developer is that neither he nor I favored a moratorium on Central Avenue.
4) As an "officer of the Court", it would be illegal for Bernstein to represent himself as the Agent of the Town without prior authorization. The Town Attorney has stated that Bernstein was not representing the Town. The ECC conducted no vote to authorize Bernstein or McNally to enter into negotiations to acquire the Dromore property on its behalf. So, who was Bernstein representing at the meeting? Under what authority did he draft agreements to acquire the property on anyone else's behalf? The only reason for Bernstein to engage in negotiations to acquire the property was to do so for his own account or his associates or partners.
Game, set, match.
You can't have your cake, eat it too and not see the result of all those calories.
If Bernstein wins the lawsuits who will suffer? Edgemont. The villages will break away from the town. Edgemont (unincorporated Greenburgh) will pay the for the entire courts. Unincorporated Greenburgh will pay for the costs of the construction of a new court house. Unincorporated Greenburgh will pay the entire Town Supervisor, Board, Assessor, Purchasing Director, Clerks, Town Attorney salary.
THere's much more.
Bob Bernstein is looking at the short term benefits. Long term, his actions will reduce property values in Edgemont and throughout unincorporated Greenburgh.
Bernsteins vendetta against Feiner proved to be a big mistake on His[Bernsteins]part.
It seems that he never looked at the whole picture his intend was to get even.
Too bad for him he has lost sight of what being honest really means.
The chances of the villages being allowed to secede are very small.
The State of NY and the Federal government will not permit the creation of lily-white enclaves carved out of diverse communities.
You think Edgemont is la-de-dah, you ought to see Irvington's reaction to non-white faces...
The six villages are already separate municipalities. The only question is whether they will be part of the town of Greenburgh or whether they will be part of a new town to be created which will consist of the six villages.
If you think that the six villages are lily white, you ought to walk around a bit, especially in Tarrytown and Elmsford. But all the villages have minority populations of varying sizes.
I agree that there is some diversity in Elmsford and Tarrytown - but admit it, Irvington, Dobbs Ferry, Hastings and Ardsley are far from representative of the general population of Westchester or the New York metropolitan area. And, the secession movement is focused on the latter four villages...
You are twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to find arguments.
The secession movement isn't focused on four villages. It is focused on the fact that some firebrands in Edgemont have made accusations to make the unincorporated residents look at the villages as the enemy and they are trying to dump expenses for running unincorporated on to the village residents. It has nothing to do with race, ethnicity, nationaligin, or anything else. It is to get away from these Edgemont firebrands that the villages are working on secession.
Whether it will succeed is another question.
No twisting necessary - the villages feel it is unfair to contribute to the Town's budget for Parks and Recreation - despite the fact Village residents may use all Town facilities EXCEPT the AF Veteran pool.
The unincorporated areas feel it is unfair for village residents to have the privilege of using Town parks free; contributing neither their costs of acquisition nor their annual upkeep.
Village residents are 55% of the voters - a majority of Town residents (many of whom are not qualified as voters for many, many reasons) are not white.
No twisting there - a simple case of not wishing to mingle.
Post a Comment