Government Reform Bill Passes

by: robert.harding

Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 08:52:26 AM EDT

The importance of the bill cannot be understated. Gregory Krawkower, who serves as the Director of the Senate Policy Group and Special Counsel to Senate Majority Leader Malcolm A. Smith, wrote a post on the NYSenate blog explaining what the bill does. According to Krawkower, the bill will do the following:

- There is one consolidation and dissolution law that is applicable to towns, villages and special districts.  (The law applies to all special districts except school districts, which were left out of the proposal because the law governing school district consolidation is - uniquely - quite clear. Most importantly, while the number of school districts in New York have been greatly reduced, the opposite is true for other districts).

- Empowered governing bodies can initiate consolidation/dissolution process for towns, villages or special districts.

- Empowered citizens can initiate consolidation/dissolution process for all local government entities though a simplified and fair petition process.

- All land owning requirements to petition for or vote on proposed consolidation/dissolutions are abolished.

It is no secret that New Yorkers face a high property tax burden. Locally, I know that Western New Yorkers (and upstate New York) face a high tax burden that really hits hard because of our low property values. While some tout our region as a great place to live because housing is so affordable, when taxes are as high as they are, that is when they feel the pinch.

This is where consolidation and dissolution can be a key to reducing property taxes in New York. We have too many local governments in New York. You could argue that some of these governments are unnecessary. When you factor in the tax rates for these towns and/or villages and then you factor in the cost of running these municipalities, the costs outweigh the benefits.

One of the lessons I learned from taking economics in college was that, if the costs outweigh the benefits of something, whether that's running a municipality, building a coal-fired power plant or opening your own business, then you probably shouldn't go forward with that project. We all want to see more benefits than costs from our government, but right now all we see is high taxation.

This bill passed the Senate with bi-partisan support. Of the 62 senators in the chamber, 46 voted in favor of the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith was very pleased that the bill passed, citing the need to address government waste in New York.

"Cutting wasteful government spending through government consolidation and eliminating unnecessary and costly layers of bureaucracy will reduce the crushing tax burden on millions of middle-income New Yorkers," said Senate Majority Leader Malcolm A. Smith. "During times of financial distress, we must find a way to do more with less, and that includes government. This bill empowers individual communities to determine the size of their government through a lasting process of reform that could potentially save millions in local property taxes. I applaud the Attorney General, as well as Senators Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Betty Little for their work on this legislation and their innovative approach to reducing the tax burden on New York families."

One other person who deserves to be commended is Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, who chairs the Local Governments Committee in the Assembly and has supported these efforts for a long time. He co-sponsored this bill in the Assembly and has always been a backer of local consolidation efforts.

This is a huge victory for New Yorkers and should be considered one giant step toward property tax reform in New York.  

Part-Time Officials, Full-Time Benefits

by: robert.harding

Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:41:36 AM EDT

Scalzo is among an unknown number of local officials who are as a group racking up full-time pension credits worth millions of dollars for what is generally considered to be part-time work. In at least some cases, too, some participants accrue double pension credits, holding down regular full-time public sector jobs and elected positions.

A precise breakdown wasn't available on Tuesday, but the state comptroller's office lists more than 3,000 public employers, other than New York state, that offer pensions through the State and Local Retirement system.

Included in that are scores of towns, cities and counties.

And in those cities, towns and counties are elected officials who have the power to grant themselves full-time or nearly full-time retirement system credits, and who, in at least some cases, hold down full-time public sector jobs as well, allowing them to boost their pensions.

The Times-Union talked about the impact on Albany County and how part-time legislators utilize full-time benefits.

In Albany County alone, $12 million of its total $114 million payroll went to pension costs, said Comptroller Mike Conners -- and that was two years ago. What portion of that pension amount went to elected officials could not be determined.

But roughly half of the 39-member Albany County Legislature is currently accruing pension credits for two public sector jobs. In addition to their elected posts, many hold or have held additional public sector jobs, including posts in the State Police, Senate and Assembly, and in fire departments.

In addition to the Albany Common Council, Albany County lists its 39 county legislators as full time.

When they retire, their pensions will be based not just on the pay from their regular jobs, but on their $20,298 County Legislature salaries as well.

The full-time status they granted themselves allows them to maximize the benefits.

This is an issue I have seen locally with my home county (Orleans). The legislators are allowed to take advantage of full-time benefits because they have been designated as such. This should not be the case and we could save a lot of taxpayer dollars by cracking down on this practice.

Silver supports pay raises; Budget scrutinzed by local government officials

by: robert.harding

Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 17:17:33 PM EST

First, Silver on the pay raises:

The State Legislature's top Democrat last week gave a spirited defense of efforts to raise the salaries of 212 state lawmakers and added that Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer is "not adverse" to backing a pay hike this year.

"I'm proud to say I support it," said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver of Manhattan. Last month, lawmakers said Silver told colleagues that Spitzer would send a pay increase bill to the Legislature.

Asked if he thought voters would be excited about legislators backing a pay raise during an election year, Silver said, "I'm not shy about putting the issue out front." He said voters would be more angry if lawmakers pushed through a pay raise after the elections.

On a personal note: I posted a letter I wrote to Gov. Spitzer about these pay raises. I oppose them, especially when we're dealing with our share of economic problems upstate and the legislators we pay are part-time.

The possibility of pay raises have received bi-partisan opposition. I find it troubling, however, that the Republicans opposed to this raise have been quiet in their opposition - unlike when they were very noisy in regards to Gov. Spitzer's DMV policy change.

Now, local governments criticizing Spitzer's budget proposal:

Silver's remarks came after he and other state leaders appeared before a skeptical audience of county leaders from around the state, who say the governor's new budget plan hurts local finances. A year ago, Spitzer stood before the same group and told them the days of governors shifting costs onto counties to help Albany balance its books were over.

But on Tuesday, Spitzer acknowledged to the county leaders that this year he is "pushing back some costs to you." Angry local officials say Spitzer is trying to force about $80 million onto them; Spitzer insists the counties have a "net" win in his budget of more than $500 million. But $390 million of that is from a Medicaid cap already in state law.

County officials say the Spitzer budget will force higher property taxes if it stands.

High property taxes? Really? I know Orleans County's contingent was in attendance and they have no place to talk. Check out Orleans County's property tax rates which were set well before Spitzer's budget proposal. These counties are looking for a scapegoat with their own property tax problems. The state is the last place to go to point the finger.