Town Codes        Town Codes        Search Town Minutes

Friday, January 26, 2007

By my calculations.....

I have been looking over the Bond Proposition handout that was available at the January 11, 2007 town board meeting and for the life of me I can't make the numbers work out to what the town has stated will be the cost per $1,000 of assessed value if each of these bond resolutions are approved by the voters on March 29, 2007. I even had another person check and they came up with the same number I did. Either my calculator isn't working or the town is using different numbers than they printed in the handout.

On the last page of the handout, in big print, they say "18 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. Includes all propositions".

Now let's look at each of the propositions and the costs they have associated with each one according to the handout:



By my calculations, it would be $.271 per thousand or $27.10 for a home assessed at $100,000. Where do they get $.18 per thousand? Am I missing something?

By the way, here is the slide they presented at the November 1, 2006 budget hearing:



Yep, "could result in additional tax increase of $.05 per thousand". And if you remember, as of November 1 when they stated $.05 per thousand, there was actually an additional $500,000 for paving included in the bonding figures. Now they take out the $500,000 and we are told it will be $.18 per thousand, yet the numbers in the handout reflect $.271 per thousand!

You know, nothing they say about these bond resolutions makes any sense. How can they ask us to vote in favor of something that they don't seem to have a handle on?

Hell at this rate, by March 29, we may be up to $.50 per thousand of assessed value depending on whose calculator we are using!

And let's not forget that this will only take care of the "needs" for this year. What future plans do they have for Highway equipment, sidewalks, etc. How much will they want to bond for in 2008? They gave us blank stares when we asked that question at the January 11th "informational" meeting.

3 comments:

Arkangel said...

There is an old saying, "liars figure, however, figures do not lie."

The author of this blog has demonstrated, time and time again, that the Town of New Hartford's elected officals continue to misrepresent the true cost of the 8 Bonding proposals as well as every facet in their representational roles on matters impacting the Town residents.

It must be noted that Earle Reed, Town Supervisor in his January 11, 2007 (23 minute meeting) emphatically stated, "the town will be providing detailed information to back up the 8 Bond Proposals." Mr. Reed, it is now January 27, 2007 and nothing yet, not even on the Town's web site. Yet, Mr. Reed, you can find time to take a three week vacation to Florida, basking in the sun. Mr. Reed is nothing short of the old time carpetbaggers who invaded the South for personal gain. There is one distinction, he did it in reverse. He went to where it is warm and no worries. The town residents should ask, "only meetings once monthly?"

Continuing to add insult to injury, Earle Reed has mandated that town residents request town minutes using the New York State Freedom of Information Law, commonly referred to as "FOIL." This is wrong, wrong, wrong! Mr. Reed thinks his efforts to thwart open communication will stop...well, Mr. Reed you are wrong on all counts.

The author of this blog should be thanked over and over and over because if not for these wonderful people, the Town residents would not know what or how the Town's elected officials are doing with their tax dollars.

In conclusion, it must be said, it appears that each and every town official needs to go back to school and re-learn the three R's (reading, writing and arithmetic).

Unfortunately, Reed and company has too much time enjoying notoriety for doing absolutely nothing for the Town's residents who continue to underwrite the cost of the Town's incompetent elected officials who appear to not give a damn!

I would ask each and every Town resident, on March 29, 2007 to vote a resounding NO at the ballot box, sending a message to our elected officials that town residents are fed-up with their on-going shenanigans.

Arkangel said...

IS it true that Robert Payne, Town Councilman has authored letters to Town Residents informing them of a proposed lighting district - absent a Petition from the majority of the town residents who live in the impacted area?

It has been my humble understanding that lighting districts, if they are to exist are normally initiated with a Petition signed by a majority (51% or more) of affected residents.

How all of a sudden Robert Payne, newly elected town representative thinks he can use town letterhead, postage and mailing services to deliver something the town residents have NOT asked for? Who is Mr. Payne beholding to?

Mr. Payne cannot even explain to the Town residents what the 8 Bond Proposals will costs coupled with very detailed explanations as to just what it is the Town is attempting to procure, if anything.

Seems like more double talk from an elected town official who smirks at the audience during meetings.

Let's put this lighting issue to bed along with Mr. Payne who obviously refuses to play by the rules in these matters.

New Hartford, N.Y. Online said...

Arkangel, you must be reading my mind! You don't want to miss my blog tomorrow!!