While looking through our files, we happened upon Earle's Observer Dispatch Guest Editorial written back in June 2009 shortly after Elizabeth Cooper, the Observer Dispatch reporter for the Town of New Hartford, reported on the
$2.6 million loss of "rainy day funds".
Prior to writing the guest editorial, Earle had John Howard from the town's auditing firm, Barone, Howard & Co., CPAs, PC, speak at a town board meeting to assure everyone that the Observer Dispatch was not looking at the entire picture. From the May 27, 2009 town board meeting minutes:
...John Howard stated that the Town has an audit performed annually and he explained his role as auditing firm with respect to the Town and what comes of their procedures. The CPA firm work comes in at the end of the fiscal year, which is December 31. He said the auditing firm comes in after the fact. They take a close look at the accounts and make adjustments where necessary, including a report or chart for use by bonding sources, etc. as well as the Town. He commented, “What you’ve been reading about lately of 2008 final results have not been audited yet”, stating that his firm has done a preliminary report and filed that report with Albany in April 2009; now we’re ready for a full audit...
Earle began his guest editorial,
New Hartford has charted course for its financial recovery, by saying:
In 2005, I was elected town supervisor with a total budget of $12.6 million and a fund balance of $5.4 million.
Is that a fact, Earle? So where did the fund balance all go? We are all still waiting to hear the answer.
Then, he went on to tell us:
It was clear that having a fund balance that was almost 43 percent of our budget was unnecessary.
Clear? Clear to whom? Obviously, the person(s) didn't know the difference between restricted and unrestricted fund balance and obviously had no prior town accounting experience.
So the town board's solution to the dilemma of having too much fund balance:
Instead of raising property taxes like so many of our neighbors had done or were about to do, we opted over the next several years to manage an increasing budget by not punishing our residents with a tax increase simply to bank funds. We made a concerted decision not to accumulate funds at the expense of increased fiscal pressure upon our constituents.
How can we ever repay this town board for the diligent foresight...oh yea, by paying a 54.3% tax increase now
[actually for NYM residents that live in the Town of New Hartford, it's an 800% increase].According to Earle:
Previous newspaper reports commented on isolated individual funds and accounts of the town, but spent little time commenting on the overall fiscal health of the town.
You should have been careful what you wish for, Earle. They sure are reporting on the town's fiscal health now! The prognosis isn't favorable at this point!
Earle asks the rhetorical question:
So what might be a “reasonable” fund balance for a town our size?
We'll answer...how about considerably more than a negative $300,000 fund balance?
According to Earle:
There is no doubt that the last half of 2008 and 2009 has brought challenges not seen in recent history.
Actually Earle, the challenges started the day you and this town board took office...unfortunately, taxpayers lost!
Earle ends his guest editorial by saying:
At the same time we will continue managing our fund balance and budget to ensure the stability and sustainability of our fiscal health while maintaining the services our residents have come to expect.
Earle...do us a favor and stay out of the financials of the town...we can't afford anymore of your
[mis]management skills!
By the way, we don't by any means hold Earle entirely to blame for the financial health of the Town of New Hartford. Every town board member stood by and watched this happen...never voting 'nay' except to deny taxpayers access to public documents. It appears they all forgot who they were voted in office to serve!
