Back in January 2010, the Observer Dispatch ran an article,
New Hartford takes advance from county to meet payroll.
According to that article:
The advance from the county, which was received late last month before Tyksinski was sworn in, came from anticipated sales tax revenue for the final quarter of 2009 [emphasis added], funds that are usually not disbursed until February.Now fast forward to the third quarter of 2010, Supervisor Patrick Tyksinski said in today's Observer Dispatch article, New Hartford reserve fund back in black:
"the town’s recent finances were helped by an inflated third quarter sales tax check from the county. That check was about $200,000 larger than projected [emphasis added] and meant the town could see 4 percent more than the $4.9 million budgeted for revenue in 2010."As we reported in our blog earlier today, the sales tax revenue allocated to the Town of New Hartford for the third quarter of 2010 was actually LESS than received for 2009. So how could Tyksinski think that the town received an "inflated sales tax check" for the third quarter of 2010?
Simple once you have the facts...
Each quarter we FOIL the amount of money received by the town for sales tax. When we FOILed the third quarter sales tax revenue for 2009, we were sent an email that said it was $1,226,244.07.
However, when we recently FOILed sales tax data from the County covering the years 2006-present, we noticed that the spreadsheet for 2009 listed the third quarter sales tax revenue as $1,476,244.07. Curious as to whether it was a typo or whether the revenue had been adjusted for some reason, we emailed the County and asked for an explanation:
Is there an error for the 3rd Quarter [of 2009]? As you see below for the 3rd quarter you show $1,226,244.07, however, on the excel spreadsheet, you show $1,476,244.07.The reply we received was:
Sorry about the error. The correct number is $1,476,244.07. There was a $250,000 advance on the sales tax for that quarter that I added into the spreadsheet.Either Supervisor Tyksinski doesn't realize it or doesn't want anyone else to know that the reason the 2010 third quarter check seemed to be $200,000 more than the 2009 third quarter check is because the 2009 third quarter check was reduced by an advance made prior to November 2009.
It would appear that the town not only borrowed $300,000 against the final quarter [fourth quarter] of 2009 sales tax revenue, but also borrowed $250,000 against the 2009 third quarter sales tax revenue!
So if there was a $250,000 advance on the third quarter of 2009 sales tax revenue and Supervisor Tyksinski is unaware of that advance as evidenced by the fact that he thinks the town received an inflated sales tax check for the third quarter of 2009...just how did the $250,000 sales tax advance transaction get recorded in the books in 2009?
Perhaps a 2009 audit should have been done as required by Town Law §123 instead of Supervisor Tyksinski making excuses at the September 8, 2010 town board meeting for NOT doing one.