As I already stated in a earlier blog, a quarter of a million dollars was either cut or prematurely reported as anticipated income to offset expenses in the 2016 budget.
Why would anyone, let alone a CPA like Supervisor Tyksinski, assume that they would see $150,000 of revenue when they have no concrete facts available to make that decision. Supervisor Tyksinski used the town board's reluctance to speak out on most matters in order to pass a zero increase budget that was false and more than likely unachievable.
Why?Could it be as a result of increased expenses that would have forced the town board to vote a tax cap override? If they were over the tax cap which was almost 0% for the 2016 budget year, taxpayers would not have received their tax cap rebate check in the mail. Would that have bothered anyone? Did you even know that you would be getting this rebate?
Here is the video of the public hearing that was held last night. Watch Supervisor Tyksinski fiddle with papers as town residents spoke.
After everyone had a chance to speak, the public hearing was closed and the rest of the meeting was continued. There were a couple of noteworthy items on the agenda that I will be blogging about over the next few days.
The town board discussion as to whether to adopt, defer, reject or amend the local law was held at the very end of the meeting.
Councilman Messa very eloquently spoke out against the proposed law and Councilman Reynolds seconded. With the absence of Councilman Miscione, the proposed local law could not receive a majority vote in favor and therefore, it was rejected.
I have called out Councilman Messa on prior blogs, but I have to say that this time he put not only his constituents first, but he also put the needs of this community first. Kudos, Councilman Messa! I hope it doesn't take another outcry at a public hearing before we once again see you stand strong for town residents. You were voted in to speak for Ward 1 residents; not to go-along to get-along!
After the no-vote, Supervisor Tyksinksi reminded the councilmen that they voted to put $150,000 of perceived revenue in the budget to offset expenses. He told them that the next meeting is in April and there would need to be some modifications to the budget to offset the loss of the $150,000 of revenue. Whether the budget will be modified by the addition of fees or by the cutting of services is anyone's guess at this point.
I would encourage town residents to pay close attention to the next few months; you may very well be in for some more big surprises!
Here is the discussion to reject the proposed local law: