Town Codes        Town Codes        Search Town Minutes

New Hartford NY Online YouTube Channel

To find videos of Town Board, Planning Board, and Zoning Board Board meetings, click here!

Monday, July 17, 2017

Which Tyksinski-isms are correct...

...the statements made in the June 28, 2017 report that Tyksinski filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission for SEC Rule 15c2-12


the ones posted in Tyksinski's political ad in the July Town Crier?

Tyksinski wants you to believe that he has worked for YOU for the past seven (7) years and he has the statistics to prove it.

However, those statistics just don't seem to jive with the ones he officially reported to S.E.C. on June 28, 2017.

Let's take a look:

Tyksinski says...he has lowered taxes each year since taking office in 2010.
Fact is, Tyksinski AND the town board did lower the tax rate in the 2011 budget, but that was a result of consolidating 911.
The only other time the tax rate was lowered was in 2013 for the 2014 budget. Tyksinski lowered the tax rate a couple of pennies per thousand in his 2011 Tentative Budget, but the town board lowered the taxes even further to the present tax rates of $1.00 General Wholetown that everyone pays and $1.77 for Police which is paid by the town proper and the Village of NYM.

Since the 2014 budget, the tax rates have remained the same according to the June 28, 2017 filing with the S.E.C. and according to town records in my files.

Tyksinski says...Increased general fund balance from a deficit of $(500,000) to a surplus of over $3,000,000.
According to the 2009 Financial Audit prepared by D'Arcangelo & Co., the General Wholetown Fund deficit was $(10,921) when Tyksinski took office in 2010, NOT $(500,000). As far as the current general fund balance being $3 million, that is very misleading because the 2016 Financial Audit, specifically states that Tyksinski has combined three funds that really have nothing to do with each other into what he is now calling a General Fund. However, two of the three combined funds are assigned meaning they can only be used for certain related expenses; General Part Town & Police...not General Wholetown taxes.

If you remove the fund balance of two assigned funds and redistribute the general town money owed to other funds, and subtract the amount of overage reported for sales tax projected for the first quarter of 2017, you would see a much different picture. The REAL amount of fund balance that is spendable and actually attributed to the General Wholetown fund is somewhere around $1 million, if that! We would have to believe that the "FINAL" audit that I received is factual!

Think about it for a moment...if the town is in such great shape as Tyksinski says, there shouldn't have been a problem with the release of the 2016 Financial Audit. Plus, as of today, the 2016 Audited Financial Statement which is required to be filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission has yet to be filed.

Tyksinski says...Improved the Town's infrastructure - $4,200,000 in road paving and over $2,000,000 in rehabbing our sewer system. Updated highway and police equipment.
Might be true, but your children's grandchildren will be paying back the bonded debt incurred under the Tyksinski regime. How does that make you feel?

Tyksinski says...Spent $2,500,000 in storm water remediation.
How was that stormwater remediation working for everyone during the July 1 storm?

Again, it is debt that everyone is paying and will be paying back for some time to come plus some of the money spent by Tyksinski was borrowed during the Reed administration.

I'll be back to talk about the bidding process utilized by Tyksinski for the Grange Hill Project. That is a story all of its own!

Tyksinski says...Rejuvenated development in the Town, adding $60,000,000 to the taxable assessment.
Odd, because the June 28, 2017 S.E.C. filing claims that only $35,000,000 has been added to the assessment since 2010.  Must be Tyksinski's campaign ad forget to subtract the assessments that have been rolled back because of tax certiorari battles that were lost in court!
I also have to wonder if $60 million in assessments were added as Tyksinski claims, how come there has not been a reduction of the tax rate since 2014? Huh?

Tyksinski says...Reduced budget appropriations by over $1,000,000.
Well, that's easy because Tyksinski also reduced the number of Highway and Parks employees plus he didn't renew their contracts that expired in 2010 until recently. Therefore, the remaining workers never received a pay raise during the past seven years. He also consolidated 911 with the County which took about $500,000 out of the budget.

Here is a copy of the June 28, 2017 report the town submitted to the S.E.C. I have highlighted each of the items above that I pointed out.

I also highlighted the statement that the Town Comptroller is appointed for a one year term. What town comptroller would Tyksinski be referencing...we don't have one, although Tyksinski manages the finances as if we did by circumventing the town board regarding the transfer of funds.

Friends, if things are so rosy in the Town of New Hartford, how come Tyksinski included $150,000 of park fees ("phony revenue") to balance the 2016 budget before the town board even voted to adopt a local law to assess park fees to non-residents? Problem was, the town board rejected the idea and Tyksinski had to scramble looking for ways to make up the $150,000.

You, my friends are suppose to believe Tyksinski's "pie-in-the-sky" accomplishments because he says so; after all he is the Emperor!


Mr. Obvious said...

Good information and all pretty much on the mark. But I think you're light on how much $ was saved in the 911 consolidation if you add all the soft costs in other parts of the budget that really were 911 related.

FWIW the town board is guilty by doing nothing in the last 4 years. They're the orchestra on the rear deck of the Titanic playing away while the boat is taking on water.

Let's take a look at each Councilman (2 are up for re-election this year):

Ward 1: A do-nothing know-little glad-handing politician looking for higher office (Supervisor? County? State? when the time feels right, aka no real opponent) who is afraid to do or say anything controversial (he calls it dignity) because he wants an unstained record. Too late in your case. Your inaction at the table is your stain.

His record is lackluster. Has an opponent and he's in trouble (probably another 1 term wonder like Boob Pain); a good chance that he will be bounced from office for playing the fiddle while Chadwicks drowned again, among other things (like trying to buy town-owned property behind his house for $50 for his ... swimming pool? <-- stand up and take notice, NH voters, he tried)

Ward 2: He does get around in his Ward but like the others has made some bad votes when pressured by the Supervisor. He's running for Supervisor and if the state audit is released before the election, he's your next Supervisor. Good news is, he has better ethics than the incumbent. Bad news is, he's going to have to work hard to fix NH, if that's possible at all after all the borrowing Tyke has done.

Ward 3: A popular village person who does have morals but won't stand up and fight often enough when he should. Has an opponent but will easily win re-election.

Ward 4: This guy says little to nothing at the table. That's his M-O. Has been in the Ward 4 seat ... yeah, it seems like forever. If somebody runs a strong campaign in 2 years, he's beatable. Probably a good poster boy for term limits.

Oh, we might as well throw the town attorney in the mix too, since he's been propping the Supervisor up since day 1. He's an attorney with a mixed record. Too bad he thinks the job entitles him to an opinion on most everything at the table (it doesn't). He's not a policy maker like the board is, but that doesn't stop him from injecting his opinion into policy. If only he would keep his mouth shut and only opine on legal issues when asked, then he would be doing the job of town attorney as it should be done.

The deputy supervisor: Why does he lower himself to being Tyksinski's lackey? You know better, Matt. Doesn't say anything at the table (and in this case that's just fine since he doesn't have a vote) ... but you're part and parcel of Pat's agenda whether or not you actively support it or not. Remember, when the SS Tyke takes the torpedoes in the audit, the egg falls on your face too.

But I do have to say the Supervisor apparently improved his own financial situation. That big watch (Seiko World Time? Rolex Submariner?) on his wrist reminds me of Tony Picente's rolex. But Tony's is real gold.

C'mon Pat, get with the times. You need a gold bracelet on the other wrist so you too can look like Tony as he's handing out election year pork, aka Oneida Indian Nation money only he gets to spend.

Gee, I hope everybody doesn't think Mr. Obvious wrote this.

Oh, the Highway Super? Ok, sure. I'll comment quickly by saying remember, he's no better than the resources (money, equipment and manpower) allocated to him at budget time by the board. So when he's down 4 workers from when he first took office, don't get mad at him when jobs get delayed, or storms devastate the area. Remember, he did as much as the town board allowed him to do via the budget.

Anonymous said...

Gee I wonder who will be blamed for that comment.