March, 2009
When People Raise Their Voices...
Submitted by joyce.mitchell1 on Tue, 03/31/2009 - 9:35pmThe members of the Property Tax Reform Coalition of New York State did just that. And they've been heard. Although their recent campaign heralds an approach that I personally think is a band-aid, it will, when passed, give economic relief to many home owners who may be on the brink of economic disaster, to which our regressive property tax system contributes. The measure is called a Circuit Breaker and sets limits on the amount of property tax you can be assessed based on a percentage of your income.
The members of NYSPTR mounted an e-mail, fax and telephone campaign that caught the attention of and won the support of Assembly Leader, Sheldon Silver, and Majority Leader, Malcolm Smith. And they will keep pounding the wires until the legislature takes action and probably passes this legislation.
Readers may go to the site of this coalition to learn more about the Circuit Breaker. As many probably know, the largest portion of our property tax goes to support the school district in which we live. It is my opinion, and many share it, that we must find a way to support the cost of public education by NYState Income Tax. There is a bill hung up in committtee...the Cahill Bill...that, if passed, would accomplish just that and it is projected that only the highest earning 8% of all New Yorkers would pay a higher amount of tax. Can you imagine that your property tax could be reduced by as much as 70%? And your income tax would not go up? To find out more go to this website:
http://www.nyspropertytaxreform.org/
The upcoming Weschester Tea Party - citizens move to abolish County Government
Submitted by JohnB on Wed, 03/25/2009 - 9:29pmDave Spano, son of Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, is calling for the abolition of Westchester County government. The rally, known as the "Westchester Tea Party", is scheduled to take place on Saturday, April 25th in downtown White Plains. A preliminary event was held on March 5th, and according to the Yonkers Tribune article linked here, around 350 concerned citizens showed up. As a result, some speculate the April rally could have upwards of 4,000 attendees. There have been signs posted all over Westchester County, and a commercial has been aired alerting residents of the event, so I believe that turnout is very well possible. As taken from yonkersinsider.wordpress.com, this is what is being posted about the event by it's organizers:
WESTCHESTER COUNTY TAXES ARE THE HIGHEST IN THE NATION. IT’S TIME THE PEOPLE TAKE ACTION AND SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO OUR SELF SERVING POLITICIANS.
TAX CUTS NOW!
My name is Dave Spano, son of County Executive Andrew Spano. I wholeheartedly support Tax Cuts and Abolishing County Government. We can’t do it without your help.
A Rally in support of Tax Cuts Now! and Abolishing County Govt. is scheduled to take place on Saturday April 25th at 12 Noon in front of the County Office Building at 148 Martine Ave. in White Plains.
TO VOLUNTEER OR SPEAK AT THE RALLY PLEASE CONTACT US BY EMAIL - Taxcutsnow09@aol.com.
LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD. JOIN THE MOVEMENT.
HOPE TO SEE YOU ON SAT. APRIL 25TH
YOURS TRULY,
DAVE SPANO
Personally, I think it is great that there are other local groups out there working for goals to eliminate duplication of services in an effort to lower taxes, but I am not sure of the feasibility of what they are asking. It is true that in Connecticut, County Government was removed decades ago and they dont seem any worse off. However, according to a blog on the website of New York State Assemblyman Greg Ball, elimination of country government is not as simple as it seems and there are deeper reasons for Westchester's tax problem beyond County Government. As stated in the recent blog post which can be read here, "Taxes will go down when the state stops mandating expenditures for counties, and that day may never come. And taxes will go down when the residents of Westchester demand that municipalities be combined along with school districts to achieve economies of scale , cut duplicative services and eliminate the true bloated bureaucracy." I do agree with Mike Edelman, the writer of the post, that there is an extreme amount of duplication of government in this area causing our high taxes, and I for one would be in support of measures to consolidate these agencies together to eliminate waste.
I hope that more Putnam residents hear of this movement and agree with it, or atleast the idea of consolodiation of government, so that such a movement towards consolidation could be started in this county and have support. Without consolidation, I dont believe we can fix the tax problems we are facing in Westchester, Putnam, and all other surrounding areas.
Town of Kent Public Hearing of 23 March re a Proposal to Change the Term of Office of the Supervisor from Two to Four Years (cont.)
Submitted by joyce.mitchell1 on Tue, 03/24/2009 - 4:24pmMaureen Fleming, a resident and attorney, argued that if the Supervisor is held to a two-year term, so should the rest of the Board, who now serve for four years, but on a rotating schedule. Many informal comments by persons in the audience disagreed with Ms. Fleming, pointing out that the Supervisor is also the Financial Officer and holds much more power that that of a single vote.
George Baum, a resident and Chair of the Conservation Advisory Committee, said that he would have preferred to hear the Supervisor and/or the Board, give compelling reasons for this change, but none had been advanced in writing or at a meeting or workshop. Councilwoman Osborne, in response, took reponsibility for the introduction of this initiative, citing that there was so much work to do as Supervisor that four years is required to implement new programs. Other comments indicate wonder at such an assertion...especially for a Supervisor who has now spent nine(9) years on the Board. Most elected Supervisors in Kent have served formerly on the Board or in other government positions.
As mentioned in the earlier posting, a compelling Statement was made by Bill Noel, from which we now quote, as well as his statement concerning his relationship to Kent Fiscal Watch." I have not yet decided where I stand on active or public involvement with KFW as per our conversation this evening, but continue to wish you well in your endeavors."
"I rise tonight to formally express my absolute opposition to the proposed local law #1 of 2009 to extend the supervisor's term of office from two to four years and to provide some of the reasons that I am so opposed....As you are aware the current election cycle for the town board calls for the election of a two year supervisor and the election (of)...two town board members every two years for a four year term. The effect of these staggered four year terms and the Supervisor's two year term is that the majority of seats on the town board are before the voters every two years. ...the voters have the power to change town policy on any matter every two years by choosing candidates who share their views. The greatest impact that changing the Supervisor's term of office will have is to deny the voters the absolute power to control the course of the town at every town election. There is, simply put, no potential benefit which could be argued to come about from a four year term for the supervisor which justifies diminishing the rights and powers of the voters"
He went on to make the point that the majority of all levels of US legislative governments are before the voters every two years and that the current proposal,if enacted, would make the Town Board less accountable to the people than any other form of government that we have. He made clear that if one did not know what the job of Supervisor entails, they should not run for the office. "The potential," he stated, "for a smoother 3rd or 4th year for the right supervisor is not worth the risk of having the wrong person in office for twice as long as need be."
"...it is very easy for public officials to come to believe that what is in their best interest is in the public's best interest...I have been told by a few memers of the Board that it is 'up to the voters' or that they are supporting the supervisor's request because they are merely voting to 'let the voters decide.' ...that argument is...shirking your responsibility or...not understanding what your responsibility is....Voting in favor of this law is stating ...that you believe as a matter of public policy that the term of the Supervisor needs to be four years... The question before you is not should Kathy get a four year term, but should the balance of power of this and all future town boards be altered....The referendum is an appeal from your decision, not an excuse to pretend that you are not making one....In conclusion the proposed local law is not supported by any public policy rationale,...and can only be viewed positively in a limited and inappropriate political light.. I encourage and expect you to vote against it, to do otherwise will dishonor your oath of office."
Town of Kent Public Hearing of 23 March re a Proposal to Change the Term of Office of the Supervisor from Two to Four Years
Submitted by joyce.mitchell1 on Tue, 03/24/2009 - 8:10amThe comments from the well-attended meeting were mostly against the proposal from all political parties, as our poll indicated. Councilman Rohde opened with a well prepared statement against and was followed by many others. The most complete and stirring statement against, one that drew a loud round of applause from the audience, came from Bill Noel, a prominent member of the Republican Committee. Quotes from his speech will be posted to this website later today. Supervisor Doherty announced that "because many people could not be here tonight, the public meeting will be continued on August 17." A most cogent point was made that, if the referendum were to be put on the ballot for the election this November, voters will not know until after the votes are counted if they voted for a two or four year term for their choice of Supervisor.
Joyce
