Town Layoffs are Inexcusable

Town layoffs are inexcusable

Shame on Armonk ("North Castle lays off five employees to get 4.5 percent tax hike," Dec. 19 story). I have been a resident and land owner in North Castle for more than 60 years, and never thought I would see the day when any of our town employees got fired to reduce the budget; especially a police officer, and at the holiday season. Ask yourselves how would you like to be laid off right now? We are not a poor community; big, expensive gas-guzzling SUVs line Main Street with its expensive shops. To save a little money on the backs of town employees is criminal.

At a retirement party for outgoing Supervisor Jack Lombardi, a notable Town Board member stated: All board members need to ask themselves in the future, how would Jack Lombardi handle this? Not this way, my friends. God forbid a police officer arrives a minute too late in your time of need because of a cut from the budget so we can have another cup of coffee at Starbucks. Where are our priorities? This is a bad decision, and we should be ashamed of ourselves.

Bob Gladman

Nice letter Bob, however you entirely missed the point. The town is not being effectively managed. Millions are wasted each year in retiree health benefits, inefficient road department operations and other items too lengthy to mention here. The key to retaining our quality of life is to cutback on things the town doesn't do well and contract them out to the private sector. However, if you are willing to voluntarily increase your share, we are all willing to support you.

Great New Armonk Website Started

This article appeared in the Journal News on January 2, 2009

NORTH CASTLE - An Armonk resident with a background in advertising has created a Web site that aims to combine town news with information on the arts, the outdoors, transportation and other facets of the community.

Michelle Boyle launched the site, AllAboutArmonk.com, two months ago in the hopes of connecting disparate elements of the community. The home page covers some of the major local news stories over the past several weeks, including the Byram Hills school district budget, local gas prices, the sale of the Armonk Bowl property to New York City, the town budget and the town holiday display. Other pages focus on police news, health and fitness, and education.

"The home page, I try to keep fresh and very current," Boyle said, by publishing items as they become available rather than on a weekly or monthly schedule.

AllAboutArmonk is the latest of several new Web sites and print publications in central and northern Westchester trying to fill the niche for local news. The nonprofit NewCastleNow.org, which covers New Castle, was launched in October 2007 with a university grant promoting digital journalism. The Examiner, a print paper, started in September 2007 and covers Mount Kisco and Pleasantville, and has been steadily expanding.

Boyle has two children in college and one at Byram Hills High School. She has been involved in many local organizations, including the Friends of the North Castle Public Library and the town Conservation Board. She said she started AllAboutArmonk.com in reaction to the disconnectedness she saw among organizations and institutions in town and as a way to use her skills and interests in the Internet and advertising.

"One thing led to the next, and I just created one," she said.

Though Armonk is in the title, Boyle hopes to report news from all over North Castle and interesting items beyond its borders.

Caryl Hahn, a resident of the Windmill neighborhood in Armonk and a friend of Boyle's, was considering creating her own Web site before she heard about Boyle's. Hahn said she grew up in Ossining, where there was a paper so local that it published school lunch menus, and she saw the void in town.

She's happy Boyle took the leap. "Twenty years ago, it would have been a newspaper, and now it's a Web site," Hahn said.

Since starting the site in October, Boyle has added a columnist but has done the bulk of the work herself. She said she hopes to develop a team of writers, columnists and ad representatives. The idea is that most of the content will come from the community. As people or organizations let her know what is going on, she will put it on the site. Since October, the site has gotten more than 5,300 hits, she said.

What If Revenues Come Up Short?

Supervisor Berman's 2009 town budget makes several optimistic revenue assumptions that may not come to pass. First it assumes that the town will realize $1,000,000 from mortgage taxes. Evidently Berman and the Board are unaware that real estate sales activity has come to a virtual halt in North Castle. The odds of the town receiving anything close to this amount are about as likely as Dr. Matusow's perpetual health insurance benefits being terminated.

Another unrealistic assumption is $225,000 in inspection and zoning professional fees. There is virtually no building or development taking place in North Castle now. Where is this money going to come from? Berman has yet to say.

Projected sales tax revenue is also potentially inflated at $1.4 million. The Board hasn't noticed the retail meltdown taking place in Westchester County. By the arrival of the New Year, many stores that were formerly household names will cease to exist. Actual sales tax numbers may be 10-20 percent below expectations.

So what happens if projected revenues comes up $500,000 to $750,000 short. This will require another more draconian round of budget cuts and further depletion of the general fund. North Castle will lose its Triple A bond rating, if it hasn't already--as a result of the adopted irresponsible budget. In addition, 2010 taxes will again have to be drastically increased to rebuild the general fund.

This is what happens when our elected officials refuse to face the fiscal realities that the rest of us must confront. By putting off the difficult decisions now, a budget bomb is just waiting to detonate.

What if the Revenues Come Up Short?

The 2009 North Castle Town Budget relies on some overly optimistic revenue

Who's Planning Department Is It?

During the December 17 meeting and others previous, numerous complaints were lodged against the town planning department. Perhaps the name of the department should be changed to the "Department of No." No matter how residents attempt to comply with often arbitrary and capricious rules, it seems that there is always another hurdle to overcome. One resident expressed disbelief that a mere garage addition had taken over two years and more than $10,000 to obtain an approval. Other residents stated that they wouldn't even attempt to a project because they dreaded the planning process.

Some developers have claimed that it is easier and faster to get a multi-million dollar project approved by the City of White Plains, than it is get a simple home renovation plan approved in North Castle. The town supervisor, Reese Berman, has studied this problem since she was elevated to her current position. Recently she announced a streamlined process for routine approvals. But this is obviously too little, too late. Many residents who were unable to obtain approvals have given up their projects in light of the current economic climate. Others, and we will never know how many, just never bothered. And we still have yet to see this "streamlined process" actually work in real life. In the end, it all boils down to less town assessables and less tax collections and higher tax rates. No doubt, this will be the legacy of the Berman regime.

And while we're on the topic of planning, our town is "fortunate" to have a full time planner, Adam Kaufman. Kaufman will not be happy until he has regulated every activity on every piece of property within the town. About a year ago, he was agitating to regulate all home businesses. Seems that no place in North Castle is zoned for home businesses. Luckily in one of Berman's few fits of common sense, she shot this proposal down. But Kaufman has declared open season on pet grooming establishments, day spas, limo companies and any other business attempting to thrive in North Castle. Perhaps if he spent a little more time trying to get approvals completeld quickly and less time trying to regulate businesses out of existence, our town would be in a better financial state.

How Much is Our Town Board Really Worth?

The Town of North Castle has four councilmen and one supervisor. Together they account for a yearly expenditure of $256,00o. Each councilman receives the equivalent of $54,000 per year in salary and benefits. They are part time employees, but it is impossible to know how much time they really spend on the people's business. In the past they have filed questionable time reports indicating that they were on call at least thirty (30) hours per week. However, it came to light that these reports were created solely for the purpose of earning these part-timers--full-timer pensions. Faced with the illegality of the practice, Berman reluctantly ended it.

A councilman's salary is about $20,000 per year. (Councilman Kittredge gets an additional $8,000 per year for being the "Deputy Town Supervisor.") This means that each councilman gets $34,000 in health and retirement benefits. Plus, after they have served ten (10) years or more they get to burden the taxpayers for the rest of their lives by receiving lifetime health insurance benefits, for themselves and their families. What have they done to deserve such lavish benefit packages?

Once upon a it was an honor to serve on a town board and it was inconceivable that members would receive any compensation. They cared about the town and the small salary they received was a mere token payment. Obviously, in North Castle, those days are long gone. But hopefully we will all live to see them again.

North Castle Restricts Free Speech

Many town residents are unaware of the Town Board's efforts to restrict dissent and free speech at public meetings. Michael Fareri has been a frequent critic and gadfly of the current administration. He has taken every opportunity to lambast the Board for its irresponsible wasteful policies. Mr. Fareri has been frustrated by the board's no-growth policies. No doubt much of his ire has been raised by self-interest. However, in this instance, his self-interest is clearly alligned with the Town's vital interests.

At a meeting several months ago, Fareri raised the issue that the board members were padding their hours worked or on call, in order to qualify for enhanced retirement benefits. Whether they are entitled to any benefits at all is a discussion for another day. But finally, the Board was called on this issue. He wanted to know how councilmen could qualify for full-time retirement benefits when they were only working several hours per week. He was met with outrage by Berman and her associates. The Board was completely unconcerned that this illegal practice was costing taxpayers thousands in wrongful pension contributions.

Some believe that Berman's generally bright attitude has never been the same.

To Berman's credit, she went to the New York State Comptroller's Office in Albany to get an opinion. Never mind that in the past twenty (20) years, the Comptroller's Office twice ruled against the Town on this very same matter. This was an attempt to prove Einstein's theory, that "the definition of insanity is attempting the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result." The Comptroller again decided against the Town. Hence, the full-time retirement benefits for the part-time board are history.

But there is another question that has not been asked or answered. The Town pays Town Attorney Rolland Baroni, hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Why couldn't Baroni figure out this very simple legal question?

Prior to this confrontation, there were no time restrictions during the Public Comment segment of each Town Board meeting. However, as a result of Berman's and the Board's total outrage at having been exposed in this fraud, she unilaterally restricted all public comment to three (3). Thus abridging the free speech and democratic rights of the entire town. One has to wonder whether there was a less restrictive alternative to dealing with the often justified criticisms of one community member.