COMMITTEE
OF THE WHOLE
NOVEMBER 9, 2009
** APPROVED **
Members Present: Chairman C. Crandall, G.
Benson, D. Burdick, W. Dibble, D. Fanton, T. Hopkins, T. O’Grady, D. Pullen, B.
Reynolds, D. Russo, N. Ungermann; (Absent:
W. Hall, K. Kruger, M. McCormick, R. Truax)
Others Present: A. Finnemore, J. Margeson, B. Riehle, T. Ross,
F. Sinclair; Media: B. Quinn, Wellsville
Daily Reporter
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by Chairman Curtis W. Crandall.
2010 Tentative
Adjustment on Tentative Budget Summary
Page:
County Treasurer Terri
Ross updated the Legislators on a small adjustment made on the summary page since
the Tentative Budget was released. Final
assessment numbers were received from the Real Property Tax Office. The “County Taxable Assessed Value” at the
bottom of the page was decreased from $1,604,395,489 to $1,604,163,777. This change raises the “percentage increase
in tax rate” from 1.75 percent to 1.77 percent, but does not change the “increase
in tax rate per thousand” (remains at 0.29) and does not change the “increase
in tax levy” (remains at 6.93 percent).
Comments and Suggestions:
Legislator O’Grady stated
that the County is bringing in more money through property taxes (increased
assessed value), and we’re tentatively using $500,000 of the surplus. The minimal tax increase reflected in the
Tentative Budget is a good thing, but costs go up each year, and we really need
to look at cutting services. That’s the
only way to bring property taxes down.
There are a lot of good programs, but it comes down to what we can
afford. Legislator O’Grady made the
following proposals for amendments to the 2010 Tentative Budget:
1.
-
The County
doesn’t contribute to other community swimming facilities.
-
Town Recreation
(Rushford or Caneadea) or the
-
It’s not really a
town function; it covers a wider area. A
lot of people use the beach, even from outside the area, many without a lot of
options for family recreation.
-
Costs are
probably offset by sales tax revenue generated by people coming in to use the
beach, and lifeguarding offers employment opportunities for our youth.
-
The beach is completely
County-operated; if funding was eliminated, it would close.
-
The need for a
state park in the County has been discussed.
The beach is a small recreational area.
We’re trying to develop tourism, and the beach is a part of that.
-
There are not many
safe, supervised swimming areas in the County.
-
The tax base
around the lake deserves some recognition in County services.
-
The
-
The beach is the
only public access for swimming at
Fred Sinclair, former Soil and Water Conservation
District Director, commented that SWCD is under contract with the County to
manage parks and forests, so he was involved with the beach. Busloads of children from schools all over the
County come in and have access to the beach.
On busy weekends, it's not unusual for hundreds of residents and
non-residents to use it. It’s a safe
facility with lifeguards, and it provides summer employment for our youth. Rushford beach is also one of the cleaner swimming
areas, as part of the fairly well-protected
A motion was made by Legislator O’Grady and seconded
by Legislator Ungermann to eliminate funding for A7180 Beach and Pool. The motion was defeated.
2.
County
Treasurer Terri Ross pointed out that due to recent changes in Mental Health
funding streams, some of the accounts have changed in the way they are
budgeted. Account A4313, designated as
"Mental Health Drop-In Center," was renamed in the Budget Detail to
"Mental Health Contracts" and now also includes supported housing,
community support programs, County match for Arc, transitional employment,
their regular state aid program, and Allegany Rehabilitation Associates (ARA). Ms. Ross noted that the total Mental Health
Budget includes expenses of $2.79 million, and revenues from state and federal
agencies total $2.56 million. The
County's net cost is $230,000. Expenses
specifically for Account A4313 total $497,524, and are offset by revenues totaling
$417,524, leaving a net County cost of $80,000 for that cost center. (The
-
If the County
eliminated funding for the
-
Who does the
Center serve? The facility on
-
Is there a
listing of the number of people served by these programs? If the County is paying a lot of money for a
program that doesn't serve a large clientele, we need to think of the
cost. It needs to be justified. All
these programs are wonderful, but government can’t do everything for everyone.
-
Questions about
the programs, the cost for each, funding streams, and clientele served need to
be answered.
-
It was asked if the
County pays salary and benefit costs for employees of the
A motion was made by Legislator O'Grady to eliminate funding
for the
(Account A4313 should be renamed "Mental Health
Contracts" in the Budget document prepared by the Clerk of the Board's
Office.)
3. Bus Transportation (A5630, Appropriations page 13, Revenue page 47) -
Legislator O'Grady thought it was the Board's goal to reduce the County cost to
0, but it looks like appropriations increased three percent. Mr. Margeson responded that the net County
cost will be 0 for 2010. Legislator Fanton
expressed appreciation for the efforts of Carrie Whitwood, the Transportation
Manager, and the Transportation Task Force in getting to this point. Two years ago the program was costing the
County $360,000.
4. Economic
-
If Tourism
(located in the same office as
-
In trying to make
the changes that are necessary to change the economic climate we’re operating
in, we can’t cut our way out of the dilemma we're in; we're going to have to
grow our way out. That doesn't mean we
can't make some cuts, and we have made some in the past couple of years. We need to focus our efforts on the Office of
-
Cuts in any
department should not be made without having department heads present to
explain their budgets and what would or wouldn't occur if cuts are made.
-
The Office of
-
There has been very
little in the way of development, and most of it has been for businesses
already here: Alstom, Dresser, and Friendship
Dairies. There isn't going to be any
major new development efforts here in the current economic climate.
-
There has been
talk about the unemployment rate being over 12 percent, but according to
Employment and Training Director Jerry Garmong, unemployment for the County is
7.9 percent. We can talk about things not
happening here, but if the IDA was not involved, and if Dresser employees
hadn't sacrificed, Dresser wouldn’t be here; if Friendship Dairies hadn't had
something that was working for them with the County, they wouldn't have
expanded; and what Alstom did wouldn't have happened without the cooperation of
the IDA and New York State. Friendship
chose to close a plant in
-
This Budget
reflects that the County lost $1 million in sales tax revenue, and it will cost
an additional $1 million for increased retirement payments. Without that $2 million increase, the tax
rate would have gone down. This is the
first time we could have "grown" our way out from having to increase
the tax rate. It can be done. Unfortunately, we got caught in this poor
economic climate.
Legislator O'Grady made no formal motion for reducing
the
5. Planning (A8020, page 21) – Total of $81,700 budgeted. Legislator O'Grady suggested a delay in
filling the Planner position for a year, or possibly combining some of the
duties with the Deputy County Administrator if planning issues arise. Discussion:
-
The Board
collectively approved creating the Planner and Deputy County Administrator positions. Are we going to hire them, or toss back and
forth with every wind of change? In
business, you don't succeed if you sit idle.
You have to have a plan and follow progress. Maybe you could save $80,000 which would have
a very small affect on the tax increase, but it could have a very negative
effect in that you wouldn't be able to perform the tasks that you could have if
the position was filled. The same goes
for
-
The County's Comprehensive
Plan is in place. There is seed money
out there, and it's time we hired a Planner to facilitate some serious planning
efforts.
-
There's nothing
in the Planner's position description about writing grants, so how would having
that position bring money in? The County
contracted for a study on grants development; where did that go? Mr. Margeson replied that Stuart Brown was
hired to research some specific grant opportunities, but the County did not
follow through on contracting with him.
-
Intention of the
Board in hiring a Planner? Mr. Margeson
gave an update on the status of the position:
a Planner should be hired, if not by the end of this year, at the end of
January. If the 2010 appropriation is
taken out, that will change.
-
What the County
accomplished with the bus transportation program and decreasing the local share
by over $300,000 is an example of planning.
The County needs to be active.
There are things that can be done in planning. The Comprehensive Plan laid a foundation for
opportunities. We need a vision, a plan,
and a course that’s reasonable. Planning, grant-writing, and economic development
are part of the package. We can look at
areas to cut, but after all the time and investment in developing a
Comprehensive Plan, this is not a good time to cut Planning or
6. Contributions for Non-Government Type Events – Legislator O'Grady suggested the need to streamline
County government. The Agricultural
Society that runs the County Fair is one example. We need to start weaning off these
contributions a little each year. The
County doesn't contribute to other festivals and events, and the County Fair is
not a County government function.
Legislator O'Grady
noted that although the Budget Committee reviews the Budget and the Budget
Officer makes changes, these Committee of the Whole meetings to discuss the
Budget are held too late in the year to have any effect. We need to look at non-government
contributions, as well as mental health contracts for services and non-mandated
programs. Some of them are good programs,
and if we make cuts some people will be unemployed, but this is what is needed
to keep taxes down.
Chairman Crandall responded
that when he was first elected, there was no Budget Committee or Finance Committee
to look at the Budget year-round, and the whole process was put off until this
time of year. Each standing committee
dealt with departmental budgets. There
is a Budget Committee and a process in place year-round now, and there is an
opportunity to make suggestions anytime during the year. Chairman Crandall noted that he did not
schedule this meeting specifically to try to reduce the rate from 1.77. There is more to the budget process than
looking at cuts. There hasn’t been a
tentative budget as close to this one in a long time, and if there was, it was
due to poor financial planning when the fund balance was used to offset what
should have been small tax increases at that time. We do have good financial planning and a good
process in place now. If the Board wants
to cut services, that's the choice of the Board. Mr. O'Grady gave good examples of ways to cut
services, but obviously that's not the sentiment of the Board as a whole. Legislator Reynolds commented that the Budget
Committee can keep some of these things in mind for next year and take the time
to look into them.
County and
Legislator Burdick
questioned the reductions in the Department Head requests for Capital
Projects-Roads and Bridges that were recommended by the Budget Officer (pages
32-35). The Town Highway Superintendents'
Association made a presentation at the Public Works Committee, and noted that
they are getting less help from the County.
There is only one
County
Bridges:
Almond, CR 32, BR#04-28 $457,000 Scheduled
Angelica, CR 2, BR#07-15 $387,500 Scheduled
Alfred, CR 11, BR#11-12 $212,000 Scheduled
Town
Bridges:
New Hudson,
Grove, Goose Hollow, BR#19-02 $410,500 Removed
Alfred,
Legislator Burdick
suggested replacing two County bridges and two Town bridges, rather than three
County and one Town, which would keep the total cost about the same. After being asked how much it would cost to
add the two town bridges back in, Mr. Margeson responded that it would result
in a tax increase of an additional 2.5 percent.
Mr. Margeson explained that the
Legislator Ungermann noted
that the
Legislator O'Grady
commented that Mr. Burdick's suggestion is just readjusting what’s being done
instead of raising the tax rate 2.5 percent.
Instead of three County and one Town bridge, we could do two County
bridges and two Town bridges. Legislator
Reynolds noted that through-traffic on a County bridge is more important. The Alfred bridge connects
Legislator Burdick
questioned the additional expense of $89,725 for Friendship County Road
20. Mr. Margeson explained that it was
an on-going project slated for completion in 2010.
Chairman Crandall proposed
increasing the Bridge Program by $250,000 by shifting $150,000 from Contingent
and $100,000 from Emergency Repair Funds, but not getting into specifics on
which projects it would go to. The
Public Works Committee and Public Works could decide where the additional funds
would go. Grove would probably be next
on the list going by priority. Chairman
Crandall also suggested that there may be work the Town could do to lessen the scew
of the bridge and work on the approach to reduce the cost, and the other Towns
may be able to find ways to reduce the costs in each of the other cases. The $250,000 increase is a step in the right
direction without increasing the Budget.
Legislator Reynolds asked how much money is left in 2009 Contingent, to
which Mr. Margeson replied there was about $360,000 left; anything not used will
fall to Fund Balance. Mr. Reynolds
suggested taking another $100,000 from Contingent, in addition to Chairman
Crandall's proposed total of $250,000.
Amendments to the 2010 Tentative
Chairman Crandall
proposed amendments to the 2010 Tentative County Budget that would shift funds
to the Bridge Maintenance Capital Projects Accounts, but would not increase the
tax rate. The actual bridge projects
affected could be determined by the Public Works Committee and Department of
Public Works at a later date. Chairman
Crandall suggested moving $150,000 from Contingent, $100,000 from Fund Balance,
and $100,000 from Bridge Repair Reserve.
(Subsequent to the meeting, the
A1990.429 Contingent Decrease by $150,000;
new balance $850,000
A15.599.00 Approp.
Fund Balance Increase by $200,000;
new balance $700,000
A9560.904 Interfund
Transfer Increase by
$350,000; new balance $933,322
H12.5031.5120 Interfund
Revenue Increase by $350,000;
new balance $350,000
(NEW ACCOUNT)
H5120.200 Maintenance
of Bridges Increase by $350,000;
new balance $350,000
(NEW ACCOUNT)
Legislator Fanton noted that Public Works Deputy Superintendent II Guy
James could be scheduled for a presentation on bridges, as has been done in the
past. Legislator Reynolds commented that
DPW has more knowledge and information on each bridge in the County than anyone
else. They have an excellent
system. Legislator
A motion was made by Chairman Crandall, seconded by Legislator Reynolds
and carried to amend the 2010 Tentative County Budget by making the changes as
listed above. Prepare Resolution
Legislator Pullen
questioned if the Self-Insurance Fund (page 35) was adequately funded. Mr.
Margeson responded that he felt the $352,580 budgeted for administration of the
fund was solid.
Chairman Crandall commented
on the proposed 2010 Budget for
Adjournment: The
meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m. following a motion made by Legislator Reynolds,
seconded by Legislator Fanton and carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Adele Finnemore, Journal Clerk