COMMITTEE
OF THE WHOLE
NOVEMBER 8, 2010
** APPROVED
Members Present: Chairman C. Crandall, G.
Benson, D. Burdick, D. Cady, P. Curran, D. Fanton, M. Healy, T. Hopkins, K.
LaForge, D. Pullen, F. Sinclair, N. Ungermann; (Absent: A. McGraw, T. O’Grady, D. Russo)
Others Present: M. Alger, A. Finnemore, J.
Margeson, T. Miner, B. Riehle, T. Ross; Media: D. Roorbach,
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 11:00 a.m. by Chairman Curtis W. Crandall.
2011
Chairman
Crandall stated that the Tentative Budget currently calls for an approximate .5
percent increase in the property tax rate, or $.09 per thousand. Newly available assessed value figures have
changed that to around .3 percent tax rate increase, or $.03 per thousand, which
brings us to the point where a small amount of adjustment, calculated at
$75,000, would reduce our property tax rate increase to zero. During discussions, it was suggested that
this reduction could come from .1 personnel services accounts, and it would be
offset by the reduction in positions through early retirement. The adjustment could be made through a pre-filed
Resolution at the November 22 Board meeting, if that is the consensus of this
Committee.
Legislator
Pullen agreed that we will see at least that amount of savings from vacant
positions that are consolidated, eliminated, or even filled at lower salaries. Mr. Pullen also made note of savings realized
in the cost of pharmaceutical expense related to the change already made with
non-unit employees where some have switched over to “Option 1,” and the use of
generic drugs is being encouraged. With
the recent agreement with the PEF union, we will continue to see additional savings
as people continue to choose that option.
That $75,000 reduction will be more than made up between those two
sources. Mr. Pullen supported making the
adjustment to the Tentative Budget in order to reduce the property tax rate
increase to zero.
Chairman
Crandall commented that to have a clear idea of the effects of the early
retirement incentive and elimination of positions through attrition, we need to
carefully track the reductions, whether it’s an elimination of a position or a
reduction in pay for bringing in someone new at a lower rate. There are funds in the budget to offset the
cost of the incentive. We’ve already seen
the consolidation of positions in Emergency and Fire Services, and recently it
was announced in a Human Services Committee meeting that a vacant Senior Caseworker
position was not being filled. Those are
things just being mentioned in committee, but we need to keep track of it all,
including what portion of the savings is local share.
Legislator
Sinclair felt that using $75,000 to reduce the tax rate increase to zero is a good
use of the savings that will be realized with the early retirement and
reduction in workforce. Every effort being
made to reduce the tax burden will help with the challenges we face in the
future. Mr. Sinclair noted some of the other
gestures already made, such as the allocation of $950,000 from fund balance to
reduce the tax burden, but he questions going any further. Reducing the tax rate increase to zero is
something he would support.
Legislator
Burdick questioned if the cost of the early retirement incentive, including
sick and vacation time expense, would be this year’s expenses. County Treasurer Terri Ross responded that
they would be 2010 expenses.
Legislator
Sinclair noted that the careful filling of some of these key department head positions
will involve some time for advertising, interviewing, and negotiating. These small amounts of time when the position
will be vacant and no salary will be paid out will also result in savings,
supporting the idea that the savings are there.
Legislator
Pullen stated that he would have liked to have made the reduction more significant,
but the current economic climate does not allow for it. The projections for what we’re looking at in
the future for the County’s retirement contribution indicate very sizable
increases. If we don’t want to have
large tax rate increases, we have to conserve the fund balance to accommodate
for that. If we use the fund balance to
further reduce the tax rate now, we’d be hitting the taxpayers with large
increases a couple of years down the road, which is even more devastating. The County recovered from a large deficit
that was carried several years ago, and has built up a fund balance which is significant,
but not large enough to comfortably face the state’s large and ever-increasing
pass-downs. The state often changes
reimbursement rates for the counties when we’re nine months through our fiscal
year; that’s the reason to have the fund balance. We’re able to absorb those increased expenses,
and didn’t have to borrow when the state reimbursements were late. Until we see how things develop with the new Governor
and Legislature, we have to be cautious in handling what’s entrusted to us by the
taxpayers.
Legislator
Sinclair added that cutting and reducing the tax burden is a positive thing;
however, there is a point when some of our surplus should be invested in economic
development initiatives and infrastructure, which would boost the tax base and
increase the number of jobs, thereby reducing the tax burden. Cutting costs is not the only way to get through
a recession; we have to support these other things to keep us level when we
come out of this.
Chairman
Crandall noted that he has information to share during the Committee of the Whole
meeting scheduled prior to the Budget Hearing on November 10 relative to
reducing or capping property taxes. The
information will illustrate that there has to be change in state and federal policy
before we can do anything along those lines, and it will outline some of those
needed changes. We can’t do it here;
we’re just administering the programs they require. Reducing the tax rate increase to zero put us
in a bad position several years ago, but we weren’t in as good shape
financially then either. We can’t fall back
on using the fund balance in order to hold taxes at zero. We can use and retain funds for development
and infrastructure. It’s an overall mix
of responsible financial oversight.
A
motion was made by Legislator Pullen and seconded by Legislator Fanton to amend
the 2011 County Tentative Budget by reducing Personnel Services (.1) accounts
by $75,000, with the specific accounts to be identified by the County
Administrator and given to the County Attorney for inclusion in the Resolution. The motion carried on a roll call vote of 12
Ayes, 0 Noes, 3 Absent. Prepare Resolution for November 22
Procedure for Filling Vacant Department Head Positions:
Legislator Ungermann requested that the top three or four
applications be distributed, well in advance, for review by all Legislators,
along with a copy of the job specifications.
Mr. Margeson replied that could be done.
Chairman Crandall pointed out that we need to have a specific procedure,
whether we have committee or full Board involvement. There can’t be multiple people calling for
references. Applications have been
filtered out to those meeting qualifications, and any questions about
references typically come through the committee to the
Legislator Pullen noted that in light of recent discussions
on department head pay raises, one conclusion that could be drawn is that the only
thing that would matter in this process is who is cheapest. This is an important position, and he wants
to see efficiencies, creativity, and ingenuity.
Mr. Pullen suggested that the committee be given some guidance as to
what we’re looking for and how the specifications in the application will come
into play.
Legislator Burdick asked about the term of the
appointment for the Social Services Commissioner. Mr. Margeson replied that it is a six-year
term, and he thinks this is the beginning of a new term. This selection also has to be approved by the
NYS Commissioner of Social Services.
Legislator Cady asked if some of the problems with salary could be
avoided by setting a salary ahead of time, which could result in an applicant
withdrawing if he doesn’t like it.
Chairman Crandall noted that in the past, a salary range is established. All candidates are different. Mr. Cady remarked that a range is alright,
but the salary should be less than the experienced employee received. Legislator
Legislator Sinclair commented that he would like to see
some of the ideas Mr. Pullen brought forward put into the interview questions
and challenge candidates in terms of facing our pending escalating costs and
how they would administer programs to keep things under control. Mr. Sinclair also suggested that in filling the
Employment and Training Director position, we consider if we could outsource
some of the aspects of that operation.
The second in command retired also.
We should look at that, not just in terms of savings, but the
possibility of outsourcing. The issue
will be discussed at the next Planning and Economic Development Committee
meeting. Mr. Cady suggested a provision
for consulting cooperation with the Employment and Training Director position. The new
hire may want Mr. Garmong’s assistance.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned
at 11:50 a.m. following a motion made by Legislator Fanton, seconded by
Legislator Cady and carried.