Randy Kuhl Has a Blog

http://kuhl.house.gov/Blog/

Why the Town Clerk's Hours Changed

Most of us do not like change and I'll be the first to admit to that one! However, there are changes all around us, in every aspect of our lives. Seasons change, people change, Town Clerks change and yes....even their hours change. All of these things happen for good and valid reasons.

A few months ago I spoke at a Town Board meeting and voiced my concerns about the Town Clerk hours that had been previously set by the Board for the last several years. I felt there needed to be an increase in the hours during the all important and very busy tax season. January through the end of March is the busiest time of year for the Town Clerk. I felt it was important to increase evening hours as well as day hours during tax collecting time to accommodate the residents of Lindley.

Regular hours for the rest of the year have been shortened for a number of reasons. Again, I realize folks don't like change, but sometimes good reason justifies its need. I took a good, long look at the data, and I mean lots of it! I looked at not only the amount of "revenue" coming in each day for two years time, but also at the number of days when no one, absolutely NO ONE came in, especially on Saturdays. I questioned how much sense it made on hot summer days for the taxpayer to pay for the lights being on, fans running, all to keep me cool. Same thing in November and December—heat turned up because it's cold, lights on, and your tax dollars being spent on keeping me warm while waiting for a customer that never showed up. As a taxpayer myself, it made no sense to me.

During hunting season in August and September, I will be open some Saturdays for licensing. I will advertise the Saturdays that I’ll be open weeks in advance in the news briefs in the Addison Post and the Corning Leader.

I monitored the busiest months and days of the year and the least busiest months and days of the year and developed an hourly schedule that best reflected when I needed to be open to serve the public. I plan to try this for a year and see how it goes. I'm all for cutting costs and serving the public efficiently. I’m sure you'll agree!

Deb Snyder
Lindley Town Clerk

Town Clerk Hours Change

Effective January 2, 2008 The Lindley Town Clerk's Office will hold new business hours.

January 2nd to March 31st

MON: 9 a.m to 2 p.m.
TUES: 1 to 7 p.m.
WED: CLOSED
THURS: 1 to 7 p.m.
FRI: 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
SAT: 9 a.m. to Noon

April 1st to December 31st

MON: 9 a.m to 1 p.m.
TUES: 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.
WED: CLOSED
THUR: 3 to 7 p.m.
FRI: 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.
SAT: CLOSED

First Mile Dig

One Lane Bridge Reconstruction/River Road

Public Information Meeting Invitation

You are invited to participate in a Public Information Meeting for the CR#73 over Tioga River Bridge Reconstruction Project. It will be held on Thusday, December 6, 2007 from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Elroy Young Municipal Building located on U.S. 15 in the Town of Lindley, Steuben County, New York. Representatives from the Steuben County Department of Public Works, Fisher Associates (Project Consultants), and the New York State Department of Transportation will be present to accept questions and comments. Aerial photographs and preliminary plans for the project will be available for public viewing.

Happy Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving card courtesy Catherine Pierce

Mary Jane Semple's Addison Post letter to the Editor

Here is Mary Jane Semple's Addison Post letter to the Editor, for those who don't get the paper. I apologize if the format doesn't hold. It is a scan of the document.

Dear Editor
Elections are once again behind us for another year. As with all elections there are positive results and negative results. On the positive side a group of Lindley residents saw fit to try and put Harold Semple back in as Lindley Town Supervisor with a write-in vote. Harold never threw his hat in the ring nor announced his
candidacy for Supervisor by a write-in vote.

The efforts were of many residents who campaigned for Harold by passing out flyers door to door, allowing signs to be placed in their yards, a letter to the editors and well wishes. These actions did not go unnoticed. The results were not in favor of Harold with the final count of 159-141 with many of the voters in Lindley wanting to see a change for Lindley Town Supervisor.

As with most everything there is a negative side. The negative being that of a person or persons who saw their need to steal two of the signs placed in private yards with the owners permission asking for a write-in vote and dismantling another sign, again placed with permission at the entrance of a private drive-way. The
dismantled sign was then replaced in the yard of the citizen only to be driven over by someone who drove across the yard to knock the sign down. There is not much one can do unless the culprit(s) are caught but law enforcement has been notified on these malicious acts.

Those of you who are not happy with any situation in the town, let your voice be heard. Gentlemen of the Lindley Town Board hold your head high and continue to work for those of Lindley who wanted to see a change in leadership for the town.
Mary Jane Semple

Absentee Ballots Counted

Harold Semple

141

Sally Orr

159

Official Results will be posted on the

Steuben County Board of Elections site

http://www.steubencony.org/boe.html

Why I Challenged Harold to a Debate on the Hawbaker Gravel Pit

I challenged Harold to a public debate specifically to give the public a chance to hear the reasons why Harold and his group for a better Lindley support the Hawbaker gravel pit. Unfortunately, Harold declined my invitation to a public debate.

Had that debate taken place, I’m sure many citizens would have asked Harold why he could support a business that--

1.) Completely violates the Intent of our Master Plan, a plan that was developed and adopted under his administration.
2.) Will not benefit the Town financially whatsoever. It is estimated the Town would receive a minimal amount ($1500) from State Sales Tax disbursement per year, due to the tax exempt status of Hawbaker customers/NYS. And when the 5 structures located on the Hawbaker site on River Road are torn down, the gravel pit will be assessed as “agricultural”. No buildings, no meaningful tax base.
3.) Will de-value all immediate (20) properties surrounding the pit which reduces the Lindley tax base. This reduction is in addition to the removal of 12 structures and approximately 100+ acres that the NYSDOT is taking for the Route 15 Improvement Project. The Town of Lindley will lose over $2 million of property value, reducing our tax base by 3% and our share of State Sales Tax. That $1500/ per year we would expect to receive from Hawbaker will no doubt be reduced as well.
4.) That will put 180 gravel trucks a day on River Road –that’s going to be 30 one-way trips every day, for twelve hours a day, five days a week, that’s one truck every two minutes up and down the entire length of River Road for 15 years! Now, how can anyone say this is a good and safe thing for the residents of Lindley? I would have asked Harold had he agreed to debate to answer that question, but he didn’t and I’m beginning to understand why.
5.) Will create two, count them, two jobs. This attempt at job creation by Hawbaker could not be considered by anyone to be a “boom” for Lindley.

I have heard Harold and his group of concerned citizens for a better Lindley support the Hawbaker gravel pit because it would provide the Town of Lindley Highway Department close access to gravel/sand that would in turn save the taxpayers money. Unless Hawbaker is going to give the Town free gravel/sand NYS is requiring all Towns to get three bids on gravel. Hawbaker may or may not come in as low bidder. So having access to a gravel pit in the middle of Town is not a supportable argument. And if Hawbaker did come in as low bidder, they would make a whole lot more money off the Town of Lindley (tax exempt of course) than the Town stands to gain off them. That’s a fact.

When Hawbakers presented their gravel pit proposal to the Town, I was your Supervisor. A major part of my job and the Town Board is to research developer’s applications to determine whether or not what they propose will serve the “greater good” for the Town or create a land use condition that causes extreme adverse impact, negating the greater good. After pulling all the facts together that were mentioned above, I concluded as your Supervisor, the advent of the Hawbaker gravel pit operating in the Town of Lindley will not serve the Town for the greater good. It is clear from the facts that the only organization that will benefit from a gravel pit operation on River Road is G.O. Hawbaker.

Should the Town Highway Superintendent be appointed?

Some think by changing the highway superintendent from an elected position to an appointed position the Town Board would have more efficient control over highway spending. However, if a Town Board is functioning in accordance with NYS General Municipal Law and has adopted guidelines such as procurement and bid policies, the Town Board has the necessary tools to provide reasonable financial oversight of the highway department without dinging the “elected” Highway Superintendent for nickel and dime purchases that often must be made during a workday.

Procurement and bidding policies were adopted several years ago by Lindley Town Boards. With these policies in place we already have one of the means to provide financial oversight to control large expenditures such as equipment and contracts to insure we get the most competitive price.

The second means we have, and probably the most important, to control highway spending is the development of a budget every year, a primary function of the Town Board. It is at this point in the legislative process where a Town Board can be the most effective at controlling the spending of ANY elected official especially the Highway Superintendent. They are, quite frankly, at our mercy.

At budget time, every line item in the Highway budget is scrutinized for fiscal accuracy and consequences to the taxpayer. Budgeting decisions are based on real spending patterns over the past five years and also with one eye peering into a crystal ball: Are we due for a heavy snow and ice winter? Or will it be a wet spring next year that washes out 20% of our roads? Or will the grader break for good this time? And what about gas prices? Going up or down?

These spending decisions must be made regardless if the Highway Superintendent is elected or appointed. Once the highway budget is adopted it has been fixed in stone by the Town Board and any changes in the budget requires Board approval. That's a lot of control.

So if we have effective budgetary, auditing controls and purchasing policies already in place to provide maximum financial oversight on an elected Highway Superintendent, one must ask why this issue has come before the board four times during the last two years and will be discussed, yet again, at the upcoming November 13th board meeting.

I guess the citizens of Lindley will have to attend the November Board Meeting and listen as certain Board members argue why they don’t believe the voter in Lindley has enough common sense to fill the position of Highway Superintendent with a qualified individual. Or how they can assure the citizens of Lindley that a Town Board/a committee of five is the most efficient way to run the Highway Department.

For the reasons I’ve stated, I am totally opposed to changing the Highway Superintendent’s position from elected to appointed. I am a strong believer in the will of the people, not a committee of five where inside politics and personal agendas will lead to certain abuses and inefficiencies. Elected officials need the autonomy of their position to make managerial decisions effectively and spontaneously without the cumbersome problem of having to get permission from five people before they can buy a box of bolts.

An elected Highway Superintendent serves both the voter and the Town Board. An appointed Highway Superintendent only serves the Board. You should be very concerned over that prospect.

Why the Town Board Raised Taxes

The chart above is an analysis of Town finances and the direction we were headed had we continued to not raise taxes and expend money from the savings account when I took over as Supervisor in 2006.

Historically, the past administration rarely raised taxes, if at all, over 1% because they were operating with a surplus created by FEMA disaster grants totaling $212,000 and excess cash in town accounts (CDs), that generated an average of $ 21,324 per year in interest income (1999-2005). The Town had on average, of $635,000 of unrestricted funds in the bank, every year at year end, from 1999 to 2004. That balance dropped to $525,000 at the end of 2005, due to purchase of the new town garage and to $468,515 by the end of 2006, the past administration's last budget.

Chart Explanation

Calculations used for five year projection chart were:

- 1% yearly increase in property taxes
- 1 % increase in revenues
- 3% (cost of living) increase in expenditures
- Starting in 2007 a $25,000 contribution to the * “Restricted for Inventory Fund”. This restricted fund/savings account, created by Board Resolution in 1996, is to prepare for the inevitable purchase of heavy equipment for the Highway Department. Currently, we are “saving up” for a grader that will be purchased in the next four or five years.

The chart clearly shows an insurmountable *deficit in 2011 had we continued to run operations without increasing taxes. As you can see on the chart by 2011, we have a projected $81,899 shortfall. We can't pay for operations because all the reserves are gone. And by 2011, we would have spent the accumulated funds in the Restricted for Inventory savings account, purchasing the much needed grader, leaving us nothing to seed another fund for equipment.

Any Supervisor or Board in office in 2006 faced the deficit problem. We had no choice but to raise taxes in 2007 to prevent a catastrophic tax increase down the road. A tax increase so astronomical not many citizens in the Town of Lindley could afford in one shot. We chose to make the hard choice and increase taxes 11% to infuse the savings with enough cash to “start” offsetting the growing deficit and maintain a bank balance capable of accumulating significant interest –which we did. We have managed to get an average of $31,000 per year in interest on less money ($10,000 more in interest per year on $110,000 less in cash) and with lower or equal rates than Harold had for most of those years.

Also, I will remind people Harold raised taxes 9% in 2004 and I don’t recall any signs going up around town protesting his increase.

I’ll present the projected Five Year Budget Plan in the next post to show how we plan to balance the budget, secure reserves and gradually reduce taxes for future financial health.

Welcome

Tis the political season.