Lancaster and the Tonawandas consider sharing one assessor -
The Bufnews ran a article where the above was touted as "Cost Saving" in nature - is it - who saves what - who gains?
First they make it sound like down sizing at work - not true - yes people have retired. So theres two tax funded pensions and benefits tax payers have and will forever support.
They say it will save tax dollars - how - as Lancaster's Tax Assessor said, "the Tonawandas may want to hire an additional appraiser" - so that means more employees - more tax funded salaries, tax funded benefits and most likely tax funded retirement money.
Then add in the cost of Lancaster's Assessor - no matter how you slice it the tax payers of Lancaster will still pay him and his tax funded benefits package and NY State Retirement contributions. Then the Tonawandas will also pay him - so both Towns will pay him to split his hours between them - so in reality he gets a raise to split his time between three Towns. Who pays for his vehicle and travel time ?
Ask your self these questions:
Will tax payers actually save money - or pay more in the long term?
Will tax payers actually be contributing to at least two more employees - or maybe even three.
How much will the cost of salaries,health care and tax funded pension be for all these employees?
Lancaster looked at this idea before - it was abandoned and West Seneca joined a Consortium instead. So who Gains what - you decide because you will pay. Politicians don't create jobs - but they do create/encourage patronage positions.