Discussing Downsizing in Hamburg

[steven]

Hamburg, NY (WBEN) -- In less than two weeks, voters in Hamburg will decide on whether to downsize the town board from five members to three. A discussion on the topic was held Thursday night, where voters heard both sides of the issue.

Regionalism advocate Kevin Gaughan says while the town has already taken steps to downsize offices in the government, it should not stop there. "They've been terrific steps to reduce costs and consolidate other departments, and what I wanted to convey is that this should apply to themselves."

Hamburg Supervisor Steve Walters says while cutting two board seats would save the town $37,000 in costs, that savings would likely be wiped out by rising costs in other areas. And he warns another person may have to be hired. "We recently reconfigured the work the town board handles, to increase the workload and shift the work around in an effort to save $300,000. If we go down to three board members, the work is going to be untenable. You're going to have to reconfigure those work duties again, and you very well could end up hiring somebody to pick up those extra duties," notes Walters. Walters says downsizing the town board won't change the structure of government, the reason he contends taxes are so high in this region.

http://www.wben.com/Discussing-Downs...amburg/5612277

[FoxxyKat]

Kevin Gaughn is like a pest. He should learn to tell the truth. He preys on the Senior vote and fills their heads with fiction.

[petunia1935]

If people only knew his M.O. and his personal financial background, they wouldn't be so quick to jump on his political bandwagon. Tha man needs to learn to clean up his own house before he barges into others. Do your homework before voting but also do your homework on Kevin Gaughan. You'll find the answers to be quite scary....

[HamburgVoter]

Downsizing would also put the decision making power in the Town in the hands of non elected people.

Since the Board members could discuss absolutely NOTHING without violating the open meetings law, contact would have to be maintained by designated representatives of each member. How is that better government?

[petunia1935]

Originally Posted by HamburgVoter

Downsizing would also put the decision making power in the Town in the hands of non elected people.

Since the Board members could discuss absolutely NOTHING without violating the open meetings law, contact would have to be maintained by designated representatives of each member. How is that better government?

Excellent point HamburgVoter...

[Linda_D]

Originally Posted by HamburgVoter

Downsizing would also put the decision making power in the Town in the hands of non elected people.

Since the Board members could discuss absolutely NOTHING without violating the open meetings law, contact would have to be maintained by designated representatives of each member. How is that better government?

It's also much easier, faster, and cheaper for well-connected individuals and groups who want something -- like a new development or a re-zoning -- to influence 3 town board members than 5.

[petunia1935]

Good Luck Hamburg! Read today's article in the Buffalo News.

HAMBURG
Downsizing’s skeptics don’t deter advocate
By Barbara O’Brien
NEWS STAFF REPORTER
November 10, 2009, 7:01 AM /
Kevin P. Gaughan is confident that Hamburg voters will approve downsizing their Town Board next Tuesday, despite the grilling he got from residents Monday night in Hamburg Middle School.

He was met with questions such as, “Of all the offices you have run for, how many of those are you proposing to downsize?” and, “Where do you get your funding?”

Monday’s session, which attracted about 100 residents, also featured presentations by Supervisor Steven J. Walters; Kathryn A. Foster, director of the Regional Institute at the University at Buffalo; Craig R. Bucki, an attorney with Phillips Lytle who has written articles on regionalism; and Michael Kenneally of the State Association of Towns.

Kenneally said there are questions on how a three-member board would operate, particularly with voting on bonding and some zoning issues, which require approval from two-thirds of the board as part of checks and balances.

Foster said there are trade-offs involved with downsizing, such as overall population and cost of the board members versus the scope of government. She said savings from eliminating two board members amount to a small fraction of the total cost of government.

Gaughan said that thousands of jobs have been lost and that thousands of Western New Yorkers have moved away in recent decades. By reducing each board in Erie County, residents could save money and make the area more attractive for businesses to move back, he said.

“What does any of that have to do with whether the Hamburg Town Board has three or five members?” Bucki said. “These are all red herrings.”

But Gaughan said voting to downsize would save money and would show that residents are ready for change.

Hamburg has consolidated departments and special districts, its population is growing slightly, and it is spending less, Walters said, adding he does not want to be one of only three town decisionmakers.

Residents will vote from 8 a. m. to 8 p. m. next Tuesday in their regular polling places, with two exceptions. Districts 27, 28 and 29 will vote at Cloverbank Elementary rather than the Frontier Educational Center, and Districts 42 and 43 at the Community Center on Prospect Avenue instead of Charlotte Avenue School.

bobrien@buffnews.com

[InFromTheCold]

Originally Posted by HamburgVoter

Downsizing would also put the decision making power in the Town in the hands of non elected people.

Since the Board members could discuss absolutely NOTHING without violating the open meetings law, contact would have to be maintained by designated representatives of each member. How is that better government?

It's not better government, it just proves most people are stupid.

If they want to save money, join the school districts in Hamburg, or anywhere else for that matter.

[Linda_D]

Originally Posted by InFromTheCold

It's not better government, it just proves most people are stupid.

If they want to save money, join the school districts in Hamburg, or anywhere else for that matter.

That would not only save real money, but it would leave Gaughan and his ilk out in the cold. School districts wouldn't even have to actually merge the schools themselves, just the administrations, to save big $$$. If two or three adjoining districts merged their administrations, there would 1 superintendent, 1 business manager, 1 transportation supervisor, etc. Superintendents easily make $100,000+ annually, so we're not talking about saving $37,000 but more like $ 300,000+ by combining 3 positions into 1 -- and that's just 1 position.

Districts with merged administrations could also find savings in better utilizing buses, textbooks and similar resources, and even staff. For smaller school districts, it would mean they could take advantage of bulk discounts that they might not qualify for now. School districts already share calendars and some services, so that this kind of merger would be very transparent to most students and teachers.

[pjmarkert]

A referendum to downsize the Hamburg Town Board is to be voted on this Tuesday, November 17th.
Please get out and vote “no” to the proposition.
Reducing the size of the Board from 5 down to 3 is a stupid idea.
The Town has a budget of around $40 Million. The cost of the two seats is about 1/1000 of that or $40,0...00.
The board members serve a part-time basis, but they provide much bang for the buck.
Just having three people watching over a budget of this amount will lead to problems.
Just the cost of putting on this vote is about $30,000.
There will be many additional legal and other administrative costs in the future if this idiotic proposition passes.
By the way, the cost of one single police officer in the Town is, on average, about $80,000.
There is a need for government to downsize. Reducing the number of council members is not the way to do it.
Kevin Gaughan is missing the point.
Please get out and vote no.
Please pass this on to other Town residents and otherwise pass the word.
Thank you.

[pjmarkert]

Open Letter to Mr. Kevin Gaughan
I read your study and quickly noticed that you included a ratio of citizens
per legislator, which after some analysis proved very misleading because of
what the legislators are paid. If you do the math, it works out to $19 per
citizen in Buffalo, but in the town of Hamburg, it is $14 per ci...tizen.
Explain why you don't include this important figure in your study? You say
that the suburbs are overspending for government. I have lived and worked in
Hamburg for 47 years and I have been happy with the current level of
representation and services in this town. If you succeed in eliminating two
town councilmen you will save 36 cents per citizen per year per councilman, I think that is
money well spent for the representation and services I receive. The low pay
and considerable time these councilmen spend is a bargain for what we get.
The problem is with the state gov and all they waste.

Philip J. Markert

[MarkLV]

Originally Posted by pjmarkert

Just the cost of putting on this vote is about $30,000.

That fact right there is reason enough to vote "YES"!

Instead of squandering away thirty-grand worth of taxpayer funds by holding a "special election", they could have easily, and at practically not one additional penny of money, held this vote 2 weeks ago on General Election day. But nooooo.....they held out for a whole new voting day, likely in hopes it would deter many of the voters from coming out.

[WNYresident]

Originally Posted by FoxxyKat

Kevin Gaughn is like a pest. He should learn to tell the truth. He preys on the Senior vote and fills their heads with fiction.

You just described basically the long time political players in WNY. Just replace He preys with They prey.

[InFromTheCold]

Originally Posted by MarkLV

That fact right there is reason enough to vote "YES"!

Instead of squandering away thirty-grand worth of taxpayer funds by holding a "special election", they could have easily, and at practically not one additional penny of money, held this vote 2 weeks ago on General Election day. But nooooo.....they held out for a whole new voting day, likely in hopes it would deter many of the voters from coming out.

If by "deter voters" you mean follow the wishes of the petition, you are correct.

[dtwarren]

Originally Posted by MarkLV

That fact right there is reason enough to vote "YES"!

Instead of squandering away thirty-grand worth of taxpayer funds by holding a "special election", they could have easily, and at practically not one additional penny of money, held this vote 2 weeks ago on General Election day. But nooooo.....they held out for a whole new voting day, likely in hopes it would deter many of the voters from coming out.

The vote could not legally take place at the same time as the Town Biennial election on November 3 because in the petition drafted by Gaughan and submitted by his supporters to the Town Clerk it called for a special election.