2020 Tentative budget

[gorja]

Last year, the tentative budget was posted on the town website on Friday, September 28.
Today is September 30th, which is the deadline of which the tentative budget should be filed
in the office of the town clerk.

If it's filed, it has not been posted on the town website as of yet.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Well Gorga, the 2020 tentative budget has been posted on the town website.

It calls for a spending increase of $1.04 million from last year’s budget – a 2.96% increase.

The tax levy increases by 2.52%.

$1.69 million was appropriated from the Fund Balance and Reserves.

The tax rate for Town of Lancaster residents increases by 2.09% - an increase of $19.96 per $100,000 of property assessment.

Comparison to final 2019 budget

Spending increased by 4.94% ($1.63 million)

Tax levy increased by 3.34%

$1.54 million was appropriated from the Fund Balance and Reserves.

The tax rate for Town of Lancaster residents increases by 2.77% - an increase of $25.73 per $100,000 of property assessment.

[gorja]

Well Gorga, the 2020 tentative budget has been posted on the town website.

It calls for a spending increase of $1.04 million from last year’s budget – a 2.96% increase.

The tax levy increases by 2.52%.

$1.69 million was appropriated from the Fund Balance and Reserves.

The tax rate for Town of Lancaster residents increases by 2.09% - an increase of $19.96 per $100,000 of property assessment.

Comparison to final 2019 budget

Spending increased by 4.94% ($1.63 million)

Tax levy increased by 3.34%

$1.54 million was appropriated from the Fund Balance and Reserves.

The tax rate for Town of Lancaster residents increases by 2.77% - an increase of $25.73 per $100,000 of property assessment.

Thank you Lee

[gorja]

Looking at the budget. It looks like Michelle Barbaro did a GREAT job in reducing
her OVERALL budget numbers in her areas of responsibility.


Please advise if something was overlooked

[Lee Chowaniec]

Looking at the budget. It looks like Michelle Barbaro did a GREAT job in reducing
her OVERALL budget numbers in her areas of responsibility.


Please advise if something was overlooked

I only have one question to ask on the data you presented. That pertains to Buildings contractual expenses. You correctly list that total budget contractual expenses were reduced by $192,608 from last years budget.

How this reduction came about is perplexing when looking at past data.

What control, if any, does Mrs. Barbaro have over this expenditure?

In line item A1620.411, Misc. Contractual Services the reduction is listed at $224,308. What does this line item encompass?

I ask because looking back over the past four budgets I can’t make sense of data presented – money budgeted in a year for this line item and money actually spent.

2017 Budget

Budgeted - $75,000

2018 Budget

Budgeted - $75,000

Spent $176,409

2019 Budget

Budgeted - $120,000

Spent -$324,308

How was the difference accounted for?

2020 (Tentative Budget)

$100,000 budgeted

Budget spending reduction $224,308

How much will actually be spent?

So, Gorga, why the heavy spending in 2018 and 2019?

Lastly, Barbaro is scheduled to receive a 14.43% salary increase ($8,792). Is that increase due to a step increase or for just a job well done?

So much more to examine before concluding this is a reasonable budget or one where taxpayers could have a better outcome.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
I only have one question to ask on the data you presented. That pertains to Buildings contractual expenses. You correctly list that total budget contractual expenses were reduced by $192,608 from last years budget.

How this reduction came about is perplexing when looking at past data.

What control, if any, does Mrs. Barbaro have over this expenditure?
2019 Budget

Budgeted - $120,000

Spent -$324,308

How was the difference accounted for?

On October 2018, the approval of rehab roof systems for Parks and Recreation, Office of Emergency Management and Keysa park utility room caused the 2018
Approved budget to be amended to increase 2018 Buildings Contractual Expenses Budget, Line Item 01-1620-0411 by $200,300.

To me, it looks like this was approved in 2018 but maybe not performed until 2019.

This is what I found so far for that line item. They do have a cleaning service contract with People Inc for $52,250 per year for cleaning services of the police building.
I can't locate where it is allocated. This is the 5th and final year of that particular contract. There are probably more contracts that automatically renew yearly from other years past

[Lee Chowaniec]

Thanks for the information, Gorga.

This budget line item is fluid and cannot be used to exemplify budget spending control or making the assessment: Looking at the budget. It looks like Michelle Barbaro did a GREAT job in reducing her OVERALL budget numbers in her areas of responsibility.

Crew chief Barbaro has done a good job, but that can’t be the sole reason for getting a 14.43% salary increase, can it?

Budgets are complex and the Budget Director and Supervisor have to make estimates on what should be appropriated for the upcoming spending in the fiscal year. Councilman Ruffino recently stated there is too much ‘fluff’ in the budget and taxpayers should not be penalized for budgets where revenues are often understated and appropriations overstated.

One’s perception differs from others on what should be essential in a budget and its related cost. The Supervisor’s Total Personal Services budget increases by 9.58% this budget year ($27,025). $24,000 of that increase went for the hiring of a Deputy Payroll Supervisor – a much contested addition.

The total department budget increased by $27,125, a 9.49% increase from last years amended budget.

It should also be noted that the $5,000 stipend allotted to the Supervisor ‘As Budget Officer’ has been removed again. It was eliminated by then Supervisor Fudoli in his 2013 budget, reinstated in 2019, and now removed again.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
Lastly, Barbaro is scheduled to receive a 14.43% salary increase ($8,792). Is that increase due to a step increase or for just a job well done?

Good question. In May of 2015, Mark Lubera was appointed parks crew chief at an hourly rate of $31.76 or $66,061. In the 2016 budget his salary was budgeted at $66,061. In the 2017 budget his salary was budgeted at $69,412 a 5% increase. In the 2018 budget, Mark Lubera's position was budgeted for $70,800 which would have been a 2% increase. He retired in the Fall of 2017.

In November of 2017, Michelle Barbaro was appointed Park's crew chief @$27.88 per hour around $59,990 per year. In the 2019 budget, her position was budgeted at $72,216. I believe they had just added 2% to the budgeted salary for Lubera ($70,800) not Barbaro's $59,900. They amended that in February 2019 to $29,29 per hour or $60,923 or 1.7% increase.

Is it fair for Mark Lubera to have been making $69,412 in his 2nd year in the position while Michelle Barbaro was making $60,923 in her 2nd year in the same position?

[Lee Chowaniec]

Good question. In May of 2015, Mark Lubera was appointed parks crew chief at an hourly rate of $31.76 or $66,061. In the 2016 budget his salary was budgeted at $66,061. In the 2017 budget his salary was budgeted at $69,412 a 5% increase. In the 2018 budget, Mark Lubera's position was budgeted for $70,800 which would have been a 2% increase. He retired in the Fall of 2017.

In November of 2017, Michelle Barbaro was appointed Park's crew chief @$27.88 per hour around $59,990 per year. In the 2019 budget, her position was budgeted at $72,216. I believe they had just added 2% to the budgeted salary for Lubera ($70,800) not Barbaro's $59,900. They amended that in February 2019 to $29,29 per hour or $60,923 or 1.7% increase.

Is it fair for Mark Lubera to have been making $69,412 in his 2nd year in the position while Michelle Barbaro was making $60,923 in her 2nd year in the same position?

Considering Barbaro has been on the job two years, that the department has been restructured and Barbaro now has an Assistant Parks Crew Chief and a part-time Forestry Supervisor, and where she is scheduled to earn $69,715 ($33.51 per/hr.) in the proposed 2020 budget, what’s not fair?

The proposed town Supervisor’s salary for 2020 is $72,164. There are at least 60 town employees earning more than that. A few part-time positions will earn around $30 per hr. One position pays $61 per hr. All full-time employees have generous health care plans and perks.

Ask low income residents or those who are living on fixed incomes about having to pay taxes to provide town employee generous salary and benefit packages that they do not have about fairness.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
Considering Barbaro has been on the job two years, that the department has been restructured and Barbaro now has an Assistant Parks Crew Chief and a part-time Forestry Supervisor, and where she is scheduled to earn $69,715 ($33.51 per/hr.) in the proposed 2020 budget, what’s not fair?

I think the budgeted salary is fair if just comparing her to her predecessor but you do make a good point,
It's not necessarily apples to apples when Lubera didn't have a PT Assistant crew chief and a FT forestry supervisor.

[gorja]

Supervisor's budget message

[Lee Chowaniec]

Supervisor's budget message

So Gorga, the Supervisor believes the tentative budget is reasonable and worthy of acceptance by the community.

The tax rate for Town of Lancaster residents increases by 2.09% - an increase of $19.96 per $100,000 of property assessment.

Sounds reasonable, right? Is that why you posted the Supervisor’s letter?

You’re an inquisitive individual who does a lot of research and one who probably asks 90% of the questions at town board meetings to get clarification on resolution language. Do you, as I do, wonder if a presented budget is ever the best it could be and/or what information in a budget is relative to making that determination?

Since I am physically unable to attend town board meetings anymore, I will present some questions I believe should be asked at the budget public hearing.

I hope you tag along and critique the information I provide and add information as well.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
So Gorga, the Supervisor believes the tentative budget is reasonable and worthy of acceptance by the community.

Actually, I posted it because it was in the communications and I hadn't seen a budget message from the supervisor since her first budget in 2016 for the 2017 budget.
I do wish there were more resident involvement. There are two political party chairman/woman who regularly attend but are 'silent'.
Their silence is not challenging anything but accepting everything that is presented.

As the supervisor stated, the debt expense is increasing. Yet, the Republican chair is in favor of a multi-million dollar community recreation center.
Debt increases for updating infrastructure is a necessary debt. A debt increase for a multi-million dollar community recreation center is not, IMHO.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Actually, I posted it because it was in the communications and I hadn't seen a budget message from the supervisor since her first budget in 2016 for the 2017 budget.
I do wish there were more resident involvement. There are two political party chairman/woman who regularly attend but are 'silent'.
Their silence is not challenging anything but accepting everything that is presented.

As the supervisor stated, the debt expense is increasing. Yet, the Republican chair is in favor of a multi-million dollar community recreation center.
Debt increases for updating infrastructure is a necessary debt. A debt increase for a multi-million dollar community recreation center is not, IMHO.

While I agree with you that more community involvement is needed, there are too few interested in reviewing a complex document and making a sound determination as to outcome, when in reality they have no voice in its final approval or denial.

I agree that a Recreation Center is a misuse of spending – a cost estimated at $6-$7 million.

The budget is about how taxpayer money is being spent to accommodate for its services, growth, infrastructure improvements & repairs, environmental focus (wetland loss through development that results in flooding and drainage issues) and a debt load that continues to rise and now costs the town $999,572 in annual interest on projected outstanding debt.

The information that will be provided is not to disparage the proposed budget, but to give a snapshot of where we have been and what concern there should be when the town’s development slows or eventually stops.

As for political involvement, it bemuses me to see on all candidate campaign literature the rhetoric to focus on infrastructure. The town has been doing just that since 2008 - spending over $16 million in the process. Much of that is to correct the past shoddy work of developers, weak code enforcement at the time and overall dumb growth policies.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Comparative trends in last three administrations regarding spending, Outstanding Debt, and estimated Fund Balance Reserves.

2020 budget – 36,062,042 (28.315,626 – 7,746,416)
2019 budget – 35,025,078 (27,502,766 – 7,522,312)
2018 budget – 33,392,261 (26,149,337 – 7,242,924)
2017 budget – 32,326,923 (25,339,015 – 6.987,908)

2017-20 administration budget spending increased by 4,179,659 (13.11%)

General Fund spending increased by 3,352,218 (13.43%)

Special District spending increased by 827,437 (11.96%)

Outstanding debt 31,870,140. Interest on principal 999,572

Fund Balance (unreserved & reserved) 7,748,897 (21.99% of budget)

2016 budget – 31,882,387 (24,963,408 – 6,918,979)
2015 budget – 31,306,164 (24,433,644 – 6,872,520)
2014 budget – 31,285,872 (24,496,853 – 6,789,019)
2013 budget – 30,672,747 (23,661169 – 7,011578)

2013-16 administration budget spending increased by 1,209,640 (3.94%)

General Fund spending increased by 1,302,239 (5.50%)

Special District spending decreased by 92,599 (-1.32%)

Outstanding debt in 2016: 26,119,883. Interest on principal 783,992

Fund Balance (unreserved & reserved) in 2016 budget – 5,373,283 (16.85% of budget)

2012 budget – 30,191,938 (23,180.135 – 7,011,803)
2009 budget – 27,710,938 (20,945,443 – 6,765,489)

2009-2012 administration budget spending increased by 2,481,000 (8.95%)

General Fund spending increased by 2,234,557 (10.67%)

Special District spending increased by 246,314 (3.64%)

Outstanding debt in 2012: 22,097,000. Interest on principal 257,813.

Fund Balance (unreserved & reserved) in 2012 budget – 3,409,888 (11.79% of budget)