Wednesday, November 6, 2013

A Fine Morning






Here are some thoughts from "The Original Gadfly" on what the future should hold for the new majority.


            -----  By Ray Mooney









An Open Letter to Ms. Matters, Ms. DiMartino and Supervisor Langley  



You did not ask, and you may not care, but I do so here goes: 

·         Don’t gloat over your victory. Be gracious. Work to unite the town – not drive people further apart.
·         Do an immediate deep, even forensic audit. You have to know the true state of the town’s finances from the very get go. Check to see if politically connected citizens are even paying their taxes. It is remarkably easy to hide that.
·         Invite/request that the OSC come back and dig into specific areas of concern from the last audit. Report openly and to the public on any concerns and corrective actions required.
·         Purchase an up to date version of today’s best accounting software. Recognize that, for the moment, it will be “garbage in; garbage out” but you have to start somewhere to improve the town’s accounting practices and systems.
·         Open up town board meetings, be more transparent. Share information without the need for FOILs. When in doubt share – don’t hide. If a town board agenda does not provide time for full public participation schedule a second, separate meeting for just public comment.
·         Negotiate collective bargaining agreements for the good of the town’s taxpayers not to curry favor with employees and their unions. Look to the long term. How will we afford health care and staggering pension expenses down the road?
·         Bruen is totally and completely out of control. Make an audit a condition in the contract and create a corrective plan. Set standards and hold the Buren leadership accountable.  You might even consider putting the contract out to bid.  And as OSC recommended, move the fiscal activity into the Town Comptroller's Office.
·         Retain Dave Van Wormer as DPW Commissioner. He is the best, by far, of the last three people to hold that position.   You will need Dave’s knowledge and support to reduce overtime and eliminate DPW excess positions. Use his expertise.  You might want to consider making the Highway Commissioner position elective as the law allows. 
·         Appoint a real accountant with an advanced understanding of modern accounting practices and up to date accounting software to the Comptroller’s position. If Pete Stenson is that person retain him.
·         Eliminate the practice of burning up taxpayer dollars at the end of the year for absolutely nothing  in a “use it or lose” way to maintain budgets for things like DPW overtime.
·         Resist the urge to appoint your political cronies. Your political hacks will not be one darn bit an improvement over their political hacks. That applies especially to your party chairperson, by the way.
·         Install computer monitoring software on all the town’s computers. It is high time to eliminate selling on eBay and surfing the Internet as valid things to do on the taxpayer’s dime while at work.
·         Set goals for all the town’s department heads.
Ø      For the DPW plan to reduce headcount by 2 to 4 positions by seniority. Set a goal of reducing overtime in the DPW by 10%.
Ø      For the PD plan to reduce headcount by 2 positions. Set a goal of reducing overtime in the PD by 15%.
·         Eliminate positions:
Ø      Deputy PD Chief. This was a purely political appointment to award a party loyalist. Eliminate it.
Ø      Automate the collection of taxes. It is soon to be 2014 for goodness sake. In automating the collection of taxes eliminate the two deputy tax collector positions.  The law allows for the tax collector position to be appointed and not elected.
Ø      Eliminate the town attorney position. Almost all serious legal work is farmed out to legal specialists so the position,  a political appointment anyway, can easily be eliminated.
Ø      Eliminate one or both deputy building inspector positions. Might be a good place to begin a work-load analysis.
Ø      Eliminate the town attorney secretary position.
Ø      Eliminate the data collector position.
·         At the January Town Board meeting pass the original, unrevised Code of Ethics.
·         Re-appoint Jack Conway to the Ethics Board.
·         Appoint serious people to the Ethics Board and the Citizens Fiscal Advisory Committee (CFAC)
·         Have the CFAC support, monitor and report publicly on the overtime and headcount reduction goals for the DPW and the PD.
·         Clean up town hall. It looks terrible and gives an equally bad first impression.
·         Re-evaluate the $14 million waste treatment plant expansion project. It makes no sense to put so much debt on taxpayers when the county option is so viable, simple and inexpensive.
·         Explore every opportunity to consolidate services. Evaluate the dispatcher function as a starting point.  It seems like a duplication of expense to have town employees doing what can equally and easily and less expensively be done through the county’s services.
·         Ask for assistance and help. Promote volunteerism. There are dozens of people, with all kinds of expertise ready and willing to support positive change in East Greenbush. Access those available resources.
Congratulations on your success.  We all look forward to your driving positive change and fulfilling your campaign promises.
Signed,
The Original Gadfly

158 comments:

  1. Ray---thank you and could not have outlined it better. This transition of majority leadership should be treated in much the same way as a merger/acquisition between 2 corporations. When companies merge, positions and tasks are consolidated thus allowing the elimination of duplication of services and thus, expenses.
    Agreed regarding the GOP Cmt Chairperson. His involvement will lead to nothing but suspicion and mistrust by the voters. Pete is not the right person for the Comptroller position as he is NOT an accountant. This Town has a few muni/ government accountants that are retired and, if tapped for their knowledge and expertise, are impartial and nonpartisan. Due to their previous employers, they always had to remain apolitical so they certainly are qualified for the position and are NOT involved in politics. One suggestion I would make and add to your list is to hire a MUNI accountant. Government accounting is entirely different than business accounting therefore, an expert in that area should be mandatory given our Town's current situation. Hire a retired one and the Town is well on its way to financial mending. If Mary Ann reaches out to some people she knows she can be provided a couple of names to contact.
    The people elected Mary Ann and Deb for the reason they do NOT condone the waste of their tax dollars any longer. Mary Ann and Deb are charged, by the voters, to start turning this ship around. It will take some time but the outline provided, along with a good accountant that specializes in government accounting can start the process.
    Best of luck to Mary Ann and Deb!

    ReplyDelete
  2. One more point I would like to add. Tap the local colleges for interns in computer science and business and government. Hudson Valley, Siena College, SUNY Albany, College of St. Rose and RPI all have excellent young adults with the most up to date information regarding computers and software and programming, business practices such as finance and accounting, government accounting for example. College students are NOT "kids" or "children". They are young adults and can offer current information and practices and they certainly are paid far less than a political hack/cronies.
    Contact the colleges and be added to their internship lists for specific majors.
    Mary Ann knows people that can guide her through this process and chances are, these young adults will not have any affiliation to the town and therefore, will be apolitical regarding the Town politics, unbiased.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hope springs eternal, Gadfly. Thank you for your insights. Be well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Ray. Chris DeFruscio has already promised the DPW Commissioner's position to Anthony Corellis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems to me that this is just the kind of mischief that we have been working to correct for the last few years. Mr. Defruscio was not elected to do anything of the sort. The reason the Dems were vulnerable was that they operated a "machine." He'd do well to NOT attempt to replace that one with his.

      Delete
  5. Rich Crist's brother, Craig Crist, will be the next Town Attorney according to Chris DeFruscio.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If Mary Ann and Deb allow Chris D. to make the decisions.....they can be assured they will not win another election. I would like to think Mary Ann is more independent and sensible than that. that goes for Chris' little buddy too! Neither of them can be trusted....as they both have proven.
    Mary Ann---steer the ship without Chris as the Captain---YOU and Deb be the Captains because YOU were both elected--in spite of Chris!

    ReplyDelete
  7. For the Love OF GOD! Should Chris be choosing the next DPW Comm!!!! He couldn't do the job right and was terminated....is he one to judge the qualifications of the next DPW Comm?!
    Chris---SHUT UP AND STAY OUT OF IT! you will ruin this for those two women...much the same way your Martha letter ruined things for Corine!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Chris DeFruscio is now saying it's ok with him for Rich Benko to stay on as Town Engineer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sounds like DeFruscio is well on his way to eliminating the possibility of a second Langley term.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This election was not won by Chris D... Two independent women won fair and square. The best thing that could happen now would be for Chris to vanish.This would be a breath of fresh air we badly need for our new majority.
    Please Chris...Leave East Greenbush...We can all do without your B.S.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why doesn't everybody just calm down and wait to see what actually happens? Deb and Mary Ann just won and won't even be sworn in until January 1st yet people are already panicking over suspected outcomes. At least give our new majority a chance to actually MAKE some decisions before we start crucifying them for it. Also, rest assured that Chris DeFruscio is NOT in power. Don't allow anonymous sources on a blog to rile you up. Again, calm down and wait for the new majority to start working. They told me at my door that they will not let me down. I believed them enough to vote for them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To 5:23 PM, Do you mean anonymous sources like you, and me for that matter? lol

      Delete
  12. One of the real side benefits of this election is that Supervisor Langley's excuse for not accomplishing much of anything is eliminated because he now has a majority on the town board.

    The early January Organizational Meeting will be one the first real tests of the new republican leadership on our town board.

    But, we can all look forward to controls on spending and the elimination of nepotism and patronage in making up unnecessary jobs for family and friends - right Mary Ann and Deb ?

    By the way, 5:23 PM people in our town are desperate for change. For now at least the destructive democratic party machine has been dismantled and Phil Malone has been effectively put out to political pasture. People have truly lofty expectations for the new majority. People are excited and interested to see what positive change will be coming and how Supervisor Langley's two years of excuses turn into a vision, goals, plans and actions for the betterment of our town's taxpayers. Please don't begrudge people that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ 6:29 PM, Let's not forget Zero Based Budgeting. That's the main reason I voted for Mary Ann and Deb. I am excitedly looking forward to the January Organizational Meeting to see how they plan to implement this reform minded approach to our Town's finances.

      Delete
  13. Well said Ray. Lets hope that all the political BS can be put aside and the town residents can rewarded with what a republican majority can do, lord knows the Dems have had their chance over the last so many years. Hey if we don't like what they do we vote them out too, right?

    Congrats to Deb and Mary Ann. I wish them both the best, good luck you are going to need it with the mess that this town is in.

    Just a reminder we didn't elect Chris to anything, so stop the scare tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If Mr. Mooney's financial plan was implemented:

    1.) Our taxes would go DOWN! Imagine that?

    2.) Our credit rating with Moodys and S&P would no longer be junk. And,

    3.) East Greenbush would be managed only for what is best for us - the regular citizen taxpayer. Imagine that?

    I did not read his suggestions as difficult or complicated at all.

    I am looking forward to learning, seeing and reading the new majority's version of their financial plan.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Can the Board appoint Deb or Mary Ann now to fill Ginny's term?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Congratulations Mary Ann and Deb. You know who your true friends are, don't be afraid to ask for their advice and help. Of course, you have the best person sitting next to you at the dinner table.

    ReplyDelete
  17. These last two election demonstrate clearly that citizen activism can be an effective force for positive change.

    This blog has developed and shared a great deal of important information with residents.

    This blog has done more to hold town officials accountable than any other agency.

    This blog is run openly and publically. The democratic party controlled blog (Talks) remains hidden in secrecy.

    Our town is finally on a good course. Will Langley, DiMartino and Matters stay the course? I don't know but thank you Don, Dwight, and Jack for everything you have done for the good of East Greenbush.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I thought, for SURE, when I read the paper on Wednesday that it would be same old, same old for good ol' EG. I thought for sure the sheep would come out and hold us to a Democratic majority. I am SHOCKED that the people of EG have actually woken up and voted for change. I think it's GREAT. I just pray people's eyes stay open and that the new ladies who were elected stand their ground and steer the ship back to safe waters. I hope the things mentioned above are implemented. I hope they have the fortitude to really help East Greenbush change.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Don & Dwight--I second Anon 7:19! Continue to run this blog and hold the Town Board responsible. Just because the majority has switched does not mean we no longer need to be diligent.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 7:19 PM-you left out one VERY important person. This long trip began with a woman, before her time, discovering the scrap metal scam. She did not hesitate to go public with the problem. That was just the beginning. I would not have the courage to do everything she has done.
    Thanks, Ann, I firmly believe you started the race that brought us to the finishing line on Tues. I realize you are out of politics and are concentrating on your personal life. GOOD LUCK.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This election, and its results, have occured at the perfect time.

    Supervisor Langley has had two years to learn his job and to develop a plan to address the town financial peoblems.

    On Janaury 1 Supervisor Langley will have the majroity meeded to implement those financial plans.

    And voters will have the next two years to assess Supervisor Langley's job performance as part of deciding to re-elect him in two years.

    A perfect situation for positive change or for voters to know what they need to in the elections two years from now.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 9:50 AM mentioned scrap metal. I forgot about that. Something else Mary Ann might want to keep an eye on.

    ReplyDelete
  23. There are two distinctions that are important in considering what politicians mean when they talk. The first is the difference between what they say when they are in opposition and what they say when they're in power. The second is the difference between what they say during campaigns and what they say when they're in office. As Mario Cuomo said "you campaign in poetry but you govern in prose." For the new republican majority the hard part starts now. We have heard their voices as the opposition and now we know what they promised during the campaign. Both sets of statements offer hope for a new approach to town government. But isn't it fair for some of us to be skeptical and adopt a "wait and see" approach? When the republicans won a majority in November 2009 and had their say for a month before the lawsuit from hell, they went straight to the public trough and started inhaling. Will it be different this time? Faced with a choice between cutting the cost of government and hiring a friend or supporter who needs a job, will they make the right choice? I hope they will. They deserve our support and a chance to make the kind of change we need. I truly wish them well. But it's no time to go to sleep and think the fight is over. It's really only just begun.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Would anyone know if the new majority plans to set up a transition team? This might be a good first step for them if they are truly interested in developing a transparent and reform oriented governing modality.

    ReplyDelete
  25. When I voted for Deb and Mary Ann I had no intention whatsoever of voting for Chris DeFruscio for anything.

    If I find his dirty fingerprints on Deb and Mary Ann's decisions the vote they just got will be the only vote they ever see from me. Same goes for Suoervisor Langley.

    I thought one of the most important points made in Ray's post is that one set of political hacks is no better than amother. How true.

    Langley, Matters ans DiMartino need to set a brand new tone - startiing with the 2014 Organizational Meeting. They need to do right by voters.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Jack, I always viewed Cuomo's quote as an excuse for flat out lying by politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous 6:32: Fair point. I always thought it was how he rationalized the fact that he gave the best speeches in the world but couldn't manage a lemonade stand at a little league field.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Nice comment Jack@4:59, but I've taken the liberty to edit parts

    The first is the difference between what they say when they are in opposition and what they DO when they're in power. The second is the difference between what they say during campaigns and what they DO when they're in office.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Jack, the human ability to ratiionalize is endless.

    Defruscio had a rationilaztion for the Martha story.

    Mangold told us that because we live in a small town we should trust her.

    Ginny rationilized that taxpayers giving her husband money was a good thing. Same for phil and his mother.

    One person's rationilization is another person's baloney.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous 9:04: I was on about the talking part because there's still two months before the new board takes office but your edit is way more to the point. It is the doing that counts and I hope we get a new way of doing things. Less talking, more doing would be a good thing.

    Anonymous 9:36: Sadly, you're right about rationalization. There's always more than one way to look at things but one of the ways is always just pure crap. I get a lot of static when I say that despite our differences we're all neighbors at the end of the day but I think it's true. This doesn't mean we agree or even like each other but we should be there for each other in a crisis. This means accepting that there's more than one way to look at things. As Paul Simon wrote about apartment living in NYC "one man's ceiling is another man's floor."

    ReplyDelete
  31. Dear Original Gadfly, it's good to hear from you. Thank you for sharing your insights on good govt. management. Everyone may not agree with all your recommendations, but you certainly connected all the right nuts with the right bolts. I always appreciated your thoughtful insights regarding business practices, being a manager yourself.

    As was mentioned by several posters after the election two years ago, let's come together for the good of everyone. Did it happen, well history has already told it's own story. We all now have the opportunity to start a new chapter in the story of East Greenbush. Jack, I'm looking forward to the excellent ethics code, that you and the rest of the Ethics Board originally drafted, resurrected.. As I said awhile back, "Why not the best?"

    ReplyDelete
  32. Pay close attention to the January Organization Meeting. If the new majority follows the same old nepotism and patronage practices perhaps Langley, Matters and DiMartino should all be one term mebers of our town board. That's OUR town board not Chris DeFruscio's by the way.

    ReplyDelete
  33. As someone involved in the campaign, I can assure your readers and bloggers that the ladies are taking their responsibilities very seriously and do indeed intend to "practice what they preach".

    Remember that the election was only this past Tuesday. I am sure that the ladies took the opportunity to rest up after campaigning steadily since early August. There will be a transition team and all aspects of town government will be examined to see how best to provide services at a cost that taxpayers can afford, and how to reduce expenditures so they can bring about meaningful and real tax relief.

    They are serious about this. I believe that you will be pleased with the change, But please do not listen to rumors and innuendo as they have been concentrating on getting their lives back to normal after an intense election cycle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fair enough. I really hope that you are right. Some thoughtful decision making based what is best for the town is what is needed here. I do not trust Langley but I do want the two councilpersons-elect to have an opportunity to lead us to a better place. I wish them well.

      Delete
  34. Dear 2:47 PM:
    That is great news. Another one of the major duties of any transition team is to authorize and conduct a due diligence examination of the backgrounds, both professional and personal, of each applicant for any Town position to ensure that governmental services are maintained in a fair, ethical and responsible manner.
    I am very happy that they are serious about this. This will provide EG with a much needed change of pace from the current Langley/Malone "style" of employment determinations.

    ReplyDelete
  35. My apologies for interrupting the political discussion but Talks has a very respectful and true thread regarding Veteran's Day. It rings true of every Veteran I know, very much true of my Dad, Combat Marine, Korean War.
    If Gadfly would not mind too awfully much, it would be wonderful if they could copy that thread and post it here. After all, if it were not for the Veterans there would be no elections, we would not have the freedom to choose our leaders and we would not have the freedom to write blogs and voice our opinions about politics, legislation and our tax dollars.
    Thank you,
    Ann Taylor

    ReplyDelete
  36. Here's a quotation from a friend which is worthy of contemplation:

    “The quality of governance depends on the quality of civil society, and the quality of civil society depends on the quality, the accuracy, and the relevance of information.

    "Transparency plus insight equals transformation. Capital flight is always at night, in the dark. Phantom companies, with more wealth than some governments, can’t stand the daylight that would unmask who owns them. Corporate and government corruption is killing more kids than any disease. But there is a vaccine, and it is information. It’s transparency.”

    --Bono, speaking at the African Media Leaders Forum in Addis Ababa, where ANSAF of Tanzania was awarded the $100,000 ONE AFrica Award.

    ReplyDelete
  37. People will disagree with some of the "picks" for town jobs because that's inevitable, however, if you disagree with a pick, ASK the supervisor to explain it, don't just run off furious. There is a lot of calculation and strategy that goes into staffing these jobs. Trust your new board majority until they give you a reason NOT to trust them. For example, if someone picked for a job proves him or herself to be good for nothing, then there is cause for protest. But first give people a chance to do a good job. The new board majority knows very well that all eyes are on them watching for every misstep. I have every confidence that they will do their best to be a vast and great improvement over the old regime that just got voted out. I, too, am so proud and grateful to EG residents for coming out on Election Day and voting for change. GOOD JOB, EG!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Dear 12:23 PM:
    Good post. Are you an official spokesperson for the new board majority? I sure hope so. I plan to completely trust the new board majority. They know what's best for the Town of East Greenbush. That's why they were elected. I hope the Gadfly continues to support them, like he did in the election. With his new majority, I am sure the Supervisor will now be happy to explain and answer any reasonable questions. He wasn't able to talk before because he didn't have his majority. Now that he has his votes, he will be able to do many great things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Boys and Girls.....I posted the comment above just to let you know that "I Like Langley" is back and at it again. What a joy to read every day.....

      Delete
  39. Right on 2:46- This is now Mr. Langley's time to shine. To paraphrase the late John Lennon- "All we are saying, is give KEITH a chance!"

    ReplyDelete
  40. Be sure to check out Dwight Jenkin's piece on "Meet Cheryl Vallee" on his blog at this address:

    http://eastgreenbushdreams.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/meet-cheryl-vallee/

    I can tell you that she is a very refreshing addition to the political scene in East Greenbush!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Dear Gadfly,
    It's unfortunate you weren't able to talk with Ms. Vallee before election day. I believe she was the most qualified candidate on the ballot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As Jack suggests below, for a number of reasons this was not going to be a Dem year. Kinda like "anybody but Dems," and almost a repeat of two years ago in the Supe contest. I believe that the "Machine" mindset on both sides of the aisle must be broken if good governance in EG is to be achieved. We'll see if Mr. Malone can get with the program or maintain the desperation we saw in the final two mailings of the campaign. We have yet to see if the Rep machine will show its head or hopefully take a business-like approach to governing. We'll have indications in January.

      Delete
  42. It was great to hear Cheryl Vallee speak about her views on town issues. She has a unique combination of life and professional experiences and a really positive outlook about how people can work together. One of my objectives in meeting with her was to encourage her to stay involved in the political process and she indicated she intended to do just that. For a whole host of reasons this wasn't the democrats' year and their candidates were relative unknowns on the local political scene but by the end of the campaign I had gained a great deal of respect for both Cheryl and Mike Bottillo. We can never hear enough voices on local issues and we need all the good ideas we can get. I look forward to seeing what the new majority can do and I wish them well but we also need a strong opposition that brings its own ideas and strategies to the table. Meeting with Cheryl Vallee helped me believe that's possible.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Dwight thanks for the story on Cheryl, seems like a genuine person to me, and that in and of itself says everything about a person. The fact that she is an independent, also points to more of what has been talked about for quite awhile around here a third party within town. I can honestly say if that reaction of hers was true, and you being the honest man I know you to be, I would have no problem supporting her in the future. Now look out I'm going to be called a traitor for saying this.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I initially reached out to both Cheryl and a Republican-backed candidate on 10/24/13 for an interview. I wanted to talk to both of them, as representatives of their party, hopefully getting some new information about their post-election (assuming they won) plans and getting it out to the readership before the vote. But Cheryl was busy campaigning, and I had my own stuff going on, so it didn't happen when I might have liked, but in the end I think it worked out for the best. As Jack and Don alluded to, it just wasn't in the cards for the Democratic party this year. Even Cheryl said she sensed it on election day. She described it as a gut-level sense she had that things were going Republican, almost like a "tsunami" wave of the public's desire to see change, if I remember it right. Was she the most qualified candidate on the ballot, 12:58? I don't think so, and I think I told her that. There were just too many important events in Town life from the last few years that she hadn't yet had a chance to learn about or digest. Her desire to learn though, coupled with her professional resume, her upbringing and her inner character will make her a very formidable candidate two years from now if she stays engaged, regardless of party affiliation. For those making plans for committee appointments, Cheryl would be an excellent choice in almost any capacity. She would gain valuable insight into how things really worked around here, and the committee would gain a smart, committed, independent-minded member with real world experience. Just a thought. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
  45. Tom Grant, the elderNovember 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM

    Dear Gadfly:

    Just in case you hadn't seen it, there's a very classy letter in today's Advertiser from Cheryl Vallee and Mike Bottillo. Kudos tor them. I hope they continue their participation in community discussions and activities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would have been classier, Tom, if they came over to the VFW (1 mile from the Elks Club where they were stationed) to congratulate Deb and Mary Ann in person and shake their hands. No one came. The Dems know that they have been out-classed in every way by their opponents and that they are going to have to raise the bar on their performance/behavior considerably if they are going to compete. For way too long they were allowed to take full advantage of the town and the residents who once trusted them to protect and serve honorably. Well, no more. It's finally over. Dear God, it's finally over. Hooray for us!!

      Delete
  46. I posted your comment, 5:45, because I wanted to respond to it. I've never met Mr. Bottillo, but I must tell you that, having met Cheryl Vallee, your criticism is unfair. She's intelligent and has some class and manners which I wish existed in a bunch of other folks involved in EG politics. First, the VFW was a party for the victors. Second, where else have you seen a loosing candidate visit a victory party?

    Please try to remember that this election was much like the last one - anybody but Dems. And I don't mean to criticize Deb and Mary Ann. The community has just had enough of the patronage, nepotism, dumb spending and tax increases. And we're waiting to see if the Reps can establish a business-like approach to governing or will we see more of the same with an "R" on it. I'd like to agree fully with the last half of your statement, but we'll have to see if it's really OVER.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I stand corrected on the losers visiting the winners issue. (I was thinking more of regional or state campaigns.) But Ann Taylor and Mike Cristo did visit Sue Mangold and Phil Malone a couple of years ago on election night to offer congratulations. I'm told that it was not a pleasant experience.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I remember it being reported as an unpleasant event at the time. We have some thugs and wisecrackers on both sides and therefore a personal visit is unwise. I wholeheartedly endorse the Advertiser as the classy and best approach. I also liked the thank you's in the advertiser

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, all you need is a couple of jerks and some booze.

      Delete
  49. Yes Ann and Mike did make a visit, which was classy, although I heard that it didn't go that well too. I think it is classy for the loser to pay the winners a visit, and I also think that if there are people making comments when visited that those people should be thrown under the bus by their respected party, or party boss.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Peanuts n CrackerJacksNovember 15, 2013 at 8:02 PM

    The political standard is a concession phone call or statement - not a personal visit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That may be Peanuts, but If it was me I would do a face to face, but I am old school like that. I still believe that my word is my word and a hand shake goes a long way.

      Delete
    2. Jim, what you advocate is classy, and it is what Mike and Ann did. It was met by some "un-classy" stuff like pushing and shoving. (I think that's what Anonymous above meant by "jerks and booze.") In any case the friends and neighbors did not behave themselves on that night.

      Delete
  51. One of the many things the Talks bloggers have never yet figured out is that is was never about the person; it was about the person's poor job performance. It was never about personalities; it was about BAD decision making that, supposedely, was to be in the best interests of the taxpayers of East Greenbush.

    So, I spoke highly of Dave Van Wormer. Do I like his politics? Probably not. But he is incontrovertibly the best of the last three DPW Commissioners. Please note: I never said Dave was perfect; just the best relative to the two previous commissioners.

    Dwight and Don are speaking highly of Cheryl Valle for these exact same reasons.

    I never cared who ran the town as long as it was run right - meaning good decisions, implemented legally and made solely in the best interests of the taxpayers of East Greenbush.

    It now remains to be seen if Supervisor Langley along with new board members DiMartino and Matters can do what so many previous administrations failed to do - actually represent the best interests of the people of East Greenbush.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Absolutely true, Ray. Some of us just don't care. All we want is a professionally run town: try hard not to violate the laws of the land. Be up front with what you're doing and be responsive to the residents. Don't squander taxpayer money. Be accountable for your actions. That's not too much to ask. Political labels? Meaningless. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
  53. Looks like everybody's waiting for the next shoe to drop. Even Talks has elevated the level of discourse temporarily. Maybe we'll have some indication about future directions tonight.

    ReplyDelete
  54. There is a true difference between a leader and a manager, anyone can be a manager, but not everyone can be a leader. A leader has earned the utmost respect of their subordinates and will work for the betterment of all, a true leader can make decisions which may not be popular but will be respected by their subordinates, because they are a true leader. We talk about cutting positions and overtime in two departments, the DPW and Police Department. Before we look to do this, let us begin to look at the root causes, are those two departments being run by managers or leaders? The town is set to move forward, in a positive direction, lets not look at democrat or republican, lets look at whether we have leaders or managers, look at root causes and solutions, what is going to BENEFIT the Town of East Greenbush.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I was asked two questions today. Forgot the answer to one-what is going into the Weathervane property? Never knew the answer to two-when are the senior apts going to be built off Miller Road?
    I would appreciate the answers. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not try the people and phone numbers on this link::

      http://www.eastgreenbush.org/departments/95-planning-department

      Delete
  56. anyone know what happened at last nights town board meeting?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Dear concerned Anonymous.....I have been assured that Dwight will have his usual concise and insightful summary up on his blog at some point. I'll link it from here as soon as it is available. Keep your eyes peeled.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Here's the link to Dwight's report on the Board meeting. There may be more::

    http://eastgreenbushdreams.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/the-5th-whereas-chapter-1-november-town-board-meeting/

    ReplyDelete
  59. Dwight's summary lives up to his usual high standards of reportage and commentary. There was a good deal of political theater at the meeting as the republican hierarchy appeared in greater numbers than normal and the democratic cheering section was nowhere to be found. The victorious candidates, Ms. DiMartino and Ms. Matters, attended as did Cheryl Vallee. I second Dwight's description of Cheryl Vallee's class in congratulating the victors. At one point after the meeting the three candidates met and had what seemed like a cordial discussion. In and of itself the image of the three of them engaged in a civil conversation offers great hope for a more cooperative, less contentious future in our local politics.

    The two highlights of the meeting were the exchange between the person from Hampton Manor and Phil Malone and the discussion surrounding the passage of the 2014 budget resolution. I'll wait to comment on the '5th Whereas' until after Dwight provides his summary because he's much better at establishing context than I am. The exchange with Phil Malone concerned his comments at the last board meeting about Rick Matters' issues with his job. Phil was in full campaign mode at that meeting and stretched the discussion on the new Code of Ethics into an attack on Rick. The person from Hampton Manor derided Phil for unseemly behavior and suggested that members of the town board should maintain a minimum sense of decorum when speaking from the podium in an official capacity. Phil's response was low key: he asked if the behavior he had described was okay with the questioner and said that he would place himself before the voters again in two years and they (we) can decide if we want him on the board. I understood the point the questioner was making but I felt like we should move on now that the election is over. I don't like kicking people when they're down and Phil was clearly exhausted from the campaign and its outcome. But the comments were made in a professional tone and had some validity so they were fair game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack,
      Would you kindly specify what you meant when you referred to "republican hierarchy" attending the meeting?
      Thank you.

      Delete
    2. 9:20: What I meant by 'republican hierarchy' was 'republican hierarchy.' All political organizations have a vertical orientation in both formal and informal terms. The more influential members of that vertical orientation may properly referred to as 'the hierarchy.' Some of them attended the meeting.

      Delete
    3. Oh, geez, Jack, boo hoo for Malone. He "was clearly exhausted from the campaign and its outcome" because he spent all his time being a poor sport and attacking people personally instead of addressing the real issues that the residents cared about. And why didn't he address the issues? Because he had no intentions of acknowledging them or fixing them, which is why Bottillo and Vallee lost. Mike and Cheryl can blame Malone for losing. With him behind the keyboard and those low end mailers, they had no chance of winning, no chance at all.

      Delete
  60. I, too, found Dwight's comments very informative and would like to thank him for his service to our town. Just one little thing, though... I think Ms. Mangold abstained from the Regeneron vote her company, Martin Electric, is the house electrician for Regeneron and I think she said "her company does work there" . So, she may or may not have made peace with avoiding votes on Hart Engineering projects. I think she avoided voting on the basis of a Martin Electric association.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Thank you, 8:33. You're probably right but, like Don, I couldn't really hear Sue's explanation. I looked at my agenda, saw Hart Engineering was involved, and made an assumption. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
  62. Here's the link to Dwight's continued summary of last Wednesday's Board meeting.

    http://eastgreenbushdreams.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/the-5th-whereas-the-meat-of-the-meeting/

    ReplyDelete
  63. Dear Gadfly,
    So, if I'm reading Dwight's summary correctly, in effect, Supervisor Langley and Councilperson Rick Matters voted to increase Town taxes for 2014. Is that your understanding?

    ReplyDelete
  64. As Yogi Berra once said: "it ain't over till it's over." Interesting set of circumstances though. It seems clear that Langley/Matters wanted it on the record that the outgoing majority put together a tax increase budget. Now the new majority has a tax increase to play with - MAYBE. Mary Ann and Deb promised "zero-base" budgeting, which rules out the old incremental methodology from past years. If they don't do something about the increase after the first of the year, there will be some real questions about whether we got the "same old, same old" in the last election. And Langley has to start building a record to run on in two years. Sitting still with the scenario (which was close to a shenanigan) from Wednesday night really won't work. There are lots of almost instant savings in the Post by Ray at the beginning of this thread. I hope the new majority takes a good long look at the list.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Anonymous 10:48: I read the situation the same way you do. The whole thing is very confusing so I will withhold final judgment until someone from the republican camp can clarify things. My understanding lines up with Dwight's in that Sue Mangold offered to approve the no tax increase tentative budget if Langley and Matters agreed to remove the 5th whereas from the resolution. They refused and I don't understand why. If the 5th whereas stood and the tentative budget was passed then the republicans would have no tax increase AND a paragraph that blamed the democrats for trying to have one. Why didn't they settle for no tax increase and no statement of blame? If their no tax increase budget was anything other than empty campaign posturing they would have immediately seized Sue's offer and spared the taxpayers another increase. Since they didn't I think it's fair to conclude that we now have a tax increase approved by Keith Langley and Rick Matters.. It's also a tax increase that Sue Mangold tried to save us from. If this is correct then it is a disturbing portent of what may lie ahead. But as I said, I am still confused and await final clarification because it's hard to believe Keith and Rick would approve a tax increase.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gotta remember that a lot of "strategy calls" (for lack of a better term) are being made by the Rep Chair. This is confusing enough to be right out of his playbook.

      Delete
    2. No,

      The tentative budget that the Democrats proposed and approved on a party line 3-2 vote is noe the budget for 2014. Ms. Mangold is being duplicitous and disingenuous in her grandstanding. You vote for the budget because it is the right thing to do or you do not vote for the budget because you believe it is the wrong thing to do. To offer to vote for a budget you rejected in a prior meeting if only you take some not so nice, but accurate language out is very disingenuous. Ms. Mangold lost by close to 2000 votes the past election, obviously she hasn't learned anything from that. As for Mr. Malone, his conduct the past election cycle says more about him then I can, so I won't even bother.

      Delete
  66. What I saw was Supervisor Langley, unable to understand the proposed amendments, looking to Rick Matters for his direction and Matters giving him an obvious negative head shake after which Mr. Langley voted no twice as instructed. This was interesting for two reasons:
    1. If the dems are able to keep the pressure on and act the role of a true political minority, the Town will be very well served. My guess is that they will do exactly that based on the good job the other night.
    2. Mr. Langley and company would help themselves if they prepare for meetings anticipating questions from their colleagues as well as the public. If a person on the dais is charged with cuing Langley's votes, they should find a more subtle way to do it.
    I am very much in favor of the two party system and I will never understand why it was not in evidence for the last 18 months.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Mr. Langley and Mr. Matters had a whole cadre of intelligent and experienced people ready and willing to be involved after the last election. They opted to not take advantage of that resource - choosing instead, the DeFruscio brain. I think Mr. Malone is interested in teaching the new majority how to use the minority condition to advantage. This is something which was offered two years ago, and rejected.

    The next two years are critical. Not much vision from some folks who I won't name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To Jack Conway 11/23 at 12:45 p.m.: keep in mind that even if Langley and Matters agreed to Mangold/Malone's amendments, there was no guarentee that Mangold/Malone would have still voted YES for the tentative (no tax increase) budget. After all, THEY made the case that THEY were STRONGLY IN SUPPORT of their tax increase premliminary budget when they approved it (so THEY own the tax increase), yet they were so quick to set it aside just to hold themselves blameless in the reso language. Bottom line is that they were talking out of both sides of their scheming mouths, which certainly could not be trusted by the minority. It's all political gamesmenship at the taxpayers expense but Malone and Mangold own the tax increase. Make no mistake about it.

      Delete
    2. @ 8:50 there was most certainly a guarentee from Mangold proclaimed for all to hear. there is no evidence of going back on her word from Mangold or any history voting trickery. she offered a good deal publicly and R. Matters refused it with Langley following his lead. if Langley and or Matters had any concerns they had the option, as theyalways have had, to voice their concerns. they refused the deal without expllaining their votes and we won't be fooled by your after the fact spin.

      Delete
  68. It's speculation since the republicans didn't take Sue Mangold up on her offer but I believe she was sincere. Maybe the election changed her mind since the issue of the tax increase figured prominently in the campaign and the voters made it abundantly clear they favored the no tax increase approach. More cynically, maybe she knew the dems budget was designed to feed the gravy train and she didn't want that option available to the new majority. But then maybe the new majority turned down her offer because they wanted the extra gravy for their own people. Unless someone from the republican camp can make sense of this for me (and I'm still open to that) it looks suspicious. I want to give the new board a chance to put its stamp on town government but it's just as important to ask the hard questions of them as it was when the democrats ran the town. This seemed like a chance to have no tax increase and it looks like they turned it down and opted for an increase.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Someone once remarked that, when it comes to goverance in East Greenbush we are all idiots governed by fools.

    That a terribly nasty comment but over the last 7 or 8 years and, as of the November town board meeting, that nasty assessment still seems valid.

    Here's a new flash to the current and future board members:

    No one givesa crap who is to blame, who takes credit for what or how we get there. Just get us on a path to fiscal reonsibility, intelligent decision making, accountability, and lower taxes.


    Can't you four knuckleheads figure that out????

    ReplyDelete
  70. 10:07 sue gave langley and matters the opportunity to rollback the preliminary budget to what they'd proposed and give the new majority to function with it pure and simple. now they are 'stuck' with the prelim budget. Langley owes sue a big thank you for saving him from what Dwight calls optimistic revenue estimates

    6:58 come january the vote cues will be much more subtle with rick matters in the audience so only the folks on the dais can see him

    8:50 sue offered to vote for the tent budget in front of everyone in the room with each amendment she offered



    ReplyDelete
  71. 3:57 Phil Malone called Langley's revenue estimates "pie-in-the-sky." I don't think "optimistic revenue estimates" is really so different, do you? And Sue, in her first attempt to amend the wording of the Resolution, wanted a phrase inserted about "conservative revenue estimates." I consolidated the wording of the two Democrats but left the concept intact. Let's keep it real. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
  72. Speculation is just that speculation. We will never know who did what or who voted which way and why unless they give us an explanation. To me the bottom line is that taxes should not be raised one bit around here until someone down there actually figures out what the hell is going on in this town.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Jim C

    And thanks to irresponsible accounting practices we cannot account for the last several years of tax and spend nonsense.

    Doubt it? Ask any town board member where the $500,000 of taxpayer money went for the baloney early retirement joke.

    That's just one example of many.

    And that waste of taxpayer money was approved by the entire town board - not just the majority.

    So, I tend to agree with 3:50 pm.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Can somebody please explain why Supervisor Langley and Councilperson Rick Matters both choose not to explain their negative votes on the Councilperson Mangold amendments?
    An explanation seems warranted since their negative votes have resulted in a Tax increase for East Greenbush taxpayers. I'm with Mr. Conway and Mr. C. and believe Town Residents would be most interested in hearing clarifying explanations from Supervisor Langley and Councilperson Matters at the next Town Board meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I really think a "wait and see" is in order. The Board can, after all, direct that spending caps be put in place in the various departments after the first of the year. And I believe that the budget can be modified in January.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. can they roll back the tax increase we're left with?

      Delete
  76. Dear 9:57 PM:
    That's great news. I hope your information is right on.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Little bit of fresh information on the audit timetables outlined at the last Town Board meeting: they've been pushed back by about a month in order to give the Supervisor, the Comptroller, and Wojeski time to make sure the 2010, 2011, and 2012 AUD's are correct in every respect before turning them over to the Toski auditors. Probably a good idea. The reports are years late anyway, another month isn't going to hurt anything if it means we get a clearer picture of where we're at. How do I know? The Supervisor told me. I went down there after work and he was gracious enough to sit with me for an hour, discussing a number of concerns I had. Rick Matters and Pete Stenson sat in as well, since I'd FOIL'ed a number of documents that required a little context to be appreciated. I also ran into Town Engineer Rich Benko, an old nemesis from the fierce "Thompson Way" and Planning Board battles, among others. Maybe we're both getting old but we actually had a pleasant exchange. Gotta give it to him, the round-a-bout at Mannix Rd. came out really, really nice. He was down there a lot, in all kinds of weather, flagging and directing traffic at times. What the hell is going on around here? Feel like I'm in the Truman Show. Not complaining, though. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom Grant, the elderNovember 26, 2013 at 4:19 PM

      Dear Dwight,

      Was it your sense that more time was needed,with all three AUD's, or just the 2012 AUD?

      I thought I had heard earlier this month at CFAC, just prior to the election, that the 2010 AUD was ready for submission and the 2011 AUD was nearly ready.


      Be well,

      Tom

      Delete
    2. Hey Tom, both. The impression I got was that Wojeski was nearly finished with all three years but, rather than call Toski right in to complete the audit, the administration wants time to sit down and digest what they should have known all along. What they've been submitting to the State and what they should have been submitting are two very different things, perhaps. I think the potential differences intrigue them (Supervisor, Comptroller, etc) and they want to be mentally prepared, perhaps? Just an impression. If I were in their shoes I would want the same thing, especially given the Organizational meeting coming up in January, appointments, hiring, etc. The AUD's could reveal nothing, or they could signal that some important changes are needed in the composition of Town Hall. Just a thought.

      Delete
    3. Tom Grant, the elderNovember 27, 2013 at 9:54 AM

      Thanks, Dwight:
      That makes sense. Reminds me somewhat of the Agatha Christie mysteries ... entertaining plot misdirections, interesting characters and surprise endings. Here's hoping there is a Miss Marple or Hercule Poirot to explain it all to the rest of us in the final Chapter.
      Happy Holidays to you and your family.
      Be well,
      Tom

      Delete
  78. Dear Dwight 9:57 PM,
    Was there any discussion regarding the 5th Whereas Tax Increase Issue?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not ask at the next Board meeting?

      Delete
    2. Questions to the Board are not allowed.....right? Or was that a policy of the previous majority, just articulated by the Supervisor?

      Delete
  79. The troubling thing for me is that Wojeski was the auditor during the bad old days. Toski was called in to do an independent, outside audit. The longer the inside audior "helps" with the books, the less independent and revealing the resulting audit will be.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Sorry, no, we didn't get that far. Dwight

    ReplyDelete
  81. Anonymous at 11:37PM..... There are some fundamental concepts which need to be made clear. The Town never had an independent audit until UHY did the audit for 2009. Prior to that time the Town did reports for the State Comptroller called "Annual Update Documents" (AUD's). These were done by Wojeski and have been constantly confused with Audits. They were not audits, but compilation reports. They were not "certified" in any respect and did not contain any opinions.

    There was a great confusion a few years back about this, and I remember clearly that some Board members and citizens thought that the AUD was an audit.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Exactly my point, Gadfly. Prior to 2009's UHY audit, the only people with any access to the books were the then Comptroller, long gone politicians, and WOJESKI! Now we are paying extra to Wojeski to "help" recreate the books as they existed way back then. If they are having any trouble, the Comptroller from the junk bond era is also in Town Hall to "help". My point is that we should demand the results of the Toski audit, warts and all. If hey cannot find a starting figure, then, so be it! That is the finding and publish that finding because we paid for it!
    I am well aware that pols tried to sell citizens with questions a bill of goods by telling us that the simple AUD was enough of an audit for us and I didn't buy it then any more than I buy it now. My point is that all we had in those days was the AUD which was unreliable and Wojeski was in charge of the AUD. The fact that Wojeski has been called in to tamper with the new audit when they are who is being audited is very troubling. They were called in because they supposed to be the experts on our books. I say we no longer require that type of expertise.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I clearly remember trying to explain to the Board at one point early on the difference between a certified audit and the old AUD which some persisted in calling an "audit." I said on several occasions that until independent certified audits are consistently done "you don't know what you don't know."

    Even with the compilation which Wojeski is now doing so that Toski can feel more comfortable in auditing 2010-2012, I'm betting that there will be some interesting comments in the Independent Auditors Report (Opinion) and in the Notes to the Financial. We are looking at a highly unusual situation here. I just hope folks don't forget how we got into this pickle in the first place and remember how not to get there again. Remember that UHY issued a "qualified" Opinion in their report, and the then majority persisted in saying that it was an "Unqualified" opinion. To folks who don't know the language of audits, this means little, but it means a lot. They ought to look it up in their Funk and Wagnalls.

    ReplyDelete
  84. The past is the past, not one of us can change that, I would think that we all are looking forward to what the future will bring. What are the plans for East Greenbush, to bring it into the new year in a positive. Are we looking at some change in leadership? New faces bring new change within some departments. Change brings cost savings, change brings progress. How about a new town hall, it is getting up there with one of the biggest eyesores on Columbia Turnpike. I wish we could see what the new administrations strategic plan is going to be. Open government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Columbia Tpke. is a big eyesore from the sewage plant to the Schodack town line....,But,do we need anymore cash siphoned from our wallets before we get the books balanced???
      A new car would certainly look nice in my driveway,BUT..I know I can't afford one.So,I'll do with the one I already own. Catch my drift?
      We could use some laws with some teeth (similar to Colonie) reguarding abandoned buildings,say if not occupied or have plans in the works after 6 months...tear them down at owners expense.This could certainly clean up this strech of 9&20.
      Just having a law reguarding trash dumpsters concealed from view would help. (Just look along side IHOP;The Tattoo Parlor;Grand Premier to name a few) How about ticketing the drivers of big waste trucks who drive 9&20 with the tops open on the compactors letting trash and debris blow out the top (check it out any morning between 4:00&7:00AM mon thru fri)
      Last but not least,How about a buiding dept. that actually enforces codes uniformly...not just for those who trying to do thing by the book.The people with the right connections can get away with just about anything...look at some houses on Phillips Rd.some under renovation for 2 years with an open trench across the front lawn,a foundation drain into the sewer on the weekend when inspectors are nowhere to be found ???
      How about some roadwork on 9&20...this could help.How about some professional roadwork on town roads we travel every day.

      P.S.Happy Thanksgiving

      A Fed-Up Taxpayer,
      Jim Buell Jr.

      Delete
    2. Its a problem when we do not even take pride in our own town hall, who has a better tax base, EG or Schodack? Who has a better town hall EG or Schodack. Have you driven Ridge Road lately? Look at all the garbage all over the place, look right across from the transfer station, what a mess....Do we have leaders or managers? How about a strategic plan....for 2014? We have town employee's, we can accomplish much of this without expense....LEADERS or managers?

      Delete
  85. Change brings an unnecessary tax increase?

    ReplyDelete
  86. I just wanted to wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving! We can debate and argue all we want but at the end of the day I'm thankful to live in East Greenbush and have so many good people as neighbors and friends. Our sons are grown and off into their own lives now but this was the perfect place to raise them and I'll never forget that. Thanks to the Gadfly for doing the work to keep this blog rocking.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Hi, Dwight and Bloggers. I really do appreciate getting an answer to the audit question at the November meeting and, moreover, I got the impression that the Supervisor and others at town hall are now attending to getting us a reliable audit. Wishing the new majority luck as they begin their work includes the hope that they will have some good solid numbers to work with. I will trust your judgment on the need for extra time.

    I do have a few observations that I hope would get into the mix as the audit results are digested.
    1. Do we have some kind of a commitment from Toski that they are comfortable with being "called in" during their busy tax season? Will we need to pay a premium for tax season services?
    2. Do we know what the window of opportunity is for the NYS Comptrollers financially stressed community program. Could we possibly apply for admittance by imploring the state based on our lack of an audit? It was a great decision to apply and I would hate to see the opportunity lost
    3. Is there role for community volunteers in the digesting stage of the AUDs?

    Happy Thanksgiving to all.

    ReplyDelete
  88. why do you folks ask questions here when there are no answers?

    ask Langley for a sit down langley like Dwight did and ask him yourself about 1 and 2 and why he's really delaying the audit which is different from an aud?

    answer to your 3 is likely a resounding no

    ask him about the fifth whereas while your at it.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Asking questions here does get answers. Some examples of positive results achieved by the blogging community are the Ethics Law passed in October and the commitment to future audits also from the October meeting. The answers are indirect but rewarding.
    Like 7:38 I admire Dwight for going into the office to see Keith and would like to commend Dwight for being so generous with his time and talent on behalf of our Town. Some people may be unable to visit TH during the day which is one of the reasons public meetings are scheduled in the evening. Public meetings are also our monthly opportunity to get our leaders on the public record which is the reason many people prefer blogging and public meetings to the personal visit.
    I, for one, was encouraged by Mr. Langley's answer to the audit question and, like Dwight, am willing to give the benefit of the doubt on a BRIEF delay.
    So, 7:38, I ask questions here because the blogging community does get answers.

    ReplyDelete
  90. 7:38 doesn't say he or she admires Dwight.

    Then I'll ask for 7:38. Can anyone here answer Eileen Grant's questions with authority? Or just conjecture?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @9:36 - ooops, my bad. It didn't occur to me that anyone would advocate for people to do something that they feel is not admirable. But. you live, you learn.

      If we get a January audit, I will consider that to be an answer with authority.

      Hope you are enjoying this beautiful day.

      Delete
  91. Folks have been asking about the audits for longer than I can remember. They’re within our grasp and the Supervisor does an arbitrary about face between Nov. 20th and 25th for no apparent reason and these same(?) folks appear to be content with it.

    What the hey?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe that some of the “hey” is this, 1:50PM….. I would not doubt at all that there are very serious problems with the Town’s financial records. Remember that when UHY did the audit for 2009, they issued a “qualified” opinion, yet before the report was released after the election some candidates and surrogates were spinning just the opposite message before the election.

      The most important indication that there are serious problems is the fact that OSC refused to include the “taxpayer complaints” in the scope of the recent audit, choosing rather to treat them in an appendix. And this after the material sat unacknowledged on a desk in OSC’s legal enforcement office for nine months. I know for a fact that some of the material represented in the “taxpayer complaints” was edited and altered by OSC – and a major allegation was therefore avoided. It is my opinion that, had the “taxpayer complaints” been included in the scope of the audit and subjected to Government Audit Standards, there would have been serious repercussions with political and legal implications.

      I agree with Jack (below) that the Town needs to get to the real numbers and financial condition. I know that Toski is a high quality accounting firm.

      Delete
    2. To my anony commenter who used the term "balderdash" related to the taxpayer complaints....before I print your comment, I think you should read the taxpayer complaints. It's about 140 pages of primary documents, most of which come from the Town's own records. Just trying to save your chin. I don't make assertions I can't support with paper. I'd be happy to get you a copy.

      Delete
  92. We need these audits to establish the correct numbers once and for all. We have a new majority taking over in January and knowing the precise financial condition of the town would really help them get off to a good start. We can spend a lot of time on the post mortem, questioning how things got so mixed up and why it's taken so long to get the accounting right but there will be time for that later. What is most critical in the short term is getting the new majority off and running with firm facts and policies that take into account the actual financial picture. In line with that, I also wouldn't mind if someone could systematically walk us through Eileen's questions so we'll have a context for knowing what the numbers mean when we get them.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Here's an interesting link to a similar problem in a neighboring municipality.

    http://blog.timesunion.com/saratogaseen/fiscal-fears-in-mechanicville/20048/

    ReplyDelete
  94. Gadfly,
    Would you know if the new majority has named the members of its transition team?

    ReplyDelete
  95. Replies
    1. Defruscio with a little input from Langley.

      Delete
  96. Sorry to hear that. I had hoped you and Dwight and a few other reformers would have been asked to be part of the new majority transition team.

    ReplyDelete
  97. According to a "highly placed" operative on Langley's team, "reformers" are perceived as in opposition to the new majority. This is not new. After the Supervisor was elected two years ago the word went out that distance was to be put between the EG reform movement and the Langley administration. I attribute this to Mr. DeFruscio and some of his pals.

    The fact is that the reform initiative in EG created the context in which it was possible to elect Langley, Matters and DeMartino. A couple of years ago, some of us associated with the "reform" initiative were breakfasted or dinnered with the message that we shouldn't criticize because the new administration wanted the same thing that we did. All this without any content as to what that "thing" was.

    So bottom line is that we will be watching for performance. If we see the same old stuff, only with an "R" brand on it, there will be criticism. If there is real improvement in governance, there will be support.

    In a real sense, they may not "get it."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seriously Gadfly??? you really think that you had anything to do with Langley's success 2 years ago or Matters and Demartino's this year.Tell me why. how many votes did you bring in ? how many signs did you post? How many petitions did you get signed? what did you do in support of any of the candidates? the best I saw from you this year was stating that Matters and Demartino were better than "the devil you know" .You remind me of the guy watching tv that thinks wearing his special hat will help his team win, Real work is what wins elections contemplating your navel from your living room laptop doesn't.

      Delete
  98. Langley and Defruscio are looking to place government lackeys. That's the truth; it is the very sad truth. Keith and Defruscio are not interested in placing the most qualified people in positions. Being one of the people that Keith and Defruscio have made "persona non grata", I can assure you, Keith and Defruscio have labeled anyone who is a "Reformer" as toxic.
    Keith and Defruscio should understand that after the Organization Meeting, if cronyism is present and patron jobs are awarded, many of us have NO PROBLEM writing letters to The Advertiser calling the two of them out for the hypocrisy of their actions.
    Defruscio should understand he was NOT elected. Keith should realize he is up for re-election in two years which gives Reformers two years to hammer him for his hypocrisy. Keith should remember what happened to McCabe when we hammered him with the facts and numbers for two years; Keith can be hammered for cronyism and patron jobs. If Defruscio receives an appointment, Keith will be putting the final nail in his own coffin.
    Reformers do watch and publicize the nonsense with which our tax dollars fund. It will be no different for Keith and Defruscio.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Same old stuff is coming. Many members want to dispose of Matt DeFrisi, an operative of the Dems and Phil. Frank DiMartion, for baby daughter, issued a stay of execution so Matt stays. Good Old East Greenbush. We will be typing about him in 15 talking about how he is sucking on the public teet. Frank D. wants a job but they are concerned as he has paper. We shall see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could you be more clear? The insider language is difficult to understand.

      Delete
  100. I would be surprised if Mary Ann put up with the kind of stuff you are alluding to. I would hope that she would want a clean house. Remember that the FBI is in the area looking for work.

    ReplyDelete
  101. From what I'm hearing, things are shaping up as I anticipated. We're gonna have a DeFrusico administration presided over by Mr. Langley. Hope it's not true. Maybe Keith should call me with information to the contrary.

    This Town deserves better than a trade of political machines. Can't we have something for the people's interest Chris?

    ReplyDelete
  102. To EG Gadfly 10:12 PM--AMEN to that!

    ReplyDelete
  103. Talks doesn't seem to want to publish my comment, so I'll put it here:

    Dear anonymous.....So the Town was better off with Presidents Maney and Malone? Gimme a break. The previous majority's management led to an accounting condition that is requiring two accounting firms to straighten out. They escaped some serious fall-out by the skin of their teeth. If DeFruscio is up to the same thing, the same fate awaits. All he will be preparing for is a third party citizens initiative to replace his operation.

    This Town needs to be freed once and for all from machine politics - whether it has an R or D label on it. We can't afford it anymore, and more and more people are realizing that. Local government doesn't exist to fund the retirements of a select few.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Town was way better with Maney and Malone. Defruscio is ignorant and hell bent on stealing everything and anything he can from ALL of us !
      His family will be placed in key positions to ensure maximum destruction. What you fail to realize is that YOU are in complete denial because you hate the Democrats. You fail to see whats directly in front of your face- a crooked, thieving, liar who intends to stop at nothing to exact his complete and total destruction of our infrastructure and finances to benefit himself and his select few friends. Watch the independent contracts that are awarded the next few months for starters.

      Did you forget or dismiss his antics from a few years back when he was DPW commissioner? The Martha Letter ? His numerous brushes with the law- posing as a Police Officer in Albany ? Really Don , get with the program. The previous majority inherited the Gause mess and it went downhill from there. Gause was much like Langley - no show and no common sense - no ability to lead the Town.

      Hang on to your pants Gadfly - you'll be screaming from the roof tops soon enough. Stop trying to blame the Dems for everything wrong and start looking very closely at whats about to happen right in front of your eyes.

      Delete
    2. So your argument is that the citizens of EG only have a choice between (shall we say) "less than adequate" leadership?? If your characterization of Mr. DeFruscio is true, he'll be out the door under his own steam. And rightly so.

      Delete
  104. You say 'The previous majority's management led to an accounting condition that is requiring two accounting firms to straighten out.'

    Who appointed the comptroller in 2010? Cristo Danaher and Matters!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we'll find that the origins of the difficulties were with the interfund borrowing which began way before 2010.

      Delete
  105. Anonymous 6:30: The Comptroller works for the Town Board, not the Supervisor, so financial decisions made under anyone's tenure as Comptroller are the fiduciary responsibility of the Board. If you have been paying attention to the fiasco over the bottom line, the numbers that are causing most of the trouble stem from the inability to figure out 2009. Without sound numbers from 2009 the following years lack a firm basis but say this about the last couple of years - the debt doesn't seem to have gotten worse. Of course, we won't really know until all of the audits are done but during Jim Breig's tenure as Comptroller we were able to at least get accurate figures for the decisions being made. Two things are clear to me from all of this: (1) Jim Breig did a good job for the town; and (2) the five member board of Langley, Matters, Mangold, O'Brien and Malone was the best combination we've had in a while. But since Ginny and Rick Matters were retiring from the Board that group had finished it's work. Now we need to get behind the new five-person combination and wish them well, especially if they can start with a clear picture of our fiscal condition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only if the Comptroller keeps the Town Board and the Supervisor aware of what is going on.

      Remember, McCabe was demonized on blogs as the CFO of the Town.

      FYI, Town Law includes among the duties of the Supervisor to "Keep the town board informed generally concerning town affairs and of the financial condition and future needs of the town and make such recommendations as may seem to him desirable."

      Delete
    2. Couldn't agree more Jack. There's just one problem - Defruscio and his need to be involved in every decision made. He acts like he has authority on decision making and Langley plays right along.

      I want you to mark this down - todays date and time and remember this phrase: improper practice lawsuit.


      Delete
    3. With DeFruscio and Langley in charge, a series of improper practice lawsuits is inevitable. Hope the DeFruscio Langley budget has plenty of money set aside for legal fees and judgements.

      Delete
  106. Can anyone tell me why on earth Chrissie DeFruscio should be in a closed door meeting with Langley, Lavin M.Hart and the town Labor atty? They obviously were discussing town business. Isn't this illegal? Its definately unethical. This is crazy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Langley's a "deer in the headlights" when it come to policy stuff and needs some direction.

      Delete
    2. The evidence is now overwhelming. Defruscio is the new "anti-Christ" in East Greenbush.
      Taxes are surely going up and services will most definately go down.
      Remember - YOU voted for this !

      Delete
    3. Not to worry 4:55. Langley is quite happy being DeFrruscio's mini-me.

      Delete
  107. Langley's getting direction on "policy stuff" from DeFruscio? Heaven help the taxpayers.

    ReplyDelete
  108. I've not seen any postings so maybe they're keeping everyone

    ReplyDelete
  109. They were probably in a meeting discussing how to trim the fat of the police department. I for one think is it a great thing a business minded citizen is in their on our behalf. That of course, is if this even happened. DVW might be stirring the pot.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Why shouldn't Langley include defruscio? Langley owes him big time. Defruscio got him and his new town board elected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because DeFrusicio WASN'T elected. Once elected, a public official owes allegiance and responsibility to a much larger constituency - namely all the people. This is the classic mistake that you machine people consistently make. You talk like you never took a Civics class in High School.

      Delete
  111. Gadfly the civics lesson needs to be taken by you. At every level of Government leaders surround themselves with trusted advisors political and otherwise. You assert that the supervisor can't work with Defrusicio because he is not an elected official that is just patently false. You also assume that based on associations the supervisor has shifted his allegiance away from the town and toward a political machine yet offer nothing but your assertion as evidence, wrong again. The one thing you have correct is the supervisor owes his allegiance to a much larger constituency what you fail to realize is you are not that large a part of that constituency. You are one person, the supervisor must look out for the whole town. one day you might actually understand what being the leader of a municipality means, right now it is beyond evident that you have no idea what that entails.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Chris (for the second time) for your skewed analysis of what belongs in politics. The Supervisor has yet to get out of the truck and work for all the people.

      Delete
  112. I seen Mr. Magoo's Ghost today ,what a sight for sore eyes . He was seen walking in to a front door of a church shortly after he was staggering out the back door of a bar . This has to be the worst thing I have ever seen . This is the only town in NEW YORK where you can pray ,play lotto, and get drunk , all in the same TAX exempt building . And guess what folks ? the town of EG sends down a truck to pick up there trash . GUESS THE BAR ? and GUESS the owner ? why you ask ! guess and I will tell you ,has to do with your money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lemme guess: the little OTB/Manor House plaza at 6 Ridge Rd., tax map #155.13-21-18.1, owned by Faith and Love Fellowship, of Rensselaer. I don't know who Mr. Magoo is but I guess that doesn't matter so much as the money angle. So if I'm right, you, like Smeagol playing guessing games with Frodo in the cave, must now tell us about the money and the free trash collection. But if I'm right, the tax roll shows that property is in fact taxed, with an assessed value of $176,300. Seems low for a mini-strip mall with gambling and alcohol involved, but I'm not an assessor. Your turn, Smeagol. Dwight

      Delete
    2. If you take the time to look, or better yet call and ask, you would see that 155.13-21-18.1/1 is the bar which has a taxable value of $176,300. 155.13-21-18.1/2 is the thrift store and church which have a tax exempt value of $455,000 for a total building value of $631,300. Pretty good value for that location.

      Delete