County Letter

8/6/2019 County Letter

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/county-letter 1/7



Montgomery County

Board of Supervisors 20 Park St., PO Box 1500

Fonda, NY f2068-1500ffice (518) 853-4304

Fax (518) 853-8220

During negotiations regarding the Extension, the City of Amsterdam requested a greater portion of theCounty Sales Tax Revenue prior to approving the extension of water and sewer services to the parkExtension. Upon reaching a consensus, the County of Board of Supervisors in April 2009 approved anew Sales Tax agreement throughout the County in order to 'foster economic growth, inter-iunicipalcooperation and long-term stability". This agreement went into effect in the third quarter of 2009 whenthe City of Amsterdam received their first sales tax payment under these new terms.

Since this iime, the City has received an additional $833,131.22 in sales tax revenue as compared to theamount they would have received under the prior distribution formula before the good faith negotiationstook place. This figure does not take into account the additional sales tax revenues that will be received

directly from the Towns of Amsterdam and Florida based upon separately negotiated agreementsbetween the two towns and the City.

The parties involved entered into the aforementioned agreements with the full understanding thatcontinued economic growth would lead to future sustainability of the County and City. Furthermore,such future cooperative agreements, based on mutual trust and understanding, will be required forcontinued growth. The parties recognize the value of both water and land in the efforts toward realizinggrowth in the tax base and job creation. In fact, it is this recognition and compromise that call for theprovisions in the agreements to charge outside users one and half times the amount of that charged toinside users. Should the City decide to continue fbrward with the course of action laid out in thisbudget, one would have to question whether any additional mutually beneficial agreements, such as the

agreements discussed in this letter will ever come to fruition again.

The City, we believe, wants to position itself as a business friendly, attractive place to work and live, yettakes actions portraying the exact opposite message, and it is with this that we ask that you reconsideryour increase in water rates and consider the tough choices that you were elected by the people to makeand not hinder the future prosperity of this community we all call home.

Sincerely,

-f/,- |fl",/t,--Thornas L. Quackenbush, Chainnan

Montgomery County Board of Supervisors

Cc: Montgomery County Board of Supervisors

Heather Reynicke, City ComptrollerSusan Alibozek, City ClerkMedia

www.co.montgomery. ny. us



'::' , i'.':' {," {.}i::'tlt I I .,"f

'}.'tr:

1.. ri 1 i '!. iii{,; lll';} t"f'

! t-Jrrrri.i) nir') I i

M*y S, 3*1:

Mr. Thcn"ras Queckenbush, fhairmanM*ntErnnery e*unty ffi*ard *f Supervirors?fi F*nk $t., P* Ssx L5S*F*nda, New Ysrk E3*SS-1$SS

Dear thairman Quaekcnb*sh :

I have re*d y*r*r ietter *f l4*y 4, 2011" and i* appears thnt y*u

h*ve several fundamentai misesnc*ptions regarding taxes cnd the

best interests *f th* tity *f Amsterdam.

First, sc|:**l *nd r*unty tax*s arE levisd at a high*r rate than city

taxes nnd hav* ir:creased at a higher rfit€ *ver the last *ecad*. I

have *ncl*sed n $pre*d$he*t det*iiing the tax rates irnpcsed *ncity r*slder:ts from thc fiscai year 3*0*-20*1 t* the present day,

s* that y*rr m*y verify this fundamentel truth, {"}sing e$tirfiates of

th* scho*! tax r*te end city tax rate for ?*33-?fi1^?' the e*mulativeiner*ase fr*m ?*S*-?#*1 is 49"5s/* fcr the schscl tax rate, 38"93CI/o

for the **unty tex rete and ?6"41"s/c for the city tax rate. These

high i*cr*ases from the c*xr:ty *nd sch**l taxes are detriment*l t*pr*psrty v*lrJes *n*l h*ve a tnemend*gs ?rfipagt *n eity taxpay*rs-

$*c*nd, sn€ *f the primary $tratesies fotrlawed by the ei$ *f&rr"lst*rdam is tfr earn rev€Flu* fr*rn the saln *f w*t*r" Thi* g*ai

har *nj*ycd icng standing sLrPSOrt frcm city rssid*fits, If ws w*r*n*t t* r*i$* the weter rstc, City r€sidsnts w*ul* *fi!-i"l n0 benefit

fr*n'l the $alfr *f waf*r. The r*vsnu* would merely c*Ver *Xper"1$e$.

,{ss*m!nE w* sh*uld *perete #*\r*rilffient like a businesE wh**pr*ctical" why wculd ws *h**se t* *nrn nothing fr*m the s*le *f*ur res*ure€$? Cle*rly, f*r city resid€fits t* beneflt frsm the 5*l€ *fwater, this is th* **ly strntegy thnt n"lak*s s*ns*. An increas* in

the weter r*t* pn*du**s revqfiue at e IOW*p c*st t* city t*xpnyers

th*n an incrs*s* in the city Fr*perty tax rate. Th* }s/e tap that

w*s S'eC*d tn t*is rat€ had the unforesasn negfitiv€ **r:seqil*ilc**f destroyinE th* clty's ebility t* sell its watsr arld *crn enything

from th* ssl*. fver: if, th* *ity budg*t b*ard elects to reduce

g*n*rfi: fur:d expendit*res the water rate shCIt:td stilt be incremsed

*s prapss*du h*weve r, ihe city property tax r*te 5h*uld th*n be

{*1, a$ that w*uld provide th* maxirnum t*x rellef f*r rityresid*r':ts"

i r, r .i1:!t3i{'iit:tl}lllr,llit!

iji ii ll- llil l ),, r;'ilii-t'.i:l-l;iir',]

i, i r !l' iaii11l,r "i r|i!r' tllili:,i21r,1



Tlrird, th* pr"*p*s** il**r f** incres** is n*t pcrticulnrty unique in

magnitxde. Ifl the *s*r f** ral*s are *na*t*d *s pr*p*sed, theeffect ** a sir":61*-f*mily resid*nce is an inereese sf $58"25 perycar in ilser fees. 3n ?*03-S4 thn t*tal f**s iner*ased w*s

$76"**,in 3fi*4-5 t*tal fecs iner**scd $57.S* snd in ;***-g tstal fe*sdecremsed $e"3$. While nny incre*se in taxes *r f*es is

sigrrif!*ant whcn *ur- r*si**nts arre *ire*dy highly taxed, it is

imp*rtant to remer"r"rb*r th*f, thiu f** increase has the l*nst impnclnn city residents *f any *th*r t*x *r f** du* tn its epplicability t* a

hr**d*r number of us*rs"

Fourth, the fsct*rs tlrnt drive tax ln*re*ses in the elty, scho*ldistrict, and the cmunty *r* n*t "# ssfififfi;edpaffern pf irlcress*dsp**#ingl end decre*sfnE rtrvst?{J#sr - es you essett in your letter.The fnetsrs thnt ar* cnLlsit'?g th* budg*t shsrtfe lls s{:ross the stste

*r* incr**sed r*tir*nrent **ntribxtions, reduced sales tax r*v*nue*nd reduc*d st*le aid. All cf tF:*s* fact*rs are bey*nd lccai e*ntr*|.*nly stat* g*\r*r*ment can flx this" As bng e$ stat€ g*v*rr::"':r*nt

sc*ks tn trensf*r **sts t* t*eal Sov*rnment by cutting *id and

in:pcsing *nfund*d mnndmtes the only result wlll be higher t*xesand fcwen x*rvic*s"

Fiflh, y#u s*em t* f**i thmt thE lnereas*d s*les t*x revcnue paid t*the city is in som* w*y r":r-rf*ir" This is rr*t true. Aft*r years of heing

underp*id, *ity taxpayers are finally g*tting * fsFr share sf sales

tax rcv*nLies. Th* sh*r* thre city *ow r*esives is r**ghly equal t*

tt"le city'* Ehare of ***r:typcpulati*n.

5ixth, the *ity nnd r"r'ly *dministr*ti*n frr€ csmmitt*d to econ*mlegr*wth and tn prnvi*ir"rg ti:e infrnstructulne for that grnwth"

I'J*c*ssary infrnstruetur* g**s b*y*nd water and sewer iin*s; itineludes polic* elnd fire pr*t*eti*rr. Cuts that would cl*se l**r*v*nlje sh*rtfetl witi-rryut a wat*r rat* increase wnuld damcge tlre

effectiv*t"r*ss *f these departm*nts. }""{iEh crime and high fir*insurancs rnt*s have a c*st t* resldenls that cannot be ign*r*d.

S*v*plth, th* **r.rnty {sr} easiiy corrert a *ignifica*t nrea *f unfnlrtr*atment rcgarding its practic* *f p*ying *ut r*ed nrnintenance

fees. turr*ntly th* **unty pnys **t significont f**s to nll of th*vnni*ils t*wns tm rnairltain "c*urrtyu' l**ds. These r*ads are n*trenlly e*ilnty rond*" Th*y are tcwn r**ds, The eftect of this is th*tcounty t*xs$ are appNied tc maintaS* r*nds th*t sh*utd be th*resp*1":slbility *f the t*wn ln which they *r* l**st*d" Since county

r**ds are practic*lly r":**-*xistent in th* city, the net *ffect is th*tcity taxpayers subsidiue thes* tow* r*eds. This practice shouldf6ace

t t1;tl,t,.



It is my duty as Mayor t* da whnt is best for the resid*nt* sf theclty as a whole. That means protecting the taxpayer's financialinterests even when those interests are not well understosd by thepublic at larg*. i h*pe that this l*tter sheds light

onaur pnsitie;r

and that you better understand the city's motivations in thisdifficutt economic period.

I have faith that the City and County will overcCIme this time ofdifficulty and, tcgether, wili pr-osper in the future.

i-i' ,r, SinEergly,

t, :l v.* i*$tflrdtlnr fit,*qls

r,.i ".lf;-llt.r l.ili i ir: iit-tt$f-!iri' I

ttaw;&r}/*rt*--*Ann M. Thene

Mayor

CC; *ouncili{*athe,r" Reynicke, City Contr*l ler$*san Alib*zek, City CterkMedie



Chart of Tax Rates, Fees, Exemptions, Equalization Rates

City ofAmsterdam

Charl of Tax Rates and Fees % change from 00/01 to 2011112 lfrom O1l02 to 2004 i iO+,o ZO1O lfiane

ZUUJiZUg+iZUU'-iaidi--, --666i i 66i ::":+ I

i'ty it4t t1.E4i 12.4t

l0 i 13.021 13.8t'.i653-ra 5i

"ii:"2i:

13.64'i6.3i'ai4

13.96i 13.69i 13.49

{O.gil..- 1r,.0ti 16.60'it{6i""'ai dad" ";i-i

,67IdAt $15s.004 iz27'Et l , 7.s3"/"i6.03n/.' $255.0ii' """32.5rr;:""""'-'i--"i:i0%'--':it.'s-6%

^e4st/"i5do45 1i tsi)": - -"-- | -i5iiib7" --C:idal"

tYl3t_-

rlGi;iiinG;

200.23i 200.53 i 223.7A173 a4 i 17239 i 171 35

53.15i 54.32i 56.04

2?0.ddi'-'-2i116:5<ti-'-'zllrt:rti,i7 ati | - - rla' 1i r "'ai8na

59.461 5l.l9t 5l.4lt 56.491 59.6t-_-i

302.63 318.37 i 313.77 | 331.54 352.81

261 52 260 9a: 251 a1i 266 52 267 1

40.39% $910.45. 2O.5O%t i 9.46%, 2.34% 2.14%

ianlaton ror,ori ror.oJi-;t876_f - --eii r;l- _ ---7nH el193.C4 t99.6/i 205.36i 2t1.33. 2lt.!'Talats'""1iatt)i 7zi-!i7i -80iias- -

847!__ - -taat;f

fser tue chandes 1 7 61 i 242( 76 ao r 5t titr ,aa\jj

it a, 2111-i ' ' -Brit'- 'i8 ar- '--'r8 air' -' '-58 i5 r

Charts of ExemDtions

iTAR

,1.5i6i-6- Ti?t

.:?r.p_ge__i._:!9.e!e4t 060 i 36 aao

20.000 i 3 630/.40070 i a65o/"

Senior Citizs - RPTL sedion 457

e!!nder

,0ei,001

Y,"_':-YY9.000 45'l( 40

. l-u-ru.Yi.Under"iihiiat $ii"ii

-5-0

45

"i'-('7

I

0bT

a;;0-o-d ,59 45

tatti00

1o

3,200

3;70i3,604

1,0b04,&o15oia qoo

4,f1;i

\l4,S

i-

35

i5

?1i0

5,OOO

a 8bh20

LOA'S. RAR'S and Eoualization Rates 10161'Tentative or Preliminary)

PS, released I

c MD/Pbc66 and Pbceduregchadof Tax Rat6 Fees.xls



CITY OF AMSTERDAMHEATHER REYNICKECITY CONTROLLER

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

ApnJ,26,201,1

Attention: Budget Revrew Committee

Re: Fund Balance

As the aucdon has now been completed and mostly finaLzed, the impact to the fund balancehas been determined. This rmpact is detrimental.

Losses on property taxes are recorded after the transfer of propetty is made (when

auction/saie is completed and corresponding Deed ftansfers are filed). After reconcjliation

recently completed; it has been determined that $856,663.00 is need to balance this

transacdon. As always done, the loss is recotded against the allowance for uncollectible

accounts, vzhich in this case does not have enough futditg. Therefore, there must be an

appropdation made in the dollar amount stated above. In the future, with more timeiy and

regular in-rem foreclosures, I do not anticipate this to occur agun. I would recommend that

the Common Council create stipulations before the next auction is performed (ie: minimum

bidmg).

This transacd.on, coupled with fund balance akeady used to balance this current year's

budget and anticipated overtime and retroactive payments made teduces the fund balance to

approximately $ 600,000.

As previously stated, the fund balance is needed to effecuvely operate city government.

Fund balance shouid not be used to balance an operating budget, as previously noted

numerous times. A plan to grow and increase fund balance needs to be put into place to

maintain our current bond rating. If this is not done, the City will be issuing debt at much

higher rates ffran it cwrendy Procutes.

Please contact me with any questions you may have. Thank you.

61 CHURCI{ STREET .

PHONE,: (s18) 841

AMSTERDAM/NEW YORK' i2O1O

-4332' FAX: (518) 841-4338

Heaiher Reynicke

Documents

County Letter