Quoted from 47

Cicero,
  Anyway, as far as grant money goes, I will offer my opinion now so you can quote me correctly   I have a love/hate feeling about them, mostly hate.  As a taxpayer, I know that we are all paying for the grant from whomever for whatever purpose it is for.  As Supervisor, I know we are all paying for the grant from whomever for whatever purpose it is for, but do I turn down a grant?  For example, we (town) got a grant from the county for restrooms at the park, should I have said thanks but no thanks?  Maybe, but I couldn't do it.  The whole thing is relative, whether the grant is from the federal gov't, state, or local.  We are all paying for it as taxpayers.  

You're comparing apples to oranges when you compare Mrs. Lazzari's grant which was invested into her personal property, and you as a town official accepting a grant to invest into a public facility like a park.  Everybody in your town can use the restrooms at the park.  You used public funds and invested it into a public park.  I still have trouble seeing how a county legislator using public funds to fix up her personal "historical' property benefits me as a county taxpayer.

As for apologizing for the mudslinging comment......there is no need....that's all part of the fun.

Quoted from CICERO

You're comparing apples to oranges when you compare Mrs. Lazzari's grant which was invested into her personal property, and you as a town official accepting a grant to invest into a public facility like a park.  Everybody in your town can use the restrooms at the park.  You used public funds and invested it into a public park.  I still have trouble seeing how a county legislator using public funds to fix up her personal "historical' property benefits me as a county taxpayer.

As for apologizing for the mudslinging comment......there is no need....that's all part of the fun.

Let me know if this helps at all, Cicero.

I do believe that Mrs. Lazzari actually stated right at that meeting that she was using the money (along with 3x that amount of money out of her own pocket) to help to rehab the barn.  This is something that had been going on for quite a while.  She employed others in the county while she was working on this renovation, hence adding to the tax base.  Also, each year, in fact, the upcoming weekend, I believe, many people are drawn into the county to come and look at historical sites, specifically barns, I believe, but I may be incorrect.  If someone has that meeting, I believe that she did say something about it, if you could check it.  This barn, along with other places throughout the county is a good size pull for bringing people in from outside the county to tour around and hopefully to spend some money in the county while they are visiting.  Hence, any of the businesses that receive business from these people that come on these tours is not only helping the bottom line of the businesses that they come into, but it's also adding to the amount of sales tax brought in for the county (and the Metroplex).  At the same time, I'm sure that the value of this property has increased to at least some amount to help balance the average home value in the county (or to at least raise hers) to help take a larger percentage (and yes, I know it's probably not 1%, but whose property is?), or probably better to say part, piece, etc. of the amount of school, town and county taxes that are applied to her land versus others.

I can't offer an opinion on the grant she got. I don't know where it came from or anything else about it.  I do know she has tours of the barn.  There is another Dutch Barn in Onesquetha owned by the Touhey family. I wonder if they got grants?  The house I grew up in was on the National Registry of Historic Homes, I remember my father saying grant money was available for certain restoration projects.  That was until he put vinyl siding on it.  A sixteen room farmhouse was cumbersome to paint after a while.

Mudslinging.....Thats all part of the fun??? Thats my problem, I take this stuff WAY too seriously, I guess.

Just passionate.....

BigK,

Are you suggesting that pork barrel money like the money that is given away in the form of grants for "historical" restorartion is a proper use of tax dollars??  Then I guess that the money Metroplex throws around is also good use for our tax dollar.....Using your logic of course....Proctors brings people into the county, it generates sales tax, it increases the value of the property.  The whole city of Schenectady is subsidized by the taxpayer....and again, using your logic, it's money well spent because it does do those things you say....Brings people to the county, generates sales tax, and increases the value of the property.  But is it that the long term answer??

Me, as a more conservative person,(I refuse to call myself a republican) I believe that you can accomplish those same things(generate sales tax, increase value, ect.), by lowering taxes, and offering tax incentive for things like the restoration of historical property, or facade restoration.  That way we keep the money out of the hands of the bureaucrats and stop allowing them to spend the money how they see fit.  Instead let the individual residents of Schenectady County spend the money how they want.

I have yet to hear any of these county republicans offer up any ideas on how to we can get our tax money out of the hands of these Bureaucrats.  And I believe that the reason is because they(republicans) want to get their hands on the county treasury themselves.

BigK, your prior post sounds so unrepublican.  This blind allegence with anybody who has a (R) next to their name has got to stop.  I'm sure that Mrs. Lazzari, Mr. Santabarbara, Mr. Guidarelli, and Mr. Shurada are all good people.....But their ideology doesn't match up with what I believe republicans stand for. Mainly,,, Lower taxes, and smaller government.

Quoted Text

I have yet to hear any of these county republicans offer up any ideas on how to we can get our tax money out of the hands of these Bureaucrats.  And I believe that the reason is because they(republicans) want to get their hands on the county treasury themselves.

They all eat at the same trough.....

....the ideology that money follows money is true....

.....however, with the 'free markets'/capitalism/globalism---- we can only 'keep it in the family' for so long before moths and rust get at it......

bottom line----which plan will work,,,,,the best laid plans of mice and men and discernment is not exercised......

I think I agree with part of what Cicero is saying.  If the funds did not exist via grants, Metroplex, member item money etc., the benefits to the project owner could be captured through tax incentives or even reductions until the cost is recovered.  The funds need to be kept away from bureaucrats, It seems for some reason ego's come into play and one upmanship when spending other peoples money.  The higher the level of government the less important it seems how much they spend.  But another thought, the American public has to stop expecting the government to take care of their needs,  a double edge sword that takes on a life of its own and just doesn't stop growing.  Next thing you know you have a huge amount of $$ in the hands of a few doling out to the many.  The biggest problem with all those $$ in the hands of a few is accountability.  They spend the $$ and blame it on someone else, ie: state mandates, employee benefits, etc. I don't agree with all the projects but I think there is also a use for Metroplex, but it truly needs to be a seperate entity from the government.  

It could appear exactly as you (cicero) preceive both the dems and reps. It could appear that the reps desire the control of the bucks. To be in charge. To make the major decisons. But if they did, one would think that they would be running a much  more pro-active campaign. One would think that they would endorse stronger candidates. One would think that they would have a vision, a plan, a blue print for their platform. But they haven't.

So perhaps Cicero, you perception may be incorrect. Cause if the reps really wanted to make a difference, change the status quo and truly be in control of this little empire, they would have pulled out all of the stops in this election and perhaps even tried to change the GOP leadership who is at the helm, that clearly is inadequate at best. But they haven't.

Make no mistake, the reps surely do want to be in control.  Its human nature. Why all the stops haven't been pulled, I don't know.  I have to assume it goes back to the fact that people don't want to get involved.  They don't have the time, can't make a difference etc.  I also think it is cyclic. It is the dems turn now. I wonder what would happen if the Conservatives or Independence were the majority?  I think regardless of the majority the ego comes into play.  After the last year or so with this majority, my suggestion is anything but dem.....lets try a legislature of seven dems, seven reps, and one resident of the county not registered to even vote.

Here's some food for thought, I read somewhere that when Paul Tonko left he had ten million $$ in member item money earmarked for projects.  I'm certain, knowing Paul, they were for worthy causes.  My point is thats ten million of our tax $$ to one man, in one small district in upstate NY.  Now add member item money controlled by my favorite Senator....Farley.  Add to that the local county government, Metroplex.  That is a ton of money in the hands of politicians.  Again the double edge sword, we wouldn't have our sewer districts if if wasn't for all of the above.  Oh and I forgot Mike McNulty, he helped us out too.  So what is the answer?  What should the plan be?  You have all these entities handing out money and they need to be paid via our tax dollars in order to hand it out.

Quoted Text

Are you suggesting that pork barrel money like the money that is given away in the form of grants for "historical" restorartion is a proper use of tax dollars??

If it would create more money brought in through taxes than the amount that is going out, I would wholly support grants of any type.  I guess the true question is the old cost benefit analysis.  Does / Did the county make the money back that they have given?  Well, in the case of Ms. Lazzari, it was a one time thing.  

Quoted Text

Proctors brings people into the county, it generates sales tax, it increases the value of the property.

Again, does Proctors bring in enough taxes to cover what they are being given.  Did Proctors bringin land tax, sales tax, etc. in an amount greater than $165,000 this year?  Will they bring in more that $200,000 next year and each year in perpetuity?

Quoted Text

I believe that you can accomplish those same things(generate sales tax, increase value, ect.), by lowering taxes, and offering tax incentive for things like the restoration of historical property, or facade restoration.

I wholly agree with this, and I have actually spoken out about this in the recent past, both in this forum and out in public, whether to other residents or to the Town and County Councils.  If you put money back into the hands of the people and let them decide where the money is being spent, then the market will decide what should stay and what should go.  

It seems to me that if Proctors has needed money from the County for the past 30 years or so (I don't know when these taxes actually started), then if they were a stand-alone business (which I thought they really should be), thye would have closed up at least a decade (or maybe 2) ago.  If you let the free market decide what's going to happen, THAT'S how you get successful businesses, but you have the Metroplex taking additional money from residents and visitors to the county as well as this wonderful bed tax that makes sure that Proctors (and other "arts and entertainment" groups throughout the county) get money each year.  

If the residents and visitors to this county really wanted these projects to stay afloat, don't you think they would be willing to throw their support behind them and help to raise the funds or bring in the business that would be needed to have enough to support their business and not go to the government trough?

Quoted Text

That way we keep the money out of the hands of the bureaucrats and stop allowing them to spend the money how they see fit.  Instead let the individual residents of Schenectady County spend the money how they want.

I agree.  The businesses and the people need to keep this money and be able to fix things as they see fit.  Think of this.  For every hotel room that is booked (and I have no clue what hotel prices are like nowadays in the county, I stay at home when I'm in the county, so I'll just go with a shot in the dark for a price on a hotel room), let's say that the going price for a hotel room, before taxes, is $85.  Now, you add on state and county sales tax (8%) and that's another $6.80.  At the same time, Metroplex dips in (.25%), $.2125.  Then, we have the Bed Tax, (which I believe is another 4%), at $3.40.
That's a total of taxes in the amount of $10.4125, probably rounded down to $10.41.  

I think the main question that really needs to be asked when looking at these grants is has the county made back the money in other ways.  Well, I don't know when Ms. Lazzari's grant was from and I can't honestly tell you if the county made back the money.  As far as a project like Proctors, though, I must say that if we've been giving them money for years and years on end and now they just had a new law added to the books to give them a gift of $600,000+ this year and $200,000 / year in perpetuity, then tell me, is the county ever making back this money?  No, this is money that the county is raising to put into Proctors with nothing to show in return.  IF there comes a time where Proctors doesn't need this money anymore and they are in fact putting the money back into the system, then AND ONLY THEN, are these grants that they have been given a good deal...AFTER THEY PAY BACK EVERYTHING THEY'VE ALREADY RECEIVED.

Quoted Text

If you put money back into the hands of the people and let them decide where the money is being spent, then the market will decide what should stay and what should go.  

Dont forget how fickle we are---as to our likes/dislikes, comfort/discomfort, simple/complex cost etc....our leaders are also called planners/framers....if the market were totally allowed to just be free wheelin' with just us and our wallets and that was all that affected planning, there would be dollars stores, mcdonalds,walmart and the like, as far as the eye can see......

But, let me ask this----artsy-fartsy brings it's own issues, it just looks nicer,,,,,so, who will go to these venues to uphold them??  

art is in the eye of the beholder.....

Quoted Text

But another thought, the American public has to stop expecting the government to take care of their needs,  a double edge sword that takes on a life of its own and just doesn't stop growing.  Next thing you know you have a huge amount of $$ in the hands of a few doling out to the many.  The biggest problem with all those $$ in the hands of a few is accountability.

You got that right....and dont forget the other side of those subprime mortgages.....$$ in the hands of the few ready to dole out to the many who just think it must be okay......

Shame on the advertising used today--"you deserve the time", "you need more time", "just relax" etc etc......it seems the politicians have taken on this watered down version of actual planning/needs and try to make "easy" the tune of their campaigns of wants......

ie: we will makes seniors first
     we will protect your children
     we will keep SS
     we will make it easier to get health insurance
     we will make the American dream of home ownership happen for everyone
     we will create higher safety standards
etc etc etc.........

and we must remember---politicians are not created in a vacuum....they come from our Towns, cities, villages and communities and schools.........
........our posterity remains to be, that which we expose it to and stuff it with.......

needs?----wants?

Absolutely Senders.  Needs vs. Wants.  Today, "wants" have become "needs".  This is the way the public justifies paying $70 per month to watch TV.  Does everyone in every family NEED a cellphone that does everything but cook dinner for you?  I can make a cup of coffee at home and take it with me for about 10 cents instead of spending $1,79 at Dunkin Donuts or more at other places. That is $565 per year for a person who stops for coffee every morning on the way to work.  The costs of these "necessities" per month is astronomical and its no wonder no one has the money to pay for health insurance for their family.  Being in the insurance business, I have seen it many times.  People know they should own life insurance  (especially when their children are young) to protect the future of their family in the event of their death, but they don't have the money.  Of course they don't have the money after they pay their cable, cellphone, and massive vehicle payments, not to mention those subprimes.

I don't make issue of what people deem as needs or wants. AS LONG AS, they are working for these needs or wants. And that they are not looking for handouts to supply their wants. If you work than I don't really care what one spends their money on. We live in a progressive society. We always have. People 'wanted' the new invention of the phone. People 'wanted' the new invention of the radio.  People 'wanted' the new invention of the automobile. People 'wanted' the new invention of black and white TV. Then they 'wanted' the new invention of the color TV.

So things REALLY have not changed so much. We just have more things to 'want'. And if we work legally for it, than go for it. If we all had the same wants and needs, than perhaps we should move to China and let the government take most of our paycheck and support us as 'they see fit'. Then the government will give you what 'they think' you need or want!

Just like our county legislatures are doing with our tax dollar and the metroplex. It is surprising that there are actual business folks (ex: Neil Golub)on the metroplex board who actually follow the rule of metroplex. One would think that the business folks who own private businesses would discourage the tax funded metroplex and encourage private industry.