He's says how they are trying to reduce costs (cutting) but then whines about the Republican congress cutting CDBG funds. Wonder if STratton supports Cuomo making cuts? Hell, anyone with a brain (except DV who doesn't have one), knows that Stratton is trying to get out of having to make those tough decisions for the thanks to the cuts by his fellow democrat and new boss.
He proudly is proclaiming this better rating for the city --- yeah, WHY does the city have this better rating????? Becuase Stratton JACKED UP THE TAXES BIG TIME on the people LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD IT !!!!!!!!!!
His exit speech make me want to barf.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
About the New York State Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program The Office of Community Renewal administers the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program for the State of New York. The NYS CDBG program provides financial assistance to eligible cities, towns, and villages with populations under 50,000 and counties with an area population under 200,000, in order to develop viable communities by providing decent, affordable housing, and suitable living environments, as well as expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income.
The state must ensure that no less than 70% of its CDBG funds are used for activities that benefit low- and moderate-income persons. The program objectives are achieved by supporting activities or projects that: benefit low- and moderate-income families; create job opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons; prevent or eliminate slums and blight; or address a community development need that poses a serious and imminent threat to the community's health or welfare
To learn more about how to apply for a NYS Community Development Block Grant, visit our Funding page.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The good news is..............he'll be the hell out of schenectady!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
My guess is either (1) the City received the funds, never told anyone and Proctors now has more padding for their seats or (2) the City tried to apply for CAFR but the person responsible for such grant writing already had $100K in overtime and didn't feel the need to finish the paperwork.
Official annual report of a government. In addition to a combined, combining (assembling of data for all funds within a type), and individual balance sheet, the following are also presented as appropriate on a combined, combining, and individual basis: (1) statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance (all funds); (2) statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances, budget and actual (for government fund types); (3) statement of revenues, expenses, and changes in retained earnings (for proprietary funds); and (4) statement of changes in financial position (for proprietary funds).
A "Comprehensive Annual Financial Report" or CAFR (pronounced caffer) is the financial report of a state, municipal or other governmental entity that complies with the accounting pronouncements (government Generally Accepted Accounting Principles - GAAP) promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) http://www.gasb.org/.
A CAFR is "compiled" by a state, municipal or other governmental accounting staff and "audited" by an external AICPA http://www.aicpa.org/ certified accounting firm utilizing GASB pronouncements. The CAFR is composed of three sections:
I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION This section provides general information on the organizational structure of State or municipal government as well as information useful in assessing the State's or municipality's financial condition. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) http://www.gfoa.org/ has a special awards program called the "Certificate of Achievement in Financial Reporting" that recognizes properly prepared and exceptionally presented CAFRs; this award is typically a part of the Introductory Section to inform the reader that this is an exceptional document (for a CAFR). One should examine these requirements to better understand what they are and how they are applied in the evaluation.
II. FINANCIAL SECTION
This section is used to present the independent auditor's report on the financial statements, the management's discussion and analysis ("MD&A"), the basic financial statements, other required supplementary information (i.e., pension and budgetary information), as well as combining fund statements and schedules typically portrayed as:
•Basic Financial Statements
•Government-wide Financial Statements
· Statement of Net Assets · Statement of Activities
C. Fund Financial Statements
· Governmental Funds
· Proprietary Funds
· Fiduciary Funds
D. Notes to the Financial Statements
E. Required Supplementary Information Other than MD&A
•RSI - Defined Benefit Pension Plans •RSI - Budgetary Reporting F. Combining Fund Statements and Schedules
•Nonmajor Governmental Funds •Nonmajor Enterprise Funds •Internal Service Funds •Fiduciary Funds •Non-Major Component Units - Discretely Presented III. STATISTICAL SECTION
This section provides a broad range of trend data covering key financial indicators from the past 10 fiscal years. It also contains demographic and miscellaneous data useful in assessing the State's or municipality's financial condition.
BUDGET - A "budget" is a "plan" used by state and municipal governments to prioritize its actions and activities, provide the resources for these priorities, and measure its performance against its plan. Note that a "budget" document is not audited while a CAFR is. The budget process consists of several broad principles that stem from the definition and mission of the budget process. These principles encompass many functions that cut across a governmental organization. They reflect the fact that development of a budget is a political and managerial process that also has financial and technical dimensions. The National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting (NACSLB) developed some principles that State and Local budgets should utilize.
PRINCIPLE I - ESTABLISH BROAD GOALS TO GUIDE GOVERNMENT DECISION MAKING. A government should have broad goals that provide overall direction for the government and serve as a basis for decision making. This principle provides for the development of a broad set of goals that establish a general direction for the government. These goals serve as the basis for development of policies and programs, including the service types and levels that will be provided and capital asset acquisition and maintenance. Goals are developed after undertaking an assessment of community conditions and other external factors, and a review of the internal operations of the government, including its services, capital assets, and management including its services, capital assets, and management practices. Based on the assessment of current and expected future conditions, and opportunities and challenges facing the community and the government, broad goals are established that define the preferred future state of the community. Other principles address the development of strategies and allocation of resources to achieve these goals.
•Element 1 - Assess Community Needs, Priorities, Challenges and Opportunities •Element 2 - Identify Opportunities and Challenges for Government Services, Capital Assets, and Management •Element 3 - Develop and Disseminate Broad Goals PRINCIPLE II - DEVELOP APPROACHES TO ACHIEVE GOALS. A government should have specific policies, plans, programs, and management strategies to define how it will achieve its long-term goals. This principle provides for the establishment of specific policies, plans, programs, and management strategies necessary for the government to achieve its long- term goals. While broad goals set the general direction of a government, it is the policies, plans, and programs that define how the government will go about accomplishing these goals. As such, the development of policies and programs must explicitly consider how they contribute to the achievement of the government's broad goals. Policy and program goals should relate, where appropriate, to broad goals. Measures should be developed to determine the progress being made by the government in achieving goals.
•Element 4 - Adopt Financial Policies •Element 5 - Develop Programmatic, Operating, and Capital Policies and Plans •Element 6 - Develop Programs and Services that are Consistent with Policies and Plans •Element 7 - Develop Management Strategies PRINCIPLE III - DEVELOP A BUDGET WITH APPROACHES TO ACHIEVE GOALS. A financial plan and budget that moves toward achievement of goals, within the constraints of available resources, should be prepared and adopted. This principle provides for the preparation of a financial plan, a capital improvement plan, and budget options. Development of a long-range financial plan is essential to ensure that the programs, services, and capital assets are affordable over the long run. Through the financial planning process, decision makers are able to better understand the long- term financial implications of current and proposed policies, programs, and assumptions and decide on a course of action to achieve its goals. These strategies are reflected in the development of a capital improvement plan and options for the budget.
•Element 8 - Develop a Process for Preparing and Adopting a Budget •Element 9 - Develop and Evaluate Financial Options •Element 10 - Make Choices Necessary to Adopt a Budget PRINCIPLE IV - EVALUATE PERFORMANCE AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. Program and financial performance should be continually evaluated, and adjustments made, to encourage progress toward achieving goals. This principle identifies practices that are needed to monitor and evaluate the government's progress in meeting financial and programmatic goals identified in the budget and through its policies and plans. Based on this review, the government may need to make adjustments to the budget and to plans and policies if goals are to be achieved. The review undertaken through this principle feeds back into goal development and review processes to ensure that goals remain relevant.
•Element 11 - Monitor, Measure, and Evaluate Performance •Element 12 - Make Adjustments as Needed For example, a Fiscal Year 2009 "budget" is a plan, but at the end of the Fiscal Year, the CAFR will report the financial results of the plan. Unlike the budget, the CAFR is audited.
Public Authorities Information on NY's Public Authorities Public authorities are corporate instruments of the State created by the Legislature to further public interests. These entities develop, operate and maintain some of New York 's most critical infrastructure including roads, bridges and schools. As a result, public authorities play a significant role in the debt structure of New York State. Currently, over 94 percent of all State-funded debt outstanding was issued by public authorities without voter approval.
•What is a Public Authority? •Reports on Public Authorities •View Data on Public Authority Debt •View Data on Individual Public Authorities •Public Authority Reporting Regulations •New York State Authority Budget Office (ABO) Information for NY's Public Authorities •Public Authority Reporting Regulations •Public Authorities Reporting Information System (PARIS) LOGIN •PARIS Help Desk contact information •New York State ABO Policy Guidance •New York State ABO Recommended Governance Practices •Comptroller's Oversight of State Authority Contracts
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The REP Congress is calling for a 62% cut in CDGB funds. That will defund many useless nonprofits. At the same time the City is adding two employees, including a part timer in code enforcement. They cut 3 and hire 2 back? If not for City employees maybe 10 people would have been there after the St Patty's Day presentation.
Stratton pushes consolidation in last speech Final State of the City address focused on his biggest achievements By Lauren Stanforth Staff Writer Published 12:00 a.m., Tuesday, March 15, 2011
SCHENECTADY -- Monday night Brian U. Stratton gave his last State of the City address as the city's mayor, quickly hitting on his high notes since being elected in 2004 and pushing governmental consolidation in light of the dire financial circumstances Schenectady faces.
Stratton's last day is April 3, after which time he's leaving to head up the state Canal Corp.
The Democratic mayor revisited what can be considered his greatest hits as the Electric City's leader, such as the financial hole he pulled the city out of soon after he was elected to his first-term, noting that Schenectady's credit rating is now an A- with Standard & Poor's, compared with having the lowest rating in the state seven years ago.
Stratton also noted the retirement, resignation or firing of nine troubled city cops over the last year, and urged City Council to "continue to exercise discipline and an insistence on professionalism" for the police department. In particular, he highlighted the importance of keeping a public safety commissioner, in addition to employing the police chief.
Consolidation was a large theme in his speech, perhaps a nod to Stratton's new boss, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has championed shrinking government costs through mergers. The city is not only facing rising state pension contribution costs and reduced state aid, but a proposed $1.7 million federal cut in valued community development block grant money............................>>>>.....................>>>>....................Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/defa.....42.php#ixzz1GdiXVftG
Stratton even said Schenectady should follow the lead of Louisville, Ky., and merge all the county's municipalities into one taxing entity.
I wonder how THAT works out with collective bargaining and voter bases???? it wont consolidate ANYTHING except for giant wall so we cant exactly see where the money goes and the podium puck will look like it will crush our backs if we complain or question....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The following article is exclusive to the Main Street Journal Online. Click “Subscribe Online” above to start your subscription.
Consolidation and the Real Lessons Learned From Louisville, KY By: Ron Williams and Tom Guleff, Save Shelby County
Louisville, Kentucky is often used as a “comparable” city to Memphis, Tennessee by proponents as an example of institutional change for the better as a result of consolidation. In 2003, Louisville’s merger with Jefferson County was the largest scale consolidation to take place in the US in more than thirty years. This merger was promoted to be a major innovation and “shake up” in government which would result in improved economic development, reduced costs and taxes, increased efficiency and a role model, point of reference and example of best practices for others to follow. Multiple government organization is focused on as the major impediment to attracting new business, future growth, economic development and the general health and welfare of the City of Memphis and Shelby County in today’s consolidation drive. This focus is almost identical to that of that of Louisville. If a closer examination is made of the exaggerated claims to economic development and efficiency in Louisville, the following hard facts emerge (1, 2):
Economic Development:
The number of establishments, employees and payroll in Louisville remained unchanged from pre-consolidation 1999 through post-consolidation in 2006. The number of establishments remained virtually constant at approximately 20,000, as did the number of employees (approximately 40,000). The annual payroll remained at $15 billion (in 2006 dollars) over the same period. Actually when graphed, the lines follow a slightly downward trend. Business profits remained flat over the same period at slightly less than $4 billion. If anything can be said, it’s very difficult to draw a relationship between economic development in Louisville and consolidation based on these results. There is no evidence of improved economic development from consolidation.
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of cost vs. output. After a short period of minor savings, costs in Louisville experienced a sharp rebound. Budgets, employees, and per capita costs rose to previous or near-previous levels while some services, such as police and infrastructure services remained the same or declined.
According to the National Research Council, “There is general agreement that consolidation has not reduced costs (as predicted by some reform advocates) and, in fact, may have even increased total local expenditures.” There is little or no evidence about the relationship between efficiency and consolidation. The two loudest and most advertised claims by proponents of consolidation for efficiency and economic development in Memphis/Shelby County have no basis in fact. No matter how often the advocates of consolidation repeat the claims, the facts remain the same. Just ask Louisville.
1. H.V. Savitch, Ronald K. Vogel and Lin Ye (2009), Beyond the Rhetoric: Lessons From Louisville’s Consolidation, The American Review of Public Administration
2. H.V. Savitch, Ronald K. Vogel (2004), SUBURBS WITHOUT A CITY, Power and City-County Consolidation, Urban Affairs Review
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Residents of Louisville and Jefferson County Vote for Consolidated Government New Combined Metropolis Will Become America's 23rd Largest City by Jubi Headley December 4, 2000
On Election Day 2000 residents of the city of Louisville (KY) and Jefferson County voted to merge their governments, some 17 years after the last consolidation proposal in the region was narrowly defeated. Fifty-four percent of voters approved the plan. Under the new consolidation plan, a metropolitan Mayor and a 26-member legislative council will be elected in November 2002 and take office in January 2003. They will assume the authority currently held by the current Louisville Mayor and Board of Aldermen and the Jefferson County Commissioners and Judge-Executive.
The merger also means that when the new government takes over in 2003, Louisville's population will more than double to a projected 527,571. Its ranking among the nation's largest cities will jump to a projected 23rd, up from 64th. The vote secures Louisville as Kentucky's largest city. If the referendum had failed, Lexington was set to overtake Louisville in population next year.
The merger was supported by both Louisville Mayor Dave Armstrong and Jefferson County Judge-Executive Rebecca Jackson — Armstrong and Jackson, in fact, served as co-chairs of the "Vote Yes for Unity" campaign, a bipartisan, grassroots coalition that successfully built support for passage of the merger referendum. In a statement released after the vote was announced, Armstrong said, "Voters clearly understood that the future holds much more promise by uniting than it does by maintaining the status quo."
"This is a historic and proud moment for our community," Jackson said. "This victory gives our community a secure foundation and puts us on the right path in the 21st century," he said.
In fact, every living person who held office as Mayor of Louisville or as Jefferson County Judge-Executive endorsed the referendum. Former Louisville Mayor and Conference of Mayors President Jerry Abramson, a key spokesman for the "Vote Yes for Unity' campaign, said, "As one united community, we can look forward to a prosperous future. This vote will enable us to adopt a community-wide vision so we can attract better jobs and provide our children with more opportunities."
The merger was also endorsed by every major publication in Louisville, including The Courier-Journal (the region's major daily), Business First and the Louisville Defender, a weekly newspaper with a large African-American readership.
Some of the merger work is to begin almost immediately. Next year, for example, a 26-district legislative council map will be drawn by professors at the University of Louisville Geography Department, based on 2000 U.S. Census data. The legislators will be elected based only on votes in each of the 26 council districts, a feature of the merger plan that supporters said is an improvement over the current system. Currently, for example, all voters in the city of Louisville elect each alderman. The new legislative districts will each have a population of about 25,000 residents. All voters in the county will cast ballots for the metropolitan mayor.
The Jefferson County Attorney's office also will begin reviewing city and county laws to determine possible conflicts that the new council will need to address; any ordinances that aren't amended or re-enacted by the new council will expire after five years. There are a still a number of other issues to be resolved, however, such as where the new council will meet, and the consolidation of duplicative city and county departments and services. The legislation that voters approved leaves these details to city and county elected representatives.
The merger outcome gives Louisville the distinction of being the nation's first large city in 30 years to merge with its county. The last city of more than 250,000 to merge was Indianapolis, which joined with Marion County in 1970. The Indianapolis merger was ordered by the state legislature. The last big-city merger approved by voters was Jacksonville (FL), which merged with Duval County in 1968.
In Jefferson County, voters rejected three previous merger referendums—in 1956, 1982, and 1983. For more information on the merger, please visit the "Vote Yes For Unity" Campaign at http://www.voteyesforunity.org.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
A partisan pos until the end. He calls Cuomo's cuts "prudent". BTW by 2015 Schenectady's contribution to the State retirement will double.
