Beware Town of New Hartford...

this Bobcat may come back to "bite" you.

On November 18, 2007, we sent the following FOIL request to the Town Clerk's office:

We would like to FOIL:

Information regarding the sale of the 1995 Bobcat MDL853 as noted on page 3 of the September 20, 2006 Town Board minutes (see below). We would like the sale date, how it was sold (bid invitation or eBay, etc.), how much it was sold for, and who it was sold to. If sold by bid invitation, we would like a copy of the bid sheets for all bids submitted.

Page 3 of the Sept. 20, 2006 minutes reads as follows:

Surplus Vehicle Sale
The Highway Superintendent would like to auction or sell to someone who is interested in purchasing the following vehicles directly from the Town:

1995 Bobcat MDL853 - Serial Number 512819013
1980 Mack Dump - VIN RM6864X1160

A discussion was held regarding the possibility of trying to sell these vehicles on e-bay. It was the consensus of the Board to declare these vehicles as surplus and to sell them. Councilman Payne will discuss putting these vehicles on e-bay with the Highway Superintendent.

Today, November 30, 2007, we received an email from the Town Clerk saying we could pick up the information we FOILed regarding the Bobcat.

We went to the town clerk's office and we were given a copy of two (2) pages from the February 16, 2000 Town Board minutes. The Feb. 16, 2000 minutes refer to the Bobcat in question ID #512819013; however, the minutes state that this Bobcat was to be surrendered to the vendor for a $12,000 trade-in value toward another Bobcat. Upon delivery of said trade-in, the Supervisor shall pay the sum of Nine Thousand Five Hundred Seventy-four Dollars ($9,574) from proceeds of obligations. Please, take the time to read the minutes from 2000...we have outlined the pertinent information with a red box.

We have several questions:

1. If the Bobcat was traded in as a result of the adoption of Resolution No. 50 of 2000, how could it possibly be available to auction or sell on Sept. 20, 2006---over 6 years later?

2. Did the Town of New Hartford purchase a Bobcat from Melrose Ingersoll-Rand, Fargo, Nevada in 2000. If the town did, where is that Bobcat now because the insurance company is NOT even listing a Bobcat as being insured by the Town of New Hartford.

3. And if the town did purchase a Bobcat from this company, did Roger Cleveland not see to it that the 1995 Bobcat to be traded-in reached the Melrose Ingersoll-Rand Co. or did the Town end up paying the entire $21,574 for the Bobcat that now appears to also be "missing" along with the Bobcat noted in the September 20, 2006 minutes?

This brings us back to the same question...where is the Bobcat referred to in the September 26, 2006 minutes...1995 Bobcat MDL853 - Serial Number 512819013? If it wasn't traded in 2000 and there is no sale noted in the minutes...where is it?

Apparently, the town is NOT able to answer the FOILED questions; instead they provide us with some "baloney" that just opened up a whole new batch of questions. Personally, guys, you would have been better off keeping those minutes to yourselves, but it just proves how ridiculous recordkeeping is in the Town of New Hartford...a progressive town...that is getting progressively worse. Please...somebody help us!!

Wait until tomorrow's blog...we were given other FOILed documents today and they are even more unbelievable!

Enough waiting for FOILed info on missing vehicles...

Time to call in the "big guns" or maybe the "heavy hitters".

On October 30, 2007, we sent a FOIL request for information regarding several town vehicles. The town clerk acknowledged receipt of our FOIL request on October 31, 2007. One of the pieces of information we have not been given is what happened to the 1997 Ford E150 Van, VIN #FTEE1425VHB74499. According to the town vehicle list provided to us on March 19, 2007 to satisfy our FOIL request, this van is noted as "*Plates turned in to DMV and in the process of being removed from town's insurance", but we didn't receive the license surrender receipt that we FOILed for this vehicle. Guess it must of been one of the receipts that got "crumpled up". Actually, there appears to be a typo for the VIN number on the equipment list provided to us, but we believe it is the same vehicle as mentioned in the June 7, 2006 Town Board meeting:

Emergency Vehicle Purchase
Upon recommendation of the Highway Superintendent, Councilman Payne introduced the following Resolution for adoption; seconded by Councilman Woodland:

(RESOLUTION NO. 168 OF 2006)
WHEREAS, during the first week of June 2006, it had been determined by Mechanics in the Highway Department that the 1997 Ford Econoline Van [VIN 1FTEE1425VHB74499] with 140,000 miles, used by the Buildings and Grounds Department, the Traffic and Safety Department, the Sewer Department and the Highway Department, would require a minimum of Fifteen Hundred Dollars ($1500) plus labor to repair the engine; and

WHEREAS, this is the only vehicle of this type for use with the Highway Department, and due to the repair costs and mileage, it had been determined that the 1997 Ford Van should not be repaired and that an emergency replacement was justified;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of New Hartford does hereby recognize and declare the aforementioned circumstances as an emergency situation and does further authorize and direct the payment of Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty-two Dollars and Twenty-four Cents ($12,982.24), Purchase Order No. 76794, to Steet-Ponte Ford for the required replacement vehicle, a 2006 Ford E150, CarGoVan, VIN 1FTRE14W16VA40974.

The Resolution was declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

We guess the Town did not have to advertise for bids in the Observer Dispatch even though the cost of the replacement vehicle was over $10,000 because it was an emergency situation.

Then there is the police chief's vehicle. Remember my blog? They even had to call a Special Town Board meeting for this one on June 28, 2007:

Lease – Ford 500 – Police Chief
Police Commission member Kevin Copeland explained that the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria, which is presently being driven by Chief Raymond Philo, needs to be replaced due to the fact that there are some serious repairs needed on the vehicle, a safety concern. On behalf of the Police Commission, Mr. Copeland has spoken with Steet-Ponte Ford regarding the lease of a 2007 Ford 500, rather than purchasing a vehicle through a State Contract. The dealerships are now offering better incentive programs because the 2008 vehicles will be arriving shortly. The 1999 Ford Crown Victoria could be advertised on E-bay for sale. This lease would have no impact on the Police Department’s Budget. Councilman Waszkiewicz was concerned about mileage on a lease vehicle, but Mr. Copeland explained that the lease mileage is twelve thousand (12,000) miles a year and the Chief is presently driving six or seven thousand (6,000 or 7,000) miles a year. Kevin Copeland also stated that at the end of the lease period there would be no additional fees. The cost of leasing the vehicle would run approximately Two Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars ($273) per month. Councilman Waszkiewicz presented the following Resolution for adoption; seconded by Councilman Reynolds:

(RESOLUTION NO. 144 OF 2007)
RESOLVED that the New Hartford Town Board does approve the lease of a 2007 Ford 500 as a replacement vehicle for the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria, Vehicle Identification Number 2FAFP71W4XX110777, which Police Chief Raymond Philo is presently driving, at a monthly lease payment not to exceed Three Hundred Dollars ($300).

The Resolution was declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

Another emergency! Thank goodness for Steet-Ponte Ford...always at the ready whenever the Town of New Hartford has an emergency and there is no time to go out to bid! They can even offer the town better than State Contract prices...yes, they can! By the way, where is the "old" police chief's car...we haven't seen it listed on eBay, but according to page 3 of the 9/11/07 Schedule of Commercial Vehicles received from Bailey, Haskell & LaLonde, the vehicle is still being insured. Must be somewhere around Town. Hope it is not being driven without those "serious repairs" having first been taken care of!

While we are at it, on November 18, 2007, we submitted a FOIL request for the whereabouts of the 1995 Bobcat MDL 853 as noted in the September 20, 2006 town board minutes:

Surplus Vehicle Sale
The Highway Superintendent would like to auction or sell to someone who is interested in purchasing the following vehicles directly from the Town:

1995 Bobcat MDL853 - Serial Number 512819013
1980 Mack Dump - VIN RM6864X1160

A discussion was held regarding the possibility of trying to sell these vehicles on e-bay. It was the consensus of the Board to declare these vehicles as surplus and to sell them. Councilman Payne will discuss putting these vehicles on e-bay with the Highway Superintendent.

The 1980 Mack Dump was sold to Al Roberts on November 1, 2006--not on eBay, but what happened to the 1995 Bobcat...it is not currently on the 2007-2008 list of insured vehicles and we don't see a bid opening or sale of a 1995 Bobcat noted in the minutes. Where did it go? The town clerk said she should have the answer for us by December 14th. Guess all we can do is wait.

While we are on the subject...the 1995 Badger that was sold to Al Roberts on November 1, 2007 along with the 1980 Mack Dump truck above. Remember, that would be the time that Al Roberts didn't submit a bid, but Roger Cleveland, the Highway Superintendent just happened to have a check in his pocket anyway...well, the VIN number given in the Town Board minutes for the "sold" vehicle doesn't match the VIN number on the license surrender receipts that we were given. The minutes list the 1995 Badger as VIN #AG038182...the license surrender receipt lists a 1995 Badger VIN #282626. Not sure if it matters, but Concerned Citizens did verify that DMV record comes up blank for VIN #AG038182. Strange!

License Surrender Receipts?....what License Surrender Receipts?

We decided to match the license surrender receipts for the "unknown" vehicles with the current list of insured vehicles & property that we recently FOILed. If you remember in our blog a couple of days ago, there were several "unknown" vehicles that we thought must have either been sold prior to June 2002 or were sold as scrap because we couldn't find anything about them in our "searchable" town board minutes.

Sure enough, look at page 2 of the Schedule of Property dated 9/11/07. Now look at the two (2) License Surrender receipts...two of the John Deere Front End Loaders are still listed as being insured as of 9/11/07. Incredible...the license surrender receipts were issued 5 months earlier on March 12, 2007. So it would appear that either:

a. The town turned in the license surrender receipts to the insurance company and the insurance company failed to remove the vehicles from the Schedule of Property when they renewed the town insurance in June 2007...instead, they continued to list the Loaders as insured by the Town of New Hartford.

b. The town NEVER turned in the license surrender receipts to the insurance company on March 12, 2007, so the insurance company had no idea that the town no longer owns the vehicle. Therefore, when the insurance was renewed in June 2007, the insurance company continued to include these two vehicles in the town's insurance renewal policy.

c. It might just be possible that the Town still owns the two (2) Front End Loaders and they are being driven around with no license plates.

d. There is an explanation there somewhere...it is just not apparent right now...give the town some time though and they will think of it.

Sort of leaves wide open the possibility that the Town has in the past been insuring vehicles that they no longer own. Just how many license surrender receipts 'get crumpled up and thrown away' without ever getting sent to the insurance company? How many vehicles get taken off the insurance without the insurance company ever seeing the License Surrender Receipts...and how many other vehicles and property no longer owned by the Town of New Hartford (for one reason or another) are still being insured as of today?

No wonder there are so many shenanigans going on...there are absolutely no controls in place. It begs the question, how much town property is "walking" or being driven away and no one is the wiser?

Who is minding the store? According to Town Law 64[3], the Town Board ultimately has:

3. Management, custody and control of town property. Shall have the management, custody and control of all town lands, buildings and property of the town and keep them in good repair and may cause the same to be insured against loss or damage by fire or other hazard.

Looks like several people may have some explaining to do. Wait until you hear why the equipment is being sold for a 'song' and who is in the middle of this mess.

School "Daze"

While we wait for more of our FOILed documents to be available from the Town of New Hartford...and they seem to be taking more time than usual...we thought we would announce the addition of a new section of our website that will contain FOILed documents from New Hartford Central School.

New Hartford Central School "Daze" will be a place to find contracts, "searchable" copies of complete minutes of board meetings, etc. We are currently under construction, but we will be adding more information in the days ahead.

Here's a head's up on some of the FOILed documents that we are waiting for the Town of New Hartford to provide:

Information regarding the sale of a brand-new Moen faucet on eBay

Information on the data used by Councilman Robert A. Payne, III to decide that the Kellogg Road Community Center needs to be closed for the winter months.

copies of sale receipts for vehicles that were sold without board approval

whereabouts of one (1) town vehicle

copies of the Dispatch contracts with New York Mills, Whitestown & Yorkville

copies of the Police contracts for Sangertown Square and St. Luke's Hospital

a copy of the 2008 Approved Town Budget

Hey, it helped us to get a faster response to our FOIL request by blogging about the DMV license surrender receipts. Here's hoping it works again!

Case of the Missing FS-6T receipts...cont'd

Monday, November 26, 2007, right after I blogged about the missing FS-6T license plate surrender receipts, I get an email from the Town Clerk:

The Highway Department has delivered photocopies of DMV receipts for vehicles removed from insurance coverage. You may wish to stop by the Town Clerk's Office to review these documents. Lack of a copy does not necessarily mean that a plate wasn't turned in but only that a copy of the receipt had not been made at the Highway Department before the original was turned into the insurance company.

Oh, I see, they only made copies of some of the receipts before they turned the originals into the insurance company. Sounds very much like trying to cover someone's butt...

You know, one would almost believe the baloney in the town clerk's email except that all of the license plate surrender receipts that we received copies of yesterday...all 29...show that the license plates were ALL surrendered on March 12, 2007. One would have to believe that the Town of New Hartford sold 29 vehicles sometime in February 2007 or early March 2007. Of course, with our "searchable" town board minutes, we were able to ascertain that none of these vehicles were sold in 2007. In fact, some of these vehicles were sold in 2003...

So one has to ask...has the town been insuring these vehicles since 2003 and they were finally taken off the insurance in March 2007...or did the insurance company take the vehicles off the insurance in 2003 - 2006 without receiving the license plate surrender receipts? By law, liability insurance cannot be taken off a vehicle until the plates are surrendered at the DMV and the license surrender receipt is turned in to the insurance company. Might spell trouble for the insurance company.

Secondly, why were 29 license plates accumulating at the Highway Garage? Was the Highway Superintendent running a Rent-a-License-Center in his spare time? Is that why we have pictures of privately owned vehicles with Town of New Hartford license plates on them?

Here are the license surrender receipts for vehicles that are noted as sold in the town board minutes...we have indicated the date of sale in the upper right hand corner of each sheet.

Here are the license surrender receipts for vehicles that either were sold prior to 2002 (we only have town board minutes starting in June 2002), or they were sold as scrap. We do know that the Front End Loaders are traded on a regular basis, but the year of each would indicate that this equipment was gone long before the plates were turned in.

Lastly, there was no license surrender receipts for the most recent vehicles sold to Mr. Al Roberts in November 2006. We know that some of the vehicles were sold with license plates still attached because we have pictures. Where are the license plates now and why did we not get a copy of the surrender receipt for the van pictured at Sangertown Mall? Wouldn't you think that would be the one license surrender receipt that the Highway Superintendent would make sure was available for our FOIL request or did he not want to give us evidence that they were just turned in a couple of weeks ago? Or are the plates indeed still on the van at Sangertown Mall?

Concerned Citizens finds it interesting that all 29 of these license plates were turned in on the same day. Interesting, too, is the fact that approximately 1 week after the license plates were turned in, we were given the list of town vehicles that we FOILed on February 22, 2007. The FOILed vehicle list was supposed to be given to us no later than March 9th, but on March 14th the town clerk sent us the following in response to our email asking why we still hadn't received the information:

"I'm awaiting verification from certain departments to ensure we have an accurate list."

Sounds to us like more was at play than ensuring they had an accurate list of vehicles. Looks like some back-pedalling!

Clearly, there is no accountability for equipment and vehicles in possession of the Town of New Hartford. Vehicles are sold without board approval, long before their "useful" life and well below book value. Until our FOIL request in February 2007 there apparently was no in-house list of Town property, and no set procedure for keeping track of license plates. Since the town started selling vehicles on eBay there has been nothing in the town board minutes to document who the vehicles are sold to and the price received. If nothing else the town board minutes should contain a record of the vehicles that were sold. The Town Board by law has control of all property owned by the Town...when vehicles are sold for less than their value...it is time to question whether or not the Town Board is doing their "due diligence".

Information sent to our Anonymous Tip Line regarding some of the vehicles that have been sold is disturbing. We have verified some of the information and are working on verifying the rest...we will report on this blog shortly.

Willowvale Fire Co., Inc. Vote December 11, 2007

We had to take a trip to the Town Clerk's office today to pick up the FS-6T Vehicle Surrender receipts that the Highway secretary was able to find. (Wait until you read the ending to this fiasco!).

Anyway, while we were there, we inquired about whether a public meeting had been set-up for the December 11, 2007 vote for the residents in the Willowvale Fire District. Answer...not yet, but the clerk's office thought they (whoever they are) were working on it. The vote is in two weeks...nothing like putting it off until the last minute.

To try to give residents some information, we thought we would post the Notice of Special Election. If you live in the Willowvale Fire District, it might be wise to read this so you know what you are voting on. For more detail, you may want to read the resolution that was passed at the September 12, 2007 board meeting. You might also notice that the resolution that was passed stated that there was not only going to be a public meeting, but information was going to be mailed to each home. Just goes to show that you should probably not believe everything you read...even if it is a resolution unanimously passed and ADOPTED by the New Hartford Town Board.

The vote is December 11, 2007 at the Willowvale Fire Station from noon to 8 p.m. You will be voting on a Service Award Program in accordance with Section 216 of the General Municipal Law.

THE PARTICULARS:

The cost is $76,000 per year or if our math is correct...check with the Town Clerk's office for exact figures...it will cost about $.54 additional per thousand of assessed value. So if your house is assessed for $100,000 you would be charged an additional $54.00 per year on your town & county tax bill to cover this Program, if passed. If you have a $250,000 assessment, you will be charged an additional $135 per year. The effective date is January 1, 2008. The current tax rate for the Willowvale Fire District is $1.97...so if this program is passed, the total Fire Protection tax rate on your next town & county tax bill would be $2.51 per thousand.

Only residents in the Willowvale Fire District are eligible to vote. If you already appear on the registered voter list from the Oneida County Board of Elections, you will not need to do anything extra to vote. Otherwise, if you are not a registered voter and you wish to vote, personal registration will be held Tuesday, November 27, 2007 at the Willowvale Fire Station from 4 - 8 p.m.

Absentee ballots are available, but WRITTEN application MUST BE made to the Town Clerk...call the Town Clerk's office for more information on absentee ballots.

If we learn of a public meeting to discuss this Service Award Program, we will post it on our websites and blog. Talk to your neighbors and let them know about this vote!

Tomorrow we will get back to the surrender of license plates...stay tuned!

Case of the missing FS-6T receipts...

So the Town of New Hartford sells a vehicle...and needs to remove the insurance. Someone has to go to the DMV and surrender the license plates. The town, just like anyone else who surrenders their license plates, receives a FS-6T receipt...by law, the receipt is needed by the insurance company before they can remove the insurance. Easy...except that:

After learning of the Town of New Hartford license plates that were left on the van that was sold to Al Roberts and said van was being driven by Mr. Roberts using those Town of New Hartford license plates, we FOILed the FS-6T receipts for several other vehicles sold by the Town of New Hartford. We wanted to see if other vehicles were sold by the town with license plates still attached. The town clerk said we would have the information no later than November 14, 2007.

We didn't receive the information...so on November 16th we visited the town clerk's office to see what the problem was. The Town Clerk said she is trying to get the information, but it appears that the receipts may not be available. We were told that "sometimes we just look at the receipt, crumple it up and throw it away."

Really? Goodness, we would think that would be part of the permanent record that should be kept 'just in case' the town ever needs to prove that the license plates were turned in. Trouble is, now the Town Clerk doesn't know if the FOILed FS-6T receipts were "crumpled up and thrown away" or the license plates were never turned in and therefore, the receipts never existed in the first place.

The Town Clerk said she was working with the Highway Superintendent's...secretary by day...$20 an hour Highway Garage cleaner by night person to see if she might have kept the receipts. As of today, we have heard nothing further.

Thank goodness, just in case, the town destroyed or 'crumpled up' the receipts, the DMV has provided a way to get copies. Of course, this assumes that the plates were turned in to begin with.

For the record, the van sold to Mr. Roberts is not the only sold "surplus" vehicle being driven around with Town of New Hartford license plates...we have pictures of other sold vehicles with town license plates...the word "Official" on the license plates give it away!

Don't forget our Anonymous Tip Line! We appreciate the responses so far and we hope you will keep sending information no matter how insignificant you might think it is. Piece by piece, we are putting the puzzle together. Soon the whole picture will start to emerge.

Together, we can make a change!

Ford or Chevy?

Remember when I said a Badger is basically the same as a Gradall?

Remember the bond resolutions last October when the town wanted to bond for a new Gradall and the Town Highway Superintendent had already signed a lease/purchase agreement for a 2006 Gradall even before the bond resolutions had been voted on by the Town Board on October 4, 2006 (note the date the lease/purchase agreement was signed...9/21/06)?

By law, the Highway Superintendent does not have the authority to enter into a lease/purchase agreement without board approval and a permissive referendum. By the way, the Highway Superintendent NEVER DID bother to get board approval to enter into the lease/purchase agreement. When a member of Concerned Citizens asked about that fact at the March 14, 2007 town board meeting, Mr. Cleveland said he "needed" a Gradall. Does anyone find it interesting that the Highway Superintendent would, without town board approval and prior to the bond resolution vote allowing for the purchase of a new Gradall, sell the 1995 Badger we already had, when the town "needs" one?

If you have followed some of our blogs, you will also know that as the result of a bid invitation the town clerk placed in the paper on February 22, 2007, the town only received one bid for the purchase of a new Gradall and it just happened to be a bid from the same company (Vantage Equipment) that the Highway Superintendent had signed a lease/purchase agreement with in September 2006.

However, according to the 2007-2008 insurance list we recently FOILed, the town is now insuring a 2007 Gradall not the USED 2006 Gradall that was listed on the lease/purchase agreement! The bid invitation specifically said the town was seeking bids for a USED Gradall...it would appear that there was some sort of "switcheroo" between the time of the bid and the time of purchase.

By the way, you may remember that even though the taxpayers of this town voted to not bond for a new Gradall; the town board voted to BAN for the new Gradall so the debt was incurred whether we like it or not! The BAN is for $207,800, plus the $15,000 lease purchase agreement payment making a total cost of $222,800 for a Gradall that we, the taxpayers, voted not to purchase.

As a side note, at this past town board meeting on November 20th, the Highway Superintendent asked the town board to agree to co-sign a grant proposal that Oneida County is submitting for a new Gradall. Supposedly, the Town of New Hartford would be able to "borrow" the equipment, plus the driver, if "needed" and the equipment wasn't being used by the County. When the town board asked if the town "needed" to borrow an additional Gradall, the Highway Superintendent said sometimes there is a "need" for a second Gradall. Go figure...why did the Highway Superintendent take it upon himself to sell the 1995 Badger for less than half of what it was worth, if the town sometimes "needs" a second one?

We are awaiting more FOILed documents on this topic. The town clerk "hopes" to have the information to us by December 14, 2007. Considering the fact that the Town Clerk is the recordkeeper for the town, it is rather strange that FOILed documents appear to not be readily available. Just wait until you hear the rest of the story regarding the DMV license plate surrender receipts...it's a classic.

There is certainly an odor permeating the town of New Hartford and it appears to be emanating from the town offices.

Thankful...

I am thankful for the love that surrounds me...

I am thankful for my children and family...

I am thankful for living in this great U.S.A...

I am thankful I don't live in the Willowvale Fire District. Last night at the town board meeting, Councilman Payne explained to the town board that the Willowvale Fire Chief doesn't want to have a public meeting to discuss the December 11, 2007 vote for residents in that district. They either don't want taxpayers to know and understand what they are voting on or they hope you don't know there is a vote. You can believe that the members of the Willowvale Fire Company and their families will be voting! Sort of makes what may be a good idea look bad...people have the right to be informed.

I am thankful that Supervisor Reed led the charge to ask Councilman Payne to 'suggest' to the Willowvale Fire Chief that a public information meeting is held prior to December 11th so that the taxpayers have a chance to learn about the proposal and a chance to ask questions. I just hope that they find a way to let people know when the public information meeting will take place. We would be happy to post the information regarding that meeting on our websites and blog...all Supervisor Reed has to do is let us know.

I am thankful for the people who have taken their time to send us 'tips' on our new Tip Line...because of YOU, things WILL start to change in New Hartford. Please keep writing to us!

I am thankful to Fred Flanagan for writing (and sharing) his thought-provoking book, My AMERICA...Is Democracy Floundering? Please take the time to read it and make up your mind to "get involved". We all need to do our part to defend democracy.

Take time to be thankful for all your blessings this Holiday Season and carry those thoughts with you throughout the year...and please remember...


Together, we will make a change!

p.s. We will be back on Friday to continue writing about the Badger Invitational...See you then!

We've had some inquiries regarding the vote...so for those wondering what vote...here is some information regarding what you will be asked to vote for or against. For further information, we suggest calling the Town Clerk's office. Whether or not there will be a public presentation where you can get further information or ask questions, remains to be seen. If we are alerted to such a meeting, we will post it on our blog.

It's Time to Say Goodbye...

Regarding the possibility of term limits being set for Town of New Hartford Planning Board members, Supervisor Reed was quoted in the November 16, 2007 Observer Dispatch as saying "A one-term limit would help ensure members have fresh ideas" .

This would be a good idea if people with "fresh" ideas were chosen. However, as we have seen previously you only get chosen if you are one of the "in" crowd. In other words, you have to have the same ideas as the current administration (being related to one of them also helps).

Here are the Planning Board members and the date their term expires:

Planning Board Member Jerome F. Donovan...12/31/2007
Planning Board Member Robert Imobersteg...12/31/2008
Planning Board Chairman Hans Arnold...12/31/2009
Planning Board Member Rodger Reynolds...12/31/2010
Planning Board Member Margaret Rotton...12/31/2011
Planning Board Member Robert Wood...12/31/2012
Planning Board Member Ellen Rayhill...12/31/2013

Supervisor Reed is also quoted as saying "Planning Board member Jerome Donovan's term ends this year, but term limits would not apply until at least 2008".

If you read between the lines, there is either someone that the Town Supervisor wants off the Planning Board... or someone who he wants on the Planning Board more than the next person whose term limit is up (of course, not including Jerome Donovan) because as Supervisor Reed correctly states in that Observer Dispatch article "members currently can serve indefinitely IF they are approved by the Town Board". Guess no one on the current Town Board has the "nerve" to turn down a current Planning Board member who might want to stay..it's just easier to use a term limit excuse.

So to the next Planning Board member whose term expires...not including Jerome Donovan...(and you know who you are)...we dedicate this song to you.

And no wonder Hans Arnold is worried and said in the same Observer Dispatch article "having experience on the board is needed for a town that has a lot of development". Guess he would like to stay...his term is up in December 2009...this should be interesting!

We will be back to the Badger Invitational shortly...waiting for some more FOILed documents. Don't go away!

Update...

on our recent blog Question....

Just wanted to let everyone know that we received this email from the Town Clerk's office today.

This certainly will confirm that our "searchable" town board minutes program is reliable and a good source of information. Unfortunately, the Town Clerk had to go through the 2005 and 2006 Town Board minutes manually because the town doesn't have "searchable" minutes on their website.

Guess Superintendent of Highways Roger Cleveland may have some explaining to do. It is illegal to sell town equipment prior to the town board approving a resolution declaring the equipment surplus.

But wait, this story will get better...

The Badger Invitational...

Let's look at the 1995 Badger, VIN AG038182 sold on November 1, 2006 to Al Roberts as I mentioned in my previous blog.

Keep in mind...a Badger and a Gradall are basically the same piece of equipment...that fact is important because it is part of the puzzle pieces that we will put together as we go along! It's sort of like a Chevy vs. a Ford.

On November 1, 2006, the Town of New Hartford votes to sell the town's 1995 Badger to Al Roberts without the town board first declaring it surplus. Excerpt from town board minutes [emphasis placed on some words by this blogger]:

Surplus Vehicle Sale

With authorization being given at the October 18, 2006 Town Board meeting, the Highway Superintendent had contacted the Town of Vernon with regard to purchasing surplus Town equipment; they declined, not wanting to expend $9200, the Town’s threshold. Subsequently, the Highway Superintendent received a bid from Al Roberts of Roberts Construction of Upstate New York, Inc. who submitted a proposal to purchase the surplus vehicles for $9200 and submitted full payment. Town Board consensus was to sell the following vehicles to Mr. Roberts for $9200:

· one (1) 1980 Mack Dump Truck, VIN RM6864X1160
· one (1) 1995 Badger, VIN AG038182
· one (1) 1990 Chevrolet G10 Van, VIN 1GCDG15Z3L7151162
· one (1) 1996 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN 2FALP71W6TX167995
· one (1) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN 2FAFP71WXXX185788

Notice how the November 1, 2006 minutes above sort of conflict with the October 4, 2006 minutes below [emphasis applied to the words by this blogger]:

Highway Superintendent Cleveland then reported that after the 12 Noon Bid Opening had closed on Tuesday, October 3, 2006 he received a Bid for all five (5) surplus vehicles, totaling Ninety-two Hundred Dollars ($9200) and he acknowledged receiving a check in this amount. [The name of the bidder had not been disclosed.]

You can't be called a bidder if you submit the bid AFTER the Bid Opening! Mr. Al Roberts pays $9,200 for the 1995 Gradall and 4 other vehicles...not as the result of the bid invitation that was placed in the paper by the Town Clerk, but as a result of the $9,200 check that Roger Cleveland received from Mr. Al Roberts after the bidding is closed. Mr. Roberts didn't bother to submit a bid; but Roger Cleveland just happens to have the check in his pocket at the October 4, 2006 town board meeting. At that meeting, Roger Cleveland advises the town board not to accept the other 2 bids that were received for the 1980 Mack Dump Trucks because the bids are below book value.

After some discussion that took place over 3 board meetings, the town board finally approved the deal. Here are links to the New Hartford Town Board meetings where the discussions took place:

October 4, 2006

October 18, 2006

November 1, 2006

Now let's look at a excerpt from page 7 of the Town of Whitestown Town Board Minutes dated July 20, 2005 about 14 months prior to the Town of New Hartford bid invitation in September 2006:

The Town Board also received sealed bids for Whitestown’s surplus vehicles and equipment. They are as follows:

1. 1983 Badger (Gradall) VIN#171581

$3,250.00 – Dominick A. Talerico
$9,551.00 – Louis Cosimino

As you can see, the Town of Whitestown received a high bid of $9,551 for a 1983 Badger (Gradall). Whereas, the Town of New Hartford sold a 1995 Badger (without the town board first declaring it surplus) plus four (4) other vehicles for $9,200 and outside the bidding process!!

We can assume that one or more of the following may be in play here:

• The Town of Whitestown just got lucky...after all there is a 'sucker' born every minute, isn't there?
• the Town of Whitestown probably found the last 'sucker' born in the Mohawk Valley...beating us out by just a few short months.
• The book value of Badgers took a sharp decline from July 2005 to October 2006. The 1995 models are worth less now than the 1983 models were just 15 months previous. Must be a "supply and demand" type issue.
• Houston, we have a problem!

By the way, in March 2007, Concerned Citizens contacted a person who is "in the business" and he estimated that the 1995 Badger alone, not to mention the other four (4) vehicles ( unless the Badger was not well maintained) would be worth between $12,000-$18,000.

Have I mentioned that Al Roberts is a relative of a Town Board member?

Don't go away...to be continued! It's gonna get better before all is said and done!

Question...

Who's in Charge?

On Wednesday, October 30, 2007, Concerned Citizens submitted a FOIL request for five (5) pieces of information regarding town vehicles that were sold in 2006.

Over the next week or so, we will be reporting on our FOIL requests and what we found out...we are breaking it into parts because there is so much information...or lack thereof...that it would make your head spin if we wrote about it all at once!

One of the FOIL requests was for the board resolutions declaring the following vehicles as surplus prior to their sale to...none other than Mr. Al Roberts, a relative of Councilman David Reynolds:

1995 Badger, VIN AG038182 (sold Nov. 1, 2006)

1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN
1FDYS90L4JVA45633 (sold Jan. 4, 2006)

1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN
1FDYS90L6JVA45634 (sold Jan. 4, 2006)

1994 GMC (3HD) Dump Truck, VIN
1GDKC34F1RJ502454 (sold Jan. 4, 2006)

The town clerk sent us an email on October 31, 2007 saying that she hopes to have a response to our FOIL request by November 14, 2007 at the latest.

Today, November 16th and still we did not receive a response. We had other town business at the Town Clerk's office so we stopped in to check on our FOIL request.

The Town Clerk said that they have looked through the minutes in 2005 and 2006 and haven't been able to find anything yet. We're not surprised! If the Town Clerk finds these board resolutions, we will report it here...but don't sit on the edge of your chair waiting.

We informed the Town Clerk that she wouldn't be able to find anything because there never was a board resolution authorizing the Highway Superintendent, Roger Cleveland, to sell these vehicles as "surplus". We have "searchable" town board minutes on our website and we are confident that there never were any resolutions authorizing the Roger Cleveland to sell these vehicles.

According to Town Law:

ARTICLE 4
TOWN BOARDS
S 64. General powers of town boards. Subject to law and the provisions of this chapter, the town board of every town:

2-a. Acquisition and sale of personal property. May take, purchase,lease, sell and dispose of personal property as the purposes of the town may require, except as otherwise provided by law.

3. Management, custody and control of town property. Shall have the management, custody and control of all town lands, buildings and property of the town and keep them in good repair and may cause the same to be insured against loss or damage by fire or other hazard.

By law, the town board has control of ALL town property. Therefore, no town property should be sold without a resolution of the town board.

To be continued...it gets better...much better!

And the winner is....

the Town of New Hartford.

The D.E.C. agreed to waive 20% of the Consent Order fines...instead of the fines being paid to D.E.C., the Town of New Hartford will receive $30,000 for a local environmental beautification project!

Concerned Citizens remembers New Hartford Highway Superintendent Roger Cleveland commenting on this topic...however, Roger called it a "grant" at the town board meetings...no mention of D.E.C. and the Consent Order. Members of Concerned Citizens are always amazed at the difference between our recordings of the town board meetings and the approved minutes of those same meetings.

For the record, besides being Town of New Hartford Highway Superintendent, Mr. Cleveland is also on the Oneida County Sewer Advisory Committee and a member of the Sauquoit Creek Basin Inter-municipal Commission.

Don't miss reading Strikeslip's Consent Order (In)Justice.

Just what is needed in New Hartford...more impervious surfaces!

Anonymous Tip Line now Available...

We have now added a new feature to all our websites and this blog allowing you to send us anonymous tips regarding any waste, fraud or misuse of taxpayer monies.


New Hartford Tip Line
If you know about something that needs to be investigated and/or exposed, please use our form and let us know about it...we will investigate the situation. Rest assured, unless YOU decide to leave us your email address, even we will be unable to track you. Please be sure to give us as much information as possible when you write to us.


Concerned Citizens for Honest & Open Government

Together, we can make a change!

Surplus...Town of New Hartford Style

The Town of New Hartford now lists their "surplus" equipment on eBay to sell to the highest bidder.

When Concerned Citizens saw a brand new Troy-Bilt 5.5 HP 24" Snow Blower listed by the New Hartford Police Department with the notation "This is a new snow thrower. Only run to test machine." we were curious. Since we noticed that the item had already been paid for by October 30, 2007 according to the feedback left by the bidder, we emailed a FOIL request to the Town Clerk on November 2, 2007, asking for information regarding the transaction.

Today, we received a response from Chief Philo. Apparently, the item was a sale of unclaimed property "that was seized as part of a drug and stolen property investigation conducted by the Oneida County Drug Task Force, the Oneida County District Attorney's Office and the New Hartford Police." Curious how the town knew the snowblower had only been used to test the machine, although it does look brand new. The Subject of the memo from Chief Philo is sale of Unclaimed Property on E-Bay. Was it stolen from a local snowblower dealer who didn't report it missing?

As you can see by Chief Philo's memo, the check from Paypal was made out to Dan Herman, a New Hartford Police Officer. Chief Philo said the check is made out to Officer Herman because the town used Officer Herman's Paypal account to receive the proceeds of the sale. Hmm!! I got to tell you, nothing against Chief Philo or Officer Herman, but why would any municipality want an employee to use their own personal Paypal account to receive funds due the town for sale of surplus equipment, particularly if this is something that is going to be done on a regular basis? It might look better if the Town of New Hartford either opened up their own Paypal account or accepted only cashier checks or money orders.

Concerned Citizens also wonders why there is nothing in the town board minutes regarding the eBay sales that have taken place thus far. Seems that there should be some sort of record of the item, the amount received and who it was received from and perhaps a resolution declaring the item surplus before the sale occurs.

One other thing caught our attention. The town apparently is not charging sales tax for the sale of surplus items. Why not? According to the Terms on their eBay page, the Town of Huntington, N.Y., the City of Rome, Oneida County and Warren County, N.Y. all collect sales tax on their eBay sales. Isn't that the law? Shouldn't the Town of New Hartford be collecting and reporting the sales tax for these items...don't we get a little of that money back in the form of sales tax revenue?

Think of the lost sales tax revenue for the surplus vehicles that were sold and still running around town with Town of New Hartford license plates. Of course, if you don't register a vehicle and get license plates because someone "mistakenly" left the old license plates on the vehicle, it stands to reason that you won't have to pay the sales tax either if someone "mistakenly" forgets to charge the sales tax at the time of the sale.

Perhaps the Town of New Hartford needs to get with the program!

1 + 3 = 5

So Councilman Payne has done his homework and decided that it will save money to close the Kellogg Road Community Center, a building that is often used as a meeting room by non-profits, as well as a polling place [Wonder where Ward 1 residents will have to travel to in order to vote in the Feb. 2008 Presidential Primary?], Board of Assessment Review and to house birthday parties, etc. and Supervisor Reed is quoted as saying "when you can't raise taxes further, you try to cut costs".

We are all for cutting costs, Supervisor Reed, but why not tell people about the declining revenues due to signed contracts with other municipalities for 911 service. Isn't it ironic that you weren't thinking about the taxpayers when you signed 911 service contracts.

2006 was the last budget from the Ralph Humphreys administration...total contracted revenue for 911 service was $22,963. Earle Reed becomes Supervisor Reed, and in the first budget (2007) the town board reduced the contract amount for the Town of New Hartford 911 Dispatch service to NYM, Whitesboro and Yorkville. It is particularly odd that in May 2006 a new Dispatch contract was negotiated and approved by the New Hartford Town Board that will cost New Hartford taxpayers substantially more and yet according to the 2007 Final Budget that was passed by the town board in November 2006, the contracted amounts for each of the other municipalities is reduced leaving Town of New Hartford taxpayers to pick up the additional cost of the 911 Dispatch. Why, Supervisor Reed? If you didn't reduce the amount of the contracts, did the other municipalities threaten to stop using our 911 service and instead use Oneida County 911 services that everyone already pays for anyway? In short, Town of New Hartford taxpaying residents are subsidizing program participants. Why? Looks like you were more concerned about cutting costs to other municipalities than worrying about Town of New Hartford taxpayers.

That $2,963 loss in revenue for 911 service would have paid for the utilities at the Kellogg Road Community Center, so we suspect there is another reason for closing that building.

In the November 8, 2007 Observer Dispatch, Jerome Donovan is quoted as saying, "the building is an eyesore in the town's redevelopment plan and occupies valuable commercial property." That's a funny statement coming from a Planning Board member. The Kellogg Road Community Center occupies a small part of the land where the police station is located. Without the land that the police station is on, the land for the Community Center is useless. Even with the police station land, it is debatable what kind of commercial enterprise would be allowed on that property due to Codes restrictions and the fact that the new owner of 1 Oxford Crossing (as did the previous owners) has a lease for the use of some of the town land behind the police station.

Some people seem to have an "inside track" as to what is really being planned for Kellogg Road Community Center. Obviously, saving taxpayer money in the Town of New Hartford isn't paramount under the Earle Reed administration. We suspect it has more to do with development.

Hmm.....Mallard Brook Lane....

Interesting item in the October 24, 2007 town board minutes. We suspect it was the item discussed by Roger Cleveland, Highway Superintendent, when he walked up to the table where the Town Board sits and shared what appeared to be a map because the subject wasn't discussed openly so that the audience could hear. Roger always speaks in a low, monotone voice when he addresses the board, but this time he purposely spoke facing the board with his back against the audience. Funny, when a resident speaks to the board they are asked to come to the podium and speak up. Guess Mr. Cleveland has a secret he doesn't want to share with the taxpayers. In fact, we know he has a reason to keep this one quiet. From the October 24, 2007 minutes:

Driveway Permit – Mallard Brook

The Highway Superintendent briefed the Town Board regarding a request for a driveway permit on Mallard Brook Lane. The proposed driveway will cross a narrow strip of land under Town ownership, that strip being on one side, the southern highway Rights of Way of Mallard Brook and on the other, the northerly boundary line of a private property, the owner of whom is petitioning for this driveway permit. The subject strip of land was given to the Town in the 1990’s to preclude highway access onto Mallard Brook from a proposed Planned Development project behind what is now the Library. An agreement would be required between the property owner and the Town, and that agreement would stipulate that the Town would forever retain the right to revoke the Permit, should the Town require that strip of land for its own purposes. The Board had no issues with advancing the matter, and Superintendent Cleveland stated he would continue working with the Town Attorney on the agreement.

Hmm! Mallard Brook Lane...who owns that property? Who would be in need of some town property. Last we knew there were three homes on Mallard Brook Lane that we believe are 2 family homes. We also believe that they are all owned by Village East, Inc. and are rental properties. Hmm! Who is Village East, Inc. Obviously, the town doesn't want us to know.

This almost sounds like the same deal that was worked out when the town signed a lease agreement with the builder of 1 Oxford Crossing. We recently talked to a banker and he said that with a lease from the town, a developer could easily get money to develop land. Guess that is what happened at 1 Oxford Crossing. That's why the property is assessed for about $550,000 and appraises for $1,000,000. The owner doesn't really own the land so it can't be assessed with the building. The town owns the land and the town doesn't pay taxes. The taxpayers make up the lost revenue for land owned by a town. Without that piece of property leased from the town, the building could not have been built in the first place.

Hmm! Leasing town property to a developer...doesn't that require a permissive referendum like the bonding did where we had to collect signatures? Is it even morally or ethically acceptable for a developer to be essentially "given" town property, particularly when that developer may well be a town official? You be the judge.

Town official...is that why the name was omitted from the minutes?

Let's Make a Deal...

You will recall a short time ago we blogged about the CFO job and Mr. Frank Basile. Well, since that post we have FOILed and received several emails between Supervisor Earle Reed and Mr. Basile.

According to information we received, Mr. Reed actually contacted Mr. Basile by FAX on August 21, 2007 and inquired as to whether or not Mr. Basile had an interest in "serving the Town"...that would be eleven (11) days after the town put an ad in the Observer Dispatch, an ad on CareerBuilders and an ad on the Town website stating that the Town was looking for a Comptroller. Actually, we have information that Mr. Basile had already been in 'talks' with the town (or someone connected with the town) long before the FAX was sent to him on August 21, 2007.

On August 22, 2007, Mr. Basile contacted Supervisor Reed by email for clarification of the job the town was trying to fill. Mr. Basile asked,

"Are you looking for a firm to provide a number of hours @ a specified rate per hour/per year to assist you and the Town with your accounting needs as outlined in items 1 thru 3 of your letter or are you looking for an individual to maintain that position on an annual basis?

On September 10, 2007, Mr. Basile sent another email to let the Supervisor know he "has met with his staff"...and Mr. Basile feels that "we can work out an agreement". That email also stated his standard hourly rates v. the rates his firm was willing to charge for providing services to the town.

The ads placed by the Town were for a comptroller and the job was stated as full-time. The ads also stated that they were taking applications until October 1, 2007, yet a contract dated September 10, 2007, is signed by the Town and Mr. Basile. No place in any of the ads for the Comptroller position did the town mention that they would be open to consulting services. Looking for a full-time comptroller implies that they are looking to hire an employee...not a contractor.

By law, a town must go to bid for any service that is provided for over $20,000 per year...the town did not advertise for bids to fill this 'need'...they placed an ad for a full-time employee. How many accountants would have applied for this "Comptroller position" if they were informed that it is to be BILLED to the town on an hourly basis and the employer-employee relationship is not required. The press release sent to the Observer Dispatch by Mr. Basile clearly states that Mr. Basile is not an employee...here is an excerpt from that release:

It was incorrectly reported on September 27, 2007, that the Town of New Hartford Board hired Frank J. Basile as a part-time employee and that he would receive an annual salary. Mr. Basile has not been hired as an employee, rather his CPA firm has been retained to provide professional accounting and consulting services. Services will be billed at standard hourly rates.

The certified public accounting and consulting firm of Frank J. Basile, CPA's, P.C. has been engaged by the Town of New Hartford Board to provide professional accounting and consulting services for the next 16 months.

Additionally, paying for the consulting services from the CFO Budget Line is misleading and wrong. Mr. Basile is not the CFO of the town...by law, Supervisor Earle C. Reed is the CFO of the town. Mr. Basile is contracting with the town to provide budgeting and accounting advisory services and therefore he should be paid from the Contractual Expense budget line. As contractual, the town should have placed an Invitation to Bid legal notice in the paper for those services.

An Opinion from the State Comptroller's Office states:

With respect to whether the town comptroller may be designated as the "chief fiscal officer" of the town, we note initially that, although many statutes provide for particular functions to be performed by the town's chief fiscal officer (see, e.g., Town Law, §30; General Municipal Law, §11), there is no provision in the Town Law or any other statute which, for all purposes, designates a particular town officer as the "chief fiscal officer" of the town (cf. Local Finance Law, §2.00[5][c] defining "chief fiscal officer" in a town to mean the town supervisor for purposes of the Local Finance Law).

Concerned Citizens believes that the ads that were placed in the paper, on the town website and on Career Builders were a ruse to make it appear that Supervisor Reed was abiding by the law. You, the taxpayer, paid for this baloney and advertising is not cheap!

At the September 26, 2007 town board meeting when it was made known that Mr. Basile would be hired at the rate of $150 per hour, Councilman Woodland asked how much money would be spent for this position. Supervisor Reed replied, "we don't know, but it will be within the budget." After looking at the 2008 Preliminary Budget, Concerned Citizens has to assume that they have a very good idea of how much it will cost, because the CFO budget line was increased from $35,000 this year (2007) to $40,000 for 2008. Why would you raise the budget line if you didn't think you need to...just in case?

And here is Mr. Basile's contract with the Town of New Hartford. He is not providing services of a Chief Financial Officer.

Mr. Basile, be careful when you "Make a Deal"....it is possible that you might just get zonked!

Election 2007...

in the Town of New Hartford is over. We would like to congratulate Ms. Krupa.

To Everything there is a Season... and now it is time to get back to work.

Concerned Citizens has worked hard to bring to light the improprieties that seem to be more and more commonplace in our town government. We learned a lot from this election and we will build on what we have learned.

After last night's board meeting, Supervisor Reed apologized for the town license plates on a van owned by Councilman Reynolds relative and said it has been taken care of. We guess that Concerned Citizens is supposed to rest easier knowing that Police Chief Philo will now be in charge of seeing that license plates are turned in before vehicles are released after a sale. Thank you for 'reaching out' to this blogger, Supervisor Reed. However, one right doesn't make it o.k.--it just means that we have to continue watching, because obviously your comment last evening confirmed that we were right in what we uncovered. The question still remains, was it an 'honest' mistake or was it a 'blind eye' to the law? Also, perhaps it would be a good gesture if Councilman Reynolds would start by recusing himself from voting on matters concerning members of his family...the van isn't the first time, but we hope it will be the last...aye, Councilman Reynolds? By the way, Supervisor Reed, was it a mistake last night when you mentioned the town was wrong in how they dealt with the license plates for the two (2) vehicles, because we only wrote about one vehicle?

We would like everyone to read the email Russ Cerminaro sent to us yesterday.

I want to thank all the Concerned Citizens who supported us and say I feel sorry for all of you who could not find the time to get out and vote because you have just allowed this administration to continue it's closed door policies and runway government.

Thanks again for allowing me the opportunity to try and serve this community in the manner it should be served. For all of you who believe in the betterment of our community, I urge you to continue to push for better government by seeking new candidates in future elections. We need a new Town Supervisor and a New Town Board totally disassociated from the current members.

Russ Cerminaro
Russ for Change

We all worked hard, including you Russ...you dedicated many hours of your time to visit residents and listen to their concerns. We commend you for 'stepping up to the plate' to try to take a bite out of the Republican machine in the Town of New Hartford. Russ, it was our pleasure to work with you...I have a feeling it won't be the end of our 'working' together. There is so much work to do.

To everyone who took the time to vote on Tuesday, regardless of who you voted for, we thank you. To those who voted for Russ with the hopes of starting to change the way government is currently being done in the Town of New Hartford, we are greatly moved. To those who didn't take the time to vote because you felt your vote didn't count anyway, shame on you! What will it take to get you motivated to take part in the democratic process?

To EVERYONE in the Town of New Hartford...we will be adding an anonymous 'tip line' to our websites in the next few days. Feel free to email us with information without fear of anyone (including us) knowing who you are. We know there is information out there and things that need to be uncovered. If you are asking us to look into something, we only ask that you give us enough information so we know what path to start taking to investigate the situation.

We will also be updating our Online Assessment Program to reflect the 2007 assessment roll. Our assessment program is the only place where you will find assessment history information on ALL properties in the Town of New Hartford from 2001 to the present day. The last time we checked, the town program is missing a couple hundred properties...probably explains why those properties never got reassessed back in 2002-2004. It is also the only place where the assessment program is offered to you FREE of charge. The town has a grant to pay the bill for their assessment program for now, but when that grant is done, guess who will be paying? By the way, Concerned Citizens is confident that there will be no more need to have to wait months to receive FOIL copies of the assessment roll since ORPS has now made it known on their website that a special FOIL program has been created to provide copies of assessment databases to those who request it, right Supervisor Reed?

We have also FOILed and received many documents from New Hartford Central School to include contracts, budget information and School Board minutes. We will start posting them shortly.

Concerned Citizens is not going away...trust us, we've only just begun!

Hail! Hail! The Gang's all Here!

Did you see the news on the Observer Dispatch website on Saturday evening at about 6:45 p.m.? It also appeared in the Sunday O.D. page 11, under Political Briefs:

“New Hartford Development Announcement Monday: State and Local Officials will announce an economic development project at 10:00 A.M., Monday at Butler Hall on Genesee St. Representatives will include Oneida County Executive Anthony Picente, Sen. Joseph Griffo, Assemblyman Dave Townsend, Legislator Michael Damsky and New Hartford Town Supervisor Earl Reed.”

We couldn't wait to hear the wonderful news. This blogger put on her best pair of blue jeans, sneakers and sweater for what she thought would be exciting news...just the thought of 'rubbing elbows' with these 'celebrities' has had me in a tizzy ever since I first read the news on the Observer Dispatch website.

Almost all Town Department Heads were in attendance... guess they all must have got "the memo". I also saw Village of New Hartford Mayor Don Ryan, Mike Damsky, Jim D'Onfrio, Dave Townsend, Joe Griffo, Tony Picente, Larry Adler and Earle Reed to name a few. Excuse me gentlemen, if I left anyone out...I was awe-stricken by the personalities that surrounded me. The town spared no expense; they used their best card table and paper napkins and there was plenty of coffee and donut holes to go around. I could feel the suspense in the air. WKTV was there, along with someone from the Observer Dispatch. I actually got to sit right next to them.

Finally the moment came and the announcement was made. Drum roll, please!

The Hartford Insurance Company will be building a new building in the New Hartford Business Park.

What???!! I read that story in the Observer Dispatch back on September 30th.

I couldn't believe it! This was a well-orchestrated piece of political bullsh*t...doesn't everyone have better things to do? Like maybe their jobs! Just how stupid do all these politicians think we are...it is time to give them a clue at the polls tomorrow!

Vote for Change!

Together, we can make a change!

New Hartford residents, use our

Program.

2008 Preliminary Budget

Friday, we took a trip to the Town Clerk's office and picked up a copy of the 2008 Preliminary Budget. There will be a Public Hearing at 6:00 p.m. Wednesday, November 7, 2007 so we are making a copy available for your perusal.

We want to start by pointing out something that might go unnoticed:

On page 2 of the budget...at the bottom, under Comptroller, you will notice Bond Counsel/Orrick, Herr $3,500 and Fiscal Advisors $4,500. If we were betting people, we would guess that there are plans to vote on another bond proposal just like last year when they voted for $5.5 million bonding without giving a say to the people. We can't think of any other reason why this money would be allotted in these categories. Do you think they will once again make residents collect over 5,000 signatures in order to bring the bond issue(s) to a vote by the residents of New Hartford?

Could it be that they are waiting until after the election Tuesday for a reason? In order for a bonding resolution to pass, the town board needs what is termed a "super-vote" meaning that 4 of 5 board members must vote in the affirmative. In contrast, to conduct normal town board business, only 3 'aye' votes out of 5 possible votes are needed.

In other words they need Ms. Krupa's "bought and paid for" vote to be guaranteed that a bond resolution will pass. Otherwise, they are dependent on the lone Democrat, Rich Woodland, to side with them if Russ Cerminaro is elected to the town board. Since Russ Cerminaro was not 'bought and paid for' by politically connected people and all his supporters are volunteers from the community, they cannot be assured of getting the necessary 'super-vote'.

We suggest that you take time to read the Preliminary Budget and attend the hearing on Wednesday, November 7, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in Butler Hall.

Don't miss our blog tomorrow. We have been doing our research and we will have some very interesting facts regarding economic development in the Town of New Hartford.

It's starting to smell fishy around here...

Calling all Town Highway Superintendents, private contractors, etc...Hurry and place your bid on ebay before we have to once again sell the item to Al Roberts because the bid amount was too low.

UPDATE: The reserve was not met. Now what to do...the town can either:

• Sell it to the $7,500 bidder, whoever that might be "?"
• Re-list the item and hope that a higher bid comes in next time
• Use the plow for another 7 or 8 years...the supposed useful life of a snowplow according to the time that the bond resolution last year was for
• Add it to a sale of other vehicles to Al Roberts for a total bid of about $8,000 and hopes that no one notices
• Any combination of the above
  

Does anyone find it odd that the Town of New Hartford would be selling a 1999 Dump Truck & Plow...approximately 8 years old when just last October the town board voted to bond for 15 years to purchase snowplows?

Look at the current bid...as of 10:15 this morning (November 2) the bid is $7,100 and the reserve has not yet been met.

Wonder if we will see another deal like this one that occurred on October 4, 2006...the same night the town board voted to bond for $5.5 million dollars of spending to include new trucks for the Highway Department (emphasis in minutes has been added by this blogger):

Surplus Vehicle Sale – Rejection of Bids
The Highway Superintendent reported that two (2) Bids had been received Tuesday, October 3, 2006 for the Surplus Vehicle Sale:

· Michael Santillo - Bid $2,006 for the 1980 Mack Truck

· Harvey Material Corp. - Bid $1,700 for the 1980 Mack Truck.

No bids were received for the remaining four (4) surplus vehicles, i.e., 1995 Badger, 1990 G10 Van, 1996 Crown Victoria, 1999 Crown Victoria.

Highway Superintendent Cleveland then reported that after the 12 Noon Bid Opening had closed on Tuesday, October 3, 2006 he received a Bid for all five (5) surplus vehicles, totaling Ninety-two Hundred Dollars ($9200) and he acknowledged receiving a check in this amount. [The name of the bidder had not been disclosed.] Thereafter, upon recommendation of the Highway Superintendent, Councilman Payne offered the following Resolution for adoption and Councilman Reynolds seconded same:

(RESOLUTION NO. 285 OF 2006)
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of New Hartford does hereby reject the bids submitted by Michael Santillo and Harvey Material Corp. for surplus vehicles due to the bid amounts being below the current book value of the vehicles, according to the Highway Superintendent.

The Resolution was then declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

And then, at the same board meeting, Resolution 285 beget Resolution 286:

Surplus Vehicles – Bid Offer Accepted
Upon recommendation of the Highway Superintendent, Councilman Reynolds introduced the following Resolution for adoption; seconded by Councilman Payne:

(RESOLUTION NO. 286 OF 2006)
WHEREAS, the Highway Superintendent received a bid proposal of Ninety-two Hundred Dollars ($9200) from a local resident for five (5) Town surplus vehicles together with payment for same, said bid proposal having been received after the 12 Noon Bid Opening on Tuesday, October 3, 2006;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the New Hartford Town Board does hereby accept the bid proposal submitted [by Al Roberts] in the amount of Ninety-two Hundred Dollars ($9200) for the following surplus vehicles:

· 1980 Mack Dump Truck, VIN RM6864X1160
· 1995 Badger, VIN AG038182
· 1990 Chevrolet G10 Van, VIN 1GCDG15Z3L7151162
· 1996 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN 2FALP71W6TX167995
· 1999 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN 2FAFP71WXXX185788.

The Resolution was then declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

Isn't it amazing that the Highway Superintendent just happened to have a check in his pocket from an undisclosed bidder who didn't really submit the bid during the advertised bidding period. And notice in the second resolution, the undisclosed bidder is none other than Al Roberts, relative of a town board member. Why did the Highway Superintendent even take a check from Al Roberts before bringing the matter to the town board?

For the record Councilman Reynolds, should you be taking part in a vote to sell a piece of town equipment to a relative? More importantly, should you be the Councilman that introduces the resolution to sell the vehicles to a relative, particularly when Mr. Roberts didn't even bother submitting a bid during the ADVERTISED bidding period?

Words for the day, Councilman Reynolds...I abstain from voting because...

One of these things...

From the Regular Town Board Meeting, January 4, 2006 - page 5:

Highway Superintendent:

Disposition of Surplus Vehicles
Upon report of the Highway Superintendent, Councilman Woodland introduced the following Resolution for adoption; seconded by Supervisor Reed:

(RESOLUTION NO. 24 OF 2006)

WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 208 adopted July 20, 2005, the Town Board declared the following vehicles as surplus and authorized the Town Supervisor to solicit bids for the public sale of the surplus vehicles:

1989 Chevrolet Suburban - VIN 1GNER16K2KF179482
1990 Chevrolet Van - VIN 1GCCG15Z3178151162
1991 Chevrolet Pick-up - VIN 1GCGS14ZXM2153887
1995 Jeep Cherokee - VIN 1J4FJ68S4SL507785
1995 Jeep SPT - VIN 1J4FJ68S0SL646389
1996 Ford Crown Victoria - VIN 2FALP71W6TX167995
1996 Ford Crown Victoria - VIN 2FALP71W2TX167993
1996 Ford Suburban - VIN 1FUKE30H9SHB62081; and

WHEREAS, the Highway Superintendent acknowledged receipt of a sole bid on January 4, 2006 which had been canvassed and subsequently discussed with the Public Works & Sewer Committee;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the New Hartford Town Board does hereby accept the sole bid submitted by Roberts Construction of Upstate New York in the amount of Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000) and does hereby sell the following vehicles to said Roberts Construction, in “as is” condition, with no warranties implied or expressed:

1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN 1FDYS90L4JVA45633
1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN 1FDYS90L6JVA45634
1989 Chevrolet Suburban, VIN 1GNER16K2KF179482
1991 Chevrolet (S-10) Pick-up Truck, VIN 1GCGS14ZXM2153887
1994 GMC (3HD) Dump Truck, VIN 1GDKC34F1RJ502454
1995 Jeep Cherokee, VIN 1J4FJ68S4SL507785.

The Resolution was declared unanimously carried and duly ADOPTED.

Did you notice anything different about the first group of vehicles listed as 'surplus' vs. the vehicles sold in the second list? That's right...none of the three vehicles below are listed as surplus, yet they were sold.

1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN 1FDYS90L4JVA45633
1988 Ford Dump Truck, VIN 1FDYS90L6JVA45634
1994 GMC (3HD) Dump Truck, VIN 1GDKC34F1RJ502454

In fact, we can't find anywhere in the town board minutes where these dump trucks have been declared 'surplus' by the town board and we have "searchable" minutes on our website! We submitted a FOIL request to the town clerk for the board resolutions and we were told that she expects to have our requested documents by November 14, 2007. Sure!

These three dump trucks were purchased by the same gentleman who purchased the van with town license plates that has been photographed on Sangertown Mall property being driven by a person doing landscaping and maintenance of the mall. He is also a relative of a current board member...right Mr. Reynolds?

So he bought all these vehicles for $8,000. Either they are a piece of crap or he got one HELL of a deal! I wonder if these dump trucks came complete with plows and Town of New Hartford license plates...it has been reported to us that this purchaser has quite a few 'surplus' Town of New Hartford trucks, etc. that are used to plow and maintain the mall grounds. Guess the Town of New Hartford's loss is Sangertown Square's gain...one man's trash is another man's treasure...so they say!

Just who is minding the store in the Town of New Hartford, anyway?