http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2008/09/22/daily22.html?t=printable

Quoted Text

Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 5:07 PM EDT
DiNapoli showcases ‘open book’ Web site
The Business Review (Albany)

People interested in knowing how much money their municipality collected in taxes can do so now without traveling to city hall thanks to a new Web site created by the state comptroller’s office.

The site, www.openbooknewyork, includes revenue and expenditure information for 3,100 local governments. Users can search by city, county, fire district, school, town or village. The information goes back to 1996.

State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli announced his plans to create the Web site in June. The purpose of the site is to show how much New York’s local governments spend and collect in taxes.

For example, in 2006 the city of Schenectady reported $92.2 million in revenue and $94.9 million in expenditures.

The site also contains searchable databases of spending for more than 100 state agencies and more than 60,000 state contracts.

“New Yorkers have a right to know how their tax dollars are spent, and Open Book delivers that information in just a few mouse clicks,” DiNapoli said.

Here is Schenectady County.................


http://wwe1.osc.state.ny.us/transparency/LocalGov/LocalGovSearchResults.cfm

Link doesn't work, it's just a general link...timed out.  Gotta search for it on your own.

What is this 2006 expenditure that is listed under Cultural and Recreation?  $120K that is not accounted for under "Recreation Services" or "Youth Recreation".  Whose recreation, then, does this fund?

MISCELLANEOUS CULTURAL AND RECREATION 120,747

A summary of the problem that we face:

Revenues    2006            2005             2004            2003             2002             2001  
Total       232,307,796  212,904,657  213,413,890  210,973,655  209,909,194  208,451,972  

Expenditures   2006            2005             2004             2003             2002             2001  
Total       248,028,647  235,593,909   226,767,067  223,389,964  223,315,404  219,752,757  

DIFFERENCE 2006      2005             2004              2003            2002              2001
             <15,720,851> <22,689,252> <13,353,177><12416309><13,406,210><11,300,785>

Deficit spending.  Excessive spending is driving up property taxes and borrowed funds that must be repaid by future generations.  Cut now, Cut here!

Look at the trends below:

Expenditures     2006     2005     2004     2003     2002     2001  
Total 248,028,647  235,593,909  226,767,067  223,389,964  223,315,404  219,752,757  



EDUCATION  14,718,335 9,444,188 8,443,038 9,713,175 10,393,303 13,788,580


COMMUNITY COLLEGE 7,618,390 3,473,316 3,265,411 4,219,392 4,644,779 8,326,948
MISCELLANEOUS EDUCATION 7,099,945 5,970,872 5,177,627 5,493,783 5,748,524 5,461,632

Quoted Text

EXPENDITURES REPORT FOR THE TOWN OF ROTTERDAM


EXPENDITURES                           2006                     2004                     2002                     2000                     1998
TOTAL                             $21,002,910.00       $17,683,399.00  $20,950,597.00 $16,458,811.00       $13,688,408.00
Public Safety                     $5,164,353.00       $4,716,730.00       $4,489,354.00       $4,119,890.00       $3,393,834.00
Disaster Response              -                        -                       -                       -                       -
Fire Protection                     $41,259.00       $26,492.00       $37,781.00       $21,757.00       $38,294.00
Miscellaneous Public Safety      $139,822.00       $146,495.00       $245,023.00       $218,631.00       $142,814.00
Police                                 $4,983,272.00       $4,543,743.00       $4,206,550.00       $3,879,502.00       $3,212,726.00

        

Quoted Text

EXPENDITURES REPORT FOR THE TOWN OF GUILDERLAND

EXPENDITURES                                    2006                    2004                   2002                   2000                   1998
TOTAL                                      $30,221,978.00     $32,782,678.00     $30,873,741.00     $24,193,747.00     $23,274,440.00
Public Safety                                $6,141,511.00     $5,622,660.00     $5,190,084.00     $4,565,312.00     $3,736,058.00
Emergency Response                       $400,943.00     $380,475.00     $378,520.00     $469,437.00     $258,915.00
Fire Protection                                $255,323.00     $302,092.00     $247,232.00     $219,897.00     $249,712.00
Homeland Security And Civil         $85,183.00     -     -     -     -
Miscellaneous Public Safety               $337,655.00     $321,040.00     $280,911.00     $266,835.00     $224,073.00
Police                                          $4,509,750.00     $4,116,013.00           $3,843,825.00     $3,198,641.00     $2,659,622.00
Public Safety Administration               $552,657.00     $503,040.00     $439,596.00     $410,502.00     $343,736.00

http://www.city-data.com/city/Rotterdam-New-York.html
Rotterdam population= 21,148        
Guilderland population= 34,831

http://www.city-data.com/city/Guilderland-New-York.html
Rotterdam area in square miles =6.93
Guilderland area in square miles=57.9

Why does Guilderland with a population 39% greater than Rotterdam to police and 10 times the square milage to patrol than Rotterdam have only 15% of their town expenditure going toward their police while Rotterdam has 25%?  Almost a half of million dollars more spent on police than Guilderland.  

Maybe Mertz was on to something when forming the police commission.  To bad the other board members who shared his political stripe didn't have the balls to follow through.  

GOP leadership blinked first, now the taxpayers have to pay.

I looked at other surrounding cities, towns, and villages expenditures, and the percentage of which was spent on the police department in 2006.

COLONIE- 9%
GLENVILLE- 14%
CITY OF SCHENECTADY- 17%
NISKAYUNA- 16%
CITY OF SARATOGA-13%
CITY OF ALBANY- 18%
SCOTIA- 13%
GUILDERLAND-15%
ROTTERDAM- 24%

JOHNNY BOY CICERO BUMBLETHRU MERTZ:

Your town of Rotterdam is not 6.93 miles and the population is closer to 30,000 than 21,148.  Rotterdam is about 36 sq miles- not 6.  Check the latest census for the population Johnny.

#2-  Didn't you learn your lesson the 1st time you tried to play with numbers and falsely claimed that the police budget was 27% of the town budget.  Must I remind you that that time (as Police Commissioner) your report was full of 1/2 truths and inaccuracies and you were taken to task for it.

#3-  This time you include the $500,000 plus budgeted in Rotterdam on paramedics that is not funded in other police budgets to come up with your 24% figure.  What else are you lumping into the police budget to do your fuzzy math?

You have to ask yourself- what person in the town of Rotterdam would be so upset with the above story in the Gazette about Mertz that they would defend him and spew this nonsense about the Republican Party caving to cops,etc.  WHo would waste their time attempting to manipulate stats to make the police look bad?  Who would spend their time touting the police commission and criticizing Town Board members for "not following through" with Mertz's agenda with the Police Commission of appointing and promoting his cronies.  You could not name one positive that came out of the Police Commission.


Fortunately even your own party has come to its senses and is tired of your nonsense.  

This has nothing to do with the Republicans caving to anyone.  Simply put- when you told them that you felt you could have a better chance of getting reelected in the town if you took the position of attacking the police and their contractual benefits and you continuously misstated facts and argued with everyone about everything- they had enough. Your party won't have ya-  I will drop off an enrollment form for you.  I think that you would make a great Conservative.  Good riddens

PS:

The mole told me that gadfly has resurfaced and is looking for a few good men to assist her in collecting proxies.  Check with Tedisco in the morning and ask if you and all of the other staffers can "take their own time" to go collect a few proxies with her.  She has a great shot of controlling the Conservative Party in a few days......

Sorry to disappoint, I'm not Mertz.  I am a lifelong resident of Rotterdam though.  Mertz went against the grain of traditional Rotterdam politics, and it got him in trouble.  

As to the Open Book statistics, they speak for themselves.  I give the numbers off of the comptrollers website. It's fairly simple math, you divide the part by the whole then move the decimal 2 positions to the right and you have your percentage.  We'll do it together.

4,983,727.00 divided by 21,002,910.00 = .2372657 or 23.7% or rounded up 24% That means police expenditures are 23.7% of total Rotterdam expenditures.  Unless the State Comptroller's numbers are wrong. :-/  


I noticed another interesting trend.  The retirement benefits for police and fire represents 1.4% of total expenditures over the 10 year period in Rotterdam.  Which is very small standing by itself, but when comparing them with surrounding cities and townships, you then realize that most if not all police and fire retirement expenditures represent less than 1% of the budget over those same 10 years.  

Mertzy knew the po-po had it sweet in Rotterdam at the expense of the taxpayers.  The mistake he made was pointing it out and thinking that any politician in Rotterdam had the balls to confront it.

Cissy:

You can divide whatever you want.  Does the State Comptroller's report state that the $500,000 to $600,000 spent on paramedics is included in the $4,983,727.  Or is it just a figure from the town budget that includes paramedics and probably may other things that other towns dont have in the police budget.

Let me help you with the other figures you also lied about.

#1-   If you Wikipedia Town of Rotterdam NY you will find- above Councilman Mertz's name- the number of sq miles of the town....36 sq miles or 600% more than you cited

#2- Below your name, I mean Mertz's name is the population of the town- 28,316 in the year 2000.  Again, you were off by 30% .  Although for you- being within 30% is a drastic
improvement.


Now, you choose to cite figures spent by the state on retirement benefits.  Can we trust your numbers this time?

Let's try some more math.

Rotterdam payed out $2.9 million in police and fire retirement benefits between 1996 and 2006.  In those same ten years Rotterdam's expenditures were $193.5 million.  Ya ready for the math?

2.9 divided by 193.5 = .014987 or 1.49% or rounded to 1.5%.

In those same 10 years Guilderland payed out 1.4 million in police and fire retirement benefits, and their expenditures were $301.2 million.  
Math......

1.4 divided by 301.2 = .003984 or .398% or .40%.  less than a half a percent.

I did the same for Colonie, a larger police department, figuring I would get a larger number.  Here we go with the math again.

Colonie payed out $7.8 million in police and fire benefits between 1996 and 2006, and their expenditure were $844 million over that span.

7.8 divided by 844 = .0092417 or .924% or .92%......Still less than 1%.

I'm gonna keep on looking to find a more generous town than the great Town of Rotterdam

WHILE YOURE LOOKIN- CAN YOU PUT BACK THE 30 SQUARE MILES YOU STOLE FROM THE TOWN AND ALSO RETURN THE 7,000 RESIDENTS YOU APPARENTLY ABDUCTED.

Quoted from papanetta67

WHILE YOURE LOOKIN- CAN YOU PUT BACK THE 30 SQUARE MILES YOU STOLE FROM THE TOWN AND ALSO RETURN THE 7,000 RESIDENTS YOU APPARENTLY ABDUCTED.

Even if the source I cited was wrong and your numbers are correct.  It still puts Rotterdam behind Guilderland in both statistics.

I am trying to figure out what lifelong town resident would all of a sudden be so upset about Mertz being excommunicated , while at the same time bashing the POlice; touting raises for councilmembers; wanting credit for
whatever work supposedly will be done at Masullo.   Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.  Tough one. Who could that be?   I do not have to wonder because the mole knows....

Yes, you and Johnny never admit they are wrong- even when theyre wrong by 600%.  It was the source.  Yes, the source.  Dude, it looks like your source on demographics is about as accurate as your political advisor, Kelly Rhinesmith.  No lifelong Rotterdam resident would be off that much on sq miles.  Someone from Baimbridge might be off that much- not a Rotterdamian.

It was fun watching Mertz upset the apple cart here in Rotterdam. Disrupt the status quo.  I enjoyed watching Ms. Marco's panties get in a bunch as she defended the overpaid crybaby cops at the town hall. Larned parking his dump trucks outside the town meeting at the Senior Center because he couldn't build a Walmart Super Center in the middle of Rotterdam.  

Confronting the power structure of Rotterdam.  Exposing those who've run this town for the past 25 years.  It's ashamed that we'll be regressing back to the days of old.  Hopefully those who've been following these past 4 years will have greater understanding of the extend to the police's involvement in town politics and the drain they have on the town budget.

Goodnight...........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Those who control the guns control the masses-----those who control the money control the masses.........


THAT IS THE EASIEST MATH I HAVE EVER DONE.......DONT BE FOOLED YOU SHEEPLE.....BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

http://moneyasdebt.net/

even the police cant deny their 'job' unless someone wasn't 'telling ALL' to them.........