10/13/14 8:00am
JULIE LANE PHOTO Communities That Care leader Marilynn Pysher made a pitch to the Town Board last week for Shelter Island School’s part-time social worker Jennifer Olsen to provide part-time townwide services.

JULIE LANE PHOTO
Communities That Care leader Marilynn Pysher made a pitch to the Town Board last week for Shelter Island School’s part-time social worker Jennifer Olsen to provide part-time townwide services.

Calling it an “exciting, needed, progressive, practical opportunity,” Communities That Care leader and Shelter Island Board of Education member Marilynn Pysher appealed to the Town Board last week to hire the school’s part-time social worker for additional part-time hours. (more…)

12/16/11 9:00am

PETER BOODY PHOTO | Jeffrey Divoli of the accounting firm AVS goes over the 2010 audit with the Town Board Tuesday.

The town’s auditors gave a rosy summary of the town’s financial condition at the end of 2010 in a state-mandated annual report that was submitted to the Town Board last week.

The numbers show a steadily increasing ratio of fund balances to annual expenditures over the past three years, which means “you’re spending money more efficiently,” Jeffrey Davoli, a partner with AVZ & Co. of New York and Hauppauge, told the Town Board at its work session Tuesday. He said that 2010 was “a positive year” financially for the town, which he described as having “budgeted conservatively.”

The audit showed there had been an increase in the fund balance from 2009 through 2010 of $1,077,356, from $6,458,162 at the end of 2009 to $7,535,518 at the end of 2010. Revenues in 2010 were $316,000 over the amount predicted in the 2010 budget and expenditures were $405,000 lower than the amount budgeted, according to the report.

The 2010 budget as planned in late 2009 was expected to result in a $233,000 decrease in the fund balance but instead it increased because of the better-than-expected revenues and lower-than-expected expenditures.

The 2010 audit came in weeks later than planned so was not available for guidance as the Town Board prepared the 2012 budget. The company has apologized to the town for the delay and assured officials the 2011 audit will be on time. The audit firm is paid $62,000 for its report.

The only topic in the audit with some daunting numbers is a state-required accounting of future liabilities for retirees, including health care and pensions. A recently imposed accounting rule requires municipalities to phase those liabilities into their budgets, which Mr. Davoli said currently stand at 4.9 times the town’s annual payroll. A total of $19 million, he said, must be added to the town’s balance sheet over a 30-year period to cover anticipated retirement costs. The number is not out of line with what other municipalities are facing; the ratio range of retirement liabilities to payroll is from 200 to 550 percent, he told the Town Board. The liability is figured on the basis of current union contracts and inflation. It does not include attrition, which Councilman Ed Brown noted will make the numbers more manageable over time.

Also at Tuesday’s Town Board work session, Supervisor Jim Dougherty reported that Town Tax Receiver Nancy Kotula had mailed out property tax bills on behalf of the town, the county, and the school and fire districts. The town’s portion of the bill takes a smaller bite than it did last year because of slightly reduced 2012 budget and a related drop in the town tax rate.

Mr. Dougherty commented that Town Hall was getting “positive feedback” from taxpayers pleased with the bottom line.

The town tax rate for 2012, $2.2297 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, means the owner of a median-priced home will pay $1,427 in town taxes compared to $1,408 to support the 2011 budget, according to Assessor Al Hammond.

The school tax rate, which is included on the tax bills mailed out this month, is $2.8559 per $1,000; other rates per $1,000 of assessed valuation are: the fire district, $.2612; the county, $.2104; the library, $.1576 and the New York State MTA tax, $.0072.

In other business at its work session, the board:

• Agreed to seek new bids for re-shingling the Legion Hall-Youth Center roof because, according to Councilman Peter Reich, the existing roof does not include tongue-in-groove yellow pine sheathing, as expected; it is cedar shingling on lathes. As a result, the job will require a foundation of half-inch plywood that was not included in the original bid specifications. The job had been awarded to R. W. Mulligan Co., whose bid in response to the original specifications was $28,200.

• Agreed to vote at its December 29 meeting on a year-old proposal to allow paved driveways in the Near Shore Overlay Protection District if certain requirements are met, including with some exceptions an engineered drainage plan that directs runoff into the aquifer. No one spoke against the proposal at a public hearing at the board’s December 2 meeting.

• Heard a resident request that the town establish a dog park with fencing to be donated by users. Board members noted that a petition for a dog park was submitted last year. They expressed interest in exploring the idea.

10/26/11 10:47pm

For some reason — perhaps the bad economy — more people have asked me to explain how the budget process works this year than in my previous seven years as your town councilman combined. I would like to offer a simple overview of how it is supposed to work.

1. In late summer or early fall, the supervisor is supposed to provide worksheets to all the department heads to include information such as the year-to-date amounts in their accounts and previous year(s) budget amounts. They fill in estimates for each of their budget lines for the upcoming year and return the worksheet to the supervisor by the date requested. The amount requested is supposed to appear in the budget column entitled “Requested Budget” with no modifications. That did not happen this year. Many “Requested Budget” lines in the presented budget were not what the department heads said they had asked for. Some were higher, others lower and others simply left blank.

2. Once the worksheets are returned to the supervisor, he or she usually schedules meetings with the larger department heads to review their requests. For some reason, some departments, such as the Building Department and ZBA, did not meet with the supervisor during this year’s budget review.

3. At this point, the supervisor has full discretion to modify any numbers up or down based on his meetings with the department heads or simply of his own accord. Once he has made those modifications, they are entered into the column called “Preliminary Budget” (aka “Supervisor’s Budget” or “Tentative Budget”).

4. This version is then turned in to the Town Clerk’s office, where it is recorded, copied and presented to the Town Board and public for review. At this point, it is entirely the supervisor’s budget, as he has the final say on all the numbers in the “Preliminary Budget” column.

5. Once presented to the Town Board, we (the board and supervisor) initiate our review of it in our open session budget meetings. We call in the various department heads to discuss their expenditure and revenue requests for the upcoming year. We also review their year-to-date numbers to see how adequate the prior year’s figures were. We pore over every single line item several times. When in disagreement on a number, we confer until we arrive at a consensus.

6. After numerous such meetings and board revisions, the draft is once again submitted to the Town Clerk and presented as the “Preliminary Budget,” but it is often referred to as the “Town Board budget” since it comprises input from all five members. This is the budget that is advertised for public hearing.

7. After the public hearing, the Town Board has the opportunity to make additional changes, which are usually based on public input or “just-in” numbers, such as the final change in health insurance premiums. After that, the budget is placed before a roll call vote to adopt or not.

I have also been queried a lot this year about “fund balance” — what it is, where does it come from, how is it used and how big should it be. Fund balance is also referred to as “reserves” and appears in more than one budget line. The simplest way to understand this concept is to think of it as a sort of savings account, while the budget is the checking account.

For example, if the adopted budget is, say, $9 million, a new “checking account” is created on January 1 with that $9 million deposited into it. That $9 million can come entirely from the amount to be raised by taxes or the Town Board has the option of applying some money from the fund balance (“savings account”) if we feel doing so would still leave adequate money in that coffer for any large, unexpected emergencies.

During the course of the year, if a particular budget line runs out of money for any reason, the Town Board can vote to either transfer funds from another budget line, if there is a surplus, or from the fund balance. The more accurate a budget, the less money transfers are needed, but unfortunately no one has a crystal ball and we cannot predict every item in advance — especially items over which we have no direct control, such as rising fuel costs or revenue from mortgage tax income.

On Friday, October 21, the Town Board voted to make the third transfer this year from the fund balance to certain accounts, for a total transfer of $177,000. That merely means specific funding lines were depleted and not that the whole budget was running out of cash.

On December 31, if there is any money left in the “checkbook,” it is rolled over and added to the “savings account” (fund balance) to be supplanted by the new budget on January 1.

With regard to how much should be in the fund balance, that is a matter of personal opinion. Auditors recommend a minimum of 10 percent of the budget. My motto of “always be prepared,“ coupled with the fact that we are a small and geographically isolated community, lead me to feel that 15 to 20 percent is an appropriate reserve amount for Shelter Island. Anything in excess of that amount should, in my opinion, be used to reduce the tax burden. After all, it is your money, and the Town Board is the custodian you elected to manage it. The other Town Board members and I have always strived to do what we feel is in the best interest of the Island while trying to keep taxes as low as possible. Your Town Board members live here, too, and have to pay the same taxes.

The other confusion on the street seems to be what budget numbers are being quoted. There are two different numbers — both important. One is the change in the budget. That is the net increase (or decrease) of expenditures and revenues as compared to the previous year. The data I got on October 21 from the Town Clerk’s office showed this increase to be up 7.9 percent from 2011. By the time you are reading this, that number will have most likely changed. The other number often quoted is the net increase (or decrease) in the amount to be raise by taxes, which is the budget number less money taken from the fund balance to reduce that tax burden.

Offsetting the budget number with something like $500,000 from the fund balance may reduce that budget number from an increase of 7.9 percent to below 2 percent. That number, after tapping the fund balance, is what the supervisor has been quoting, but again, that can be very misleading to people, especially when comparing it to pre-tapping the fund balance budget numbers from previous administrations.

I hope this has helped enlighten you on the fund balance and the budget process.

Mr. Reich is running for re-election to a third term on the Republican and Conservative lines.