A Heartfelt Thank You!

I want to express my sincere thanks to everyone who supported me in the Democratic primary for mayor!

I am especially grateful to those who circulated and those who signed my nominating petitions, called or emailed me, sent me letters, or stopped me along the street or at local businesses to urge me to run or pledged their support and votes. A special thanks to those who made voter reminder phone calls for me and who came to the candidate's forum to ask questions.

I was particularly surprised to receive so much encouragement and support from members of both major parties, who expressed sincere concern about the current leadership in our village. While it was personally pleasing to hear that support would be forthcoming from residents who were not registered Democrats, it also is evidence that there is a strong disconnect between our current elected officials and the people they serve. Apparently, there is deep dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Those who are still running for election should be mindful that vote totals are not always indicative of the sentiments of the majority. No matter what end of the vote count you are on, the percentages of persons who will actually come out and vote are far less than acceptable to consider that any candidate for any office has been truly endorsed or rejected.

This site will stay open and updated, and hopefully so will our village government!

Annual Financial Audits ARE Required!

I would like to follow up on the Village Board's handling of budgets and other financial information. Taxpayers should be aware of the amounts the Village Board budgets for “consulting fees” for CPA services to conduct the legally required annual audit of the Village’s financial records.

Previously, the last completed professional audit of the Village’s financial records took place in 2002, with a report issued by the CPA firm Fox, Porretti on May 31, 2002. When Diana Smith was campaigning for the mayor’s seat in 2004 she promised she would ensure there would be professional review of the Village’s finances on an annual basis and that she would ensure that the true picture of village finances would become clear under her administration.

From what taxpayers can discern from each budget approved since 2004, taxes were collected through these budgets to hire a CPA to audit our books. However, there were NO annual audits of the books until late 2006! So, taxpayers were being taxed for at least two years for services they were not receiving.

The necessity to conduct annual audits (which are to be performed either by the Board of Trustees themselves, or by a professional accountant) has been in question.

In August 2006, a Freedom of Information request was submitted for a copy of the Board's annual audits of the Treasurer's records for 2004-05 and 2005-06 budget years.

The Village's response was: "There was no audit performed by the Village Board or a CPA firm for the years 2004-05 and 2005-06. It is my understanding, upon review of General Municipal Law, Finance Law and opinions of the Office of the State Comptroller, that there is no mandate that external or internal audits be performed, unless the local government receives in excess of $500,000 in federal funding..."

In response, the person who requested the FOIL information wrote back:

"I have enclosed for your review...information that reveals that the Village Board indeed must perform an annual audit of the Treasurer’s reports and supporting documentation. This requirement is stated in NYS Village Law §4-408(e), under the Treasurer’s powers and duties..."

On page 60 from the Village’s 2005 Annual Update Document submitted to the NYS Comptroller's Office, regarding whether the Village had performed an independent audit of the financial statements, the Treasurer indicated “no” and the follow-up answer indicated that the Village planned to conduct this audit. Detail pages from the 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 Village Budgets each included funds for the purpose of engaging financial consultants or a CPA for audit services.

Clearly, at times, the Village Board recognized its obligation to perform an annual audit of the Treasurer’s records by the fact that tax dollars were collected for that purpose. Unfortunately, the Board of Trustees subsequently failed to meet their obligation to audit for several years and taxed residents for a service that was not being provided.

Subsequent to the response to the FOIL request of August 2006, the Village Board of Trustees finally announced that they were engaging the services of Ray Wager, CPA to conduct an audit of the Village finances.

However, to my knowledge and to this date, the audit is either not yet completed, or it was completed but not discussed at any of the public meetings I have attended.

Greater Details, Better Government!

I strongly believe that the village budget must be presented to the public with great detail. As a Village Department Head I was required to present my proposed annual department budget with sufficient detail to account for each cost. The Mayor, Board, and public could see each proposed expenditure and could ask specific questions about every line item.

With this kind of detail available, the public could choose to question any bit of spending placed in front of them. While it may be uncomfortable for department heads or board members to have to explain, justify or defend proposed expenditures, it was a process that encouraged trimming where prudent.

Recent budgets, however, have abandoned the specific details in favor of grouping costs under accounts. What this does is provide a total for an account, but does not break out those accounts under specific areas.

For example, in the 2003-04 budget the Clerk/Treasurer’s departmental accounts are listed individually with dollar amounts assigned to items. The public could see what the Clerk/Treasurer expected to spend on items in that department. In the 2004-05 budget the same amount of detail was provided for this department. However in the 2005-06 budget, the first budget prepared by Mayor Smith as Budget Officer, the Clerk/Treasurer’s department, for example, lumped all of the contractual services expenses under one account number and provided a total of $43,700. There was no way to easily determine from Mayor Smith’s budget exactly how much was proposed to be spent on items like mileage, office supplies, postage, and consulting fees, for example, items that previously were specifically detailed. This same manner of lumped listings with only totals shown occurred again in the 2006-07 budget. Except in that budget the total for those specific Clerk/Treasurer departmental expenses increased to $66,288. What items in that department increased in costs by $22,588? Without the specific line item numbers there was no way to tell.

All of Mayor Smith's budgets have been structured this way.

This is not a "best practice" for Seneca Falls. We must do better at providing information. We must not be afraid to let the sun shine on village operations. We cannot confidently reduce costs without detailed information.

A Mayor's Positions Should Be Known

As I walked around the four wards of the Village gathering signatures for my petition to be a candidate for mayor, I was often asked why it is that when reading newspaper reports on Village Board actions, or watching the Board meetings on Channel 12, the Board votes are 4-0, or on occasion, 3-1. People asked why, if there are five Board members, there is seldom a five vote total, noting that Mayor Diana Smith does not vote.

Our Village Board's less-than-five vote totals are partly explained by the fact that, by New York State Village Law, a mayor may vote on any question before the Board of Trustees, but is not required to vote except to break a tie.

In my years of working for the Village under several different mayors, and attending literally hundreds of Board meetings, I can say that all of the previous mayors spoke out and recorded their votes on questions before the Board.

It is Mayor Smith's legal right to remain silent regarding resolutions before the Board. I believe, however, that when residents elect someone to lead their community they deserve to know where that person stands on the issues.

We must reduce the cost of services.
The first step in accomplishing this goal is to engage our municipal workers in the process. We must build momentum for more affordable services from the bottom up in order to succeed. This will require open communication with residents and employees. Village employees are crucial partners in any effort to make services more affordable. It is essential that their expertise and ideas be sought and they be made active partners in the discussion and decisions about our Village’s future.

Open government must be second nature, not second choice.

Village government must do a better job being open, accessible, and responsive to the public. There is very little information a municipality cannot legally, openly share with its residents. Confidence in our village government can only increase when information is easy to access and cheerfully shared.

Ethical standards should reflect a high level of confidence in public officials and employees.

The current administration is proposing changes to relax the standards in the Village Code of Ethics for officers and employees. The existing Seneca Falls Code of Ethics does not allow acceptance of gifts of any value, even though the State allows acceptance of gifts up to $75 in value. I believe the public deserves higher standards.

Revitalization of our commercial districts...

...requires more than decorative paving and bike racks. Downtowns flourish when people make them their home. Their presence is an incentive for commercial enterprise to follow. Working to support the vitality of our existing businesses is central to our community’s growth.

We cannot afford to wait...

...for economic spinoff from projects still on the drawing board before pushing for progress in enticing new businesses to Seneca Falls, both downtown and in our industrial park. The competition for new business is fierce, but Seneca Falls can succeed. It will take determined leadership and the ability to promote Seneca Falls as the best place to be!

Our plans must be clear.

We are facing the need to repair or replace aging infrastructure and equipment. Drainage projects are progressing, but this is a long-term, costly concern. Grants have helped fund these efforts, and we must continue to seek such assistance whenever possible. In the past, a 5 Year Capital Plan was adopted by the Board for infrastructure and equipment concerns, but that process fell by the wayside. Local governments under pressure to provide services more efficiently must have clearly defined plans for long-term needs. With clear plans we can meet future needs as they arise.