Now I'm alarmed

[Deleted]

Uh, oh. Here it comes. Roefaro claims in an interview with the od that next year's budget will be the "most difficult in the city's history". When asked how much he'll be raising taxes Roefaro wouldn't elaborate, saying "I don't want to alarm people". Uh, ok. Well Mr. Mayor, now that you've alarmed people by not trying to alarm us, could you be a little bit more specific on what you're up to? That way, I can make plans on whether or not I want to get the hell out of Oneida County once & for all. You see, I've about had it up to here with constant property tax hikes year after year by city & county leaders. You're bleeding us dry.

[concerned]

Try an initial 65% increase. But all will settle on a 37% tax increase. If the winter is bad, which is expected the budget will be broke. Stop plowing side streets and let the citizens on those side streets take care of there own, in charity and out of despiration for the common good.

[snickers]

Next year is an election year. I'm expecting to see some "Miraculous!" bookkeeping performed which will show the incumbents' ability to "Hold The Line On Taxes!" as they "Fight For The People!". Any increase in 2010 will be miniscule, if it happens at all (the Mayor's remark about next year being so difficult is actually in reference to HOW they're going to pull this trick off, you see).

Then, in 2011, Katie bar the door!

[Swimmy]

Eh. I've sadly come to terms with the fact that the people of oneida county don't really want to see things improve for themselves. I read the od articles now, and I read the subsequent comments. It is sad to see how anything positive for the area, e.g. the state comptroller's office auditing new hartford, is shot down and ridiculed. Even when there is a massive effort, someone allows it to be sabotaged. Every election year, I cross my fingers in hope that this time will be the time the voters wake up and vote a good candidate in. Instead, the same players or their groomed successors keep getting back into office. Taxes will always go up, and corrupt officials will always be in power.

[Deleted]

It never ends. Roefaro wants to accept a federal grant to hire 4 more police officers. The grant is for almost $700,00. Problem is that after 4 years the city must pick up the tab to pay the salaries of the new officers. If the city lays off any police officers, the grant must be repaid. There are 2 things wrong with this scenario. First, the city is for all intents & purposes, prevented from making any cuts to public safety without having to repay the grant. Secondly, where the hell does Roefaro think that the money is going to come from to pay for the new hires after the grant funds expire? I know where. The taxpayers of this city, that's where. Roefaro just got done saying that the upcoming budget is going to be the most difficult in the city's history, with double digit tax increases more than likely. And now he wants to saddle us with another bill for $700,000? Are these people completely out of touch with reality? In my opinion, Roefaro wants to accept the grant because that will prevent any cuts in the police dept. from happening. This is a joke. It's about time Roefaro & the council stopped giving into UPD brass & the police unions & started looking out for the taxpayers of this city that have to pay for this. And by the way, Roefaro also claims that crime is down in this city. Well if that's the case, then why the hell are we hiring more police officers?

[bobbbiez]

Kracker, the reason the crime rate is down might be because Utica recently appointed 14 new policemen and police women who were desperately needed on our streets. I for one am relieved to see patrol cars cruising my area more often now, but I'm sure the criminal isn't. I for one am relieved that the response time for a call in my neighborhood is much shorter then before, but I'm sure the criminal isn't.

We in our Neighborhood Watch Groups begged for more police presence and we stoned the Mayor's office to do so. I guess if you have to blame anyone then it should be us who live in neighborhoods that more police are necessary.

I don't see why such a big fuss over this grant. There will be no lay offs in the UPD because as I see it, we'll need more officers in four years anyways. There are some officers who will be retiring in a few years and will have to be replaced. If we want to keep the crime rate heading down hill then we have to keep our quota in officers on the streets.

I don't see this as a joke when I personally worked to have more officers put on for my own safety and the safety of my good neighbors. As a taxpayer myself it is probably the only time I feel paying my taxes is giving me something back. When it comes to safety, whether it be through the fire department or the police department, I know it comes with a cost. ;D

[Clipper]

It is all redundant now anyhow. I just read on the OD homepage that they are turning down the grant money.

[Ralph]

A lot of the hiring of Police Officers is due to retirement. The City Charter holds us to s specific compliment of officers, when any retire, that compliment has to be fulfilled.

If the City was to accept the Grant then they would have to have the Charter amended to up the compliment, once the Grant was over they would have to go through a much more involved process to remove them.....after they are hired they become part of the PD, and once there the Union rules apply.

Much easier to giveth than it is to taketh away. Most likely they would have to stay and the taxpayer would be footing the bill after that.

Rob was hired under contract to act as a liaison to the Weed & Seed program. Part of his salary was paid for through the Grant from DOJ for the first year. W&S doesn't exist any longer, but he is still there being paid for by us.

Nice how that works out isn't it?

[bobbbiez]

Ralph, correct me if I'm mistaken, but wouldn't the grant have left us with only one year to keep the required compliment on the UPD? The way I figure it, by time the third year was up, due to known up-coming retirements in the next two years, we will need those officers anyways. I also see no lay-offs in my life-time because of the crime rate in Utica and wanting to keep the crime rate down we will need to keep the compliment in the UPD, possibly even having to add more officers. If so, what would we be losing?

As far as Rob......that is one man who does earn his paychecks. I personally work with Rob on many problems including drug-houses in my area and because of Rob those houses were either shut down by raids or by Rob pressuring the absentee landlords to evict the undesirable tenants.
Many of us in the Neighborhood Watch Groups have witnessed Rob on his own time at all hours of the day and night do surveillance on drug-houses to give, the already over-loaded, Drug Task Force all the information they needed to close in on the drug houses.
Before Rob was there to intervene for the private citizen, we would bring our problems to the right departments but all got lost in the shuffle and the problems became worse. Now, with Rob's assistance our neighborhood problems are being addressed and handled.
Don't know what more one man can do to prove he's worth his weight in gold.

[boomer]

Nov 12, 2009 10:27:15 GMT -5 snickers said:

Next year is an election year. I'm expecting to see some "Miraculous!" bookkeeping performed which will show the incumbents' ability to "Hold The Line On Taxes!" as they "Fight For The People!". !

That's what RoAnn Destito says when you pull the string in the back of her neck!

[Ralph]

I didn't see the specifics of the grant, but most have more requirements than Deuteronomy!

When you up the compliment, for whatever reason, it requires a change in the charter voted on by the Council (if memory serves me right). This is what happened in the case of some of the "school resource officers", which were nothing more than PD stationed more or less permanently in one spot. But when the funding ran out and the positions dissolved, because the compliment was increased, they had to be assimilated into the regular department.

I don't remember how that was resolved, whether they brought someone in from PD and then back again or they hired out, but it was a hairball.
When you hire new for grant, when the grants are done you just can't cut bait and let them go.

As far as Rob goes, I worked with him when the program was up and running, and he is hard working and all for the causes and DOES get the job done.
But just what IS his job? I am not knocking Rob at all, just wondering why we are paying so much for someone that cannot even be qualified as a Peace Officer.

If you were to pack both our credentials as related to what he is doing into separate boxes, mine would need a moving van and his could be sent parcel post.

This isn't saying he isn't worth his weight, just that the positions don't always go to the most qualified, sometimes just the most favored or needed at the time.

[bobbbiez]

Well, as far as the grant we won't know for sure if it was a benefit for us until we see what happens in the next four years and see how many officers we need to put on the UPD. Definitely something to keep track of.

Rob's position is working as a liaison between the people and city departments. Before Rob, as I stated, we would bring our problems to the right departments but those complaints always got lost in the shuffle and it would take forever for those problems to get addressed, if ever. He is a great connection to city departments for us, especially valuable to the neighborhood watch groups who are the people who know where the problems are. He gets the problems addressed and corrected.
As I stated earlier, he even does his own surveillances on drug houses we complain about in our areas to give the information to our already over-loaded drug task forces.

I am not always impressed with the wording, "most qualified," especially when I witness someone who is doing a excellent job for the betterment of the people. In Rob's case I have to go with the old saying, "don't fix what's not broken."