The failure to delegate the nuts and bolts of the redistricting process, Benjamin said,  “diminishes public confidence and responsibility for the Legislature and representative form of government.”

Gerald Benjamin, a SUNY New Paltz professor, notes that citizen commissions help keep the redistricting process honest, even if the legislative body ultimately must approve any plan.

This doesn’t meet the laugh test.

The vote came after six and a half hours of wrangling before a final vote on the 2011 Dutchess County budget.

County Finance Commissioner Warns:

 County Moving Near Dangerous Financial Position 

Poughkeepsie… Dutchess County Commissioner of Finance Pamela Barrack has written to the County Legislature and County Executive to advise them of her concern that the county is nearing a dangerous financial position. 

The Legislature and Executive received a memorandum from Barrack on Monday detailing the county’s shrinking fund balance. Barrack advised county leaders that the county has moved to bare minimum financial “reserves” and is close to having to borrow money to pay day to day operational expenses. 

County Executive Steinhaus has long advocated for long-term, multi-year thinking about fund balance reserves, always seeking to protect reserves to buffer future financial storms.    In his 2011 budget message, County Executive Steinhaus acknowledged his own risky decision to appropriate $10 million of fund balance to cover deputy sheriff payroll and hold the property tax levy frozen for 2011.   The alternative would have been the layoff of up to 100 to 150 additional county employees, including possibly 50 to 100 deputy sheriffs.   However, his budget message also included the very clear warning to legislators, “any additional reduction to the remaining fund balance could put the county at risk…”   

Despite the warning and absent details, the Legislature last week adopted budget amendments to draw down an additional $3.2 million to pay for Resource Recovery Agency (RRA) obligations. 

County Executive Steinhaus took issue with the legislative claim that their use of fund balance is to pay for a legal obligation to the RRA.    “Actually, it appears legislators are drawing down reserves to subsidize higher special interest driven spending for 2011,” said Steinhaus.      The County Executive noted legislators could have used the “spending cuts” they made to pay the RRA obligation, rather than using those monies to add new spending.   “Legislators have chosen to add spending of more than $2 million, not included in the Executive budget proposal, for payroll and benefit to add staff positions and increase spending for non county government agencies.    That money could have been used for the county’s legal obligations, rather than increased special interest spending.” 

Additionally, the Legislature has still failed to address how the 2010 RRA net service fee will be paid.    When the Legislature adopted the 2010 county budget, legislators rejected last year’s proposal to address the RRA net service fee and failed to budget funds to pay for the expense.    Addressing this issue has been a legislative priority all year, but no solution to pay the bill has yet been finalized.  

Compounding the problem, the County has received the first of two bills for the 2010 RRA net service fee.   This first bill totals just over $1.8 million.   Using the 2009 net service fee costs as a guide, it is anticipated the total 2010 fee could be approximately $4.3 million. 

“We cannot afford to have our fund balance reserves drained away because the Legislature has not decided on a solution to address the RRA issue,” said County Executive Steinhaus. 

“Legislators should be well aware of how precarious our financial position is,” said County Executive Steinhaus.   “The County cannot be pushed to the financial brink by adding in new spending for 2011.” 

Steinhaus pointed to recent opinion column written last week by Democrat minority leaders, “To compound the county’s situation, we have Legislators Goldberg and Kuffner advocating for even more money from taxpayers to fund new, higher spending for employee raises.   What are they thinking?   Don’t they understand taxpayers can’t afford any more spending?” 

County Executive Steinhaus concluded, “As legislators prepare to vote tomorrow evening to adopt the 2011 county budget, they must be responsible for the decisions they make and realize that new, added spending to appease special interest groups can only push the county to the brink of financial disaster.”

Assembly Miller, It is now August 6, 2010. No responses on any forementioned issues from you. The procrastination is overwhelming, Almost a full YEAR has passes since ANY reply from you on these matters. Sadly the Residents, Fire District Emergency Service personnel await a mere response. The Not for Profits are eating us alive, no response from our Assemblyman Miller.  None

All,
This story recently was due to a multitude of factors. I can picture our
Department finding itself in the same circumstance, and seeing the inevitable
happening.

With other departments in atmospheres due to no or minimum manpower, it is no
wonder the situation hasn’t reached catastrophic proportions yet in Dutchess
County.

Logging and Monitoring ALL emergency calls and the response times, many from 2
or 3 attempts to get emergency vehicles moving, is the responsibility of the DC
911 system ? or is it? .

When one of your own is killed, the domino effect on everyone is great.

Why is it that the DC 911 system of response times and Actual vehicles being
deployed is not a Major concern, where is the accountability?

Does DC 911 have to answer to a greater entity, are they just accountable for
” the calls ” to the Fire Districts and leave the rest to the Towns / Cities and
Villages to take Actions to keep their residents safe ?.

After reading the story below, just a part of it I am going to share, empowers
me to RE-PRODUCE my previous attempts to get the RESOLUTION NO. 209176
RE: COUNTYWIDE FIRE AND EMS PROTECTION TASK FORCE back on the Agenda, AGAIN.

This Resolution I produced in 2008, again in 2009 with modifications to fit and
comply with requests from a multitude of Republicans and Democratic Party
Members, needs to come out again. It merely empowers a ” Public Safety Task Force ” to look at costs and consolidations of Departments. As we know, this is a HUGE endeavor, but surely needed.

With the support from other Fire districts, even if there is only a couple,
this issue should not remain an issue any longer.

Here is a section of that story, lets pray I/We can actually move away and
never see it happen in out lives in Dutchess County:

KANSAS FIREFIGHTER LODD UPDATE:

SCBA MASK REMOVED INSIDE THE STRUCTURE AFTER BECOMING SICK AND VOMITING:

The State/Regional investigation into the May 22 fire that led to the Line of
duty
death of Firefighter John Glaser has been completed. FF Glaser accidentally died
while searching a resident reported to be inside a burning house. The SFD today
released a report done by the Eastern Kansas Multi-County Fire Investigation
Task
Force, which investigated the origin and cause, as well as investigating the
LODD.
The report determined both the fire’s cause and Glaser’s death to be accidental
but unusual in the circumstances.

FF Glaser died from toxic gases and a lack of oxygen, resulting in his death.
Firefighters
arrived about 2058 Hours on May 22 to find fire coming from a rear garage from
the
dwelling’s basement. They were told the occupants and pets were in the house.
When
FF’s went in the front door, FF Glaser was in the front of the search line. The
search crew took a dry hose line and moved down the hallway on the main level,
locating
a dog in a utility room and bringing it outside.

They then re-entered the home, following the hose to continue their search. At
some
point, FF Glaser became separated from his search partner, who then heard him
ask
for help. A mayday call went out, and Firefighters soon located FF Glaser in the
master bathroom, which is located just above the entrance to the basement
garage.

FF Glaser had vomited in his face piece, causing him to try to fix the issue. He
removed his gloves, helmet and face mask, trying to clear the vomit from the
nose
cup. While doing that, FF Glaser tragically but understandably became
disoriented
and overcome by the smoke and gases before he could get his mask back in place,
and he collapsed due to the levels of toxin filled smoke and gas, rapidly
entering
in his system. FF Glaser was located, removed and EMS began resuscitation
efforts,
but he was pronounced dead at the hospital.

FF Glaser’s SCBA appeared to be in working order and still had two-thirds of its
air remaining, though the report noted that the system and air is being sent for
further testing.

The cause of Glaser’s illness was attributed to a number of factors. His crew
had
responded to Overland Park earlier in the day and had 3 calls there before
returning
to their quarters in Shawnee. The crew also had several calls in Shawnee that
day,
including a drowning, and FF Glaser may have been additionally fatigued from the
exertion of the search crew’s first entry into the burning home.

FF Glaser also had eaten 2 big meals during the day, a BBQ lunch in Overland
Park,
and then a meal of burgers and hot dogs around 1700 hours at Shawnee firehouse
71.
The autopsy showed FF Glaser still had a large amount of food in his stomach.
According
to the SFD, an upcoming report from the NIOSH may have additional including
suggestions
for operational changes.

R.I.P. FF Glaser.

Take Care-BE CAREFUL, Jim

Listed below are my active subscriptions:  If you need information on any of these,  just let me know and I will provide it foy you :  

   Community Development and Housing Contractor’s Bid Package
   County Clerk News Releases
   County Executive Budget Message
   County Executive News Releases
   County Executive State of the County Address
   County Legislature News Releases
   County Legislature’s Schedules and Agendas
   DCDOH Public Health Alerts, Updates & Advisories
   Dial-A-Ride Schedule
   Flu & Pneumonia Clinic Schedules
   Health Department News Releases
   Lead Paint Regulatory Updates & Training Sessions
   Office For Aging Services/Events Calendar
   Office for the Aging Newsletters
   Poughkeepsie-Dutchess County Transp. Events Calendar
   Youth Bureau Special Events

Citing a lack of written policy, the Dutchess County Comptroller’s Office concluded that no disciplinary action should be taken against a legislator who received questionable mileage reimbursements.

                          The comptroller’s recommendations were released Monday.

In 2009, Legislator James Doxsey, C-Town of Poughkeepsie, received $1,698.90 for mileage reimbursement — the highest of all current sitting legislators, according to the Clerk of the Legislature’s Office. Last year, mileage reimbursements for the 25 legislators totaled $14,756.40, according to the comptroller’s report. Of the 25, 10 legislators did not get reimbursements. Six legislators had reimbursements for more than $1,000.

Some examples of expenses Doxsey submitted were for $103 in mileage costs associated with attending caucus meetings in 2008 and 2009, driving to the funeral of a Marine in Highland and the 2009 county comptroller political debate.

Comptroller James Coughlan’s office audited the mileage records and uncovered no evidence of intent to defraud or misrepresent the facts, according to a report to the Legislature. He concluded there was no reason to involve the district attorney or investigate further.

The audit found that one-quarter of the legislators submitted to be reimbursed for various town hall, fire department and political fundraising meetings. One-third submitted requests relating to social functions, such as galas and luncheons.

Reacting to the report, Doxsey said the audit and the comptroller’s conclusions were “fair.”

New protocol planned

Legislature Chairman Robert Rolison, R-City of Poughkeepsie, said the next step is “for myself and the leadership to come up with a protocol for mileage reimbursement.”

During a March 8 meeting, the Legislature approved a resolution 16-8 to establish a written policy on reimbursement for mileage costs.

In his report, Coughlan quoted the previous county law stating legislators may be reimbursed for reasonable mileage costs in traveling from home to county meetings. However, the definition of what is reasonable historically has been left up to the clerk of the Legislature, he said.

Since Doxsey’s mileage requests were approved by the clerk of the Legislature, he had proper approvals, the comptroller said

Specifically addressing the caucus-related money, Coughlan referred to a document dated Nov. 29, 2007, from Clerk of the Legislature Patricia Hohmann stating that caucuses are not an acceptable reason for reimbursement.

However, he said soon after the memorandum was issued, the Legislature’s leadership changed, a new clerk was appointed and it was unclear whether the guideline was confirmed or negated.

Request not illegal

Coughlan said while no other legislator submitted a request for mileage for caucus meetings, Doxsey’s mileage claims were approved by the clerk.

For that reason, “it is hard to decisively state that Legislator Doxsey made inappropriate requests to claim mileage for caucus meetings …” Coughlan concluded.

Doxsey laid the blame with the clerk.

“All she (the clerk) had to do was say, ‘Jeez, Jim, this isn’t allowed,’ ” he added.

Rolison disagreed, stating that it was “clear from the comptroller’s report Doxsey was the only one putting in for caucuses.”

Caucus a gray area

As for possibly recouping caucus-related mileage, Rolison said, “That’s something we have to discuss further.

“The issue will be debated during Thursday’s Legislature leadership meeting,” Rolison said.

Assistant Minority Leader Angela Flesland, R-Town of Poughkeepsie, said the community should be “outraged ” over Doxsey’s reimbursements.

“If these items aren’t illegal they are certainly unethical and Doxsey should be criticized in the court of public opinion,” she said in an e-mail that criticized Coughlan’s audit because it took “just eight days to conduct.”

Coughlan’s report urged the Legislature to establish “adequate definitions” to avoid future abuse.

He found that some mileage claims only included the word “meeting,” which made his review “extremely difficult,” the report said.

Office of the Comptroller
Dutchess County

22 MARKET STREET

POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y. 12601
(845) 486-2050

FAx (845) 486-2055 comptroller@co.dutchess.ny.us

Hon. Robert G. Rolison, Chairman Dutchess County Legislature 22 Market St.

Poughkeepsie, NY 12601

Dear Chairman Rolison,

  As resolution to your official request, dated March 8, 2010, please find this review and commentary on Legislator Doxsey’s mileage reimbursements.  In order to establish a fair assessment of the acceptability of his reimbursement requests, my Office reviewed the mileage reimbursement records of ALL Legislators in 2008 and 2009. Further, my Office reviewed the existence of any established guidelines that may govern Legislators’ reimbursements and County Law Section 203. In contrast with Dutchess County’s employee mileage policy which does not allow for commutation reimbursement from an employee’s home to place of employment; County Law Section 203 states, “Members of the county legislature may be reimbursed reasonable mileage costs in traveling from their places of residence to the sites of county meetings.”

  In the course of this review, it was discovered that the prerogative of previous Clerks of the Legislature to approve various reimbursement requests held decisive influence on what was viewed as acceptable reimbursements. Although the Comptroller’s Office is the final approver of payments, as authorized by the County Charter, it appears to have historically deferred to Departments Heads’ approvals where internal guidelines were not clearly established and defined.

  The only governing document found that defined any restrictions on mileage reimbursement was a memorandum issued, November 29, 2007, to eight newly elected legislators expressly stating that expenses relating to caucuses are not permitted for reimbursement. ( However, soon after this memorandum was issued, the Legislature’s leadership changed, and, subsequently, appointed a new Clerk of the Legislature. ) ( There are no documents found that show the Clerk in 2008 and 2009 either confirmed or negated the guideline stated in the aforementioned memorandum. ) The prerogative to approve these requests in the absence of established guidelines resides firmly within the scope of the prior Clerk’s powers.

  My Office reviewed all Legislators’ mileage as a comparison to one another to see if, within the body of the Legislature, there exist commonalities that may reflect generally held beliefs of which expenses are seen related to their responsibilities. Upon review, my Office recognized the following observations:

  1.  Reimbursements from legislators appeared to be arbitrary: six legislators did not submit for reimbursement in 2008 and ten legislators did not submit for reimbursement in 2009.

  2.   Some legislators submitted for regular meetings only; others submitted for various legislative meetings, community meetings, special events and public events. Some legislators only submitted reimbursement requests for some months of the year and did not submit anything for other months of the same year.

  3.   25% of Legislators submitted requests for mileage reimbursement for various town hall meetings, fire department meetings, etc.

  4.   25% of Legislators submitted requests for mileage reimbursement for political
functions, such as fundraisers, meetings with New York State officials, etc.

  5.   30% of Legislators submitted requests for mileage reimbursement for social functions, such as breakfasts, lunches and galas.

  6.   Only one Legislator submitted requests for mileage reimbursement for caucuses.

  7.   It is important to note that the total amount of reimbursement does not necessarily call attention to abuse. Some Legislators submitted Spartan requests for reimbursements, but their annual totals are high due to the length of their commutation (Pine Plains, Pawling, etc.).

   8.   Due to lack of standardized reporting practices Legislators had varying detail in the description of the meetings attended. This made review of acceptable reimbursements extremely difficult. Some claims only stated the date and the word  “meeting”.  

   9.  Payment requests were submitted electronically via the LOGOS payroll system and the actual documentation for reimbursement was submitted with the required Dutchess County Travel Expense Voucher.

   10.  Each Dutchess County Travel Expense Voucher had the required signatures of the Claimant and Departmental Approval (Clerk of Legislature).

    11.  Claimant’s Certification (signed by Legislator): 1^. hereby certify that the above account and supporting documents annexed are just, true and correct; that no part thereof has been paic4 except as stated therein; that taxes from which municipality is exempt, are not included and that the balance therein stated is actually due and owing.

Departmental Approval (signed by Clerk of the Legislature or designee at the time reimbursement was submitted): The above services or materials were rendered or furnished to the County of Dutchess on the dates stated and the charges are correct.

Conclusion

   All reimbursements were made in accordance with the signed certifications of the Claimant and Department approvals. In the absence of written guidelines for 2008 and 2009, it appears Legislative reimbursements were made in accordance with the Department Head’s discretion.

   My Office uncovered no evidence that any submissions by any Legislator for reimbursement contained the requisite intent to misreport, defraud, or misrepresent the purposes behind the requests necessary to bring disciplinary action or to notify the District Attorney for further investigation.

 (  Moreover, it is hard to decisively state that Legislator Doxsey made inappropriate requests to claim mileage for caucus meetings, as these claims were approved by the Clerk of the Legislature during those years.)  However, viewing the Legislature as a whole, no other Legislator submitted a request for mileage for caucus meetings, so it can be inferred that this activity is not held as a customary reimbursement. The total of the mileage reimbursements for caucus travel by Legislator Doxsey was $55.46 in 2008 and $47.85 in 2009. The mileage totals for all Legislators for the years in question can be found on page four (4) of this review.

Additional Comments

The Comptroller’s Office commends the Legislature’s efforts to enact a policy defining mileage reimbursements. On March 8, 2010, the Dutchess County Legislature submitted Resolution No.  2010051 — Establishing a Mileage Reimbursement Policy for County Legislators. This resolution should be viewed and praised by all as the first official Departmental reimbursement policy in the County to embrace the needed transparency and accountability standards called on by the residents of Dutchess County. My Office has begun engaging other Departments throughout the County requesting internal policies to govern reimbursement requests. It is imperative that each Department clearly define acceptable reimbursements to both inform its recipients and approvers.

  ( However, this resolution should go further in stating with sufficient detail the guidelines governing what expense types are acceptable ) . Some Legislators requested reimbursement for naturalization ceremonies; events held in various municipalities including parades, community days, etc. Without establishing adequate definitions, opportunity for future abuse still exists. The burden of deciding which activities qualify as “in the performance of official duties” should lie with Department Heads and not the Comptroller’s Office. In addition, the resolution wording is ambiguous referring to “mileage shall be reimbursed to the County Legislators at a rate not in excess of that allowed County employees for each mile actually traveled in going from their place of residence”. As stated previously, County employees are prohibited from submitting mileage reimbursement for commutation. This clause should be reworded to eliminate any misunderstanding. It is encouraged that the Legislature edit this Resolution to address these concerns and reflect the County’s general policy that expenditures should be reasonable and provide the lowest possible cost to the county. Further, submittals by Legislators for reimbursements should consistently list the purpose of each meeting to ensure compliance with the Legislature’s explicit written guidelines.

  The statements in the Journal were again incorrect ! . Legislator Doxsey did  NOT  have the HIGHEST Mileage posted.