The joy of committees

Back from vacation, I have updates to pass along on two committees formed by the Dutchess Legislature.

The first is the county tax policy committee, which formed in January to figure out what to do if revenues fall short of expenses and how to distribute taxes fairly. This committee was supposed to submit a report by June 1, but several factors led to delays, including a mistakenly long public comment period and committee members' vacations, Chairman Joe Davis said.

Davis said this morning that a final report would be submitted soon. He never said he meant today. Sure enough, later today, a quick call to the county Legislature revealed that Davis had sped up the process and dropped off a copy of the report.

Its conclusions: Taxes raised by county government appear to be adequate and “as fair as can be expected given the complexity of and limitations on county tax policy."

That's more than has been produced yet by the county's 11-member WiFi committee, which is supposed to consider how the county might create a county-wide wireless Internet network.

The Legislature asked for a final report by Oct. 15 and a progress report by today. A quick call to the county Legislature revealed that the committee hasn't even met yet.

Dems vs. DCC: The movie

The meeting Wednesday night between the Dutchess Legislature's Democratic caucus and top Dutchess Community College officials featured a diverse cast of characters and some lively dialogue.

Not enough for boffo box office in the summer blockbuster season, but an intriguing scene all the same.

Legislator Fred Knapp of Poughkeepsie was typecast as the enforcer. He is an outspoken opponent of the college's annual tuition increases, and he made it clear he wasn't happy with the new increase. He also took the hardest line on withholding support for DCC's improvement bond without concessions on tuition.

"You want a bond resolution?" he said. "We want a budget with no tuition increase – this year. How do we get there?"

He made that argument twice during the meeting.

A new vote on the defeated bond resolution could come Monday at the Legislature's monthly meeting. The DCC budget with a $100 tuition increase is scheduled to be approved by the Legislature in July.

In asking for the Democrats' support for the bond resolution, DCC Board President Thomas LeGrand and Trustee Vincent DiMaso seemed to take on the good cop/bad cop roles. LeGrand came offering the proverbial olive branch while emphasizing that the college needs to move forward with the improvements, with the Legislature's help.

"I don't believe we have a troubled relationship. I think we have a good relationship," he said, adding that the college and the Democrats just seem to be at odds on tuition.

DiMaso fought back directly against some of the Democrats' criticisms, their opposition to the tuition increase and their defeat last month of the bond.

It's hard to pick one quote as representative – so many good ones – and like a good movie you had to see it to appreciate it. But DiMaso seemed to sum up his arguments with this: "You should have come to us first before making this vote."

Minority Leader Roger Higgins of New Hamburg, the Democrats' ringleader, moved the meeting along while pointing out that he personally made the Democrats' case to the DCC board last month just before it approved the tuition increase anyway.

"There was no effort at all made to try to compromise," Higgins said.

Toward the end of the meeting, DCC President David Conklin played the pragmatist and caught the Democrats' attention when he said that the Legislature's Republican leadership "didn't want a $100 increase. A $100 increase is a victory."

The implication was that the Republicans would have preferred an even larger tuition increase to offset more of the county tax dollars in the college's budget.

How will it end? Stay tuned for the sequel Monday night.

Until then, there are the previews, such as Poughkeepsie Legislator Barbara Jeter-Jackson's assessment of the minority party's chances of reversing the tuition increase this year.

"Until there is a majority on this side, it's not going to happen," she said after the DCC officials had left.

DCC to make case to Democrats

The Dutchess Community College bond resolution defeated last month by Democratic legislators isn't dead yet. The college's president and board president are scheduled to attend the Democratic caucus meeting Wednesday evening, perhaps to let bygones be bygones.

The Dutchess Legislature already passed one bond resolution pledging to borrow half of the cost of $2 million in improvements. The new resolution included modifications but no additional cost, and it was opposed by Democrats in what Assistant Minority Leader Sandy Goldberg said was a message to college officials to listen to their concerns.

If the college officials listen and the Democrats are mollified, the resolution could come up for another vote Monday and pass. End of story.

But Goldberg suggested that, even then, the bygones within the Legislature won't be bygone. The Republicans still hold a mere one-vote majority, and relations between the two parties are strained. They could continue to be strained at least through the November elections.

Legislative replay: Clarification & addendum

After reading over my post yesterday about the Dutchess Democrats' vote on mortgage tax distribution, I realized at least one detail might not have been clear: The measure passed, even with all 12 Democrats voting no. So the county's 30 municipalities will continue to receive the money they were expecting to balance their budgets.

But what does this mean for party politics and the proper functioning of county government? You could make the argument that it doesn't matter what the minority Democrats do. As long as the Republicans do the right thing, all is well because they have the majority. You also could make the argument that the Democrats, though in many ways powerless, have an important role in a 13-12 Legislature – the role of the opposition, putting pressure on the party in power. After all, they only need one Republican defector to become a majority.

A completely different dynamic occurs when the Legislature votes on bond resolutions, which need 17 votes for approval. The May 14 board meeting offered a perfect example. All 13 Republicans and Bill McCabe, D-LaGrangeville, voted in favor of borrowing money for improvement projects at Dutchess Community College. The measure failed because the other 11 Democrats voted against it. What does this mean for the projects? More on that soon.

Legislative replay: Democrats mistaken, confused

I was on vacation on May 14 when the Legislature held its last board meeting, so I had to catch up via the Legislature's streaming online video of the meeting. I'm starting to wish I hadn't been on vacation. (OK, that's a lie. Vacation was great. I just wish I hadn't missed that meeting.)

Here's why:

Resolution 136 would seem to be a mundane item, a boilerplate vote to authorize distribution of mortgage tax revenues to the cities, towns and villages. The money is significant – more than $1 million just for the Town of Poughkeepsie, more than $7 million across the county from six months worth of collections. The votes on such measures usually aren't significant. Unanimous approvals.

But this time all 12 Democrats voted against the measure. Huh?

I shouldn't have been surprised. All five Democrats in the Budget, Finance and Personnel Committee had voted against the measure days earlier. I found this odd, so I asked Minority Leader Roger Higgins afterward what the deal was. When he began to state the Democrats' case against the mortgage tax increase backed by the Republicans, I had to stop him. That was a different resolution, I said. This was just to distribute the money already collected.

Higgins seemed surprised and muttered something about a mistake being made in the vote. I didn't think much more about it, figuring the mistake would be corrected by the full board meeting.

It wasn't. The Democrats again voted no.

Later in the meeting, some seemed to realize their mistake and questioned the way the resolutions were presented. Here is my amateur transcription of the scene that took place, starring Chairman Gary Cooper, R-Pine Plains; Minority Leader Higgins, D-New Hamburg; Assistant Minority Leader Sandy Goldberg, D-Wappingers Falls, and Legislator Fred Bunnell, D-Poughkeepsie. The term "consent agenda" refers to uncontroversial resolutions that are approved together unanimously before debate moves to more controversial items.

HIGGINS: Could you go back and tell me when you pulled 136 out of the consent agenda? I don't think it was mentioned earlier that it was not in the consent agenda. And in fact – in fact, we all voted for the consent agenda earlier with that included in it.

COOPER: No, she did not read that.

HIGGINS: Can you – I'd like to see where that was stated whether it's on the video or in the minutes. I need to see that, because –

COOPER: That wasn't on the consent agenda.

HIGGINS: That's correct. I need to see some evidence of that, because frankly, when we voted for the consent agenda, we all assumed 136 was in the consent agenda. So I need you to show me some kind of evidence of that.

COOPER: Well, the evidence would be, if we played the tape back you would see 136 was not read, or the resolution was not read into the – as a consent agenda item. And it will be there. Legislator Goldberg.

GOLDBERG: Then I would just like to make a comment that my intention was always to vote for 136 —

COOPER: Well, we’re already past that.

GOLDBERG: — and when I assumed I had voted for it and didn’t realize – which was my mistake. I certainly apologize for that – but didn’t understand what we were voting on, and I just want the public record to state that. ...

BUNNELL: In a case such as I think is clearly illustrated by what Legislator Goldberg said – and I would echo for myself what she said – it was an honest confusion about this matter.

County legislators file fiancial disclosures

Most Dutchess County legislators didn't have much to disclose this year. They, and dozens of other county employees, are required by the county's code of ethics to file reports by May 15 identifying any financial relationships in the previous calendar year that might pose conflicts of interest. Straw Poll's review of the legislators' disclosures found only three with something to say.

Chairman Gary Cooper, R-Pine Plains, disclosed that he is a sales representative for Peckham Industries, a company that sells road materials and sometimes submits bids for county and state projects. Cooper also disclosed some vacant land in Amenia and Pine Plains that he owns.

A comment on another local political blog accused Legislator Fred Knapp, D-Poughkeesie, of failing to file his disclosure. He was late, but he filed it. He signed it May 15 and it wasn't received by the county Finance Department until May 18. In it, he acknowledges that his wife, Fran Knapp, is a election commissioner and collects a salary from the county.

And Marc Molinaro, a Republican who represented Red Hook until he left the Legislature in December to take a seat in the state Assembly, said he had no financial relationships to disclose under the county's code of ethics. But he attached a memo that noted he had been the village of Tivoli mayor, his father is employed by the county Department of Public Works and a company he works for has contracts with local municipalities, businesses and nonprofit agencies. He said he would have acted appropriately if these relationships had overlapped with his work as a county legislator.

Murphy followup

A couple quick followup notes on tributes to the late Michael Murphy:

1) Dutchess County flew a county flag Friday morning over 22 Market St. and then lowered it halfway in Murphy's honor. The flag was given to Murphy's family later in the day during the burial ceremony at St. Joseph's Cemetery in Millbrook.

2) County Executive William Steinhaus said the start of the Dutchess Rail Trail near Morgan Lake in Poughkeepsie will be named the Michael P. Murphy Trailhead, one of four trailheads planned along the 12 mile trail from Poughkeepsie to Hopewell Junction. The county's rail trails were among Murphy's most prized projects as public works commissioner. Construction of part of the Dutchess Rail Trail is expected to start this year.

Michael Murphy: 1952-2007

Even the most experienced reporters worry that they will come back from an assignment with nothing to write. I found myself today with the opposite problem: I couldn't keep my pen moving fast enough to get down everything said today at the funeral for Michael Murphy.

By the end, my notebook was filled with quotes, some nearly illegible from my rapid scrawlings, all with high praise for the life of Murphy, a longtime public servant who most recently worked as Dutchess County's public works commissioner.

Here is one.

"Mike was in his glory when he was surrounded by his friends, of which there were so many," said Steve Wing, who delivered the eulogy. "And when you became Mike's friend, you became his friend for life."

Reporters have to keep an objective distance from their sources, and this can be difficult when those sources are genuinely decent and inspiring people. I never got to know Murphy that well, let alone enough to become his friend, though several of my colleagues in the newsroom here knew him for years and were shaken by the news of his death.

I think I learned of Murphy's cancer last fall around county budget time. I was told that he had taken a turn for the worse, and the outlook was grim. But then, maybe a month later, I saw him again at a Legislature meeting, seemingly back to normal. He continued working to the end.

Since then, after hearing stories about the man, I wish I knew him better. The word "dignity" kept coming to my mind, though I know the word is limited. Only one of many to describe Murphy's clear passion for life and the people he served.

Wells: Possible election issue?

With Republicans and Democrats in Dutchess County staking out opposite positions on the issue of mandated tests of private wells before home sales, the issue is sure to make its way into political campaigns this fall.

Both sides could use the issue to their advantage. Most Republicans argue that well tests are essential but should remain voluntary. Democrats say a law mandating the tests would educate property owners and protect homebuyers.

A county-wide well-testing measure was passed by the Dutchess Legislature in January, mostly along party lines, but it was blocked by a veto by County Executive Bill Steinhaus, a Republican.

Meanwhile, Westchester County passed its own law this week mandating private well tests. Rockland is the only other county in the state to require such tests.

Bunnell is "torn," Kelly doesn't care

After about 10 months reporting on the Dutchess Legislature, there's one thing I've learned to expect: Legislator Fred Bunnell's regular requests to abstain from votes.

I haven't crunched the numbers, but I'd say he has abstained from more votes than any other legislator in my short time on the beat. It's a pretty safe bet that he'll do so at least once during each monthly cycle of meetings.

Years ago, when I was reporting on municipal government in Wausau, Wis., I grew accustomed to the rule that lawmakers couldn't abstain unless they had a good reason, usually a conflict of interest that prohibited them from voting. I think the idea was that lawmakers should be compelled to go on the record on issues by voting, and that we should expect them to make tough choices. That is what they are elected to do, after all.

So I was surprised to learn that Dutchess legislators don't have the same burden in justifying an abstention. All they need is permission from a committee chairman or the Legislature chairman.

Usually, when Bunnell asks to abstain, he cites some variation on the "lack of adequate information" explanation. Usually, the chairman grants his abstention.

Today was different.

When it came time for the Budget, Finance and Personnel Committee to vote on a measure increasing the county mortgage tax from 1 percent to 1.25 percent, Bunnell, a Poughkeepsie Democrat, said he would be abstaining. Committee Chairman David Kelly, a Pawling Republican, asked him why.

"I'm torn," Bunnell replied.

Kelly said that wasn't a good reason and told him to vote.

Bunnell protested Kelly's ruling before saying simply, "I choose not to vote."

"I take that as a 'no' vote," Kelly said, and moved on to the next legislator. The measure passed with unanimous Republican support and near unanimous Democratic opposition.

Near unanimous because one Democratic vote was missing. Legislator Fred Knapp had left the meeting early and was marked "absent."

All the tax data you never knew you wanted

My name is Dave and I'm a numbers addict. Nothing excites me more than a well-plotted Excel spreadsheet, and I've been known to spend hours rummaging through government budgets to make sure the figures add up.

So when I discovered recently that Kathy Myers and her team of experts in the Dutchess County Real Property Tax Service Agency had used the county's Web site to post annual tax rate and assessment data back to 1973, I felt like I had won the lottery.

Why should anyone care? Well, a lot of people probably don't care. But if you're a numbers addict like me – or if you want to do some cutting-edge analysis of government fiscal trends over more than three decades – this is an indispensable resource.

For example, would you have guessed that the assessed value of properties in Rhinebeck was just over $35 million in 1973? It's nearly $1.3 billion today. And with revaluation a hot topic these days in Dutchess County, you can get a sense for how the numbers fell in past revaluations because the documents include each town's ever-changing equalization rates.

If I've put you to sleep with my numbers reverie, I apologize, but check back here later and I'll try to distill some of the figures into a few trends that might raise a few eyebrows. And let me know you find anything interesting in your own research.

Politics or public good?

Here are a couple of questions to ponder, one open-ended and the others more to the point.

First, is any aspect of government completely free of politics?

In this case, I'm not necessarily speaking of "politics" in the nefarious sense of the word, though certainly you could provide many examples to support that connotation. Rather I'm talking about the day-to-day business of getting things done in government. Political play seems to be written into the DNA of democracy.

This brings me to my more specific questions, which relate to the often strange beast known as the political appointment.

This press release was disseminated by Michael Kelsey, assistant to Dutchess Legislature Chairman Gary Cooper, R-Pine Plains. Some Democrats cried foul because it was the work of a county employee. Clearly the points made in the press release are political, at least in the general sense, but was the press release inappropriate?

For starters, here are a few things to consider.

Kelsey is on the county payroll. He was appointed by Cooper, who was chosen as chairman by the Republican majority in the Legislature. You can argue that Kelsey is being paid partly to push a Republican agenda, but isn't that to be expected?

The Democrats, if they were in the majority, surely would rely on an appointed chairman's assistant to push their own agenda? Or would they?

Regardless of who is in power, is such a position serving the public good? You might agree that the chairman needs an assistant to fulfill the administrative responsibilities that come with the top job in the Legislature. But when does public service cross the line into political campaigning, which isn't supposed to be done on the public's dime?

My guess is that Republicans and Democrats have differing takes on this scenario, but the underlying questions shouldn't be partisan. What do you think?

Steinhaus makes Washington plea

Dutchess County Executive William Steinhaus joined this week with the New York State Department of Health and the New York State Conference of Local Mental Hygiene Directors in letting Congress know that they don't like the changes proposed to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.

Steinhaus said the possible limits on reimbursements for health care providers operated by units of government would be a "devastating multi-million dollar impact" to Dutchess government.

His letter is addressed to U.S. Sens. Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton and U.S. Reps. Maurice Hinchey, Kirsten Gillibrand and John Hall. (Apology: Copies of the letters should be available here on Straw Poll, however the blogger is still trying to figure out how to do that. Stay tuned.)