U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Rochester area
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-21-2018, 05:17 PM
 
1,127 posts, read 859,356 times
Reputation: 1476

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
I'm thinking in terms of jurisdiction and I never said anything about a 50% cut in manpower.
No, you have not. But that's my point. After consolidation, you still have the same number of workers doing the same man-hours. Nothing saved there, and likely an increase as everyone gets boosted to the wage level of the highest paid department.

The "staffing" you reference is the rank and file workers (police, teachers, etc.). The theoretical cut is in top level administration. Those cuts are not as drastic as many would like to think, and only save a portion of what is an minor part of overall costs.

Quote:
Nor have I said anything about eliminating "towns". Consolidation or dissolution of villages, yes and many in state have and are doing just that.
Most New Yorkers do not live in villages. Town, County, and state are the operative governmental units. Consolidation of villages does not make sense (on a large scale) since most are not contiguous.

Dissolution of villages? I'm sure a case could be made for some of them. As you point out, some are doing that. Thus, I don't see it as a genuine problem in the state. The villages that I have personal experience are considered a benefit by the residents. They do not pay any noticeable premium in taxes, get more services (i.e. community pool) and have more say in the local community. If they don't want to live in the village they could have purchased a home in the same hamlet and school district just outside the village.

Go ahead and dissolve villages. A small percentage of NYers MAY save $50 or $100 on their property tax bill. School tax, which is the larger portion of taxes for most of us, remains the same.

But this supports my point. Villages are not the problem. Those living in villages pay essentially the same property (and the same school) taxes as those outside of villages. I would also venture to state that a village with noticeably higher taxes is providing some additional service for that cost. It is obviously what the residents want. No one in NY is forced to live in a village - they are the exceptions.


Quote:
In terms of consolidation of schools, I'm thinking in terms again of staffing and in terms of spreading the burden relatively "evenly". Considering that many counties in the South have done, it and in term have lower taxes in that regard, that would seem like it is evidence enough.
We are all paying high taxes now. I'm not sure what you mean by spreading the burden evenly. Even if it could be done, that involves the higher rates coming down and the lower rates going up. So the "rich" folk in the nice neighborhoods get a break, while the low income areas get a tax hike? I don't think that is what you mean, but I can't see another way of interpreting the "spreading."

The south... as I have already pointed out the "south" pays their teachers considerably less than what NY teachers make. That's just salary. If you add in the benefits I'm sure it is even worse.

Again - THAT is the where the difference in tax rates come from. In New York we PAY CONSIDERABLY MORE for ALL our services. It really is that simple. Pay everyone in NY the same rate as they would make in NC and I guarantee our taxes would be lowered considerably.

Quote:
Again, if it is as simple as political corruption, social handouts(hope that includes all forms), etc. how much would that help reduce taxation, if the same structure is still in place?
Corruption, handouts, nepotism, etc. They all factor in. It happens everywhere, but NY definitely brings it to another level. That is one of the reasons the salary benefit packages are so high in New York.

Do some reading on why Nassau County almost went broke a few years back.

The "old guard" that ran the county for years robbed Peter to pay Paul. They gave away the store in benefit packages to every single public worker union. To "balance" the budget, much of it was in retirement benefits. When the beneficiaries of these deals started to retire and collect, it almost crushed the county.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-21-2018, 05:31 PM
 
1,127 posts, read 859,356 times
Reputation: 1476
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
Where do you come to that conclusion?
I just realized your question was in regards to a specific statement in my post. Since you quoted the entire post, it wasn't immediately clear that you were referring to


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe461
Understood, but the point still stands. Those “patrols” are revenue generating operations. More patrols = more income.
The answer is in the second sentence. A large part of the "patrol" function is issuing tickets. Tickets are a revenue-generating activity. More police on patrol = more opportunity to issue tickets = more income.

Come visit any of the roads leading to a NYS Thruway entrance in the Catskill region on a Sunday night. State Police and County Sheriff cars line the roads. It is a tag-team of ticket writing on unsuspecting down-staters headed home after the weekend. There was a time when even NYC DEP got in on the act.

Nassau County can't afford to hire more police, so they installed traffic cameras. The County Exec specifically stated this was done as a revenue-generating measure to close the budget gap.

I am pro-police. However, any honest officer on the street in NY will tell you that his bread and butter is ticket writing. Many departments have quotas the officers must meet. Those quotas go up when the county needs more money.

If everyone in NY failed to commit a single traffic violation for one full week, the state would most likely collapse. Certainly some counties would.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 05:44 PM
 
56,637 posts, read 80,952,685 times
Reputation: 12514
Iíll just say this and leave it alone, but the staffing wouldnít be the same at the higher end of the scale. That is a part of the process or change in order to be more competitive. Even if there is the idea of more pay for less administration, it wouldnít be to the point of the total of what higher level administrators get now. So, I would think that would have to be the part of changes made.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2018, 01:03 PM
 
1,127 posts, read 859,356 times
Reputation: 1476
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
I’ll just say this and leave it alone, but the staffing wouldn’t be the same at the higher end of the scale. That is a part of the process or change in order to be more competitive. Even if there is the idea of more pay for less administration, it wouldn’t be to the point of the total of what higher level administrators get now. So, I would think that would have to be the part of changes made.
Fair enough and I can see how that opinion makes sense to you. If you looked at historical data and numbers, I believe you would change your mind.

Some points to consider:

1. While costs for high level people such as school district superintendents are easy (and valid, IMO) targets, that represents a very small portion of the overall budget. Yes, consolidate districts and you may be able to produce some overall savings. However, it will not have any meaningful impact on the overall tax bill.

2. The initial cost of consolidation will easily wipe out any potential savings from #1 for several years to come.

3. "be more competitive" with what? That's the big problem with government bureaucracy. They have no reason to be competitive and they almost never are. In the corporate world, they have _every_ reason to be competitive. Yet, history shows that large corporate mergers rarely, if ever, achieve the promised cost savings. If profit-driven corporations can't do it, how do you expect the government to figure it out?
(Answer - they won't)

4. None of this applies to the property taxes for the vast majority of NYers who live outside of villages. It also doesn't apply to any of the villages where the cost of village property tax does not have a noticeable effect on property taxes.

5. It also doesn't apply to the majority of New Yorkers who live in school districts with >1500 enrollment, since every study I can find indicate such districts would see no cost benefit from consolidation.


I respect your opinion. I still stand by my original point that the difference between NC and NY property taxes is primarily due to public worker salary differences and not any difference in the number of governmental entities. If the people outside of villages are paying the same high taxes, and the people in larger school districts that would not see any benefit in consolidation are also paying the same high taxes, the answer has to be somewhere other than consolidation.

Let's just agree to disagree (Although I would be delighted to reconsider if there were any actual financial data to support your opinion).

Last edited by Joe461; 08-22-2018 at 01:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2018, 01:28 PM
 
56,637 posts, read 80,952,685 times
Reputation: 12514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe461 View Post
Fair enough and I can see how that opinion makes sense to you. If you looked at historical data and numbers, I believe you would change your mind.

Some points to consider:

1. While costs for high level people such as school district superintendents are easy (and valid, IMO) targets, that represents a very small portion of the overall budget. Yes, consolidate districts and you may be able to produce some overall savings. However, it will not have any meaningful impact on the overall tax bill.

2. The initial cost of consolidation will easily wipe out any potential savings from #1 for several years to come.

3. "be more competitive" with what? That's the big problem with government bureaucracy. They have no reason to be competitive and they almost never are. In the corporate world, they have _every_ reason to be competitive. Yet, history shows that large corporate mergers rarely, if ever, achieve the promised cost savings. If profit-driven corporations can't do it, how do you expect the government to figure it out?
(Answer - they won't)

4. None of this applies to the property taxes for the vast majority of NYers who live outside of villages. It also doesn't apply to any of the villages where the cost of village property tax does not have a noticeable effect on property taxes.

5. It also doesn't apply to the majority of New Yorkers who live in school districts with >1500 enrollment, since every study I can find indicate such districts would see no cost benefit from consolidation.


I respect your opinion. I still stand by my original point that the difference between NC and NY property taxes is primarily due to public worker salary differences and not any difference in the number of governmental entities. If the people outside of villages are paying the same high taxes, and the people in larger school districts that would not see any benefit in consolidation are also paying the same high taxes, the answer has to be somewhere other than consolidation.

Let's just agree to disagree (Although I would be delighted to reconsider if there were any actual financial data to support your opinion).
Competitive in terms of a lower property tax, which in turn could allow for areas to be able to attract companies to those areas or to have existing companies in the state to grow. This is what I’m thinking of, as in much of the state, overall cost isn’t necessarily the issue in parts of the state that could use more economic development.

Again, even outside of the villages, it would help to lower property taxes throughout the state and given that school tax makes up the biggest chunk, it just makes sense to at least examine that aspect.

Keep in mind that consolidation doesn’t mean completely eliminating everything either.

I will also say that you can look at the difference in property taxes in many Southern counties with lower property taxes than what you can find in NY, in many cases. However, I will say what may happen is that home prices go up and in term would in essence neutralize things in terms of home costs.

On the flip side, can we honestly say that the current structure is doing the whole state any good as is? Should we just leave things alone? If it is as simple as corruption and handouts, would keeping the structure the same show that it isn’t the issue at all? I’m only asking, because if it is as simple as those things, while leaving structure alone, is that really changing anything? This is given that people of both major parties in the state have had their chances to improve things in this regard.

Last edited by ckhthankgod; 08-22-2018 at 01:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 12:52 PM
 
1,510 posts, read 1,339,244 times
Reputation: 2259
According to Gary Keith, the M&T economist, in June, Rochester recorded a gain of 8100 new jobs since the last June and it was a record high number of people working. It was just reported that for July, the region gained 9800 non- farm jobs over the previous July.
https://rbj.net/2018/08/22/rochester...climb-in-july/


Sure looks like the area is growing to me
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,134 posts, read 9,573,267 times
Reputation: 8156
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
No...You are taking the post somewhere it wasnít even going to. My point I was pretty self explanatory.

To be fair, Richmond is a little bit bigger than the size of Rochester and Syracuse city limits combined and isnít that much bigger than Rochester in terms of city limits. So, I would hope it would have some growth given the trajectory of the area it is in.
You and I will continue to disagree, Rochester city population in 2017 is 210,565, Richmond City is 204,214 in 2017 I think the 2 are close enough without adding a another jurisdiction. Once again you can't get your point with population numbers so you want to compare square miles within the city limits. There will never be an equitable comparison with you because you'll always want to pull a different statistic to make your point....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 07:14 PM
 
56,637 posts, read 80,952,685 times
Reputation: 12514
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA Yankee View Post
You and I will continue to disagree, Rochester city population in 2017 is 210,565, Richmond City is 204,214 in 2017 I think the 2 are close enough without adding a another jurisdiction. Once again you can't get your point with population numbers so you want to compare square miles within the city limits. There will never be an equitable comparison with you because you'll always want to pull a different statistic to make your point....
You are still talking about this? Wow...My initial point was just relaying a simple fact about Rochester’s Combined Statistical Area and how its slight growth may mean that people in the area are moving a little further versus leaving the “area”.

Also, what I said wasn’t wrong though about the land area of the cities(or metro areas) and I think Richmond’s population is actually higher than Rochester’s at this current point by about 10-15,000 people. Just so people don’t think I’m making the land area information up and to put this into perspective(which was the point): Virginia Land Area City Rank (#5)

New York Land Area City Rank (#5 and 11)

Last edited by ckhthankgod; 08-23-2018 at 07:45 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 07:47 PM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,134 posts, read 9,573,267 times
Reputation: 8156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe461 View Post
From what I can find, Brockport has outrageous taxes. Maybe they provide a list of services worth that kind of money. I donít know. If not, ďconsolidationĒ is not the issue - itís gross mismanagement. ďConsolidatingĒ Brockport into a higher government entity might solve that problem, but only because it would eliminate the idiots who are throwing away money. That kind of waste can also happen at higher levels, but it is much harder to fix. Much easier to vote out people at smaller govenerment entities.

I can just as easily point to other villages that have similar taxes to the surrounding areas, while providing extra services to their residents.
I read all the other point you posted in many ways your response is the classic NY response because ultimately no one want their child being mixed in with those from "that" district. Consolidation can benefit beyond just the central administration but think of it if each district has 2 specialists for the English Curriculum and you combine 12 districts in a county into one (just an example) then that's 22 positions eliminated. If district "A" has an ES that's 38% below capacity and district B needs more class space then it can make sense to rezone the districts and balance the load. Contrary to the fear mongers the kids are not dragged from end to end within the county (where I live), if a community is under federal jurisdiction to de-segregate then more extensive bussing may be involved but I don't know where that is being ordered. Why can't a plumper support 8 buildings instead of 4? How many SPED services can be shared instead of needing duplication the same for VoTech, AltED, and any other specialty program.

Brockport is in Monroe County, their tax table is 23 pages printed and every entity listed is a taxing authority especially the school districts. Maybe if the schools had to submit a budget and operate under
it they would manage their money better the way it is now they can raise their tax rate every year "for the children". You also stated that salaries down here are less, in many areas i'm sure they could be in some cases but we only pay 5% sales tax to your 8%, our property tax is $8.70 per 1k assessed, Brockport's is $39.23 (approx.) per 1k assessed. Do you really think that our employees are paid 4 1/2 times less?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,134 posts, read 9,573,267 times
Reputation: 8156
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
You are still talking about this? Wow...My initial point was just relaying a simple fact about Rochesterís Combined Statistical Area and how its slight growth may mean that people in the area are moving a little further versus leaving the ďareaĒ.

Also, what I said wasnít wrong though about the land area of the cities(or metro areas) and I think Richmondís population is actually higher than Rochesterís at this current point by about 10-15,000 people. Just so people donít think Iím making the land area information up and to put this into perspective(which was the point): Virginia Land Area City Rank (#5)

New York Land Area City Rank (#5 and 11)
I was gone for a while just responding,You don't stop I took two population figures from the same source/year I am not going to try and match the square footage of 2 cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Rochester area
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top