"Shame on them if they have no legitimate excuse,"

"Eighty percent of success is showing up."
-- Woody Allen


Some Ulster lame-duck legislators skip out | recordonline.com

By Michael Novinson
Times Herald-Record
Published: 2:00 AM - 12/13/11

KINGSTON — County Executive Mike Hein's Oct. 25 address on the financial need to privatize Golden Hill was heard by 19 legislators and 14 empty chairs. Eight of those empty chairs belong to departing legislators.

The Legislature paid the Center for Governmental Research some $60,000 to analyze Hein's 2012 budget. Just 23 of the 33 legislators showed up Nov. 9 to hear CGR's findings. Six of the no-shows are leaving Dec. 31.

The Legislature's most important public hearing in nearly a decade took place Nov. 29. Eight legislators failed to show; six of those eight are not returning for another term.

Why so many empty chairs? The shrinking of Ulster's Legislature by 10 members and the switch to single-member districts Jan. 1 turned 15 of the current 33 legislators into lame ducks. And once futures were sealed, attendance changed for many.

The Times Herald-Record found 12 of the 15 departing legislators showed up less after learning they wouldn't serve another term. Attendance for seven of the 15 fell at least 24 percent.

"Shame on them if they have no legitimate excuse," said Russ Haven, legislative counsel for the New York Public Interest Research Group. Legislators draw an annual salary of $10,000.

Walter Frey, R-Saugerties, attended 41 of his 53 legislative meetings between Jan. 1 and Sept. 12. On Sept. 13, Frey lost the Republican primary to incumbent Bob Aiello 43-106. Since then, Frey made just seven of his 21 meetings. The drop-off: 44 percent. Frey was an early advocate for privatizing Golden Hill and was criticized by colleagues and public speakers. He didn't attend a single meeting of the full Legislature between July 19 and Dec. 5, when he cast the critical 17th vote for privatization. "I let them have their dog-and-pony show," he said. "My day would come."

Jack Hayes, R-Gardiner, attended 44 of his 50 legislative meetings between Jan. 1 and Nov. 7. Hayes lost the Nov. 8 general election to Tracey Bartels 905-1,035. Since then, Hayes has made just three of six meetings and was the only legislator to miss the Dec. 5 Golden Hill vote.

A personal issue has taken Hayes out of state the past two weeks, he said. He extended his trip for a week after being assured there were enough votes to privatize the infirmary.

Joe Stoeckeler, D-Cragsmoor, made 11 of his 17 legislative meetings between Jan. 1 and May 31. Since failing to get an endorsement at the June 1 Democratic convention, Stoeckeler attended just seven of his 24 meetings. Work and family health responsibilities prevented him from traveling an hour to Kingston for meetings. "I haven't put as much time in as I meant to," he said.

Not all departing legislators have cut back. Roy Hochberg, D-Hurley, attended every 2010 meeting and all of his 19 meetings between Jan. 1 and May 31. Even though Democrats endorsed incumbent Don Gregorius at their June 1 convention, Hochberg attended all of his 26 meetings since then. "You just put it on your calendar and make it your business to be there," he said.

FUTURE UNCERTAINTY

HUGH REYNOLDS ATTEMPTS TO SUM UP AN EMOTIONALLY CHARGED WEEK IN ULSTER COUNTY...we have heard it all...deficit financing...one shots...unsustainable....the only alternative...a budget balancing effort...sacrificing the few for the many....... Not quite sure if there were any winners or losers but the one thing that Reynolds frames well is the future uncertainty


County Beat / Opinion
Hugh Reynolds: Golden opportunities
by Hugh Reynolds on Dec 9, 2011 • from the KINGSTON TIMES

Some thought County Executive Mike Hein might have as many as 19 votes for his Golden Hill/budget package, but 17, which he got Monday night, was just enough. We now move forward into an uncertain future with the county executive more powerful than ever.

The smoke has barely cleared, but it’s not too early to pick winners and losers on this one.

Mike Hein — obviously a winner, but bruised. Hein, who does not suffer criticism well, was pilloried for excessive secrecy, duplicity and connivance, even as he spoke to the “transparency” of the process. Pshaw. The new 23-member legislature, which the executive is undoubtedly already courting, had better keep a wary eye.

Dave Donaldson — clearly a loser and humiliated to boot. Donaldson fought the good fight for Golden Hill, but was crippled by some fancy footwork of his own doing. In attempting to reduce the executive’s staff — some said motivated by payback — Donaldson couldn’t even raise one vote in the Ways and Means Committee. Committee Chairman Rich Gerentine reminded Donaldson that as legislature chairman he advocated for the two additional executive deputies he lately sought to cut. Even Donaldson had to smile at that one. That their minority leader-elect was so roundly repudiated does not bode well for the Democrats next year.

Workers at Golden Hill and patients — tragic losers, and I do not use that word lightly. They face an uncertain future under private ownership. Word around legislative chambers is that upwards of 100 of the facility’s 400 workers could be “retirement eligible.” Few will be able to get by on the half-pay pensions the county will offer. Elderly patients can only wonder about their fate, and stress at that stage of life is especially debilitating.

County unions — Losers for the most part. CSEA could see its membership gutted when Golden Hill goes private. On the other hand, construction unions, which backed Hein with money and manpower during the last election, could see tens of millions in new buildings going up at Golden Hill.

Elliott Auerbach — the comptroller looks like a winner, despite losing a last-ditch attempt to thwart the inevitable. It took Auerbach a while to get geared up, but he made a convincing argument that legislators really had no firm idea what a limited development corporation really meant. Unfortunately for the “kick the can down the road” crowd, by the time he mounted his counter-attack the votes were in. People will remember that the watchdog growled, however belatedly. If not, he’ll remind them.

Ken Ronk and Terry Bernardo — winners. Both two-termers have bright futures in the legislature, if not beyond. She’ll be chairwoman, he majority leader. Siding with the Democratic executive will score big props, at least with the Democratic executive.

Fred Wadnola — the affable chairman never could hold his 18-member majority together; half voted with Hein. Wadnola, an old-school politician, was taken to the woodshed by the executive on this one.

Taxpayers First — A catchy slogan, but one that should leave taxpayers in doubt about the future, two, three years down the road. The county is now in the business of selling assets and laying off people to balance its budgets. It can only get worse.

Resolution To Transfer Ownership Of Golden Hill

Here is what the Ulster County Legislature will be considering on Monday, December 5, 2011. Do they have all the information and are they ready? Resolution 266 GHHHCC to LDC">

Making It Transparent: Certificate Of Incorporation Golden Hill LDC

A transparent look at the papers of incorporation for the GOLDEN HILL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION...Certificate of Incorporation GHLDC">

GHHCC v LDC

GOLDEN HILL...If you choose an LDC...here is what I recommend!

November 28, 2011



Frederick J. Wadnola, Chairman
Paul J. Hansut, Majority Leader
Jeanette M. Provenzano, Minority Leader
Ulster County Legislature
244 Fair Street
Kingston, NY 12402

Dear Legislators:

I write to join you in resolving the financial difficulties we face with regard to our Golden Hill Health Care Center and the 2012 budget.

The fact of the matter is that you are being asked to restructure the ownership of our Health Care Center through a process that has raised substantive concerns by the NYS Comptroller. Further, you have been presented with a Tentative Budget that has been balanced with a non-recurring source of funds (a one-shot) to be raised through bonding. And, you must act quickly.

You hold a position of substantive authority on how to proceed. Since, it appears, the Local Development Corporation (LDC) is the only viable solution that you have before you to address the financial needs of our Health Care Center, I recommend you clearly and decisively take ownership of the process and make this LDC a model.

Proposed Action Plan:

A. Immediately hire Counsel with expertise in finance and LDCs.
B. Establish a vigorous governance structure to assure the integrity and independence of the LDC board of directors. As recommended by the NYS Authorities Budget Office (ABO), LDC board members should be free of direct governmental control and political influence.
C. An LDC must use the acquired property for purposes set forth in its certificate of incorporation. The certificate of incorporation requires a “Purpose” statement. Be certain you are comfortable with the answers to the required questions on the existing certificate of incorporation:
a. Why is the corporation being formed or what does the corporation intend to accomplish?
b. Who will benefit from the corporation’s accomplishments?
c. How will the corporation achieve its purpose?
D. Include in the LDC By-laws:
a. A requirement that the LDC report regularly to the Legislature to ensure the Legislature has a continued voice and role in the process. Expect written reports and attendance by an LDC board member at appropriate committee meetings.
b. The Authorities Budget Office (ABO) shall be notified of the LDC’s incorporation and the LDC’s commitment to comply with ABO reporting and accountability measures.
c. The Ulster County Comptroller shall have direct authority to audit any and all books and records of the LDC and for this purpose have access to all such books, records, and accounts at any time.
i. The LDC shall file with the County Comptroller a professional independent audit of the LDC’s annual financial statements.
ii. The County Comptroller shall audit and certify for payment all lawful claims or charges, whether for payroll or otherwise, or against funds for which the LDC is responsible in whole or in part.
iii. All such audits shall be an expense of the LDC.
d. The requirement to comply with all state, federal and/or local laws and/or regulations relating to:
i. Procurement and specifically to adopt and follow the County’s procurement policies.
ii. Competitive bidding.
iii. Freedom of Information Laws providing access to LDC records.
iv. NYS Public Officers’ Law requiring the meetings and activities of the LDC be open and accessible to the public. The by-laws should specifically state that confidentiality agreements as a pre-condition of any negotiation are not permitted. The ABO does not agree that full disclosure and transparency are incompatible with LDC success.
v. Competitive bidding.
e. The requirement to comply with Ulster County’s Ethics and Disclosure Law.
E. Amend the County Ethics and Disclosure Law to include the LDC.

F. Embrace the NYS Comptroller’s reform proposal to require that any contract between the County and an LDC must be for fair and adequate consideration and may be for a term no longer than five years, subject to periodic renewals for terms of up to five years each upon the consent of both parties.
G. Assure taxpayers they will receive full value for their asset and it will not be sold without an appraisal:
a. Employ a professional to study the value of the property; use your authority to require the production of books, papers, and other evidence deemed necessary and material to such study.
H. Require a detailed implementation plan inclusive of expected dates for each required step in the restructure/sale process (such as dates for when the: LDC board of directors will adopt by-laws; Legislature will transfer fee title to LDC; reserved leasehold agreement will be drafted, approved; etc.) and designate responsibility for each step.
I. Require scenario planning. The Legislature needs to review a series of multi-year financial scenarios depicting the impact of successes and failures, the effect of this one-shot revenue, and a second one-shot if needed in 2013.
J. Require a back-up plan in the event the LDC method of privatizing does not succeed.
K. Know your options now, don’t wait for future surprises.
Please do not hesitate to call on me if I can be of further assistance.

IS THE CHARTER WORKING AS EXPECTED..What do you think?

Implementation v. Application.....http://www.dailyfreeman.com/articles/2011/11/25/news/doc4eceebfd1612c921820490.txt

APPROVED FIVE YEARS AGO...IMPLEMENTED THREE YEARS AGO...Is it working? What do you think?
By PATRICIA DOXSEY
Freeman staff

KINGSTON – Five years ago Ulster County voters fundamentally changed county government, when they voted to move to a charter form of government.

Most significantly, the charter put at the head of county government a county-wide elected executive empowered with broad unilateral powers. Ulster County’s first county executive, Michael Hein, took office on Jan. 1, 2009. He was elected to a new four-year term in November.

Three years after government began operating under the charter’s auspices, a special commission is revisiting the plan.

Since September, the Ulster County Charter Revision Committee has been meeting to review the document which lays out how the new county government works.

ON DEC. 13, the Center for Research, Regional Education and Outreach at SUNY New Paltz and the League of Women Voters of the Mid-Hudson Region, will host a conference to examine how the charter has worked and how results compare with the original expectations, as well as its strengths, weaknesses and future best practices.

THE MEETING is designed to provide information to the commission now considering whether to recommend changes to the county charter.

“We’re calling upon people who helped write the charter, who advocated for it and have experience operating under it to tell us whether their expectations were met, whether it’s operating the way they had thought, what it’s strengths and weaknesses are,” said Gerald Benjamin, the center’s director. A SUNY New Paltz professor, Benjamin was chairman of the commission that created the county charter.

Benjamin said the Revision Commission has been invited to the conference and he hopes that members “will be informed” by the conversations.

THE COUNTY charter requires that a Revision Commission review the charter five years after its creation and every 10 years thereafter.

THE 11-MEMBER Revision Commission meets on Tuesdays at 3 p.m. in the Legislature’s conference room of the County Office Building, 244 Fair St.

Over the course of the past several meetings, commission members have met with department heads, administration members and other countywide elected officials to understand the impact the charter has had on their departments.

Mandate Relief Starts Here!

Reforming the way we finance Medicaid will lead to taxpayer accountability