Submitted by Pat MacKinnon, Voter Services Chair
Please join us for the Schenectady League's Consensus meeting on Government Consolidation/Shared Service,s on Tuesday, May 25 at the First Reformed Church in Schenectady . According to the State League "This initial consensus is very broad and is to set the parameters by which local Leagues and the state League will evaluate current and future legislation and/or proposals. It does not require a great deal of specific knowledge to answer but, rather, a general knowledge base." You can familiarize yourself with the terminology and the pro & con arguments at http://www.lwvny.org. The same information will be presented at the meeting.
The Schenectady LWV Consolidation Committee has been meeting since November to explore this topic. A panel discussion with local government officials from Schenectady County was held on Jan. 13th, and the committee members have interviewed all the town supervisors as well as a county official regarding the issues involved.
The local results of a Consensus meeting on Consolidation are due to be turned in to the state League by June 1. We hope that you will join us on May 25 for our consensus discussion.
Consensus Questions for Consolidation Meeting on Tuesday, May 25
(Please bring this with you to the meeting.
SECTION I Standards for Judging State Legislation or Constitutional Amendments
What standards should the League apply when evaluating statewide legislation or constitutional amendments concerning the implementation of local government
dissolution /consolidation/major shared service proposals?
(Answer affirmatively all that you would support)
A. Does the legislation or constitutional amendment encourage a process that [is]:
1. Cooperative and collaborative? Y___ N___ U____
2. Transparent? Y___ N___ U____
3. Contains well defined channels for citizen input and review?: Y___ N___ U____
4. Provides affected citizens with sufficient and timely information necessary to make informed decisions? Y___ N___ U____
5. Other? (Add any additional process standards you support.)
B. Does the legislation or constitutional amendment contain operational standards that, taken as a whole:
1. Promote administrative efficiency in the decision/process to dissolve, consolidate, or shared services: Y___ N___ U____
2. Promote fiscal efficiency in the decision/process to dissolve, consolidate, or shared services: Y___ N___ U____
3. What other minimum operational standards should we support when evaluating state legislation/amendments affecting dissolution/consolidation/major shared services proposals? Attach separate page if necessary.
C. Possible State Funding of Government Dissolution/Consolidation/Shared Services
(Answer unsure if you do not have an opinion.)
1. Should the state provide grants or loans to local governmental units that wish to consider dissolution/consolidation/major shared services to enable them to do all or any of the items specified below? Y___ N___ U___
2. Specifically, should the grants or loans be available to:
a. Conduct a feasibility study: Y___ N___ U____
b. Implement the mechanics of dissolution/consolidation/major shared services (e.g.legal, accounting, consulting fees and costs of referenda (if any)
Y___ N___ U____
c. Pay employee expenses related to the integration of staff, early retirement, buyouts: Y___ N___ U____
d. Provide an incentive (thru municipal aid) to dissolve/consolidate/share services:
Y___ N___ U___
e. Other? (Please list any other costs of consolidation/dissolution/shared services, if any, that you believe should be funded by state grants, in whole or in part)
3. Should the aid consist primarily of: ____a. Grants or ___b. Loans?
4. Should grants, if any, cover 100% of the costs, be limited to matching grants (ie 50%), be limited to some other percentage, or you are unsure? (Please indicate the consensus, if any)_____________________________
SECTION II Standards for evaluating a specific local proposal for the dissolution or consolidation of a local governmental entity (county, city, town, village, district, authority) or major shared service.
Answer affirmatively all that you would support as one of multiple standards for evaluation of a proposal, not necessarily as a prerequisite for supporting a proposal.
A. Is the process with respect to the proposal:
1. Cooperative and collaborative? Y___ N___ U____
2. Transparent? Y___ N___ U____
3. Containing well defined channels for citizen input and review?: Y___ N___ U____
4. Providing affected citizens with sufficient and timely information necessary to make informed decisions? Y___ N___ U____
5. Other? (Add any additional standards you support.)
B. Operational standards in deciding whether to support a proposal
(Vote for as many as you feel should apply.)
Costs/Tax Impacts
Whether or not the proposal:
1. Results in overall cost savings/positive effect on taxes in the short term?
Y___ N___ U____
2. Results in projected cost savings/positive effect on taxes over the long term?
Y___ N___ U____
3. Results in cost savings/positive effect on taxes for citizens of both/all entities?
Y___ N___ U____
If cost savings for all are not possible for both/all
Whether or not the proposal:
4. Results in the governmental entity(s) with higher projected costs/taxes having those costs/taxes phased in over time or otherwise mitigated? Y___ N___ U____
5. Relies on increases in state aid to show an economic benefit from the transaction or does it stand on its own merit? Y___ N___ U___
6. Requires any governmental entity affected by higher costs/taxes to accept such increased costs/taxes by means of a majority vote of the governing board?
Y____ N____ U_____
Impact on Service Standards:
Whether or not the proposal:
7. Results in increased quality and/or efficiency of services? Y___ N___ U____
8. Results in, at a minimum, a maintenance of services? Y___ N___ U____
9. Results in diminution of services but ones that could be purchased more cheaply in the private sector? Y___ N___ U____
10. Requires any governmental entity to accept any plan where residents would see a diminution of services by means of a majority vote of the governing board? Y___N___U_____
Other Items to be evaluated
Whether or not the proposal:
11. Fairly addresses disparities in employee contracts? Y___ N___ U____
12. Results in increased social/economic justice? Y___ N___ U____
1 3. Results in a reduction in the number of governmental entities? Y___ N___ U____
14. Maintains sense of community? Y___ N___ U____
C. Other? (List on back any other areas of inquiry that you believe should be evaluated in any study of a dissolution/consolidation/major shared service proposal)
Fund Raising Committee Report
Submitted by Sandra Harrsen
The League extends a big thank you to both members and non-members who contributed to our Fund Raising efforts for the year 2009 + 2010. The Operating Fund received $1,085 and the Educational Foundation received $1,305. The total for all contributions is $2,390. Your generosity is greatly appreciated!
© Copyright
League of Women Voters of Schenectady County, New York. All rights reserved.
![[LWV]](images/lwv76.gif)
