Mayor nixes council’s budget

McCarthy planned to build city’s savings for Moody’s rating

Monday, November 12, 2012
Text Size: A | A

Mayor Gary McCarthy presents the 2013 proposed budget to members of the Schenectady City Council at a meeting Sept. 30. (Gazette file photo)
Mayor Gary McCarthy presents the 2013 proposed budget to members of the Schenectady City Council at a meeting Sept. 30. (Gazette file photo)

— Mayor Gary McCarthy vetoed the city’s 2013 budget because it doesn’t set aside enough money to replenish the city’s savings, he said.

The final version of the 2013 budget cut more than $1 million in items that council members described as unnecessary padding. Councilman Vince Riggi suggested the mayor’s proposed budget had been deceptively padded so that the city would end up with a large surplus next year.

Other City Council members said the increases might have been honest mistakes. They took out most of the excess so they could offer a lower tax rate. The budget they approved raises taxes by 1.7 percent; McCarthy had proposed a 4.1 percent tax increase.

After vetoing the council’s budget, McCarthy said the city must raise taxes further to create a larger cushion for city finances. Otherwise, he said, Moody’s Investors Service will lower the city’s credit rating to junk bond status early next year.

“You need something to show them,” he said, explaining that Moody’s wants the city to have a large savings account. “They look at the fund balances.”

The council’s cuts to the budget won’t look good to Moody’s, he said.

Should the Schenectady City Council override the mayor's budget veto?

See the results.

“The way they’ve outlined [the budget], it pretty much guarantees us a downgrade in April,” he said.

Moody’s plans to return in April to judge the city’s financial health, and McCarthy was hoping to have an impressive balance in the city’s savings account by then.

He said the sale of properties taken by the city in tax foreclosures will help — but not until the end of the year. He said he could instead auction off the houses the city took, but that would devastate the city’s new plan to bring every house up to code in a partnership with local contractors, and then sell them to owner-occupants to improve the city’s residential base.

An auction would be quicker, but he doesn’t want to give up on the plan that just began this fall.

“It would give us enough cash, but I just believe that’s the wrong way to do it, and it doesn’t get us where we want to be,” he said.

The City Council supported the mayor’s housing plan in the budget and did not change the financial items related to it.

However, McCarthy objected to a decision the council made regarding some of the expenses it cut.

The council used half the cuts to reduce the tax rate. Money saved from the other cuts was placed in two savings accounts, which would be used to reduce debt and reduce the 2014 tax rate.

McCarthy said the wording on those accounts might make it impossible for the city to use the funds for cash flow. The city is low on cash, averaging about $75,000 after wiping out most of its savings account to pay county taxes that Schenectady property owners had not paid. The city makes the county whole on taxes, although the council is planning to stop that process this year.

McCarthy said he wanted the wording on those funds changed so the money can be used for cash flow.

He said he expects to come to an agreement with the council during tonight’s council meeting.

“I don’t believe we’re that far apart, so I don’t believe there’s a big fight,” he said.

The Democrats on the council held a closed-door caucus meeting Monday night to discuss the veto and whether they should override it. They did not allow the press, the public, or Councilman Vince Riggi to attend the meeting. Riggi is registered as independent. The Democrats did the same thing when writing the final version of the 2013 budget, the night before their public vote on it.

Riggi said he was “disappointed” that the council has begun to use caucuses to debate issues without his presence.

“Talking about public funds! Where do they think it’s OK to do this? Even though they do have that legal loophole, it’s really sad. I’m so disappointed,” he said.

Legally, the Open Meetings Law allows members of one party to meet behind closed doors to discuss matters of public policy. But a caucus can only meet if the governing body includes at least one elected representative from a different political party. Legally, that representative cannot be present at the caucus.

Council members are not allowed to vote in caucus, but they can agree on how they will vote.

Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit


November 12, 2012
9:19 p.m.
wmarincic says...


November 13, 2012
4:53 a.m.

"Legally, the Open Meetings Law allows members of one party to meet behind closed doors to discuss matters of public policy." then why do they keep calling it a caucus and why are they meeting at City Hall and not at the Blue Ribbon like they used to do?....Talk about arrogance..and misuse of public funding for their own uses..

November 13, 2012
8:01 a.m.
tonijean613 says...

The Mayor and City Council need to listen to the taxpaying residents and find the savings by CUTTING THE GROSSLY HIGH SALARIES OF THE POLICE AND TOP ADMINISTRATION - FREEZE OVER TIME, FREEZE EVERYTHING, FORCE THE CITY POLICE TO LIVE AND PAY TAXES IN COMMUNITY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO SERVE ! CUT FROM THE TOP OF EACH DEPARTMENT ! END THE SALARIES OVER 100,000 ! END the take home of police and all city cars ! Cut the city owned car fleet and make city workers (especially the police) use their own cars to commute to their jobs like everyone else! Why are we paying for more than a few city cars that can be shared by all city employees if one is really needed? First, Stop the abuse, stop the pension padding, stop the high salaries!

November 13, 2012
9:09 a.m.
jimsquest says...

Can we have a recall of Mayor Gary McCarthy? It is so obvious he does not represent the taxpayers of Schenectady. And get rid of any council member who does not vote to override his veto.

Talk about a sleazy government. They wait until after Election Day to let us know that the small tax increase we were going to have was all a joke.

Wake up Schenectady taxpayers!! You keep voting them in, and they will continue to screw you.

November 13, 2012
10:29 a.m.

A recall to who? Roger Hull?...or Roger Who?....I have not seen hide nor hare of Mr. Hull since he lost the election...He has written some op eds and endorsed a candidate for council that hardly put any time or effort into running a campaign...You would hope Mr. Hull would be at every meeting speaking out against all that is wrong and supporting the people he wants to represent...But..that is not happening...He is a ghost...this is why we have what we have in this one wants to put in the time or effort..they think they can buy and election...and somehow gain the support of the people...just more of what is wrong with the system of elected officials....

Log-in to post a comment.

columnists & blogs

Log into

Forgot Password?