Blogs > Saratogian Newsroom

The Saratogian Newsroom blog, complete with thoughts and commentary from our newsroom staff and regular posts on happenings around town.

Wednesday, December 22

Front page: NY loses 2 Congressional seats, recreation officials warn of E. and W. Side Rec. changes

Good morning! I hope everyone is staying warm while getting those last few days of shopping in!

New York will lose two Congressional seats because of shrinking population. [Srtgn]

Advocates and officials have started the push for independent redistricting. [LoHud]

City recreation officials are asking the City Council to "take back" the East and West Side Rec. Fields. [TU]


Anonymous Anonymous said...

The recent announcement that the City and School District will end their longstanding agreement on operation and maintenance of the East Side and West Side recreation fields will presumably result in Recreation Department’s operating budget reductions.

The question here is: Are those reductions ALREADY shown in the adopted City budget or are they in ADDITION to the cuts already presented?

At a November 15 meeting, Ivins responded, in part, to a question regarding staff eliminations in the proposed 2011 budget by saving that there would be a $70,000 reduction in the Recreation budget labor accounts.

However, the then proposed budget ONLY showed a $24,778 REDUCTION in LABOR, from $224,778 (2010 original appropriation to $200,000 in the proposed 2011 budget. It is noted, however, that Finance has projected that Recreation will overspend the 2010 appropriation by more than $40,000 ($265,000 compared to the $224,778 appropriation).

There is also a $5,000 reduction in the corresponding Labor OT account. So it appear that there are approximately $30,000 in Labor account reductions in the original proposed 2011 Recreation budget. Is Ivins’ reference to the $70,000 present as an ADDITION reduction in Recreation budget labor accounts? And, if so, specifically which labor account?

December 22, 2010 at 9:39 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reduction of labor would $$ be in the DPW budget for recreation since there are three people there in his budget. The reduction you ma be referring to is the retirement savings minus her return in a part time capacity. If the fields will not be maintained by the city in 2011 obviously there should be some drop off in the DPW portion of the Recreation budget not the operational budget of the Rec department. very confusing I admit. My preference would be the Recreation Center have their own employees for maintenance on their budget and out of DPW control alltogether Pretty touhg to control and give direction to people working for another department.

December 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why don't you e-mail him for an explanation. I'm sure he would be more than willing to explain your question??? That would have been the first alternative.

December 22, 2010 at 12:50 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why is all the concern over the Recreation Budget. There is at least $70,000 in overststaed revenue in DPW. It was brought up seevral times but did not chnage. A statement was made just prior to the vote that DPW would be down about $350k for 2010 but the $200k projected was not chnaged. Actually the $350k will be more like $750m. If you're gpoing to go after Ivins why don't you go after your dear Skippy. Hopefully the old Democrats will clean house some day and get rid of the termites in the attic.

December 27, 2010 at 7:14 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home