I can’t fault Dan Weaver for closing the comment thread on what has become a rehash of a rehash of a rehash. Still, I do need to point out how, yet again, memes propagate that have no basis in fact. This meme centers on the claim that Mayor Thane would rather buy curtains than fix the leaky roof at City Hall. The goal of course is to position this as “out-of-control spending”, “fiscal mismanagement” and “skewed priorities of the mayor”.
Let’s deconstruct this a bit by looking at the public record, easily provided via Google from the Recorder aptly titled Council Rejects Appeal for More CIty Hall Money:
City Hall custodian Shane Hoefs’ request to increase the former Sanford mansion’s repair budget to $200,000 wasn’t approved by the Amsterdam Common Council’s Budget Review Committee Thursday, but $25,000 was added to the original $10,500 account.
It wasn’t a move supported by 1st Ward Alderman Joseph Isabel, who has publicly stated he’s against spending tax dollars to repair the old building since the February suspension of his City Hall relocation committee, which he’d established out of concern for the costs of maintaining the structure.
[snip]
“I’m open minded to staying there, but if they want that building, don’t put the burden on the taxpayer,” Isabel said. “I don’t think any expenses should be made until [the Historic Amsterdam League] takes the year to get their plan in order.”
On the other side, Mayor Ann Thane said during the meeting she believes maintenance is necessary, though she agreed some projects, like the portico repair, could be reserved for grant funding.
“We can’t just let everything go until grant funding comes through, because you’re just going to increase costs in end,” she said. “Some things you have to take care of in a timely manner. It’s the responsibility of the city to care for the building. If it was a new building, you would take care of it. Even if it’s an older building, you still have to take care of it.”
If you follow the thread from Dan Waever’s blog, you see two things of note when you actually talk about the dollars:
1) The repair fund available to the Mayor and the custodian is on the order of $10,500 dollars
2) The requested amount for the roof repair is on the order of $200,000
In other words, addressing the roofing issues is a multiple of 20 times that of the repair fund. Or, in reality, the custodial fund in no way, shape or form, comes close to repairing the roofing issues.
And in Alderman Isabel’s own words, the Council has no interest in spending money to fix the rood or in fact, spending any money on City Hall upkeep while Mayor Thane argues otherwise.
Here is Mayor Thane again in her state of the City Address:
With a very limited budget, we have painted the interior, refurbished an outbuilding, offices and closets, repaired drainage, refinished stairways, carpeted, and continue to make cosmetic improvements to the building and grounds. I have repeatedly asked for funding to repair the roof, gutters, porticos, windows and the back patio, but as we have seen, larger projects are often put off until there is an emergency, much like the boiler failure during the prior administration. That project had also been identified well before it became a high cost repair. As a significant icon of our shared heritage, this invaluable building is a city treasure that demands preservation
See kids: it’s not the Council who fails to fund it; it’s not the COuncils of past and present who refuse to establish a capital fund to pay for repair and who neglect basic upkeep of City Hall; it’s not the desire to shutter the building for what can be politely described as the institutionalized cronyism of our city that puts the financial interests of a few above the interests-at-large. Of course, it’s all in the interest of “protecting the taxpayer” which I can assure you, is always a different taxpayer than you or me.
No, it’s none of that. They want you to believe it’s Mayor Thane unwilling to fix a $200,000 roofing issue with a budget line of $10,000 or Mayor Thane ignoring the priorities even though the public record makes the true culprits quite clear.
That’s what passes for reasoned political discourse and sound financial management and fiscal responsibility in our fair city– when numbers mean nothing– it’s high finance indeed when a $10,000 budget can get you a $200,000 roof repair or $500 spent on Christmas lights can instead buy you new roads and infrastructure. It’s the miracle of Christmas at election time!
You betcha’!
PS LIke Dan, I’m losing patience with rehashing disproven arguments so if you want to comment, your argument had better bring some hard numbers to the table versus talking points.
