Council Considering Another $231,160 in Cuts

Astorino has proposed a county budget thats cuts spending 1% ! How is it Rye isn’t following ? Doug French : here is a tip : cut the Rye budget 1% and work backwards … its that simple . and all department hjeads who scream should be ordered to meet with Astorino to discover how he did it . Another 2% increased Rye budget is what Steve Otis used to give us …. i thought the new team was going to bring ‘ CHANGE’ ? many voters see ‘ business as usual ‘ developing and that is BAD .

You’re correct divman – the standard 2 to 5% increase was common from The Gang of Steve. And what’s really incredible to me is that the new council played right along with The Gang’s law department malpractice. Why? And why did it take a judge last week to force them to allow senior city employees to answer questions under oath after 3 months of stonewalling? And why have they authorized and paid ANY – I repeat ANY – 2010 litigation fees on the Schubert/City/Gates fiasco? That couple of hundred grand would have closed this gap and more. And naturally they’re still spending under the guise of “defending.” Ask ‘em who exactly is now being defended.

And speaking of BIG money, where is the Rye Police Overtime Schedule this year? Last year’s didn’t have to be FOIL-ed and it showed huge payments (again, hundreds of thousands of dollars) to certain employees that could probably have been greatly avoided with better management. (Triple dipping Commissioners apparently know no other manpower scheduling pattern.) I sure hope some adult supervision was applied this year – guess we’ll all find out soon…

So lastly now we have the spectacle of DARE on the chopping block. They must think the taxpayers are pretty stupid. Just because they’re not TALKING about big money politically toxic issues doesn’t mean they’re not quietly wasting boatloads of cash on them.

Ted C.

Boatloads, as in $500,000 avg per year the last 4 in RPD Overtime!

Someone please remind me why Connors is still employed here?

Here is a tip about overtime in ANY organization. If people do not want to work overtime there is not a law that makes them have to work. If only one or two people agree to work when overtime comes, guess what? The people that work overtime will get paid the most. The people that don’t want to work will be the people complaining about how some people make so much money. If anyone complains about anyone making overtime, look at those that say no to the overtime. The people that are hungry, that don’t mind being away from family or weekends or holidays in the long run will be the ones that benefit.

I’m confused. Various posters here say that Connors should be dismissed, usually using the “no confidence vote” as one of the reasons. Now another poster is using the amount of OT as another reason that Connors needs to go.

First of all, OT is a necessity in law enforcement. A department running at top efficiency should always incur OT (it’s a more economical way to staff). Of course, excessive OT is not good.

Why is it a necessity? Because unlike DMV or Citibank, if a teller calls in sick, you can always do without the teller and just deal with longer wait-times. But Rye only has three RMP’s on patrol. If one of those officers calls in sick, you could attempt to go with two, but you will eventually run into a problem. A minor MVA on Purchase St. could easily require two officers. Throw in an aided call and a 911 hang-up (up to a dozen a day with the majority being nothing) and you are up a creek. So if an officer calls in sick, someone is needed to replace him/her. Also, when an officer takes vacation, you need to replace them also. Twisted ankle? OT for their replacement!

Now, back to Connors. As PC, he is directly responsible for the police budget. The more he is over budget, the more he has to explain. And since nobody (apparently) likes him, I can’t see him “throwing OT” at the officers, unless you are also saying that he is trying to curry favors.

Thoughts?