Guest Guest Posted April 29, 2008 Report Share Posted April 29, 2008 No, like the Town of Vestal revenue is listed separately from others in the Binghamton Water Department, why? Town of Dickinson and Conklin buy water from Binghamton and they are not listed. The point being made was that Ken Franks does not live in Binghamton nor does Ed. Ken Franks is being paid to represent a city he doesn't live it but that's OK. Ed assists in organizing a meeting in Binghamton and that is not OK? Do you see the double standard? no - no I don't actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tax&Spend Posted April 29, 2008 Report Share Posted April 29, 2008 OK, so all that does is open more questions. Simply, how many hours did the City bill for "Corporate (sic) Counsel" (or Asst. Corporate [sic] Counsel) to the Water Fund? What rate did they assess the hours at? Just more questions, no answers. I'd guess you'd probably have to sumbit a FOIL request to get that documentation. Or, when the City Council holds its budget hearings in the fall, request that your City Councilperson ask these questions to the head of the Water Dept. when the Water Fund budget is up for review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 1, 2008 Report Share Posted May 1, 2008 Ed Arkookian it is. Thats Mayor Arkookian to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Thats Mayor Arkookian to you! Where is our Mayor Arkookyian these days? Both he and his legions of fans on this board are MIA. Could that be because his "fans" are all him posting to himself? @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 No, it's because they actually took the time to understand the reasons behind the water rates and now they have nothing to say about how Bucci drained the fund before Ryan got into office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 5, 2008 Report Share Posted May 5, 2008 No, it's because they actually took the time to understand the reasons behind the water rates and now they have nothing to say about how Bucci drained the fund before Ryan got into office. Hummm, 15,000 water accounts in Binghamton all paying a $12 "Capital Improvement Fee" three times a year for a toal of $540,000. Amount transfered to capital in 2007? $0. Bucci? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 5, 2008 Report Share Posted May 5, 2008 Bucci drained the fund before Ryan got into office. Draining the fund has been a bi-partisan effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 13, 2008 Report Share Posted May 13, 2008 Joseph Yannuzzi, Acting Water / Sewer Superintendent (607) 772-7210 & Binghamton man nabbed after fleeing sentencing May 12, 2008 BROOME COUNTY COURT Binghamton resident Joseph J. Yannuzzi, 46, will appear in Broome County Court at an undetermined date to face charges related to an assault on his girlfriend. Yannuzzi failed to appear last Wednesday for a plea bargain sentence to three years in state prison. Yannuzzi had been arrested July 29, 2007, and charged with assault, Binghamton detective Lt. John Chapman said. A plea bargain was reached when Yannuzzi pleaded to second-degree attempted burglary to satisfy several indictments from a Broome County grand jury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 15, 2008 Report Share Posted May 15, 2008 Its just a though but I was at the new My Bath showroom on Upper Front St in Binghamton earlier this week and they have dual flush toilets that can save over 10,000 gallons of water a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Almost 14,000 views of this thread and still The Press & Sun-Bulletin has never explained why the water payments collected by Broome County are going to the City of Binghamton General Fund instead of the Water Fund. What will it take for them to tell the truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Almost 14,000 views of this thread and still The Press & Sun-Bulletin has never explained why the water payments collected by Broome County are going to the City of Binghamton General Fund instead of the Water Fund. What will it take for them to tell the truth? are you saying they don't tell the truth? or just ammking DELETED up again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Client 9 Posted May 25, 2008 Report Share Posted May 25, 2008 are you saying they don't tell the truth? or just ammking DELETED up again The Press & sun-Bulletin has never reported that the money Broome County is collecting for water payments ($700,000 so far, another $700,00 wil be made soon) is not going to the Water Fund it is going to the General Funds where Ryan can spend it as he pleases. It is supposed to go to theh Water Fund. Ryan is raiding the Water Fund to pay for his waste elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northsider Posted May 25, 2008 Report Share Posted May 25, 2008 Isn't it about time you all gave it up. In November of every year when the delinquent water/sewer bills are rolled to taxes, they become a tax liability attached to the property and are no longer an outstanding receivable. The water fund is credited and the general fund is debited. Therefore when the tax payments are received from the county the general fund is credited. Simple municipal accounting. I would not be surprised that this is the way all the other towns in Broome County do it when they roll their delinquent water & sewer bills to taxes. Binghamton is not the only municipality to roll to taxes in Broome County. Unless you have concrete proof that it done some other way, I would suggest that you move on to more serious matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Client 9 Posted May 25, 2008 Report Share Posted May 25, 2008 Isn't it about time you all gave it up. In November of every year when the delinquent water/sewer bills are rolled to taxes, they become a tax liability attached to the property and are no longer an outstanding receivable. The water fund is credited and the general fund is debited. Therefore when the tax payments are received from the county the general fund is credited. Simple municipal accounting. I would not be surprised that this is the way all the other towns in Broome County do it when they roll their delinquent water & sewer bills to taxes. Binghamton is not the only municipality to roll to taxes in Broome County. Unless you have concrete proof that it done some other way, I would suggest that you move on to more serious matters. If it is so simple then why won't anybody say it? Why won't the Press & Sun-Bulletin put that into print? Why is the County Executive so concerned as to have her lawyers looking at it? Furthermore, if that is being done then the late water payments are really not an issue at all are they? Why is so much being made of them if the Water Fund is being credited? The Mayor of Binghamton told people in City Chamber back in April the Water Fund is completely independent of the General Fund. So was he lying again? Former City Councilmen have said the practice you are describing was never done before. So are you making up your explanation? PS Another comment you made that draws your whole epxlanation in question and damages your credibility is that you wrote, " In November of every year when the delinquent water/sewer bills are rolled to taxes". But in the past Broome County did not collect City of Binghamton taxes so how was this done "every year"? Can you tell us what line in the budget shows the payment (credit) to the Water Fund you describe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northsider Posted May 25, 2008 Report Share Posted May 25, 2008 If it is so simple then why won't anybody say it? Why won't the Press & Sun-Bulletin put that into print? Ask the Press why they don't report anything correctly. Why is the County Executive so concerned as to have her lawyers looking at it? Ask the county executive that. Where has it been reported that she has attorneys looking at anything? Furthermore, if that is being done then the late water payments are really not an issue at all are they? Why is so much being made of them if the Water Fund is being credited? The City was not the one that started this firestorm. Ask the county this question The Mayor of Binghamton told people in City Chamber back in April the Water Fund is completely independent of the General Fund. So was he lying again? Former City Councilmen have said the practice you are describing was never done before. Both the Water and Sewer funds are "special revenue funds" which rely on the general fund to make them whole at the end of each fiscal year. Brush up on your Governmental Accounting 101. Have the former city councilmen ever taken the time to review the yearly audits done on the city books? So are you making up your explanation? I stand by my explanation. Do you stand by your accusations? PS Another comment you made that draws your whole epxlanation in question and damages your credibility is that you wrote, " In November of every year when the delinquent water/sewer bills are rolled to taxes". But in the past Broome County did not collect City of Binghamton taxes so how was this done "every year"? The outstanding water and sewer bills were always rolled to taxes even when the City collected them. The only thing that changed was the collection arm when the consolidation agreement was signed by both the county and the city. Can you tell us what line in the budget shows the payment (credit) to the Water Fund you describe? I unfortunately do not have access to a copy of the budget at this moment to give you that information - however, I would assume that it is a matter of an opening journal entry at the beginning of each new billing cycle which would have started with the December billing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Client 9 Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 "Ask the county executive that. Where has it been reported that she has attorneys looking at anything? " It has not been reported that is still part of the problem. News outlets have spoken to her weeks ago, no reports. I already asked her. Here's what she wrote: From: Fiala, Barbara J [mailto:BFiala@co.broome.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 10:55 AM Subject: RE: publishing comment? I have asked our attorney’s to look into this for me and advise. As soon as I get the correct information I will let you know. bf ________________________________________ Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:01 AM To: Fiala, Barbara J Subject: publishing comment? Dear Mrs. Fiala, Today, May 21, The Press & Sun-Bulletin once again failed to state what is really happening with the water payments Broome County is collect and sending to the City of Binghamton General Fund. At some point I would like to make the fact that you are aware of this public. Have you met with Mayor Ryan? Do you have further info on this? Do you have a preferred timeframe for me mentioning this your comment about it? Thx. "The City was not the one that started this firestorm. Ask the county this question" Another lie. The late payment issue was raised by Ryan and Abdelazim as a smoke screen to hide the real issue of their of 81% rate increase. They tried to use it as a justification, just like the $300,000 deficit that would be repaid in two months with the proposed increase and the "300%" increase in chemicals which really means an increae from $100,000 to $300,000 on a $6,000,000 budget. Again no reason to raise a $2,000,000 surplus per year. "I unfortunately do not have access to a copy of the budget at this moment to give you that information - however, I would assume that it is a matter of an opening journal entry at the beginning of each new billing cycle which would have started with the December billing." You are not very resourceful. The budget is available on-line 24/7. Here is the link. Find the line item: http://www.cityofbinghamton.com/library/pa...ed%20Budget.pdf So, again, if these late payments have always been resolved in this fashion, when did they become a justification for an 81% increase? If the Water Fund is being credited by the General Fund and the General Fund gets the payments from the County where is the big problem? The deliqunet water account holders are paying penalties and fees, they are the only ones with the problem. Care to explain? The only reason for an 81% increase is to cover Mayor Matthew T. Ryan's waste elsewhere. He will "draw down" expenses against the Water Department, like the $50,000 he charges for computer time. The Water Fund is Ryan's piggybank. That is why it is empty and he needs an extra $2,000,000 per year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 "Ask the county executive that. Where has it been reported that she has attorneys looking at anything? " It has not been reported that is still part of the problem. News outlets have spoken to her weeks ago, no reports. I already asked her. Here's what she wrote: From: Fiala, Barbara J [mailto:BFiala@co.broome.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 10:55 AM Subject: RE: publishing comment? I have asked our attorney’s to look into this for me and advise. As soon as I get the correct information I will let you know. bf ________________________________________ Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:01 AM To: Fiala, Barbara J Subject: publishing comment? Dear Mrs. Fiala, Today, May 21, The Press & Sun-Bulletin once again failed to state what is really happening with the water payments Broome County is collect and sending to the City of Binghamton General Fund. At some point I would like to make the fact that you are aware of this public. Have you met with Mayor Ryan? Do you have further info on this? Do you have a preferred timeframe for me mentioning this your comment about it? Thx. "The City was not the one that started this firestorm. Ask the county this question" Another lie. The late payment issue was raised by Ryan and Abdelazim as a smoke screen to hide the real issue of their of 81% rate increase. They tried to use it as a justification, just like the $300,000 deficit that would be repaid in two months with the proposed increase and the "300%" increase in chemicals which really means an increae from $100,000 to $300,000 on a $6,000,000 budget. Again no reason to raise a $2,000,000 surplus per year. "I unfortunately do not have access to a copy of the budget at this moment to give you that information - however, I would assume that it is a matter of an opening journal entry at the beginning of each new billing cycle which would have started with the December billing." You are not very resourceful. The budget is available on-line 24/7. Here is the link. Find the line item: http://www.cityofbinghamton.com/library/pa...ed%20Budget.pdf So, again, if these late payments have always been resolved in this fashion, when did they become a justification for an 81% increase? If the Water Fund is being credited by the General Fund and the General Fund gets the payments from the County where is the big problem? The deliqunet water account holders are paying penalties and fees, they are the only ones with the problem. Care to explain? The only reason for an 81% increase is to cover Mayor Matthew T. Ryan's waste elsewhere. He will "draw down" expenses against the Water Department, like the $50,000 he charges for computer time. The Water Fund is Ryan's piggybank. That is why it is empty and he needs an extra $2,000,000 per year PLEASE!! for the love of God go back on the meds and stay on them this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Unable to address the facts, huh??? Can't come up with any more lies? People understand this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Unable to address the facts, huh??? Can't come up with any more lies? People understand this. what people understand is that you are a whackjob lof the umpteenth degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 what people understand is that you are a whackjob lof the umpteenth degree. Can you explain why? Can you provide any justificiation for an 81% increase in the water rate that will generate a $2,000,00 surplus for years to come? First, we were told about a $300,000 deficit in the fund. Ok. This increase will pay that down in two months. So that didn't work to sell the idea. Secondly, we were told about increased costs like a "300%" increase in chemicals to process the water. OK. The chemical cost went from $100,000 to $300,000 on a $6,000,000 budget. No big deal, even paying the extra chemical costs and reducing the deficit there is a $1,500,000 surplus the first year and a least that much of a surplus every year after that. So that excuse did not work either. Third, we were told the "big problem" is late payments. Ok. Turns out there have always been late payments. Turns out Broome County is collecting the late payments. They already gave the City back $700,000 two months ago. They will give another $700,000 in the fall. So that doesn't seem to be a problem after all. But we did learn that the City of Binghamton is not putting the $700,000 in late water payments into the Water Fund but putting it into the General Fund where it can be spent by the Mayor. The water payments are not supposed to go there. So can you explain what is whacked about asking for an explanation for the 81% increase when half that would still replenish the water fund and why the payments the county is collecting are not going to the Water Fund? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Can you explain why? Can you provide any justificiation for an 81% increase in the water rate that will generate a $2,000,00 surplus for years to come? First, we were told about a $300,000 deficit in the fund. Ok. This increase will pay that down in two months. So that didn't work to sell the idea. Secondly, we were told about increased costs like a "300%" increase in chemicals to process the water. OK. The chemical cost went from $100,000 to $300,000 on a $6,000,000 budget. No big deal, even paying the extra chemical costs and reducing the deficit there is a $1,500,000 surplus the first year and a least that much of a surplus every year after that. So that excuse did not work either. Third, we were told the "big problem" is late payments. Ok. Turns out there have always been late payments. Turns out Broome County is collecting the late payments. They already gave the City back $700,000 two months ago. They will give another $700,000 in the fall. So that doesn't seem to be a problem after all. But we did learn that the City of Binghamton is not putting the $700,000 in late water payments into the Water Fund but putting it into the General Fund where it can be spent by the Mayor. The water payments are not supposed to go there. So can you explain what is whacked about asking for an explanation for the 81% increase when half that would still replenish the water fund and why the payments the county is collecting are not going to the Water Fund? Any day now the State Comptroller will commence the investigation Ed called for in that letter he sent earlier this year, just like the Attorney General is investigating based on that letter Ed sent last year. He is just that important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Can you explain why? Can you provide any justificiation for an 81% increase in the water rate that will generate a $2,000,00 surplus for years to come? First, we were told about a $300,000 deficit in the fund. Ok. This increase will pay that down in two months. So that didn't work to sell the idea. Secondly, we were told about increased costs like a "300%" increase in chemicals to process the water. OK. The chemical cost went from $100,000 to $300,000 on a $6,000,000 budget. No big deal, even paying the extra chemical costs and reducing the deficit there is a $1,500,000 surplus the first year and a least that much of a surplus every year after that. So that excuse did not work either. Third, we were told the "big problem" is late payments. Ok. Turns out there have always been late payments. Turns out Broome County is collecting the late payments. They already gave the City back $700,000 two months ago. They will give another $700,000 in the fall. So that doesn't seem to be a problem after all. But we did learn that the City of Binghamton is not putting the $700,000 in late water payments into the Water Fund but putting it into the General Fund where it can be spent by the Mayor. The water payments are not supposed to go there. So can you explain what is whacked about asking for an explanation for the 81% increase when half that would still replenish the water fund and why the payments the county is collecting are not going to the Water Fund? oh I have explained why - numerous times on here - you know the reasons - evryone else here agrees with me to. even if they agree with your opinions, they think you are a whackjob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 So, in other words, you have absolutely no reasonable explanation why the City of Binghamton needs to raise the water rate by 81% other than Matthew T. Ryan's waste and mismanangement. Thank you for confirming that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 So, in other words, you have absolutely no reasonable explanation why the City of Binghamton needs to raise the water rate by 81% other than Matthew T. Ryan's waste and mismanangement. Thank you for confirming that. oh i have lots to say about that - what I am saying however is that you are one serioously whacked out dude in dire need of help. you know it - i know it - everyone here knows it..for the love of god - please go back on your meds. your insanity is creeping in again. people are catching on people are starting to see the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 oh i have lots to say about that - what I am saying however is that you are one serioously whacked out dude in dire need of help. you know it - i know it - everyone here knows it..for the love of god - please go back on your meds. your insanity is creeping in again. people are catching on people are starting to see the truth Yes, you are correct. People are realizing that there is no justification whatsoever for an 81% increase in water rates, just like landlords realized there was no justificiation for an 80% increase in their rtaxes. It was all arbitrary gouging of residents by Mayor Matthew T. Ryan due to his waste, mismanagement and incompetence. People clearly understand this. Ryan is a laughing stock. Why do you want to pay an 81% increase? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.