Amherst Town officials scam Spfld Republican

So either the Town Manager lied or the reporter is incompetent. Because if Shaffer actually stated that Cherry Hill “did not have to draw on tax money to help offset cost” it’s completely incorrect; and if he didn’t say it, they why would the reporter use it--especially so high up in the article?
#####################################################################################
By DIANE LEDERMAN
dlederman@repub.com

AMHERST - With improved playing conditions and additional programs to attract a new group of players, the Cherry Hill Golf Course ended fiscal year 2007 nearly $7,200 in the black.

This was the first time in years the course did not have to draw on tax money to help offset costs, Town Manager Laurence R. Shaffer said today.
#####################################################################################

And in my interview with her yesterday I NEVER said the course “budget was in the black”. I continuously stressed that it was $24,000 in the RED. Period. And taxpayers don’t care if bureaucrats classify tax dollars as “direct or indirect costs” or ‘sewer fund dollars’ or ‘community preservation fund dollars.’ A tax dollar is a tax dollar.

Most homeowners consider insurance a routine operation cost. The Cherry Hill clubhouse insurance (one of those hidden “indirect costs”) was $5,712. And any business owner considers “employee benefits” a regular cost of doing business. Last year (another one of those hidden “indirect costs”) Cherry Hill consumed $21,858.

IF Cherry Hill WERE in the black then how about repaying the Finance Committee Reserve Fund $23,000 required to close out the fiscal year? On May 31 the Town Manager told the Select Board Amherst couldn’t afford to fill the potholes until July because there was no money left in that “emergency” Finance Committee controlled fund.

Since Ms. Bilz has a marketing background I expect her to tortuously push the envelope for positive spin. But the town manager is a different story. And if he lied about this (a golf course for God’s sake!) then what else is he covering up in our $60 million budget?

Cherry Hill: Missing the green...again!

If only cup cakes or alcohol consumed in a closet didn’t impact your waistline, dieting would be a snap. And if our ailing golf business, no longer an Enterprise Fund, didn’t have those pesky $31,612 in hidden costs, insurance and employee benefits, (beancounters call them “indirect costs”) this past fiscal year Cherry Hill would have broke even for the first time in a decade.

But as usual, in FY07 Cherry Hill trampled its operation budget of $192,385 by $20,000 coming in at $212,260 and revenues fell short of the $220,000 at $219,440. Thus the $23,000 Reserve transfer rubber stamped by the diffident Finance Committee on 7/11 should, almost, cover the actual overall losses of $24,432.

Although I still take issue with using a fund designed for “unanticipated emergencies” to cover routine losses at our sinkhole golf business.

And considering Cherry Hill generated $245,932 five years ago, when managed by that guy who mysteriously disappeared (after 20 years) on April 1’st, allowing town officials to scapegoat his mismanagement for business woes, you have to wonder about this super-manager, Barbara Bilz.

Alice Carlozzi tried to get Finance Director John Musante to declare the difference “a wash” at the 7/11 Finance Committee meeting, perhaps I’ve been running a small business too long, but I consider $24,432 a very expensive John Edwards kind of wash.

The rejected Niblik bid for private management at $30,000 per year in GUARANTEED profit instead of a minus $24-K equals a $54,000 difference…or one police officer, a teacher, a building inspector.

And the golf budget Town Meeting approved on June 12 has a $15,000 higher operations and an additional $15,000 in capital for FY08. So IF Cherry Hill intakes the same $220,000 losses will total $35,000 and then add in the guaranteed $30,000 we could have had with private management…

ARA (1) Select Board (0)

And since nobody seems to have spotted my update posted last night at 7:45: NO, the ARA did not scurry up to the Town Clerk's office on a hot and humid Monday afternoon to post a meeting we were specifically excluded from.

Subject: Re: ARA Vacancy Election August 1, 2007
From: Gerry Weiss gerryweiss@comcast.net

Everyone,

I was out of town yesterday, so I instructed Larry to deal with this. I believe he agreed that we should wait until September. If however, the ARA has posted a meeting for this Wednesday, then I believe we could proceed with the election on Wednesday night. If the ARA did not post a meeting, then we will have to wait if the ARA wishes to have a joint meeting. Please let everyone know if the meeting was posted. thanks,

Gerry

To: Alisa Brewer
Cc: Larry Kelley ; Jonathan Tucker ; Jeanne Traester ; Nancy Gordon ; Gail Weston ; Larry Shaffer (TOWN MGR)
Sent: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 5:28 am

How hot is it?

-----Original Message-----
From: Alisa Brewer
To: Gerry Weiss

Subject: ARA Vacancy Election August 1, 2007

Hi Gerry-

If it turns out that all of the current ARA members can come at 7:00 Wednesday, I personally have no reason to prevent them from voting in a joint election. Of course, they'd need to post their meeting today -- right now -- to get the 48 hours notice. Perhaps it would be wise for them to do so, anyway, since they might have a quorum that might have some substantive discussion even if they aren't part of the election?

http://onlyintherepublicofamherst.blogspot.com/

Take care,
Alisa
-- Alisa V. Brewer
Cc: Larry Kelley ; Jonathan Tucker ; Jeanne Traester ; Nancy Gordon ; Gail Weston ; Larry Shaffer (TOWN MGR)
Sent: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:20 pm
#####################################################################################
UPDATE: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 7:45 pm Did the ARA post the meeting with the Town Clerk for Wednesday? Well, no.

The hot seat

His Lordship Gerry Weiss must think the sun rises and sets upon the Amherst Select Board.

At their July 23 meeting Mr. Weiss complained he had made it s-o-o-o pubic about the ARA opening (“over a month ago”). Yeah, well that meeting (June 13’th), buried in a backroom at the Middle School, had Amherst Redevelopment Authority on the agenda but the minutes show “No action taken”.

And on June 18 ARA chair Fran Van Treese appeared before the snobby Select Board to argue against Vince O’Connor’s Town Meeting proposal to “Abolish the ARA”.

Ms. Van Treese effectively advocated for the ARA as the Select board voted unanimously to dismiss Mr. O’Connor’s pernicious proposal. So why didn’t Mr. Weiss advise Ms. Van Treese at that meeting the vacant seat was such a burning issue?

Select Man Kusner came to our July 10’th ARA meeting (where we signed a draft letter of formal notification to the Select Board). Of course he later told the Select Board we were unqualified to pick a replacement, something he dared not mention to us that night.

I received a chatty email from Select Man Alisa Brewer on June 22 saying “The clock's ticking, man...the SB gets to do the appointing our own selves if you all don't tell us within 30 days, and the ARA (during the time you were not an ARA member) already blew the 30 days by not letting the Town Clerk know to put *two* positions on the annual ballot. Given that drop in the ball handling, I talked SB and Larry`` into using the date of Town Counsel's letter about that issue.”

The town counsel’s letter (date June 18 and stamped ‘Received June 19’) clearly says, “The ARA may not have been aware of nor in a position to notify the Select Board of this vacancy. This statute’s preference is to offer to the authority which incurs the vacancy a roll in filling out its membership. Therefore, it may be appropriate on the part of the Select Board and ARA to jointly fill the post upon delivery of written notice as proscribed above.”

The Town Manager confirmed to the Select board at their July 25 meeting: “At its last meeting (July 10) the ARA did vote to provide formal notification to the Select board of the vacancy” And that vote (not to mention signing a draft letter) was well within the one month period from the town counsel’s letter.

This ARA (hot) seat has been vacant since the election of April 4, 2006. And since nothing happens in Amherst between July 4’th and Labor Day another month is not going to matter.

Installing a (Manchurian) Candidate on the ARA without their input may further the goals of the Select Board, but it will be a setback for downtown development.
#####################################################################################
9:30 UPDATE:
So I just now received a “reply all” email from fellow ARA member (Governor appointed) Jeanne Traester to the Select Board, ARA, and Town Manager confirming she would be at the August 1’st Select board meeting.

I didn’t get the original email sent July 20 (Chair Fran Van Treese just confirmed she did not get it either) from Town Hall, but it was an invite to a JOINT MEETING August 1’st with the Select Board to appoint a new ARA member.

The attached memo from the Town Manager dated July 19 and billed as “New Business” for Select Board meeting of July 23 states: “I recommend that the Select Board and ARA utilize the process employed by the Select Board and School Committee for filling of the vacancy on the School Committee created by the resignation of Alisa Brewer.”

Hmmm.

Of course Ms. Traester is showing up thinking she’s invited…yikes!

UPDATE: 10:20 Just received another email from Gail Weston that, sort of, clarifies things:

From: Weston, Gail
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 4:54 PM
To: Tucker, Jonathan
Subject: Amherst Redevelopment Authority Election

The election for the Amherst Redevelopment Authority will take place at 7:00 p.m. at the 8/1/07 Select Board Meeting. Amherst Redevelopment Authority members are invited to attend but it will not be a joint meeting. Will you notify the members or is this something that I should do?


Gail Weston

Assistant to the Town Manager

A Tree (or two) Grows in Amherst

Since half of Amherst is tax exempt (owned by Amherst College, Umass and our Conservation Department) the other half has to pick up an awful lot of slack. And then, within that taxable half shouldering twice the burden, homeowners contribute 90% while commercial property only accounts for 10%.

So now when property goes off the tax rolls it’s like throwing a drowning person a 25-pound Olympic weight plate rather than a life preserver.

Recently Umass purchased and demolished Frat Row, five funky big old houses at the gateway to Umass that previously generated over $50,000 in taxes. And Amherst College outbid developers for the Dakin Estate next to college owned Amherst Golf Course. Although the property was valued at less than a million the purchase price was four times that so if, say, Barry Roberts, had won the bid he would have paid Amherst $60,000 the last two years and much more when his development was completed.

And speaking of Roberts, the town now wants to purchase 7 of his 13 lots in North Amherst (the more mountainous ones) for anywhere from $500,000 to $700,000 to quiet the NIMBY types mostly those living in Leverett. Thus, instead of adding $2 million to the tax levy Amherst gets less than zip.

Any time anybody wants to develop or expand their property the neighbors are quick to cite turtle habitat, swamp fauna, or increased traffic that will endanger the kids. I fear greatly that Amherst College is going to discover that sad fact when they go before Town Meeting to get the zoning change (requiring a two-thirds vote) for the $5 million expansion of the Lord Jeff Inn, which would more than double tax revenues to Amherst (yes, the Lord Jeff and the Golf Course are on the tax rolls).

While the trees in question are common—maple and fir—they are pretty BIG. And in this town, as long as they are large enough to hug…

Amherst 7/4 Parade Déjà vu: Much Ado About Nothing

So about half our Committee (four) met with Amherst Town Manager Larry Shaffer this afternoon at 2:15 to discuss next year’s parade permit. And like last year, he opened the “discussion” with the declarative statement: “I’m going to sign your permit.”

If he was not such a gregarious guy, you’re tempted to say “Okay, thanks…I’m out-a-here!”

Like last year, the only indulgence requested was that we hear his mediation if problems occur. Once again we replied exactly the same: “Of course!”

For those of you just tuning in the Amherst July 4’th Parade, as a town function, last occurred during the 1976 Bicentennial, when my cousin Sheriff Bob Garvey lead it as Grand Marshall (his wife Jane Garvey was FAA chief on that awful 9/11 morning).

In 2002, in the turbulent wake of 9/11, Kevin Joy, 5’th generation Amherst townie and former FBI counter-terrorism agent, revived the parade via a volunteer private committee.

And the US Supreme Court unanimously declared that a private committee has the First Amendment right to mitigate off-topic messages: Insidious groups like the KKK, Skin Heads, NAMBLA; or even simply controversial issues like abortion, gun control, gay rights, etc.

The first year we had some whackos in Halloween masks (Presidents Nixon and Clinton) jump into the parade distributing vile literature. Another year an anti-war group wished to march with placards displaying the Bill or Rights (minus the Second Amendment, of course) and we allowed it.

Last year the Amherst Democratic Committee boycotted us (although Congressman John Over, State Senator Stan Rosenberg and Representative Ellen Story happily marched); and…alas, this year the Amherst League of Women Voters SUDDENLY (after five years) boycotted.

Strangely, since our debut in 2002, we have not officially denied anybody marching rights. The League of Women Voters sent a press release to the Town Manger dated June 23 saying they voted in May to boycott.

Hmmm—took you long enough to tell people about it; and no, they did not copy the Parade Committee.

And since we agreed LAST YEAR to discuss ANY Parade problems—especially inclusion—obviously the Town Manager did not take the League letter seriously, otherwise he would have called us.

Next year we are BIGGER than ever (the Town Manger agreed to march again). And, I’m thrilled to say, whackos need not apply.