Last week there was a letter to the editor in the Gazette which stated that I was found to have engaged in an unfair campaign practice. The assertion was made by candidate Brian Pugh 24 hours prior to a scheduled hearing before the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee. I was over a thousand miles away at the time and not able to appear to defend myself. The nature of the claim was that at the debate held October 13, I stated that “If I remember correctly . . .” Ann and Brian supported borrowing 8 million dollars, and when the Croton United board came on board they reduced it to 1.5 million dollars.
The 2015/2016 bond amount was indeed set at 8.5 million and that borrowing did take place, but the 2016/2017 borrowing by the Croton United controlled board was 1.5 million. I’m not sure how this was an unfair statement to make with the full ability my opponents had to clarify the point before the public at the debate, which they attempted to do, but only obfuscated the matter further.
Let’s compare this to the statement that Brian Pugh made at the January 21, 2015 village board meeting concerning the controversial acquisition of the Gouveia property. He stated that the Gouveia financial analysis was “appropriately conservative.” He stated that the “historic performance of t-bills is 5%” and therefore we should have $50,000 income per year from the million dollar endowment that Gouveia gave along with the property. Anyone who’s trying to earn any kind of income on their savings knows that there’s no t-bill now or that existed in 2015 paying 5%.
In fact, the village is now earning less than 1/2% on the million dollar endowment, which doesn’t even pay for the lawn care maintenance, let alone any other item. The Gouveia financial analysis touted by Mr. Pugh as being conservative showed that the expense of widening the driveway, and putting in a gravel parking area was going to be less than $15,000. The village board just approved a contract of $218,000 for this item. Does Mr. Pugh now think that his touted estimates were “conservative”? (See the table below for a comparison of the estimated v. actual costs and revenues.)
My approach to Gouveia had I been on the board: The village board would have looked at all likely expenses and invited contractors to provide estimates BEFORE agreeing to acquire the property. What type of board acts without getting appropriate information before making a decision that results in acquiring a white elephant? We now own property whose taxes have been eliminated from our tax rolls; have a house that requires many expensive upgrades to make it usable to the community (think things like ADA bathrooms; ADA access; fire exits; fire alarms, etc.) and we’ve already committed to spending more than 20% of the million dollar endowment, and haven’t budgeted or begun any of the house renovations. Gouveia was a colossal mistake by the Wiegman/Gallelli/Pugh board, and could have been avoided with deliberative scrutiny, which is what you’ll get with an expanded Croton United village board.
I hope that I and Dan McNatty can have your vote on November 8th. You can find us on the ballot, all the way to the right on Line I.
Mark Aarons
Candidate for Croton-on-Hudson Trustee
