PLATTSBURGH — The City of Plattsburgh’s revised five-year budget plan, which will serve as a guideline to the city’s spending over the next five years, was approved by councilors at Thursday’s meeting.
The measure passed with support from Councilors Mike Kelly (D-Ward 2), Jennifer Tallon (D-Ward 4) and Caitlin Bopp (D-Ward 5), as well as Mayor Chris Rosenquest who voted to break the council tie.
Councilors Julie Baughn (D-Ward 1), Elizabeth Gibbs (D-Ward 3) and Jeff Moore (D-Ward 6) had voted against it.
WAS REJECTED IN JUNE
As previously reported, the last plan put before the Common Council in June had been overwhelmingly rejected. Councilors were then given several opportunities to make revisions to the plan.
The newly approved five-year plan included a revised tax rate over the next few years to $10 per $1,000 of assessed property value, which Gibbs suggested at a special common council meeting July 10.
GIBBS HESITATIONS
Despite this, Councilor Gibbs was hesitant to vote in favor of the plan at Thursday’s meeting because of other unfamiliar changes that were made in the plan.
“There are some changes in this document that are not explicitly connected to the tax rate that we did not discuss as part of that special meeting,” Gibbs said.
“In 2024, the original plan says we would be in a deficit of $151,000. Now we’re not. and then the surplus continues to go up even though the tax rate goes down. There are a number of things like this so I just wondered if we could get some answers about why there are changes in almost all these other categories.”
Rosenquest said all the changes were made based on the conversations that they previously had.
“The only clarifications that I added were in the clarifications and assumptions of the percentages. Those are compared with percentages each year,” he said.
“The amount of real property tax is the only number that changes based on … that $10 mill rate. Everything else is based on purchase percentage increases, historical percentage increases.”
MOORE CONCERNS
Councilor Moore was not supportive of the plan because he felt the city’s projected expenses over the next five years were “overly optimistic.”
“I mean, I would love my household expenses to slowly go up by these tiny numbers over the course of the next five years, but I know that is totally unrealistic,” he said.
“I also know that things come up. I don’t think it behooves us to come up with a really glowing report that ‘oh boy, everything is going to be great and we’re going to be rolling in dough in five years.’ In my experience in municipal government, that doesn’t happen. There’s always things that happen that you didn’t expect. I think the expenses were way under … it’s pretty optimistic.”
The mayor then reminded Moore that he was given multiple opportunities to change the document how he saw fit in the days leading up to the meeting.
“Again, we had this conversation on Monday. I sent out the sheet based on … on that conversation on Monday. and in that email, I said, ‘Please, if there’s additional changes that you want, please send them to me. I will incorporate them back into this and resend it out.’ I sent that out on Thursday — nothing — I heard nothing from anybody when I sent this out.”
Councilor Kelly, though, felt the plan was “good.”
“I think it does paint a good picture for the city’s finances. But I don’t know why we shouldn’t celebrate that. It’s a good thing.”
NOT SET IN STONE
Rosenquest reiterated that the five-year plan is a “guide” and adjustments will be made to it as they go.
“I’m not saying that that is going to be how it is,” he said.
“We’ve seen plans that we’ve approved that have the city in the negative $6 million. I wouldn’t say that that’s the appropriate way to approve this plan. The point is, is that right now, it’s a snapshot with a potential. Not to say that that is going to be set in stone … it’s a guiding document for planning and potentially planning.”
“We’ll have to agree to disagree,” Moore said.