One of us is a registered Independent and the other is a registered Working Families Party member. We are former council members in the city of Dunkirk and after watching recent meetings and reading the OBSERRVER, we feel some things need to be addressed about the city’s 2023 budget.

We commend council members Dave Damico, James Stoyle and Nancy Nichols in an attempt to have oversight of the mayor’s spending. Good job!

We say shame on you to council members Martin Bamonto and Natalie Luczkowiak for being “yes” votes for the mayor without even questioning a thing. You two should remember that your oath of office is to the city of Dunkirk taxpayers, not the city mayor.

The mayor cut council’s retained legal counsel line. Why? Who knows. He probably doesn’t want them to have the ability to legally question him and get official legal opinions outside of the city attorney or the New York Conference of Mayors.

The mayor proposed more than $11,000 of increases in his Office Budget lines. Council cut the personnel line from what the mayor proposed. Why? Council cut it to $10,000 more than what it was for 2022, leaving room for negotiated benefits for the Mayor’s secretary in 2023, while assuring that the mayor doesn’t have extra money in there to hire a “part-timer” to do the work that his union secretary is more than capable of professionally doing. He did that for a few years when he first got in office.

Council cut the mayor’s travel line from what the mayor proposed. Why? Because the mayor only used $25 in that line in 2022. It’s been our experience with this mayor that when he travels, he tends to choose the most expensive places to stay.

Council cut the mayor’s training line from what the mayor proposed. Why? Because no money was spent in 2022 in that line. Why fund it to the tune of $2,000?

Council cut the mayor’s discretionary fund from what the mayor proposed. Why? Because the mayor allegedly has a problem showing receipts for spending out of that line.

Council cut the Fiscal Affairs Officer line from what the mayor proposed. Why? The mayor proposed a 10% increase in wages in one year. The city unions aren’t getting a 10% increase, why should a non-union political appointee get a 10% increase?

Council cut the city attorney line from what the Mayor proposed. Why? Because it’s currently put in as a part-time position. If the mayor wants to make it full-time, we’re sure council would reconsider that amount. Also, the mayor is proposing appointing a non-city resident to a job that, by city of Dunkirk code, states the city attorney should be a resident of the city of Dunkirk. At least three of the five council members are smart enough to realize that.

Council cut the HR director line from what the mayor proposed. Why? The title of HR Director, in the City of Dunkirk, does not exist! How can the mayor, legally, fund a ghost line for a position that doesn’t even exist? He also thinks that if it’s budgeted, he can just appoint someone. He better check with NYCOM on that like a council member already did. According to NYCOM, the mayor cannot appoint someone to a position that does not exist, just because it’s budgeted.

Council cut the DLDC allotment line from what the nayor proposed. Why? Because they haven’t received a report of the finances of the DLDC yet. Give them a report, and we’re certain they’ll give you more money.

All of these cuts that council made, they don’t amount to tax dollar savings, since all of their cuts were put into the contingencies line. So, if needed, any line can be increased by a simple budget modification and be moved out of the contingencies line to whichever line they need it to go. The mayor has said point blank, he doesn’t like having to ask. We say, too bad!

What these cuts do, is hold the mayor accountable for his sometimes lavish spending.

We’d like to inform the public and a couple council members, there are three exceptions to the “Open Meetings” law:

¯ Executive session of an open meeting.

¯ A political party committee meeting.

¯ A legislative caucus meeting.

All three of these exceptions are under the assumption that no “official” act of city business is conducted in these meetings, meaning that the “official” act of city business be carried out in an open meeting.

Last we knew, Damico, Stoyle and Nichols are all Republicans on the city’s legislative body. Not knowing if they did meet or not, we do know they can legally caucus.

Paul VanDenVouver and Don Williams Jr. served are former Dunkirk Common Council members.