| Author | Message | ||
     Hobsonschoice |
Is there a process to recall elected township officials? And how would the positions be backfilled? Put fire under the elected officials and they react. If not, we desire the government we get. If some or all of the township officials were thrown out of office I guess it would put a crimp in the dreams for any higher office. Good or bad, where do I xxxx WE sign!!! | ||
| Chris |
Huh? Dude, what ARE you talking about ... | ||
| Toad |
Hob- Yes. There is a mobile sign up unit going around town right now. Just stand out in front of your house and wait for it to pass by. | ||
| Soda |
Oboy...Clearly one of the more trenchant thinkers on the board... Isn't it time for the dead white truth-seeking fringe to chime in here? | ||
| Hobsonschoice |
It amazes me that with all the complaining on how elected officials are out of touch, these same officials continue to be returned to office. This goes for Democrats and Republicans. "The Congress is a mess, but my Congressman is ok". If they get thrown out of office at the voting booth or are recalled, their replacements will think twice before making decisions that go against the needs and wishes of the voters. If the citizens of Maplewood can recall these guys, go for it, could not be any worst. Again I ask the question, is there a process to recall Team Deluca? | ||
| Nilmiester |
Yes, and it is forming right now, fairtax01@aol.com. Get involved! | ||
| Margu |
who heads snow removal.....!! with the scarcety of public/commuter parking, it's a disgrace that the snow stayed curbside as long as it has Are these guys so complacent in their appointments that they stand around twiddling their thumbs while the rest of us scurry for parking space in an already crowded town. AND WHERE IS THE PARKER AVENUE JITNEY!!! We've been getting promises of its upstart for over seven months now. | ||
| Deadwhitemale |
Soda: hello! It seems taxation gets the blood boiling, cost ineffective education is another matter. Wht troubles me is that if the house tax is raised, the sale value of the house decreases as a result of the total monthly nut factor, i.e., the amount to be paid rises due to taxes, if the house sale price is unchanged, so the house value, at sale, would have to be less to permit the home purchasers' budgeted nut to be made. So, increasing taxes by three thousand a year is about 250 per month, which is about a (?) fifty thousand dollar decrease in home value. "'Tis a puzzlement." DWM | ||
| Tom |
Oh please just try to be the tiniest bit realistic. Is it "team DeLuca"'s fault that houses on the west side are worth a lot of money, and the appraisers said so? And what do you want to do about parking? Tear up Memorial Park? Build a multi-level garage (ha!)? If you don't like the way schools are funded, getting rid of the township committee isn't going to do one single thing to correct it. Vote the GOP out of the state assembly and we might get somewhere. | ||
| Hobsonschoice |
Tom, And what did "Team Doria" accomplish when they had the clout? | ||
| Argon_Smythe |
Hobsonschoice: The 'sign up' sheet for 'recalling' officials is called 'voter registration' and the actual process is called 'voting.' Hope this clears things up. | ||
| Margu |
Tom, no...I'm not suggesting tearing up the park or making room for any parking lot....I merely suggest removing the snow in a timely manner and getting the promised jitney going! | ||
| Eb1154 |
Tom, Well said!!! Don't blame team Deluca, this process was going on for two years now. He just happen to become mayor when it came to a head. As I have stated in previos threads Vic may not always do what I want or feel is best for me and my situation but give him credit he does what he feels is best for the town as a whole. And many times it is not a popular decision. Plus, he doesn't hide anything. You have to give him credit for his comments at the last town meeting. He stated in front of a room filled with irrate residents that he felt that there were people paying too much taxes already and they have been for years, he then admitted that he was one of them and that his taxes were going down by about 20%. He could have kept his mouth shut and avoided that topic completely but he didn't. Bravo to a politician who is not intimidated by the public when put on the spot. EB1154 | ||
| Nakaille |
Argon: you got it right from start to finish. Thank you for your succinct explanation of the process. Bacata | ||
| Beach |
Yes, and please, don't complain about our trusty leaders AFTER you vote for them! | ||
| Truthseeker |
The NJ law has an almost impossible burden of requiring 25% of registered voters to sign the recall petition. Focus your energies elsewhere. | ||
| Tgb |
Tom: Don't understand your rationale for blaming the GOP in the state legislature. They don't raise property taxes, local governments do (ie:towns, school districts and county governments) Dems have a right to blame GOP for the massive debt state has accumulated, but to blame GOP for Democratic bodies raising local property taxes or supporting revals is nothing more than a red-herring. | ||
| Nohero |
Tgb - It is not a "red herring" to point out that the NJ income tax was meant to raise funds for municipal and school aid, and reduce the reliance on property taxes. It's simple arithmetic - cut income taxes, reduce the amount available for municipal aid, and property taxes are therefore higher. | ||
| Tom |
State funding for education has gone down. We have to make up the shortfall, or cut back, or get a state government that will start to put more money back in. | ||
| Tgb |
Under your rationale why have local governments at all? If the state exists only to fund schools and keep property taxes reasonable. Income tax history. In 1976, Brendan Byrne was governor then, and he had a brilliant idea to cut property taxes. He decided to institute a state income tax to pay for education. There would be plenty of money for schools and homeowners would get a nice, big rebate on their property taxes. The problem was solved. Until Byrne was out of office and safely ensconced in a law practice. Your rebate disappeared. Your property taxes went up again, higher than ever. And now you were paying an income tax as well. Whitman, to her credit in 1993 realized that NJ was crushing people and businesses with taxes. ("The business of America is business" or is that a radical idea?) She lowered the state income taxes because they weren't doing what they were designed or promised to do --lower property taxes. Am amazed how people forget why we get rid of ideas that don't work only to bring them back a few years later and market it as new reform and ideas? Why? In New Jersey's case, the weeds are education spending. Schools consume about two-thirds of property taxes. And education spending has been out of control since the Byrne era. The figures are appalling. In 1974, just prior to Byrne's "reform," the annual cost of educating a public school student in New Jersey was $1,486. If you account for inflation and put that figure in 1998 dollars, it comes out to $4,910 per student per year. But what are we actually paying in 1998? About $10,106 per student. In other words, our education costs have more than doubled in real dollars, even after inflation is taken into account. This could be justified if our students were getting a great education. They're not. Test scores are no better than they were back then. And no better than in other states that spend half as much as we do. The education bureaucracy and the teacher unions are getting rich. You as a consumer and a taxpayer are being ripped off. If education spending growth in New Jersey had been kept within any reasonable confines at all - say if it had risen by just 20 percent in real dollars - your property tax bill would be cut roughly in half. There would not be a property tax crisis. To Whitman's credit, she tried to halt education inflation. Her panel made one excellent recommendation. It proposed that raises for school and municipal employees be held to the rate of inflation. Great idea, and if Whitman could have gotten it past the unions and enacted into law, then we would have to grant that she is a political genius. But this is a classic case of locking the barn door after the horse is gone. Your tax dollars have made the public employee unions rich, and they will use that money to convince the legislators to make sure that you keep paying. Whitman could only nibble at the edges with stupid ideas like regionalization and consolidation of town services. I prefer small beauracracies to large ones, anyday. | ||
| Tom |
But despite all your very valid statistics, M/SO spends less per pupil than $10,106. And far less than those districts that we would like to compare ourselves to. And clearly it's not something that we in Maplewood/SO are solely responsible for; it's state- and nation-wide. So what can we do? If we say, OK let's only spend $4,910 per student because it was good enough in '74, what will our situation be? I would guess it would involve no computers, no new books, the lowest paid teachers and administrators in the state -- and therefore the bottom-of-the-barrel choices. Why would any teacher want to work in a district where s/he is assured that their income will never, ever grow beyond the rate of inflation. Would you find that acceptable in your line of work? Also, no music, no art, no sports. That would clearly be unacceptable. State (or even federal) funding of education is based on the same reasoning as property-tax funding. Education of children is of value to the entire community; not just to parents, but to their future employers in industry and commerce. By moving more funding up to a higher level, we balance out the significant property- and income-tax resources of districts with a higher commercial and industrial base, with those of a more modest suburban/residential nature which only have property taxes to draw on. |
