| Author |
Message |
    
Ffof
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 9:41 pm: |     |
Townie- That was a good one..."I hear that Fairtax gets money from Essex County Republicans"! Could it just as easily be disgruntled Democrats?! Surely you were joking to get your point across. |
Mfpark
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 10:18 pm: | |
Ffof, Townie, et al.
If the Republicans are really behind Fairtax (which I doubt), then I am glad they are finally finding the religion to discuss changing the way school budgets are funded in this backward state! More power to them, I say (but, again, I doubt this is true).
While I have only been here for three years, it seems to me that the Republicans who control Trenton have not done a blessed thing to solve the problem, except very token gestures. And I say this as a true independent who will gore the Democratic ox (or donkey) as easily as the Republican ox (or elephant).
Why are people on fixed incomes being forced to sell their homes? It is not the reval--it is the budget (stupid, as Clinton might say), which is driven by school taxes and the lack of commercial ratables in this town. If you really feel bad for people who are on fixed incomes and cannot afford the tax hike, call your legislators and demand an answer as to how this situation can be tolerated, and what they plan to do about it--fast!
Wait, it gets worse. At the last CBAC meeting, Councilman Liebman said that Millburn and Livingston got 7% and 11% increases (respectively)from the state for school funding, but South Orange-Maplewood got nothing. And remember, Millburn and Livingston have much more commercial property revenues than we do, meaning the burden on residential taxpayers is much less than in Maplewood. Try calling your legislator and our new Governor and ask how this one played out!
Could it be that there are more Republican votes in Millburn and Livingston? Is there an agenda against Maplewood-South Orange because we are so racially and economically diversified? Hate to sound paranoid, but you gotta wonder.
The issue is not to be simply anti-tax--it is to have a balanced, fair, and sustainable tax system that promotes our schools and communities. Take a look at the front page of the NY Times today--even Vermont is trying to fix this problem (with bumps, yes, but nothing that cannot be worked out).
And, as we all know, the revaluation won't be worth a tinkers dram, even if it is correct, if our schools fail or the town sees a huge sell-off of property--property values will fall like a stone faster than the last bubble rose.
The problem is not the TC. Sure, they could have managed the reval better, and sure I believe there are some problems with the entire process. But I see no evidence of scheming on their part--I believe Vic and Gerry when they say that they take this seriously (I wish we also heard on-line or in print from the other members of the TC), even if at times I have disagreed with their moves. That is their prerogative as elected officials, that is what politics is all about.
The problem is that almost our entire budget is carried by residential property taxes, which will eventually kill our town and our schools. |
Townie
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 10:43 pm: | |
Hi Fairtax (and answering Ffof to),
I said in my response to Bacata that "I have heard around town that Fairtax gets money from Essex County Republicans and that some of the people use their e-mail list to push a tax agenda to reduce the school budget and to replace the TC" because that's what I heard, right here in town.
In Fairtax's unfortunate letter to the News-Record (which they say the signed for the News-Record but didn't sign when they posted it here) Fairtax wrote: "Many residents have told us in the past few days that we're not doing enough as a group to engage the TC to resolve this issue." Also: "Others ask us if we're going forward with a lawsuit against the Township Committee (TC) and want to know how they can help and participate."
If Fairtax can have conversations with folks in town and blab to the world what they've been hearing, golly gee, I can too, and so can Bacata. I heard all this from people who live in Maplewood who are interested in resolving the bad feelings surrounding the reval, not inflaming them.
Also, Fairtax? I checked back through my e-mail inbox and found an e-mail clearly sent from fairtax01 that distributed JL Nathenson's plea to stick with the "reject and redo" strategy despite town residents getting corrected and accurate adjustments. So it's hardly surprising that when I get e-mails directly from the same (yes?) JL Nathenson urging "us" to look "beyond" the reval towards cutting the school budget that I think it's from Fairtax. And folks: I understand when people e-mail Fairtax01 at its aol address, guess who sometimes responds back? Not Fairtax01, but JL Nathenson! (at an address different from aol.com.)
When you talk about stopping people from sending e-mails through you "weeks ago" you're forgetting that it's only been since January 1 that a lot of people got plugged into Fairtax anyway. True, people quickly began to wonder who you were and quickly began to ask to be taken off your mailing list lest you claim them as supporters of your taxes and agenda. You've burned up an awful lot of credibility in the past few weeks while the rest of us having been trying to work with others to sort things out.
Here's an e-mail I got from fairtax01 called "optional project":
"Jerry Ryan and Ellen Davenport are scheduled to hold office hours that evening between 6:30 and
7:30. This is a good opportunity to get in their faces."
Like I said, the project for the rest of us has been trying to work together.
In public you talk about reasonableness and say what you think will make you sound sincere. You say you to want to work with the town. You don't really sound very sincere. No thanks on the offer of giving you my name. It's annoying enough to find the "in their faces" stuff in my inbox. No way I'm having Fairtax use its tactics against me personally. |
Townie
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 11:02 pm: | |
Mfpark (and Ffof)
I almost posted that NY Times article for Ffof. I hope he (she) got a chance to see it.
I absolutely agree with you about commercial ratables. The Springfield Avenue revitalization seems to be the strongest effort the town is making in that direction. I'm sure town officials would be happy to clue you in as to its progress. (And I think this TC has taken it more seriously than any of its predecessors, but residents of longer stature know better than I.) It's a bit like trying to bring a mountain to Maplewood, if you get my meaning.
It's not only true that Republicans have not done one blessed thing, they've done everything they could to make things worse. Welcome to the land of Steve Forbes (who by the way, pays almost no property taxes. His massive estate is zoned as a farm). |
Curmudgeon
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 11:07 pm: | |
Quote:for the purposes of this board however - I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours Townie.
That's a joke, isn't it, Fairtax? As far as I can tell, Townie represents Townie, an individual. You, on the other hand, claim to represent hundreds of people. Since that is the claim, we'd like to be able to assess its veracity by knowing who you are. Not all the members of the Fair Tax committee, but you, as its representative. Simple as that. |
Gph
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 1:56 am: | |
Those who think the dissenters are slowly fading away except for a radical fringe element are mistaken; many are quietly testing the TC/Assessor proposal for redress; the assessment review. Your neighbors are not the enemy. When a contractor builds a house with inferior materials, you don't blame the people living in it, you blame the contractor. We are seeking redress from the effects of the work of a poor contractor. And we are NOT a bunch of Jack Bennys, guarding the vault in the basement. My wife and I are not Wall Street Moguls; we're civil servants. It takes both our pay to make the bills. And because government wants to keep people's taxes down, our salaries have not kept up with inflation. We didn't buy a rich person's house when we moved in four years ago. And we haven't invested hundreds of thousands of dollars turning our house into "The Great American Castle." We've done nothing but live, breathe and go to work like everyone else here. Suddenly, we find a fast and loose contractor declaring our house a mansion and fellow townspeople attacking us like we're some tightwad dotcom millionaires who'd better darned well part with a few measly pennies from their piles and piles of gold. That just isn't the case.You want fairness, Townie, well so do we. When the numbers come in based on reality, we will all either pay it or move. Let's just get it right first, and stop fighting among each other. The contractor's at fault, not you, not me. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 9:00 am: | |
Gph -- bravo to you! And I mean that!
This is exactly what Townie is saying all along. That each homeowner is responsible for his own situation.
To Fairtax, can you tell us how many of your members have overvaluations and how many do not? Also, why is it necessary to remove the TC, even if the reval is flawed? BTW, I don't believe it to be flawed -- there are mistakes, but the process itself doesn't seem to be. In addition, if you are for fair taxes, you MUST be worried about my taxes as well as other homeowners who are currently overpaying. Have you done a mass mailing via snail mail so that all 7500 households in Maplewood can make a decision to join your platform? |
Yvette
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 9:36 am: | |
I think it's clear that the town is not going to table this assessment, but will move forward, SO SHOULD WE ALL!
Whether it's an appeal or request for how they arrived at ones assessment...that's an individual issue not a town issue.
Let's focus together on other town issues, ie, the BOE, there's a meeting on Monday, the 5th. |
Nilmiester
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 9:55 am: | |
Townie: The Republicans are behind FairTax? You are as bad as the News Record and being one of the few in town, I highly doubt it. I am not even contesting my taxes! Glad you got a laugh over my joke about being married to the TC. Your devotion is partnerlike. I will venture to say that most of the fairtax group are Democrats that voted for the TC. Looking beyond that the group has "little political sense" as you put it and whatever that means, they are not supposed to affiliated with any group. So don't let those battered Republicans scare you, the rumor I hear is that another political group in town is forming which is neither and I welcome it. It will finally break up the monopoly and that's good. |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 10:03 am: | |
Gph,
I'll second Njjoseph's loud "Bravo to you." I have never been opposed to anyone challenging their assessment or working with others to challenge your assessment. I have never said such people were a "radical fringe" and, besides, radical fringes often do a great deal of good work in the world.
Fairtax has adopted a very unpleasant, very unneighborly, very divisive and bullying tone, lodging accusations against the TC and using tactics of ambush that finally made me extremely angry and thought they deserved a taste of their own medicine. While the TC has been providing information and responding to everybody's need to be heard and the need to have an accurate assessment, what has Fairtax done in the past month? They've offered not a single solution or even bright idea. And they've tried to paint a sinister picture of what is going on in Maplewood.
Gph, if you have any reason to question that the assessment you have received is not the market value of your home, you should of course take action to make sure it is assessed at market value. I had a meeting with Certified just to go over my assessment, and I don't care 2 figs what my neighbors think of me for doing so. Unfortunately, as a relative newcomer to Maplewood, I was unaware when we bought our home that no revaluation had been done in the town since 1981. Even if my new assessment was based solely on what I paid for the house, I still would face a rise in taxes in the thousands. To add to my tax burden, though, is the fact that the Midtown Direct boosted house prices in my particular neighborhood considerably, and that the system of unfairly overtaxing other property owners in Maplewood has suddenly come to an end. Put it all together, my tax bill will go up by 30 percent, meaning even more thousands, based on the market value of my home and the new mil rate.
Like you, I've done no major renovating and all this "paper money" means nothing. To us, it's a place we want to live, not a monetary investment.
My spouse and I never dreamed in our wildest dreams that when we bought our first home it would rise so quickly in value. New Jersey tax laws require that our homes be taxed at market value, and redoing the reval won't change that. As you point out, we're taxed for just living and breathing in New Jersey. We see no point in making villains out of the TC and we want to continue living in Maplewood. We haven't found Fairtax's rhetoric and tactics helpful in making Maplewood a better place to live. |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 10:24 am: | |
Hi Nilmeister,
Being called as bad as the News-Record is the lowest possible blow. But in this case I can't deny it: I didn't hear that the Essex County Republicans were behind Fairtax. I only thought I did. What I was told is that there is "a political agenda" behind Fairtax. After posting last night, I happened to talk with the person with whom I'd been discussing the reval a few weeks ago and double checked the conversation.
I don't know what you base your information on that they are Democrats who voted for the TC. About all that is clear from this thread is that there is a lot of talk and questions about who they are and what they really want. That may be just their ineptness in communicating. But my apologies to Fairtax for simply adding to the speculation in a mistaken way.
My overall feeling about Democrats is that they are incompetent. My particular feelings about the TC is that most of the mistakes they have made regarding the reval are p.r. mistakes, while a few may have gone to their competence in monitoring the reval. It's hard to say. I've never seen another reval. I certainly don't think they had any choice but to use a privatized service. I tend to have a weakness for intervening on the side of people who are being unfairly pummeled and lied about. The consistent effort to paint the TC as unresponsive just doesn't square with what's been going on. I've found them to be the only reliable source of information about the reval and feel they've gone out of their way to make it available. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 10:29 am: | |
Townie, I appreciate your voice of reason and your research and analysis, but I must take issue with your statement that Democrats are incompetent. Individuals may be incompetent, but Democrats as a whole are not. I am a democrat, and I feel that I am competent. However, you may have been speaking of certain Democrats in public office, but your generalization was too general. |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 10:37 am: | |
Hi Njjoseph,
I was speaking of Democrats at the national level, not the local level. I really feel they have failed to keep the faith with the people who need them most and don't know how to fight the right political fights. I fear they are installing John Ashcroft as we write. And they actually won the election! I don't understand them any more.
From all your posts here, I certainly see you are competent. Tell them to listen to you more often! (And can you do anything to get rid of Bob Toricelli and Sharpe James?) |
Waynecaviness
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 10:39 am: | |
Townie,
I'm not sure this post will be worth the effort; its a little too much hindsight, and, as you say, the need to move forward is paramount, but here goes anyway...
Your most recent post (10:03 am) makes the TC sound like a relatively benign organization, almost like they are victims in the reval process.
But Townie, we tend to look for and value foresight in our elected officials. The TC doesn't seem to have exercised very much of that in this situation.
It is my impression that for the most part, the TC has been forced by public reaction to Certifieds work to react. Left to their druthers, I get the feeling that they would have done very little. Yes, thank you very much Messrs Ryan and DeLuca for your recent public contributions to the information flow. It was and is very helpful.
It is not that I disagree with your points about needing to work with the TC and not make them villains, I do. But when reading your posts, I get the feeling that your're making them out as innocents. They aren't. Admittedly, others may not get the same impression from your posts as I have.
I know, hindsight is always 20/20. But I really would have expected a little more foresight from the TC, perhaps in the way of some contingency planning. I would be really pleased if it were to become public knowledge that some kind of activity representing foresight actually did take place, but we just didn't know about it. But that appears to be wishful thinking.
To their credit, recent actions have been steps in the right direction. Will more be needed? |
Euclidean
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 11:41 am: | |
Townie,
There is a school of thought which says that the Democrats in Washington are wise to not waste their bullets on Ashcroft at this time. There will be more important decisions in the future such as Supreme Court nominations. Anyway, aside from his beliefs and political positions which worry many people, Ashcroft does appear to have a bit more personal integrity than many politicians on the national scene. |
Nilmiester
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 11:46 am: | |
If it was Joe Lieberman, there would be no problem with his religious beliefs. |
Lseltzer
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 12:03 pm: | |
Waynecaviness:
>>But I really would have expected a little more foresight from the TC, perhaps in the way of some contingency planning. I would be really pleased if it were to become public knowledge that some kind of activity representing foresight actually did take place, but we just didn't know about it. But that appears to be wishful thinking.
What exactly would you have them do? It was obvious to everyone who gave any serious thought to the matter that there would be increases in certain areas (mostly the west) and decreases in others (mostly the east). Perhaps they didn't forsee the degree of the increases, but certainly we've been pretty engaged since them.
Please don't stop with asking for some kind of contingency planning. Be more specific. |
Waynecaviness
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 12:09 pm: | |
Lseltzer,
I'm thinking in terms of say, what do we do if Certified's work produces a public outcry, or maybe what if Certified's work produces a significant number of factual errors, etc. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 12:17 pm: | |
Haven't we already reached that point, and aren't the individual homeowners appealing the mistakes? |
Waynecaviness
| | Posted on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 1:20 pm: | |
Njjoseph,
Yes, we have reached that point. Remember, the question I was being asked was, to what kind of contingency planning was I referring? In that previous post, I was wondering: did the TC, at any time, engage in any contingency planning? To wit: were the possibilities of significant and numerous factual errors discussed; was there discussion of monitoring the quality of Certified's work; were performance standards written into the contract, etc. If not, why not?
Please note that my post is not intended as sniping at the TC. Rather, it was intended to provide a little balance to Townies post wherein he seems to portray (IMHO, recognizing that others may not read it the same way) the TC as being somewhat more "victims" than (again, IMHO) participants central to the process.
I recognize that the questions that I am asking are full of "hindsight is 20/20" implications. But I do think that a postmortem analysis of what went wrong (e.g., appearing to react to events rather than anticipate), as well as what went right (e.g., the very helpful provision of info by Ryan and DeLuca) might provide a useful "lessons learned" for the future.
There appear to be those who would rather see the TC replaced or recalled. That appears to be counterproductive. To keep this thing moving toward a sooner-instead-of-later resolution, we need to work with them, not against them. |
|