| Author | Message | ||
     Lseltzer |
Waynecaviness: So what if they wanted to plan for such eventualities? What could they have done in advance? My questions are basically rhetorial; I don't think there was much they could have done that they didn't do. I have today's News-Record and the letter isn't in it. I guess they missed the deadline. Is there some reason they don't want to put their names on record here? | ||
| Nakaille |
Nilmeister: I think it is what one does with one's religious beliefs while serving as a "public servant" that is at issue with Ashcroft, not the specific content of his beliefs. With Ashcroft there is deep suspicion among many of us that he is entirely capable of using his post to further his particular religious agenda at the expense of the civil rights of vast swaths of American society. Your post sounded like a snipe at Judaism. I'm not sure that's how you meant it. I hope not. Bacata | ||
| Townie |
Hi Waynecaviness, I have to dash off, but let me make a quick reply and forgive my spelling mistakes. My understanding is that the TC picked Certified after looking at 3 other companies, and that Certified was chosen because it had a better track record of delivering on time. And then it seems that Certified needed town maps and something delayed them getting them. So, Certified began late under instructions to make sure they got the work completed on time. I don't think the TC was prepared for the extent to which property values had shifted over 19 years. I don't know how Certified canvassed the town physically, but if they started on the east side and periodically turned in numbers, it wouldn't be obvious that the assessments were going to produce an uproar. I think the real difficulty and sore spot and tough spot for the TC may be that Certified made this big last minute boo-boo in assessing the west: It failed to adjust for the bidding wars (which bid up houses tens of thousands of dollars over asking prices) in some neighborhoods. So Certified sends out letters reflecting those bubble prices and all hell breaks loose. It may be that the TC sits around with its feet up drinking beer and tossing paper airplanes around during all its meetings for all know. They don't strike me as wild and crazy folks. Should they have delayed Certified sending those letters? Should they have known the bubble hadn't been adjusted for? The law says the assessment has to be market value. In my neighborhood, Certified's first letter was plausibly market value. But peak market value. Ed Gallante's subsequent adjustments made it middling market value, or "fair" (not sunny day) market value -- and I think as a basis for taxation, that's the fair way to treat a homeowner. I only developed a bleeding heart affection for the TC after watching them be the sole source of accurate information, the sole source of thoughtful idea, and the sole source of thinking about the whole town (will the town be sued? Do people need more help?) and getting portrayed as people who were unresponsive and trying to be secretive. I think none of that is true. By and large, in my experience, popular small town politicians are people who can make voters feel like "I take care of you." It may not be true, but they can make you feel that way. I think our TC missed a early few opportunities to be seen that way: They could have circulated among those standing in the cold or the lobby during that first big meeting; they could have had breakfast every day this month at the Maple Leaf Diner or elsewhere. But actually what could they have done, substantively, more than they've done? I don't know. They've given the town the first crack at tax equity its apparently had for a very long time. They bit the bullet and did the re-assessment. They've been telling the truth. They hired an independent assessor to look over their shoulders. They've kept the town out of lawsuits. They've provided extra people to do the appeals process work at the local level, not just handed people off to the county. They found Certified's error and got it corrected. In the real world of not only local government, but government in general, if people are going to say this TC isn't adequate, I hear myself asking: As compared to what? West Orange? Linden? Bob Torricelli? Sharpe James? Woodbridge? At least this TC isn't trying to get us all to fly flags! I don't think it's wrong to question their performance. And despite all those wild rumors, I am not in bed with the TC and neither is my spouse (I don't think so anyway!). I don't know if they are wholly innocent of any responsibility for mistakes in this process, but my double checking of their statements persuades me they have been telling the truth. I think the town lawyer has advised them not to say any old thing that comes into their heads, because there do seem to be people clamoring for "open process" as a way of gathering ammunition for a law suit. I think the independent assessor is a satisfactory answer about whether standard, state-approved process was used. Individuals may want to ask the TC and Ed Gallante for help in understanding how their individual assessment was arrived at, but I foresee trouble if people who thus far have not shown themselves to be acting in good faith in wanting information (they've discarded the accurate information handed them and discounted it) are put in charge of this process. It would be a disaster I think. Got to run. PS to Euclidean: You remind me to send more bullets to Washington. As for Mr Ashcroft's personal integrity, if he ever asked me on a job interview about my sexual orientation, I'd call the police. Not fit to be AG I think. | ||
| Nilmiester |
Bacata: No swipe made at Judaism. Must every remark be taken out of context and if someone disagrees with you accuse them of some prejudice? I meant it's okay to be religious (ANY RELIGION)as long as the person's on your political team, that's all. Calm down. | ||
| Waynecaviness |
Lseltzer, As a consultant (though in another field) for many years, I can tell you that if my work was as full of factual errors as Certified's appears to have been, I would be answering depositions already. Note that I use "appears to have been" deliberately. We have all heard anecdotally about errors, but we don't really know the number or significance. We don't know if the TC prepared for the possibility of errors by insisting on some contractual form of performance monitoring/standards or not. We don't know if they even thought about it ahead of time and dismissed it as unnecessary. You see, we just don't know. But whichever the case, lets document it, learn from it and pass it on to the next TC that has to deal with a revaluation. | ||
| Njjoseph |
Townie, you reminded me of one aspect of all this that is the most troublesome for me. I think that all revaluation letters should have been sent at the same time, and they should have been mailed by the tax assessor's office who would have reviewed them first (and hopefully discussed potential problems with the TC). I don't know why Certified mailed the letters, since they are the "tool" rather than the office that keeps the records. Also, if the tax assessor had reviewed and then informed the TC, adjustments could have been made to correct errors (well, at least I like to think the potential was there). That's it. | ||
| Nakaille |
Nil, maybe your one-liner just wasn't sufficient to communicate as much as you thought it would. No context at all was provided by your quip. I still disagree with you. I don't really think it's about someone being on your political team. I think it is what they do with the power of the office they hold. If they are inclined to abuse that power to further their religious agenda it is wrong, no matter whose team or what religion. Bacata | ||
| Euclidean |
Well, I still think that the Democrats are wise to save their bullets for later battles. This is especically true at a time when the national press view is that GWB has gotten off to a good start. A wise strategy for Democrats is to mount a reasoned opposition to those aspects of the Bush Administration which are the most alarming (e.g. yearly tests for grades 3-8, national missle defense against what?, etc.) and otherwise wait to see what happens. If Ashcroft puts his personal views above enforcing the law, there will be a backlash which will strengthen those who oppose Ashcroft. And if he puts the law above his personal views, then we will have a decent AG. And it is possible that he has learned from prior judgement errors. I can tell you that as a 20 year old, I was rather less sensitive to issues of tolerance, fairness, and diversity than I am today. | ||
| Nilmiester |
Bacata- My quip was actually something I read in the newspaper. If Ashcroft uses his power to further his religious agenda, I will be the first to cry out. Give him a chance. | ||
| Ffof |
Ok -we're really jumping all over the place with this thread, but ..Njjoseph, I totally agree with your point. (Can you believe it!!!) Anyway, It is the basis for which I think many have argued that we should have had a full-time assessor if not all along then at least during the whole re-val process. Jerry Ryan has responded to this with (and this is probably not a direct quote) but something like "and I still don't see what a full time tax assessor would have done any differently". Oh well, if only it were "Ground Hog Day" (the movie! not actually tomorrow!) And as for Ashcroft...his personal beliefs unfortunately seem to reflect THE WHOLE REPUBLICAN AGENDA! And why the press think W has gotten off to a good start is beyond me (and others?) after taking away international funds for women's health services and now pushing church and state together - this is all too much! And to your point Euclidean - there are even more battles to come. HEY - instead of spending education money on national testing, W could send a bunch of it right here to Maplewood and solve our woes! He might even win New Jersey next time! | ||
| Euclidean |
Ffof, I felt a need to switch to national politics. If seems like the reval issue has been beaten to death and continued discussion is leading to more strongly argued points of view and some degree on nastiness. | ||
| Nilmiester |
Yes, I'm sure gonna miss all that money the Clinton's sent to Maplewood for the past eight years.... | ||
| Townie |
Euclidean (btw, my spouse suggested I change my message board name to "non-Euclidean"!): Don't know really what the political geometry is but have bad memories of the Dems playing rollover in the past. What a different world it would be if they had kept Clarence Thomas off the Supreme Court! There! That's should change the subject from the reval -- although I appreciate your remark about nastiness. It rarely helps and leaves wounds. But politely getting back to the reval (as long as we are in the reval folder here): Njjoseph: I didn't know the letters didn't all go out at the same time. How did the letters go out? Also, Ffof: Is a full time assessor on the budget something the town would have supported? And finally, Waynecaviness: I've only been aware of one error by Certified (the failure to adjust for the bidding wars in some neighborhoods). I'm certainly not disputing some people got erroneous assessments, but it also seems some people didn't get erroneous assessments but don't realize that. What other factual errors do you think Certified made? I'm just curious. | ||
| Ffof |
Townie- We haven't had a full time assessor in 8 years. I guess that means that we used to always have a full time assessor. My guess is that the assessor is part time for budget reasons. Perhaps, going into a reval, the council would have considered putting someone on this full time to address the issues that someone brought up many posts ago - like getting all the reval letters out at once, and going over all the CV work before the letters went out, and maybe even having the letters go out from the assessor's office (with a nice explanation letter?!) instead of a vague letter from CV. Of course, we see how this could have improved our situation NOW, but whether the TC even considered this last spring(foreseeing or not foreseeing problems) is doubtful. P.S. Many people got their assessment letters in October and the rest got theirs on December 8. | ||
| Lseltzer |
Townie, Certified moved through the town basically from east to west, and sent out letters as they were done. | ||
| Jln |
Townie, Just to set the record straight: 1. Although I am associated with the Maplewood Committee for Fair Taxation, I have not posted here or elsewhere under the name of Fairtax or any other pen-name. 2. I am not the "owner" of the Fairtax01@aol.com e-mail address. It is true that on occasion the owner of that mailbox has forwarded to me questions sent to that address, with the request that I answer them. I have done so in a strictly objective and factual manner, always noting the limits of my knowlege where appropriate. 3. On the rare occaisions that I have chosen to state my views on this board, I have done so under my own name or initials. This is in stark contrast to you, who hides behind the cloak of an anonymous pen-name and has neither the courage nor integrity to stand up and publicly identify yourself. JLNathenson | ||
| Waynecaviness |
Townie, I probably should speak only to that with which I have personal knowledge...The errors that were made to our valuation included counting a mansard-roof-like overhang as living space. There it is, a small section of roof, hanging out in the breeze, no walls around it, no heat, no nothing but the breeze, only the exterior wall of the house, and they counted it as enclosed living space. There were a couple of other errors, but that one really got my attention. And, by the way, they haven't corrected it yet, even after meeting with the Certified representative. We have to take it up again with the assessors office. You are probably correct that some people believe they got erroneous assessments, but didn't, at least not according to the Certified methodology that has been surfacing thus far. For example, I looked back through some recent posts but couldn't locate the one concerning a large stair landing that was classified as a den. (I may have the details of that one wrong, but thats the gist of how I remember it). But thats not the type of "error" that I refer to as a "factual" error, and besides, that is a whole 'nother thread! | ||
| Townie |
Ffof: Did you know who got October letters and who got December ones? I got one in December and so did my neighbors and I live west of the village. Was it half the town in October or more? There was no outcry about valuations at that time. Come to think of it, somebody did say that the timing of the letters was politically motivated, implying that people due for increases didn't get them until after the November election. But who was running for a TC seat this year? I don't remember voting for anybody for TC in November. But I think I also recall Jerry Ryan in another thread saying that the TC had nothing to do with when letters were mailed. Well, it could be that a full-time assessor would have been helpful going into the reval. But there are these damned if you do, damned if you don't issues. Even if the reval had gone picture perfect, people in the west of town were going to see huge increases in their taxes. And then would people have been questioning the wisdom of using a local assessor appointed by the TC ("Cronyism!") and Maplewood's extravagant budget anyway ("Privatize!) and why didn't the letters go out all over town until the very last minute ("Shoving it down our throats!") And someday I'd be interested to hear tales of other town's revals. Any love-ins? | ||
| Townie |
Yes, JLN I'm the cloaked and sinister figure you make me out to be, just like those cloaked figures on our horrible TC elected by those gullible folks in Maplewood. Thanks for setting the record straight and revealing more of your true colors. | ||
| Townie |
Waynecaviness, I see now. Do you have my sense that it's really hard to know how many errors of that kind Certified made and how that stacks up against the track record of other assessors? I was more thinking when I asked you the question that maybe Certified had done other things I hadn't heard about on the macro-level, like count the town pool as a condo unit. (Joke, joke. Don't go looking for the evidence.) Also, when I talked about people getting accurate assessments but not realizing it, I was thinking about a conversations I had with a friend who felt his house had been way overvalued. I said: I would have guessed your house to be worth about $XXX,XXX, and his reply was that I had guessed about $5,000 over Certified's assessment. I think my guess and Certified's assessment is actually what the market is for his house, but he has yet to realize that. Also, another friend of mine in town said he would appeal because all his neighbors were appealing, although he thought his assessment was probably correct. So I don't think that the number of appeals filed will be any guide to the number of errors Certified might have made. I hope that the report of the independent assessor is useful -- either in terms of allaying people's suspicions or persuading people like me that the magnitude of error requires further redress. |
