| Author | Message | ||
     Mwood |
Ahhh Talking Points.... Reign it in a little D - "national exposure"? Last I checked the New Jersey section isn't included in the national edition of the NYT. | ||
| Joancrystal |
Roses are Red Violets are Blue A fair real property assessment Is all we ask of you | ||
| Interalia |
I think I have just been labelled a big business loving Republican (along with a few others). Just goes to show you how dangerous these online posting boards can be. Sweet dreams, Maplewood. | ||
| Melidere |
Gee, D Obviously you are studying the numbers. Take a look at the sales data...it's reasonably full back to 1990. You will see that the divergence was firmly in place at that point. | ||
| Bobk |
Hey guys, I know for a fact that "60 MINUTES" IS doing a segment on the Maplewood tax situation. Mike Wallace has already grilled Ed Galante and and as we speak is stalking the TC members, microphone in hand with camera right behind. How is that for national exposure? :-/ ps: And if you believe this I can give you a real good deal on the Brooklyn Bridge. Yah know, buy it, put up toll booths.......... | ||
| Nilmiester |
And they will buy that bridge now that they live in Maplewood! All that sharp savvy, you can't pull one over on me, that New Yorkers are known for, went right of their heads when they saw that Dickens Village! | ||
| Octofoil |
Melidere, Cost/benefit analysis are a well-known and documented methodology in both the public and private sector. This is basic stuff. It would be very surprising to me if such hasn't been done on the various proposals surrounding Springfield Ave (Nolan, can you point us to any?) If they haven't been done, they should be, especially before any funds are committed. You seem pretty comfortable with the quant stuff, tossing around npv's and the like. I can probably point you to a couple of references if you wish. You might find it interesting. | ||
| Melidere |
I'm comfortable with quant stuff..particularly investments, but obviously my statistics is further in my past than it is for you. I would love to see the links. I've seen the cost/benefit on public programs and the like..but deep down i think you can fill pages with pretty numbers but i don't think public projects are very amenable to that kind of analysis. What's the ROI on all the repaving and curbs we've put down in the last few years? (Personally, i'm dying to see the correlation between assessments and those curbs...at least superficially the streets screaming the loudest about the reval numbers seem to correlate pretty seriously with the new curbs, Jefferson and Prospect in particular.) I'm not at all convinced of D's numbers on the costs of NOT doing it...I'm not sure what he/she is adding up, but i do think that if it were possible to return some 'cache' to that area of town with aesthetic improvements, the increases in property values of both the avenue and the surrounding residential housing would be considerable. One thing we have all 'caught on to' in this reval is that 'land value' drives the whole thing. There is a fair amount of the total land of our town surrounding springfield and boyden. Bring it up and we redistribute back to a relatively low tax rate (relative to the rest of essex). | ||
| Townie |
Euclidean, The Star-Ledger did a story on a local Republican who was a big supporter of bringing the Trenton review board here. Journalism being what it is, I got the impression he was the same man who tried to get the TC to adopt a resolution asking for the review at one of the reval meetings, the first I heard about it, and that this drive was being led by Republicans. But it doesn't matter to me and I have no doubt, as Nilmeister says, that if there is a petition drive, Democrats will also sign it. I won't sign it, but not because I'm neither a Republican or a Democrat (true fact) but because I dislike the idea, not who is behind it. ;-} I don't have any problem with petition drives or letter campaigns or any political process to bring the review board in. I have a problem with review boards of that sort, which I do think are less "bottom-up" and less democratic than the established political processes and an attempt by some in town to end-run around them, and certainly don't see any fiscal reason to bring a review board here. ;-{ I've never thought the reval is partisan, either in implementation or resistance to it. I don't view Republicans as a class. Just a voluntary organization of people whose ideas I don't like. Same is true of Democrats. I'm not alone on these boards in criticizing Fairtax. Fairtax has seen it that way. And like the Trenton review board, it's the idea behind Fairtax and what it does that I don't like (to the extent that can be discerned), not who started it. I honestly don't believe I've ever met anyone in Fairtax. (?) In a similar vein, Interalia, I think the danger for you on these boards comes from interpreting disagreement as a personal attack, and then getting mad thinking somebody else did that to you! We simply have different ideas about managing Maplewood's revenues. ;-] Octofoil, I don't disagree with anything you said about Social Security. I would only say that projections of future economic downturns make me more, not less, committed to the basic program, which of course always needs adjustment as the picture of the future becomes clearer. PS, Euclidean, Social Security is not a pension fund. It's an anti-poverty program that uses current tax revenues to redistribute wealth to low-income seniors. Period. Democrats have told what they consider white lies about this program for 60 plus years because they think it's politically necessary. Just like their support of John Ashcroft, its one of my many areas of disagreement with their politics. (Oh - one other thing. Surplus FICA revenues go into a "fund" but are immediately "borrowed" and spent on other Federal programs. Kinda like the pool fund! In the case of Congress, it's indisputably legal.) Mwood, you're right about the Sudnay New Jersey section of The NY Times. Dyntunck, a lot of the things that the TC did politically to deal with the protest about the reval isn't necessarily evidence that there was something wrong with the reval. Could be evidence of an overly emotional reaction to the reval on the part of some residents. Melidere and Octofoil Quantifying the charm and beauty of Maplewood is difficult as you point out, but I also think it's only common sense to say that rising property values throughout most of town are solid evidence that spending money on town upkeep has paid off for individual investors here (homeowners) handsomely. Spending money to visibly improve Springfield Ave. sounds to me like a very good investment. Not only do I not like blighted looking parts of town, it may be that when the next reval is done, some of the tax burden can be distributed more evenly, as assessments rise on residental property in parts of town more distant from Maplewood village. Now I really have run out of things to say. Ciao. | ||
| Octofoil |
Melidere, Not much in the way of useful links on the topic, mostly textbook/practitioner type sources. Things like the classic Musgrave text on taxation (more for the theory part) and others more on the quant side. Still want references if they're not links? Happy to furnish them... | ||
| Melidere |
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make sound? If information is not on the net...is it real? lol I've studied the analysis of public projects. They are about as accurate as calculating the price of a stock. Lots of people spend lots of money putting lots of numbers on paper. Then the market does what it will, as we have learned in the last couple of years. Thank you for your kind offer, but i was thinking of the links more as public talking papers than self-education. I'm sure that if residents demand it, those analytics will be produced. The people that are for the project will produce numbers showing what a great return it is, and the people who are against it will produce reports showing that it is throwing money down a black hole. Sort of like tech stocks. | ||
| Njjoseph |
Townie, if you're referring to the same article I read, and to Eugene McNany in particular, the article states he is a Democrat. I certainly agree that I don't want a state review here. We'd probably get very generic recommendations, and those that would be more specific would change the character of Maplewood. | ||
| Nohero |
With respect to the state review, reports from past reviews are online at The NJ Treasury Department. People can read what the past suggestions are, and consider whether these are needed/helpful/desirable in this community. | ||
| Nilmiester |
Nohero- Thanks for the link. Provided that this analysis is free, why don't we take advantage of it? The township committee position is not a "real" job, most of the members have full-time jobs. I can't see any down side to getting free advice whether we choose to use it or not. And Interalia, I don't see any danger for you on this board about misinterpreting anything as a personal attack or getting mad about it. | ||
| Octofoil |
Townie: No argument at all about spending money on "upkeep". When maintenance is deferred for very long, bad things happen! But look, the "Clean Up, Paint Up, Fix Up" type of activities are one thing, major capital improvements running into 7-figure amounts are quite another. Are you aware of any impact studies/cost/benefit analysis on the Springfield Ave proposals? Melidere: You're absolutely right...those that are for it will show numbers that support their argument; those that are agin' it will do likewise! Totally rational behavior for both! For those that have to make decisions based on competing analysis, the task is to look behind the numbers to the assumptions used in their production. If the assumptions are questionable, so are the results. It usually boils down to an assessment of whose assumptions make the most sense at the time. Nohero: Thanks for the link. Looks interesting. | ||
| Yvette |
Interalia - I believe if the TC hired a CFO, which is currently vacant, we (the townspeople) wouldn't have to worry so much as to who is trying to balance the check book, at least we would hope. | ||
| Mtierney |
I just can't shake the feeling that Townie is on the TC. | ||
| Melidere |
Octofoil, And if, in your gut, you think that investing money on the avenue will produce a general greater good, then the assumptions on that side of the argument will make the most sense at the time. Thanks for the link, Nohero. I took a brief glance at the one for West Orange. They recommend a lot of new fees, or increases in fees...reduced leaf collection, reduced street sweeping..and the bulk of their 'savings' came from reorganizing police and fire, cutting benefits... egaaads. These are the people you call in (as in consultants) when you want to deliver bad news to the troops and you want to blame it on someone else. I don't see much in that one, at least...that is much of an 'audit' function. I think we can figure out if we want to install parking meters or not on our own. | ||
| Nilmiester |
We can find out "for free" what happened to the pool fund and stop getting the run around. That in itself is worth it. There is no stopping it now. | ||
| Nakaille |
Mtierney: do you know someone named "Kathleen" on the TC? That's who Townie is. I think she's had enough harassment courtesy of Fairtax AKA Lydia, don't you? Bacata |
