| Author |
Message |
    
Mtierney
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 4:40 pm: |     |
Got it! - and "no". |
Nakaille
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 4:51 pm: | |
Mtierney: No, you don't know someone on the TC named Kathleen? Or no, she hasn't had enough harassment? Lydia seemed to think so, she offered a public apology which was incredibly graciously accepted by Kathleen.
Maybe I'm misreading you. Please correct me if I am.
Bacata |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 5:16 pm: | |
I THINK I know who Kathleen is on TC - that's the "got it." The "no" relates to the fact that I do not think she has heard enough from the community. She is badly mistaken if she thinks her contribution to this board will heal us. The harm done to Maplewood by this reval will take a great deal of action on the part of the TC. First order: Admit your mistake hiring CV. |
Nakaille
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 5:24 pm: | |
I believe Townie has stated in several posts that she has no connection whatsoever to the TC. But you could ask her that yourself.
Bacata |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 8:02 pm: | |
Mtierney, what makes you think Townie is on the TC? There are many intelligent, educated posters (you, too!) with opinions that deserve to be heard. |
Euclidean
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 8:33 pm: | |
Townie, Your reply to me exceeded my attention span, but I few things caught my attention. The first is that I am glad you aren't anti-Republican. I believe Republicans are a protected species in Maplewood.
Regarding Social Security, I have to remind you that this is 2001, not 1937. Social Security may, at one time, have been designed to protect the poor, but if the idea of Social Security is still only to protect impoverished seniors, then we need to cutoff more than a few beneficiaries of SS |
Interalia
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 9:14 pm: | |
We don't mind when the TC spends $295,000 of our money on a reval that is being re-done by OUR very appeals. We don't mind that the TC paid 95% of the invoice in advance of completion and acceptance of the 'botched' project. We don't mind paying more money to have other people come in and TRY to straighten out the mess CV made. Just on the aforestated, it won't surprise me if taxes go up! But then, the same people that brought you the "REVAL OF '01" are the same people that misappropriated funds from the pool and the library. Inquiring minds want to know. Is this anyway to run a business? And if anyone believes that running a town isn't running a business...get a reality check. |
Eb1154
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 9:30 pm: | |
Dytunck,
I have to disagree with you on a few issues that you have pointed out.
1) The $12m disparity that you point out as being unfair only proves the point of how much the values have risen on the west side as compared to the east side.
2)While I agree that the difference hasn't been since 1981 I do think that it has been since the late 80's boom.
3)"signs of mistakes", the TC hired independant entities not because they thought the reval was flawed but because they heard the cry of the people and acted upon it. What happens when their numbers come back the same as CVI? Never mind I know the answer, they were just the rubberstamp.
4) The NYT article did bring attention to the area but who was it that called them and had them print the article? The people who weren't happy about paying their increases? (Even if they were assessed correctly.)
5) "Emergency meetings", again this was done by the TC to deal with the public outcry. Oh and by the way, just because the people cry doesn't make what they are saying any more true.
To those of you who want the state review I want you ask yourself a couple of questions.
1) What happens when the states says eliminate the Jitney?
2)Or cut back on your employees? Less police? There goes the crime rate. Less Firemen? Who cares let my neighbor's (whose taxes I am fighting for) house burn to the ground(it saved me $100.) Less D.P.W.? Let the tree lay accross the road, let the sewer back up in to my neighbors house, let the road break away, let the grass grow over and the swings break in the parks, let the snow stay there it will melt, and don't worry about the sweeper we don't need him in the center of town we don't liter over there.
And let's not forget all the little projects the town funds for your betterment.
ALL this because I wanted the state to come in and save me $100. and to prove to the TC that they don't have a clue.
On the bright side you will have a pool to go swimming in if you can get there!!!
I agree there may be some fat to trim but having the state do the trimming is only going to leave you with a piece that will leave you hungry. Especially with the appetite that you have become accustomed to feeding. |
Euclidean
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 9:38 pm: | |
EB1154, I don't think the state reviews are binding. It will just provide more grist for the mill of town politics. |
Eb1154
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 10:11 pm: | |
Euclidean,
I don't think the state reviews are binding either but why wouldn't the TC follow the states suggestions? Afterall this is what the townspeole asked for isn't it? I think the state review is a bad idea and why all of a sudden do we need a review? The amount of money being spent by the TC hasn't increased (by much) this year? Is it because there is a different group of people paying a higher amount of taxes? I know we all felt we were paying too much in the past but we never heard anyone screaming for a state review. The tax revenue hasn't changed with the reval it is still the same amount as last year give or take a little. I personlly think this is just another attack at the TC because of the large increases.
Again, my biggest problem is that now that the burden has shifted to another group of residents they want to act against the TC and they want to come together as a town but where were these people while I was on the recieving end of the stick? |
Interalia
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 10:25 pm: | |
EB1154:
The right to appeal has always been available to all citizens of the state. If you or people you know felt particularly burdened you had the choice to appeal. Now there are people who are being asked to pay-out up to $6,000 in one lump sum and they ARE going to appeal...and they ARE going to ask questions. It isn't my fault or their's that you or people you know chose not to do so. This tax increase is a hardship for many and most people cannot 'absorb' the exorbitant increases.
On another note, it is a wonderful thing to enjoy the 'services' that the town provides with OUR tax dollars. However, if WE can't afford some of these services, perhaps we need to grow up re-evaluate what we can spend and live within OUR means. I teach my children that lesson. |
Eb1154
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 11:08 pm: | |
Inter,
I agree that the appeal process was always in place and it still is. If there are people who feel they were overassessed they should appeal. It is their responsibility as it was mine, the TC should not have to throw out the reval for these people.
I find it ironic that you would say "perhaps we need to grow up re-evaluate what we can spend and live within our means". You want all of the townspeople to give up some of their services because a few people don't know how to "live within their own means". If they can't afford their taxes they should move to smaller house or to a house in a more affordable section of town. If the people on the eastside couldn't afford to pay their taxes they were told to live in their own means which in essence meant they had to move out of town or in to an apartment. I never heard anyone say "let the state review the budget" or "cut the services we can no longer afford". |
Interalia
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 8:52 am: | |
Eb1154:
My point was the whether people bought homes on the east or west side of town, they knew what they were getting into and I would assume they were able and willing to pay that price AND were living within their means. When a reval comes along that increases a family's overhead by as much as $6,000 (maybe it is more in some cases) that is not an anticipated overhead increase,
unless that family has a lot of disposable income, that is a big hardship indeed. You can't expect people to stop putting money aside for their kids' college education or fund their retirement accounts to cover this ridiculous, obscene increase. That, clearly in YOUR posts, is not what you think the character of Maplewood is about! So, I ask you...What's a family to do?
Move out! |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:15 am: | |
Mtierney,
Hi. I'm Kathleen. I live in a house with a Japanese maple, a gravel driveway and two orange cats on Durand Road. I'm about 5'10" and I drive a white Ford Taurus station wagon. I'm most often seen walking up Durand Road carrying groceries from Kings. I'm a neighbor of Ellen Davenport's, but I believe the last time I spoke with her was when I ran into her at my polling place on Election Day. We have often discussed national politics, but never local ones, except I've told her I admantly oppose shooting deer. When Jerry Ryan was Deputy Mayor, he married me. Hey, joke! MEANING: He performed my wedding. (You think YOU'VE got a gripe with him ;-] ) I haven't seen him since and have no particular sentimental feeling about the day or him. I met Ms. King and Mr. Lieberman on my front lawn when they were campaigning in my neighborhood (I told them I didn't want them shooting deer). I once shared a crowded train with Vic De Luca when he had just been elected to the TC. To pass the time while we stood smashed against the door, I talked with him about Springfield Avenue. I've never spoken to him since.
I don't mind exchanging views with you, but if you seriously believe that by addressing questions to me you are talking to the TC, you're quite mistaken! |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:23 am: | |
Octofoil,
The Springfield Avenue discussions have been going on for some time in town. This hasn't been a casual thing. I don't know how much time you want to invest catching up with the discussion, but I'm sure Jerry Ryan could tell you who is the best source of information. Six figures doesn't surprise me at all if we are talking making visible and concrete (literally concrete) improvements to the whole of that very long stretch of road, or even major intersections of it. Springfield Avenue definitely needs more than paint and nails. |
Nohero
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:25 am: | |
Townie - You think that Mtierney thought you were Ellen Davenport?
Dang, I was betting that Mtierney thought you were Burt Liebman in drag.
 (Just kidding. Really.)
Since that mystery is solved, how about this question. Which one of the recently-arrived posters is running for office in November, or running a campaign? Is it Interalia? Damellon? Any thoughts? |
Nilmiester
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:30 am: | |
Just make sure you run on the right ticket in this town....Democratic. You will win. It's all in the primary. |
Joancrystal
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:34 am: | |
Eb1154:
You are missing a couple of points here:
1. The State team may have a new idea or two or ten that haven't occurred to our vocal majority. If even one is worth trying, the examination is worth it!
2. We are all trying to live within our means. We make our budgets based on what we can afford. Sometimes we make long term commitments: college tuition, business loans, nursing home care for aging relatives, etc., based on what we have or can expect to earn in the future. An unexpected real property tax increase which far exceeds the normal State cap can wreck havoc with those long term financial commitments.
3. Some houses have appreciated considerably since 1981. That's the point of the outcry isn't it? I could afford to spend $100,000. on a house in 1981. That doesn't mean that I could afford to buy it at its present "value' of half a million dollars or more or pay the added taxes based on that valuation. The "living" has changed due to outside influences while the "means" has stayed the same.
4. Not everyone can sell and run. If too many houses go on the market at one time, everyone's market values will go down. But, if the County Tax Asessor sees these as "distress sales" due to sudden tax increases, our taxes and the taxes of those buying the properties will probably stay the same. Furthermore, more houses on the market than buyers will mean some people can not sell their homes at any price.
Have you ever heard the term hidden poor? Prepare to experience it big time in Maplewood if we don't find a way to soften the impact for some of these people. |
Townie
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:34 am: | |
Euclidean,
I'll try to keep it short. Did the TC build the paddock in South Mountain Reservation for the Republicans? Is that the real scandal here?
Briefly about Soc Sec: Benefits are taxable, so higher income seniors get lower benefits. I think they could be taxed more. Others are now advocating lifting the tax completely.
In some ways the program began as a classic "pump-primer" in the Great Depression, and it was also used to tighten the labor market, but it also recognized that the dependent elderly had lost the support of their now unemployed children. My point about the Great Depression is this: If people say we can't afford it now, I say if we could afford it during the Depression, we can afford it now. If you say we don't need it now because children can afford to support their parents, I can't argue. Politically, however, I think kids would rather have Social Security than mom and dad and aunt sue in the spare bedroom.
It would be tough to reconstruct Social Security if there was a future Depression. The costs of administering the program are almost nothing. The benefits reach the right people. The excess is taxed and returned.
In Maplewood, it helps retirees pay their rising property taxes, so a lot of it ends up in our hands anyway. |
Jfb
| | Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 9:46 am: | |
EB1154,
Is it wrong to want to get the most for your money? No one is talking about "eliminating" services. Besides, the town budget is only 20% of the total.
If we got rid of Essex county's 20% that would be a real savings. I don't know what we get for that money but it's nothing that this town uses. |
|