| Author |
Message |
    
Dave
| | Posted on Friday, February 23, 2001 - 12:08 pm: |     |
The Maplewood reval section of this message board will remain active until the end of March. New or recently active threads after that date will be shifted to the Soapbox section and the remainder will be archived under "Maplewood Reval" in the Attic section.
Comments? |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Friday, February 23, 2001 - 4:09 pm: | |
You really think this will all go away by the end of March?
From your mouth to God's ear!
But, I think we'll be fighting the good fight until November, at the very least. |
Bobk
| | Posted on Friday, February 23, 2001 - 5:54 pm: | |
Dave:
"It ain't over until its over"
credited to Yogi Berra
 |
Joancrystal
| | Posted on Friday, February 23, 2001 - 8:34 pm: | |
I would keep this section active at least until the end of the appeal period for filing for a County review. Then, I might consider extending the active period further if there are additional developments at that time: such as progress with Mr. Rice's bill. Even once the revaluations have been finalized, we still may need a separate section to post information on how to help people cope with the changes that will result. |
Tracks
| | Posted on Monday, February 26, 2001 - 10:30 am: | |
Mr. Rice's Bill is a bad bill and I hope everyone understands that a bill that helps one community short term and tries to do that retroactively is not a good thing. The bill is unfair to S. Orange. The bill would be bad for Maplewood if Newark is allowed to use it. And the bill would be bad for Maplewood in 10 or 15 years from now when S. Orange does another reval.
It is a shortsighted reaction from a politician who refuses to tackle the real problem of property taxes in NJ. |
Aruba18
| | Posted on Monday, March 5, 2001 - 5:06 pm: | |
Dave-
Since the reval is still such a hot topic, why not let it be until things die down? It's much easier to seek the "thread" if it hasn't been archived!
Just a suggestion - - - |
Pcg
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 6, 2001 - 11:32 am: | |
I prefer the old chronological listing of topics. New topics always showed up at the top, old topics that I choose to ignore fell to the bottom. |
Eliz
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 7, 2001 - 10:26 am: | |
I prefer the old listing as well - it seems there are a lot of "dead threads" under the other topics that could be archived. |
Librarylady
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 7, 2001 - 11:33 am: | |
Another vote for chronological listing(as opposed to the Dewey Decimal) . A lot less complicated, IMHO. |
Dave
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 7, 2001 - 1:26 pm: | |
In a survey we found that 58% liked the new format and 37% liked the old format. |
Ted
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 7, 2001 - 4:50 pm: | |
Dave,
in the "new messages" area, you used to be able to specify new messages since a specific date/time. Anyway to get that functionality back? |
Gibby
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 7, 2001 - 7:35 pm: | |
I vote for the old system for the same reasons Pcg does too. |