| Author |
Message |
    
eliz
Citizen
Username: Eliz
Post Number: 503
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 11:17 am: |     |
What is the reason for sewer taxes being billed outside of property taxes? Wouldn't it be cheaper and more efficient (money saved on mailing bills, processing payments, etc) to roll it into our property taxes?
Same question for garbage pick up - since we are obliged to use Waste Management couldn't the town negotiate a reduced rate (saving WM the cost of billing and collecting from thousands of individual homes) and pay Waste Management directly for garbage pickup?
Just curious. |
ReallyTrying
Citizen
Username: Reallytrying
Post Number: 36
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 12:22 pm: | |
At first, I thought your question made sense. But then it occurred to me that the town doesn't want to be -- and shouldn't be -- a bill collector for private enterprises. If you add the garbage pickup, why not also add the water bill and cable bill and PSE&G bill? (I'm trying to think of servces for which we have no choice.) Then the town would have to add staff to handle all of the bill tracking, late paymnets, etc., and then our taxes would go up (again). |
eliz
Citizen
Username: Eliz
Post Number: 504
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 12:26 pm: | |
The town already bills us for the sewer so they are already the bill collector. As for garbage - it's a set amount (your water bill varies, as does your PSEG, and not everyone has cable).
The town is already a bill collector (taxes) - I'm not talking about a separate bill - but including it as part of our taxes. |
mayhewdrive
Real Name
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 210
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 12:44 pm: | |
I've always speculated it was to "shield" our politicians from taking responsibility for increases. It's easier to say your municipal taxes "only" went up 4% (without mentioning that your sewer tax went up 12% and your garbage "tax" went up 8%).
Numbers above are purely fictional and just an example. |
sac
Citizen
Username: Sac
Post Number: 770
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 2:32 pm: | |
One advantage of having it built into the taxes is that the property tax is a deductible item for Income tax purposes, while the sewer, garbage, etc. bills are not deductible if billed separately.
However, if I were on the TC right now, I wouldn't be adding anything discretionary to the tax bill, would you? |
Joan
Citizen
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 1592
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 4:16 pm: | |
The property tax is based on the assessed value of the property. The utility bill is based on the use of service. This may be a standard cross the board fee for some bills or based on amount used for others.
Why should people living in homes assessed at a higher amount automatically subsidize utility use for those paying lower property taxes? We would still need to have separate bills sent out by the town for each utility service in order to maintain fair billing for all. Shift to the town as bill collector in such circumstances just doesn't make sense. |
eliz
Citizen
Username: Eliz
Post Number: 505
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 8:06 pm: | |
Joan
That's not what I was suggesting - simple math could solve that problem.
Let me repeat once again - sewer taxes are already collected by the town .... why the extra expense of a separate bill????/
|
Joan
Citizen
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 1593
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:20 pm: | |
Eliz:
Because the math required to compute the sewer bill is different from the math required to compute the real property tax. I would think that it is less expensive to generate separate sewer tax bills for every property than it would be to compute the exact amount of sewer tax required for each property and add it on to the real property tax. |
#9Dream
Citizen
Username: 9dream
Post Number: 325
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 3:24 pm: | |
Other towns have garbage pickup and the sewer tax included in the property tax. In fact, friends of mine are quite surprised when they hear we have to pay a separate fee for the sewer. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 43
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2003 - 7:14 pm: | |
#9dream:
Please research the history of the Joint Commission and its unique role in providing sewer sewer services. Over the years it has been a model for the rest of the country and has given us very low fees comparatively. Unfortunately it has become a political football in recent years. Best it stays separate so we can see the increase.
Other Township services have either been reduced or are resident-fee provided. This attrition has ocurred with frequency over the past 8 years. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 16
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:34 am: | |
The sewer bill should be included in our regular taxes. A simple algorithm in the computer could be used to add the right amount to each property's tax bill, and the amount spent on this could be broken out in the mailings we receive from the town so we can monitor that increase as a separate line item. It would just be a heck of a lot more convenient. Garbage is more complex, since people have different levels of service with summer leaf pickup etc.... |
johnny
Citizen
Username: Johnny
Post Number: 656
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 1:34 am: | |
Could have something to do with timing. The sewer bill is collected once a year. If it were collected with the taxes it would be in four installments. Perhaps tracking and allocating the four installments over the year is more time consuming and expensive than sending one bill per year. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 100
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 4:20 pm: | |
How much do the sewer taxes usually end up being? I haven't moved into town yet.
Tom Reingold |
xavier67
Citizen
Username: Xavier67
Post Number: 185
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 5:04 pm: | |
$150 a year. Welcome to Maplewood, Tom. If you're moving here before the summer ends, consider joining one of the best amenities our town has to offer: the community pool. Privateline me if you want details. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 49
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 7:23 pm: | |
OK - the Reason:
The Federal funding for the Secondary Waste Treatment Plant (circa 1975) mandated a separate sewer use charge to citizens. The Joint Commission is responsible for providing this service for 11 communities which traditionally have benefitted from excellent service at a low cost. As I mentionned in my 4/30 post above, all should research the 100 year history of the Joint Commission and how it runs. It ran very well until 7 years ago when finally it became a political football. How - J Davenport, Eliz and #9 Dream, might ask? Here's how. Circa 1995, the $26 million surplus/reserve for unexpected contingicies was mostly rebated to the municipalities to meet their budgets and hold the the local tax rate down. This was an un- precedented political decision. And where there was, but one attorney representing the Joint Commission, for slightly under $100,00 a year, there are now four attorneys consuming over $500,00 a year. another political plum for insiders!
For your information, we have a Township Committee representative, Mr Ryan, on the Joint Commission. It is a paid position! Over $5,000 a year. The salary should be disclosed and be known.
All municipal representatives are paid. It is the fairly recent change in make-up of the municipal representatives which have turned the formerly well-run responsible Joint Commission into a political football regarding higher rates and hidden rebates to local municipalities to hold down tax increases..
This hasn't been an issue until now, but Mr Ryan certainly made it a "feeding at the public trough" issue in the now legendary and infamous King Bob attack brochures against a widely respected and admired mayor. A mayor who professionally knew water treatment well and who had the respect of all in that profession. In fact the current treatment plant is named after him in honor of his leadership.
It's either arrogance or cowardice the Mr Ryan, our representative on the Joint Commission (and who reads these threads) hasn't commented. If anything, this comment is intended to draw Mr Ryan out of the closet. Jerry, pls comment.
Last, I have gazed into my crystal ball - somewhat cloudy- and see a committeman whose name rhymes with rumor, who is looking towards replacing Mr Ryan and getting the Joint commission salary.
J Davenport - I hpoe this answers your issue, at last. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 20
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 12:33 pm: | |
Thank you "Reflective," that is interesting and helpful, and you obviously know more about the history of this than I do. And sorry I had not seen this post right away. Probably you are right and we have to keep paying this annoying bill separate from the rest. But does the law actually mandate a separate bill, rather than collection through taxes? That would seem to be a separate issue from the question of how the joint commission runs (e.g. how many lawyers, are positions paid etc.). And I can't comment on that since I don't know the reasons for the changes, or what representatives do. However, I will say that all our town committee members (and Board of Ed members), whatever their political stripes, do a heck of a lot of work for nothing. So if Ryan picks up $5 for yet more public work he does in addition to all this other volunteering, I have no problem with that. I think political positions in NJ, especially at the state level, ought to be more highly paid in fact. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 21
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 12:34 pm: | |
Thank you "Reflective," that is interesting and helpful, and you obviously know more about the history of this than I do. And sorry I had not seen this post right away. Probably you are right and we have to keep paying this annoying bill separate from the rest of our property taxes. But does the law actually mandate a separate bill, rather than collection through taxes? That would seem to be a separate issue from the question of how the joint commission runs (e.g. how many lawyers, are positions paid etc.). And I can't comment on that since I don't know the reasons for the changes, or what representatives do. However, I will say that all our town committee members (and Board of Ed members), whatever their political stripes, do a heck of a lot of work for nothing. So if Ryan picks up $5 for yet more public work he does in addition to all this other volunteering, I have no problem with that. I think political positions in NJ, especially at the state level, ought to be more highly paid in fact. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 22
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 12:35 pm: | |
Thank you "Reflective," that is interesting and helpful, and you obviously know more about the history of this than I do. And sorry I had not seen this post right away. Probably you are right and we have to keep paying this annoying bill separate from the rest of our property taxes. But does the law actually mandate a separate bill, rather than collection through taxes? That would seem to be a separate issue from the question of how the joint commission runs (e.g. how many lawyers, are positions paid etc.). And I can't comment on that since I don't know the reasons for the changes, or what representatives do. However, I will say that all our town committee members (and Board of Ed members), whatever their political stripes, do a heck of a lot of work for nothing. So if Ryan picks up $5k for yet more public work he does in addition to all this other volunteering, I have no problem with that. I think political positions in NJ, especially at the state level, ought to be more highly paid in fact. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 23
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 12:37 pm: | |
Hmmm, somehow all my revised versions of this post got posted, though I only meant to post the last one... |
sac
Citizen
Username: Sac
Post Number: 808
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 12:46 pm: | |
You still have time to delete the unwanted ones. I think you get 30 minutes after posting by mistake to edit or delete a post. |
Adam D Andres
Citizen
Username: Tinhead
Post Number: 6
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 9, 2003 - 10:45 pm: | |
you know maplewood used do things for the people now it's all about the money
so SHOW ME THE MONEY |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page