| Author |
Message |
    
Dave
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 5, 2001 - 9:49 am: |     |
(thanks to Joancrystal for question)
Do you think the town is in need of reunification as a result of the aftermath of revaluation? If so, what steps would you take to implement it? |
Admin
| | Posted on Saturday, June 16, 2001 - 6:59 am: | |
SCOTT KISCH:
The principle reason I have taken a consistent, public position on the reval setting it aside - is that I believe we need a one-year cooling-off period. Im not interested in challenging the TCs decision to conduct the reval Im not that cynical, and I DO believe in a progressive tax system.
However, the anecdotal evidence of ambiguity & randomness in the process, and a complete, in my mind, disregard of market conditions led me to conclude that undeserving homeowners were getting screwed.
Too many people who I care about and who care about this town in too many diverse and varying neighborhoods, told me how frustrated they were with the entire process and the performance of the township committee under pressure. In the end, that is what compelled me to pursue this undertaking.
To deal with it, we simply need to identify those things that bind us all together arts, cultural, recreation, sports and family activities ... and stage a couple town-sponsored events.
Also, children can be a powerful force. Parents often find themselves in new, awkward territory because their kids lead them there. In the process, they often interact w/other parents they would not meet otherwise. The community events we might have considered could have been staged to encourage this accidental interaction.
Absent of that, I would have deputized all of the neighborhood association presidents and other civic leaders to develop, together, a message of healing and take that message back to their constituencies.
Also, I would make a public appeal to the less-than-zealous members of the various factions to throw down their swords and rhetoric to come together to discuss their differences.
Another consideration would be to enlist the support of the clergy in town with hopes that a quiet, subtle message would have a calming effect. Faith, in its many, varying forms, is another thread that binds the community together.
But, in the end, I expected stronger leadership from FOUR members of the TC. Three TC members live in the Jefferson area and a fourth lives on Plymouth Ave. In the beginning, I was hopeful that they would sow the seeds of conciliation in the outraged portions of town. Nothing.
Was it lack of courage? Lack of communication skills? Lack of credibility with their own neighbors? I dont know. When we needed leadership, we got silence.
As a result, I believe they left their colleague, Vic DeLuca, out to hang and he became the punching bag for the reval. That wasnt fair. |
Admin
| | Posted on Saturday, June 16, 2001 - 7:00 am: | |
DAVID HUEMER:
I oppose the lawsuit to set aside the revaluation, and I don't believe its desired outcome will lead to a positive or fairer result in our town.
There is real unity among Maplewood residents I have spoken to about the crushing property tax burden and the need for property tax relief. The conversations have been a remarkable affirmation for me about how forward looking and clearheaded our residents are about this difficult issue. Their concern is, correctly, centered on the high absolute level of property taxes and New Jersey's archaic system of school funding. In conversations with members of Maplewood Fair Taxation Committee, I have urged them to use their organization to address the real inequities in tax burdens and state aid between municipalities. All Maplewood would benefit, and all residents could rally behind, such an effort. |
|