| Author |
Message |
    
Admin
| | Posted on Monday, October 22, 2001 - 10:16 pm: |     |
Questions for David Huemer:
1. In the spring, all three Maplewood members of the Board of School Estimate voted "no" on the "Special Question" proposed by the Superintendent and the Board of Education. If you had been a member of the BOSE at that time, how would you have voted and why?
2. In its latest report on Maplewood, Moody's Investor Service stated that the financial outlook for Maplewood was "negative" and that it "expects
that further tax increases or strict expenditure cutbacks will be necessary in order for the township to achieve balanced operations in the future." What policies, if any, of the Township Committee would you change in order to
avoid this prediction?
3. Your campaign literature states that you favor additional affordable senior citizen housing. How would you propose to finance this, keeping in
mind the issue of property taxes? |
Davidhuemer
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 6, 2001 - 12:49 am: | |
1) I would have voted "Yes". I stated this publicly during the primary and haven't changed my mind.
By law, any staff positions included in a separate question have to be new positions. I felt all three positions included in the separate question--Special Education Department Chair at Columbia High School, assistant principal at Jefferson School, and a district wide data manager-- made good use of our tax dollars (the tax impact of the separate question was about 14 dollars per resident). The first two positions would have helped our school district cope with a persistent national shortage of elementary school principals and special education directors. One way exemplary school districts meet this shortage is by creating positions one level below. This serves to: keep good employees, have a ready talent pool to fill vacancies quickly, and avoid interim and transitory periods in leadership that can disrupt schools and children's learning. The data manager would have helped decrease the lag between collecting data and having it available, thereby making it more useful.
I believe that the Board of Education and the Superintendent make good efforts to control costs. We spend about what a typical New Jersey school district spends for each pupil, while our cost of living and program requirements exceed an average district. To credibly ask for an accounting of program success requires that you trust your staff or Board of Education to correctly assess what they need to succeed and giving it to them.
2) I disagree with the alarmist nature of this question and the taking of quotes out of context.
Moody's issued its report in October 2000 with two concerns--not having a chief financial officer and the Township's ability to raise taxes. Maplewood hired a chief financial officer. We know that the Township Committee raised taxes. Overall, Moody's had no doubts about Maplewood's ability to service its debt. It also pointed to an above average rate of principal repayment (61% over 10 years). Our debt service will steadily decrease, both in absolute and as a percentage of the budget, over the foreseeable futre.
I am the only candidate who has made a specific suggestion on what to eliminate from the capital budget. It may be inappropriate to capitalize $600,000 worth of computer equipment, as is currently proposed. Computer equipment depreciates steadily, making leasing more attractive. As a member of the Township Committee, I would carefully review the capitalization of technology spending and pull items off the capital when appropriate.
Candidates or elected officials should not claim that we suffer from "excessive bonding" without advocating one of the two alternatives to bonding-- either raising taxes and paying for projects immediately or eliminating current items in the capital budget.
3) Affordable senior housing is usually built with a non-profit sponsor and money from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD reimburses virtually all the costs a local municipality might incur in the process of building that housing.
The Senior Center at 564 Irvington Avenue makes a payment in lieu of taxes based on its rents. Last year the payment was $101,000, the equivalent of 17-23 single family homes in that area and without the associated school costs of single family homes. From a property tax perspective, therefore, it could make very good sense to build affordable senior housing. |
|