| Author |
Message |
    
vermontgolfer
Supporter
Username: Vermontgolfer
Post Number: 480
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 10:23 pm: | 
|
Spitz,
Let's hope for the impossible and think that our 'leaders', I use that term loosely, will realize the importance of what people are saying. Unfortunately, I will be out of town for the next meeting, but I'm sure our friends will continue to make themselves heard.
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4407
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 10:26 pm: |
|
Elizabethm
THANK you for going out to collect signatures.
I just sent you a Privateline about what to do with them. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2007
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 8:08 am: |
|
550...
Here's the link to the online petition again so it doesn't get lost
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4409
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 8:11 am: |
|
I am completely blown away by the comments being left by people. People have implied that there are just a few "malcontents" on MOL, but here we have a HUGE number of people across the entire Village that are just as sick and tired of the obscene taxes & fiscal irresponsibility.
Are the Trustees THAT BLIND to ignore so many people? |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2008
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 8:15 am: |
|
Not blind MHD.......
There are other words that would describe why they are ignoring a large group of residents, but blind isn't one of them.
|
Just The Aunt
Supporter
Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5636
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 8:22 am: |
|
Yeah -
Ignorant and Self Absorbed; for starters... |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4411
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 9:48 am: |
|
Dave - I LOVE the new banner ad for the petition that is appearing on MOL! |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 482
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 9:58 am: |
|
The BOT will do whatever it can get away with. Look at the 3-4 million in new debt for change orders for SOPAC they approved Monday night. They have arranged to funnel $14 million in borrowed money, over half of the town's annual budget, to Arnell Construction which was appointed without competition after they threw out honest bids for the construction costs of SOPAC.
Sign this petition, SO, if you are tired of vampires using borrowed millions to pay their friends and subverting procedures that protect the public.
Here it is: http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2019
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 10:56 am: |
|
567
If the trustees are reading the petition, the will see comments such as
Tau is the wrong priority for the Village
Put the money into the schools
Repair the library
Improper use of tax dollars
Leave a recently finished area alone
Is there no trustee with common sense
Fix our streets
These comments are pulled from the most recent page of the petition...
Each person wants to be heard. Each person is asking that our tax dollars be used for basically the one same thing...upkeep/repair/maintenance of our town.
Is it so hard to see?
Our own State is clawing back every dollar it can. Yet "we" seem to feel that we have unlimited resources. borrow, borrow, borrow, borrow and when the money is called forward, heck, let's borrow more.
A trustee said on Monday that "they" weren't to blame for the state of affairs, it was from prior trustees. Yes, I agree that a lot of this STARTED prior to the last 2 years, but they are responsible for allowing it to continue.
I feel that there are people on the Board who do have issues with certainly things happening, I only wish that they could be heard over the others..
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4418
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 3:26 pm: |
|
SOParents,
Several weeks ago, a large majority of the comments left on the Online Petition were sent via email to every member of the Board of Trustees. Only Trustee Rosner bothered to respond.
Since that time, the number of signatures and comments has virtually doubled. Perhaps the comments need to be re-sent to the Trustees again.
On a side note, as the signatures on the petitions grow, many people are only leaving one signature per household. Please tell your friends and neighbors collecting signatures to ensure that ALL voting age adults in each household sign the petitions. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2045
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 7:31 am: |
|
Almost 600 people have signed online now. This is over DOUBLE the amount that had signed it before the BOT meeting on Monday.
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
bets
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 23567
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 9:03 am: |
|
I hope anyone that signed the online petition also signs the paper version. Privateline me if you want me to bring it to you. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4422
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 9:34 am: |
|
For those of you collecting paper signatures, please send me a Privateline or Email, so we can get a rough tally of how many more signatures are out there & so we know who to pick up the petitions from. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2086
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 2:16 pm: |
|
627 |
Mike Matterly
Citizen
Username: Ittakesavillage
Post Number: 67
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 3:22 pm: |
|
MHD,
If you and say (another person ran together for BOT - as a unit), how many votes could we (oops) realistically garner from MOL (South Orange) residents?
MM |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4423
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Counting me & my wife? I'd say one. LOL!!! |
noracoombs
Citizen
Username: Noracoombs
Post Number: 158
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 5:43 pm: |
|
bets: I thought we were supposed to sign EITHER the online or paper one--not both. Does it matter which one we've signed, as long as we've signed one or the other? |
noracoombs
Citizen
Username: Noracoombs
Post Number: 159
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 5:44 pm: |
|
P.S. 629 online!!  |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4424
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 14, 2006 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Nora,
The hardcopy & online petition names will be merged & duplicates will be purged, so no worries if people have signed both. Just make sure people sign, including all adults per household. |
Pdg
Citizen
Username: Pdg
Post Number: 1006
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 15, 2006 - 10:51 am: |
|
637 on-line!
MHD, please be careful not to delete true non-dupes, such as a "junior" with the same name at the same address. We need every signature we can get.
I have six hardcopy signatures and the prmoise from several more that they'll sign online. I'll try to get a couple more and will get them to you Monday. It's not 20, but I asked everyone to tell their SO friends about the petition. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2139
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 6:59 pm: |
|
661 |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 715
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 8:30 pm: |
|
We will have Bill Calabrese cast vote 666.
jd |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 500
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, July 17, 2006 - 7:36 am: |
|
People I talked to this weekend about it are pretty disgusted with the current BOT's follies. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2149
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Monday, July 17, 2006 - 7:51 am: |
|
675 -
Here is the link: http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html
I have been talking to residents (Longer term and those that have moved here in the last 2-4 years)and a lot have been saying that they have never really "bothered" with how the town is run etc, nor voting, but recently they have been hearing what happens, which in turn has opened their eyes to the state of the downtown/library/village hall etc. They are now watching every move. I hope that will mean they will vote next time too. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 503
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, July 17, 2006 - 12:51 pm: |
|
682 - Thanks, Dave, for the banner across the top of the SO Specific board. Much easier to find and use! Another color besides black might make it slightly more appealing or easier to notice, but maybe others feel differently. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2166
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 7:03 am: |
|
696 -
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
Crazy_quilter
Citizen
Username: Crazy_quilter
Post Number: 369
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 9:58 am: |
|
do we need to reach 1000? or 2000? how close are we? |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4429
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 10:27 am: |
|
CQ,
According to the following videoclip, we need 2500 signatures: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gnafg9ks0g
However, I am not sure that number is correct and if you watch the rest of the meeting there was quite a bit of uncertainty of the actual number required.
Also note that the online petition represents only a fraction of all signatures that have been collected and many more are still coming. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1848
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 10:54 am: |
|
I guess only 2499 more signatures are required to put a referundum on the ballot of whether to increase the open space tax by 1 cent.
Edited to add: Maybe Eric can explain the difference between the two cases at the next BOT meeting. |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 652
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 2:39 pm: |
|
Spitz, the difference is that either the BOT can by their passage to place a question as a referendum or by petition.
I look forward to the wording they will use for the referendum to increase the Open Space TAX.
|
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2190
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 12:21 pm: |
|
720
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
Flying_char
Citizen
Username: Flying_char
Post Number: 119
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 7:15 pm: |
|
Is there a deadline for the signatures?
I am trying to get a couple of S.O friends I have to sign!
|
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2221
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - 7:57 pm: |
|
Sign away...!! |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1612
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 20, 2006 - 9:08 am: |
|
This may have be discussed, but after signing (and mr. doula signed as well), we each received fat envelopes with literature & pictures...it clearly must have cost some money & the postage alone was quite expensive...ironic - what a great way to approach someone who has said they think the expense of something is excessive. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4443
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 20, 2006 - 9:35 am: |
|
Flying_char - People should continue to sign until the BOT realizes the magnitude of the opposition to this expenditure of OUR tax dollars.
Doulamomma - Yes...this was discussed here in the "TONY SMITH SCULPTURE FACTS" thread. |
Just The Aunt
Supporter
Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5702
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 20, 2006 - 11:00 am: |
|
MHD
What is the current combined total of online and hard copy signatures? |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2301
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, July 22, 2006 - 7:19 am: |
|
MHD - When do you want the hard copy signatures handed over to you? |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2343
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 11:40 am: |
|
739
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
Nuff Sayid
Citizen
Username: Parkingsux
Post Number: 449
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 11:45 am: |
|
"completely absurd and financially irresponsible"
I wonder what the trustees think when they see so many comments on point!!!! |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 529
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 12:16 pm: |
|
They think, we better hurry up and rush this through so it can't be undone or reversed. At least, that's what they say, even when untrue. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4457
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 3:05 pm: |
|
Latest "news":
I have received correspondence from Village Hall stating that the town attorney has determined that the petitions are not legally binding, regardless of how many are collected!
In addition, I have been informed that the on-line petition is not "valid"!
So, it appears that if you do not want at least $250,000 of YOUR tax dollars spent for a sculpture, the only way to make a difference is to show up in person tonight & SPEAK UP TONIGHT! |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 658
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 6:31 pm: |
|
Or one of our Trustees can place it on the agenda for discussion and vote. This would be the same process that was done for the additional Open Space Trust Fund tax.
It would be interesting to hear the opinions of our Trustees. The ballot question is non-binding but would provide a sense of where the public stands on the issue. |
Just The Aunt
Supporter
Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 5730
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 24, 2006 - 7:55 pm: |
|
MHD
The only reason they have come to that conclusion is they know it would be no problem to get that many signatures. Why then did Taylor tell people at the BOT meeting to bring them X amount of signautes if there was a problem. Don't you think Matthews should have said something thing?
Are you going to take his word on this or attempt to present them anyway? This way it is on tape the BOT refused. Make sure the public sees copies of this when it's election time. Also, I'm sure Howard, Joel, you or someone will look into this.
I think this should be put on the ballet in 2007. But, because we all know what the outcome will be, 80 percent or so AGAINST taxes being spent on the sculpture, you know it won't happen. Can't anyone find a reason to force this into the Courts? |
jayjay
Citizen
Username: Jayjayp
Post Number: 736
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 2:30 pm: |
|
I still am not clear about the funding of this sculpture. As I understand it, at the last BOT meeting the town's obligation went from a minimum of $250,000 to a maximum of $170,000. What I did not hear is what the Tony Smith Sculpture Committee is paying the town. In my opinion, they should pay the whole $170,000 as well as any overages.
I'd also like to know how the project cost went from $410,000 to $170,000, and why the Committee which had orginally pledged to give $160,000 to the project now can't fund the whole thing. An extra $10,000 shouldn't be hard for them to get from the project benefactors if it has the support they claim. Their part of the funding should not go from $160,000 to $0, which seems to be the case.
Until the money situation is resolved, this petition needs to be kept alive!
http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html |
Pdg
Citizen
Username: Pdg
Post Number: 1106
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 4:27 pm: |
|
JayJay, No one has clearly stated a precise new total for the project at the new location. That said, I believe I heard the Tau people say that they expected to spend approximately $60K more, above the "already spent" $170K, and if that is an accurate guess the new total would be about $230K.
The impression I got is that the Tau people seem to think they are doing South Orange a really big favor by letting the village off the hook for the $250K the BOT apparently agreed to spend in writing - I suppose they think they could force the town to pay for the entire project if it will be less than $250K! Maybe if our BOT had more thoughtful legal advice, they would have committed to a percentage of the total, with a cap not to exceed $X. (Perhaps because they actually thought the money was coming from a GRANT - i.e., "free money" right? - not much thought went into protecting the local taxpayers at all.)
In the original Sloan Street proposal, the entire project was supposed to be $410K. Our $250K would have represented 61% of the total. If the new project is to be $230K total, then the town's portion - if we accept the old terms which I believe we should not - would be a maximum of $140,244, which is 61% of $230K. That would leave $89,756 for the Tau people to contribute.
Where I have a huge problem is the percentage split. If this is a "partnership" between a community and a foundation, as the Tau people repeatedly proclaim, why isn't it a 50%/50% split?
They can't really count the supposed "value" of the rights to build Tau, because if they hadn't gotten that donated by the TS Estate, the town never would have agreed to the project at all. Plus, that donation was from the TS Estate and not the Foundation. If anything, the Tau people want the sculpture MORE than the BOT, so if any party's portion should exceed 50%, it should be the TS Foundation's portion.
But, for the sake of compromise and in the interest of ending the nastiness, I suggest that if there were an agreement on the part of the Foundation to pay 50% of the costs associated with getting Tau fabricated, brought here and installed in Meadowlands Park (if approved) I think/hope people would not be interested in protesting the project any further. I know I would be satisfied, but of course I don't pretend to speak for everyone originally opposed to the Tau project.
And by installation, I do NOT mean placement of lighting and benches and any other dressing the Foundation and it's donors may want or desire. Just getting it safely installed.
A separate question that comes to mind, that someone with a background in fundraising might be able to answer is, what about the fundraising the Foundation has already done and the funds they have bragged about already raising? Aren't they required to spend the funds raised on the specific project they claimed needed the funds raised? If they have raised $100K in the name of getting Tau installed to date, aren't they required to use those funds for that purpose, or if not, return funds to donors? |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4490
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 8:35 pm: |
|
PDG,
Actually, from the numerous responses I have received from people so far, the consensus is that people OVERWHELMINGLY do not want ANY tax dollars spent on this project.
I will continue to advertise...uh, I mean solicit public input from people over the next few weeks and will make an announcement in the coming weeks about whether or not to continue the fight. In the meantime, I ask that everyone please send me your thoughts via Privateline or email at notaxesfortau@gmail.com so an informed decision can be made and presented. |
Nuff Sayid
Citizen
Username: Parkingsux
Post Number: 460
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 9:12 pm: |
|
I hope one of the trustees has the gumption to address our tax trauma index as featured in the Sunday Star Ledger. It speaks to Essex County residents as the most traumatized collectively in the state. South Orange ranks with the highest among them. It's a sad commentary on our local politicians past and present and the political machine of unbridled corruption.
|
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1865
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:19 pm: |
|
What was South Orange's score on the index (Maplewood scored 89 out of 100) and where did South Orange rank? I didn't get the Star Ledger and the tax trauma index isn't online. Thanks. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 567
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 12:19 am: |
|
Ditto of Spitz, Nuff Sayid. Where is the article; is it online? Glanced online earlier and didn't see it.
Thanks. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4491
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 7:56 am: |
|
Here is the article from the Star Ledger: http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1154234155227780.xml?starledger? ntop&coll=1
The article itself doesn't mention South Orange specifically, but it does say there are only 42 towns where the average tax bill tops $10,000.
The tax trauma index showed South Orange with a tax trauma index of 89. (one of the most traumatized) |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 568
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Saw the article but not the index. Can someone post the index? |
Montrose13
Citizen
Username: Montrose13
Post Number: 41
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 2:53 pm: |
|
South Orange trauma index 89 just like Maplewood and many other Essex towns. |
