| Author |
Message |
    
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1475
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 11:35 am: | 
|
Mark,
Many thanks for reconstructing this for us. Best explanation I've seen yet of how this project crept quietly into our town budget. Don't apologize for the length...every bit is needed to explain this mess.
To quote your conclusion:
"I wish we had been given the facts up front. I wish we had not voted on each piece of the project separately to be pieced together like some sort of puzzle after the fact. I would like to have these discussions before the votes.
I am sorry it has all played out the way it has. It is not fair to the volunteers who have worked hard to bring the sculpture to the village. It is not fair to the residents who are now footing most of the bill without having had a chance to voice their opinion first. It is not fair to the BOT who clearly by the comments made by a couple of trustees were not fully aware of how the project was to be funded. I expect to be given accurate information in a timely manner.
Quite frankly, this is a perfect example of what should never happen again and a lesson for all of us to use for the future."
http://www.nj.com/weblogs/rosner/
Thanks again for being willing to reexamine this process and what went wrong. I can live with the project going wrong IF you and the other Trustees can figure out how to not have this sort of creeping incrementalism cause us to make costly mistakes on much larger projects like SOPAC and downtown redevelopment.
I can live with Tau, but I'm very concerned that our town's taste for incrementalism and back room discussions is going to cost us many millions of dollars and/or real public debate on Valley Street.
Again, thank you for actually being willing to communicate with the consituents, rather than simply telling us we are wrong, or haven't lived here long enough to understand (as some of our trustees routinely do). |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 292
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 11:38 am: |
|
If you can live with it, does that include your paying my share of taxes for it?
jd |
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1476
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 11:54 am: |
|
No Joel, I'm not offering you tax relief. I'd still rather see the tainted deal put on hold, examined and potentially revised. But I also can see that it is unlikely to be, given that fabrication may be underway. So I'm eager for our more thoughtful trustees, like Mark, to apply the lessons of Tau to the much larger projects in the town.
I'm begining to suspect that it may be time to move on to larger battles. Very interesting things are happening in Village land acquisition, planning board, etc., and I fear that the Tau debate can become a smoke screen for them. |
LibraryLady(ncjanow)
Supporter
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 3244
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:04 pm: |
|
Susan, why are you always so eloquent, logical and right on the money? It's posters like you (and Mark and others ) that make reading and debating on MOL so informative, educational and helpful. Thank you for your reasoned approach. I find myself agreeing with you and your style even when we disagree on the topic. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1657
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:08 pm: |
|
Ditto. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 236
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:24 pm: |
|
Thoughtful trustees are important. Ones willing to admit their errors are as well. And ones willing to tend to the consequences of their errors are equally important. I am thankful that Trustee Rosner has thought enough and conversed enough to admit error on his own part and the part of the BOT. I really hope he continues in his trajectory of conscience and now deals with the lingering harmful consequences of his and the other trustees' errors. To do so would mean stopping Tau, stopping the bleeding now so that the town has time to recover itself. In this pause it could take a long, hard look at itself in many of the ways susan1014 mentioned and in other related ways as well. But if there is no will to deal with Tau in the way it should be dealt with, what hope do we have for things of more mamouth proportions? Tau can be fabricated at any time. Whatever it may cost to break the fabrication contract is still less than what is proposed. It should be viewed as the purchase price of building trust in the town. This would be a better investment at this time than the price of Tau which will costs us loads of money but much more than that.
Trustee Rosner, do you know if the fabrication cost has been paid, or any portion of it yet? If so, who paid what amount?
|
SO1969
Citizen
Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 253
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:26 pm: |
|
I echo susan1014's appreciation for Mark being willing to communicate.
Unfortunately, as she alludes to, we have many chickens coming home to roost resulting from back room, incrementalist decision making. The consequences, in lost tax revenues, poorly designed and sited buildings, open ended funding commitments/subsidies and overly generous PILOTs, and architectural heritage destroyed, are so large that:
WE CAN'T ALLOW TAU TO BE BUILT ON SLOANE STREET WITH TAXPAYER FUNDING. PERIOD.
The bond was for streets and sidewalks.
Show me one - I mean 1, any one - neighborhood in our village that doesn't have a need for improvements to both streets and sidewalks, because I've yet to find one.
Mark, the volunteers can continue to do what volunteers across the country do - they keep working. And the donors can do what donors across the country do - they keep giving. Until they can fund it themselves.
As to location, the estate and this small band have absolutely no right to dictate how the focal point of our village should look. If they want it on Sloane Street, they should put it to a ballot.
You Trustees - and you must take responsibility, not just blame others - have FAILED to communicate to the general public about the appearance and the location of this sculpture. Put the renderings showing the context and appearance in the Gaslight already - or better yet, use Bailey's photoshop image and put it on the website, or don't bother running for office again. PERIOD.
The Valley Street development/Millenium proposal is a last ditch effort for Calabrese, et al, to cover up their financial bungling and sweetheart deals. The huge mistakes over the last several years are starting to hit the rate base...they want the $3mm PILOT to bail them out. |
SoOrLady
Citizen
Username: Soorlady
Post Number: 3195
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 12:57 pm: |
|
With all due respect to Rising & 1969, Mark has been the only Trustee to question the funding. He has been in the minority for some time on a number of issues so don't lump him in with the others.
As far as I know, fabrication has not begun on TAU, so this would be the time to stop it. Ms. Arnedt also mentioned to me that the fabricators have agreed to store it, without charge.
I'd love to put this issue to rest - as susan1014 says, it provides a wonderful smoke screen for other, far more important issues. |
Lizziecat
Citizen
Username: Lizziecat
Post Number: 1144
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:09 pm: |
|
I also would like to thank Mr. Rosner for his informative blog. I appreciate his willingness to communicate with us. However, I don't agree that we must go forward with the statue. I don't feel that we should have to live with it. It seems to me that a substantial number of South Orange taxpayers have voiced their opposition to this statue, enough so that at the very least it should be put on hold until a determination can be made as to how many people want this statue project to proceed and how many don't. We would need to take real polls of the residents, perhaps going house to house. We would need to make sure that everyone was informed as to exactly how much this statue is going to cost and where the money is to come from. And perhaps we need an impartial, respected outside agency to conduct these polls, not some so-called "professional pollster" with an axe to grind, wh polls only her friends. |
SO1969
Citizen
Username: Bklyn1969
Post Number: 254
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:15 pm: |
|
I appreciate that...however, on his blog he reaches the wrong conclusion.
In addition, I haven't seen him advocate for greater public disclosure of what Tau will look like, where it will be situated, how it is being paid for and how much it is costing. He has done an excellent job of disseminating information via MOL on the latter points and for that I am grateful, but it doesn't reach the general public.
If he pushed for full disclosure, maybe more trustees would question the funding and the decision to move forward.
It's great he recognizes many mistakes were made getting to this point...it is not okay that he thinks we need to move ahead because of all the effort of a small band of volunteers that want to spend money they aren't duly authorized to spend on a luxury item at a time of tremendous fiscal stress and competing ESSENTIAL priorities. |
Pdg
Citizen
Username: Pdg
Post Number: 793
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:17 pm: |
|
It is my understanding that the fabrication HAS begun and that about $100,000 has been spent so far. I don't know WHY that has to be the Village's $100,000 when the TSSP has commited to $160,000! Before it goes any further, let's get this thing STOPPED! BEFORE the demolition of the gazebo and fountain begins on Sloan Street!
Everyone makes mistakes, but intelligent people work to correct them immediately upon discovery of the mistakes!
STOP!
And do NOW what you realize should have been done initially! There really is no excuse not to!
Publish all the details for all residents to see and offer an opportunity to the residents to have some input!
|
Soparents
Citizen
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 118
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 1:20 pm: |
|
Hear hear Pgd,
I had also heard it was being fabricated now....
The BOT has a chance to redeem themselves somewhat.... PUBLISH ALL DETAILS.... GET THE PUBLIC INPUT |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 242
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 4:49 pm: |
|
I just read Trustee Rosner's explanation. Helpful, but a huge question: if the whole sorry affair is so unfair to so many people, why don't you stop it? The contract is not something the town should be part of anyway.
This will never go away unless you and other trustees stop it. Then the town might be able to have the kind of conversation it needs. |
Two Senses
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 428
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 6:18 pm: |
|
mrosner: Your 4/03 blog post is very informative, but begs an obvious question. If the trustees are all part-time volunteers, who clearly must rely on the work, research, and information provided by very well-paid, professional senior staff when making decisions, why don't our trustees publicly complain about the inadequate (at best) and misleading (at worst) information and support received.
You're assessment ("It is not fair to the BOT who clearly by the comments made by a couple of trustees were not fully aware of how the project was to be funded. I expect to be given accurate information in a timely manner. Quite frankly, this is a perfect example of what should never happen again and a lesson for all of us to use for the future.") points an underlying crisis in how our government is managed -- if it already were not so obvious from the SHU dug-out fiasco, stalled New Market nredevelopment, still-born Beifus site redevelopment, Sayid Plaza non-redevelopment, and SOPAC project (now slated to be completed for $15.5 million, rather than the "value-engineered" quoted price of $11+ million, and still seeking $4.5 million from donors a few months before opening day).
Surely there's a better way to run our government.
|
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1661
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 6:27 pm: |
|
Two Senses - That's the first I've heard that the cost of SOPAC is now $15.5 million with $4.5 million to be raised from donations. Previously there was $3 million to be raised from contributions. Can you elaborate? |
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1479
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 6:32 pm: |
|
And have they actually asked anyone for contributions? I'm planning to be a modest donor, but I'm still waiting for a letter. They've missed at least one annual donation cycle with me just for failing to bother to ask.
However, they gave me a pretty refrigerator magnet, so their priorities must be right.
Seriously, $4.5 million is quite a donation goal for a town of this size with no major corporations in it. Wow.
In truth, I have a target annual donation amount in my head for SOPAC, and will split it between my tax bill and an actual charitable donation, based on how deeply the Village ends up having to subsidize it. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1662
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 6:43 pm: |
|
"Surely there must be a better way to run a governement."
Since Sloan St., is there one thing they've gotten right? If you look at every single thing they've touched, including the ones they say that are private (Beifus, Shoprite), I can't think of any. |
IMHO
Citizen
Username: Imho
Post Number: 6
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 - 10:23 pm: |
|
Mr. Rosner:
Thanks for the sad chronology. If you haven't "learned" from ShopRite, Beifus or Sayid Plaza, you ain't gonna learn now. Cut the losses: STOP TAU |
Two Senses
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 429
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 12:24 pm: |
|
SOPAC's stated fundraising goal is $5 million, of which SOPAC claims to have $500K "pledged" -- although, pledges can be paid over many years, including balloon payments at the end of a multi-year pledge period.
Surely there's a better way to run our government.
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page