| Author |
Message |
    
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 3949
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 5:40 pm: | 
|
At the neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, an attempt was made to explain the "water surplus". As I understood it, we pay money to a "water utility" that then returns any excess money to the Village, who then uses that money as part of the normal municipal budget.
I don't understand why the "surplus" money is not returned to US directly. Aren't we simply paying for water that was actually used, just like we pay for Energy used to PSE&G?
The logic provided by Allan Rosen was that by shifting this money to the town, it lowers out taxes because they can then use the money.
However, isn't this like the Federal Government keeping our tax refunds to "lower our taxes"? In both cases, the money represents an overpayment and therefore should be returned director to the payor. The municipal budget should be balanced responsibly and not according to some "kickback" from a water company. |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 395
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 5:59 pm: |
|
You know, Rosen is correct.
The town knows better than us how to spend our money.
Just look around when you are downtown, for the proof.
jd |
Soparents
Citizen
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 225
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:12 pm: |
|
We pay money for water.... There is a surplus. That means that we are being overcharged....
If there is indeed a surplus and the town deems it unfit to return it to the residents, they should not use it "wherever". This was "Water" money and should either be used to check/maintain/correct the quality of the water in this town, or at the very least, since we all have problems with the water, the town should use this surplus to pay all our rentals of water softeners, or the salt used.....
OK - probably not feasible, but you get my drift....
|
Soparents
Citizen
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 226
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Quoting MHD on his water thread and the surplus...
"The logic provided by Allan Rosen was that by shifting this money to the town, it lowers out taxes because they can then use the money...."
Lowers our taxes? Sorry? I thought we were facing a tax increase???? So the surplus doesn't come back to us and our taxes DO go up?
Hmmmm
|
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 397
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:31 pm: |
|
Alan has a PhD from Harvard.
He is, therefore, smarter than I, a City University graduate with only a Juris Doctor degree.
So, I agree with him.
jd |
Soparents
Citizen
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 227
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:42 pm: |
|
 |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 327
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 7:56 pm: |
|
ONe question is whether them keeping the overpayment and not returning it or crediting it to those who overpaid is legal?
Anyone know? Usually an overpayment would be credited to the account that overpaid. Why is this not done? |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 566
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 8:17 pm: |
|
There are two points for the water charges:
1) It provides a surplus (profit)in the Water Utility that goes back to the general fund as revenue (offsetting property taxes)
2) Places a greater burden on those who do not pay property taxes but use large quanties of water - Seton Hall. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 328
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 6:21 pm: |
|
Who sets the rates for water usage? If the rates are higher than actual consumption, they should be adjusted downward. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1715
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 6:43 pm: |
|
What is the net tax savings to the average homeowner? I guess in order to know this, you have to know how much additional the average homeowner's water bill is than it would be if the rates were not inflated. Then you have to know how much the average homeowner receives back in the way of a "tax savings." Has this ever been calculated, and if so, how much is the net tax savings? |
Bailey
Citizen
Username: Baileymac
Post Number: 258
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 7:22 pm: |
|
Something else..
Water bills are NOT tax deductible, real estate taxes are. That means this "surplus" amounts to tax revenue to the town which we can't deduct.
Doesn't sound fair. |
Stuart0628
Citizen
Username: Stuart0628
Post Number: 258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 7:36 pm: |
|
For those in AMT land, deductibility is irrelevant. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page