| Author |
Message |
    
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4511
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, August 5, 2006 - 6:09 pm: | 
|
Mark,
Now that we have heard from the State, what is the anticipated municipal tax increase this year? (What would it have been without the state aid?)
Thanks. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2892
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, August 6, 2006 - 4:15 pm: |
|
Spitz: Some of the indirect costs were already covered by fees, but there will always be some question if the fees are fair.
MHD: After the last budget meeting, the anticipated increase was between 7.4% and 7.9%. So the tax increase should be about 6%. I expect the BOT to have one more budget workshop before we have a final vote on the budget.
|
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 590
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 6, 2006 - 4:49 pm: |
|
One reason a new BOT is needed is to ensure that the town does not enter into bad contracts it then "has to honor". The BOT hires and (supposedly) oversees the village counsel who draws up those contracts. It alone is accountable to the electorate.
Trustee Rosner, it is highly doubtful that I would, as you wish, ask you only questions you want to hear for which you provide only answers I agree with. I do appreciate you answering those questions you do. I don't appreciate the BOT having a slew of obligations it feels it "has to honor" because they don't have the good judgement or desire to compare legal advice from more than one source. People get multiple opinions for medical issues, why would major expenses of the town be any different? And the triple-job salary of the administrator/CFO/treasurer is outrageous. These three salaries should be cut drastically as soon as possible.
The bottom line is the rate of increase of debt for the town is alarming and the BOT is reponsible for it. If it cannot find a way to reduce spending, reversing the debt to zero, they should be replaced by others who can.
May 7, 2007 the voters of South Orange will be able to voice their opinion on the matter and I hope they speak with a clear and unified voice.
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4513
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 9:15 am: |
|
Thanks, Mark.
Above you say "As we saw with our recent study to work out a plan to have a combined recreation department..."
Why weren't ALL deprtments and/or a full consolidation study done? From what I understand, 3 elected officials from each town, agreed to a full consolidation study last year, but nothing happened. Why? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2893
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 10:32 am: |
|
MHD: There is a cost to studying shared services. A large portion can be covered by grants. However, after each "phase" you have to apply for another grant. The hope is to study every department. Those same reports could be used as the basis for the consolidation study.
The majority of the S. Orange BOT did not vote to consider consolidation. Only Trustee Rosen and my self voted in favor. The others preferred to take a different approach. VP Calabrese has been silent on the issue of shared services and consolidation. I am not sure where it stands in Maplewood at this time.
SOrising: Unless a majority of the BOT wants to discuss or change an existing agreement, we have to honor them. I can not discuss an employees performance in public. It would be hard to have a dialogue about a person's salary without discussing performance.
There have beent times we have gotten a second opinion but again, a majority of the BOT has to agree on whether to get one or not. |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4516
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 10:45 am: |
|
Quote:The majority of the S. Orange BOT did not vote to consider consolidation. Only Trustee Rosen and my self voted in favor.
Mark - according to Jeff Dubowy's comments at the July 24 BOT Meeting, 3 officials from each town had agreed to have a consolidation study. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEuKXSRk4FE) What happened to that? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2894
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 10:55 am: |
|
Not sure who the third person is but four votes are needed.
I would have no problem with a full consolidation study. I do wish the state would do more than give lip service to doing these studies. Even if both towns agreed (the voters, not just the elected officials), it is an expensive implementation process and only now does the state (Corzine) appear to be serious about subsidizing the cost.
Another question is since the schools are the largest part of our budget, would it make sense at looking to share with Millburn or W. Orange (assuming either is interested). Also, the next largest part of our tax bill is for public safety so at the very least we should look at studying consolidation of those departments (NOTE: This would not mean a reduction in the number of police or fire. The largest likely potential savings is in capital expenditures based on a preliminary study that was done).
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4517
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 11:05 am: |
|
Thanks, Mark.
I agree that a full consolidation STUDY is a good idea. I think it is important to differentiate between a STUDY and an IMPLEMENTATION. As I understand it, the cost of the study is negligible. We should first have a study & see the results BEFORE we worry about the costs of whether or not to implement.
As for schools, I grew up in Freehold which had a REGIONAL High School District consisting of 5 high schools (now six) that shared a common Superintendent etc. I honestly don't know much about the actual financing, but from an edukashun purspektiv it seemed to tern owt reelly good. LOL!
(kidding...the education was fine) |
Politicalmon
Citizen
Username: Politicalmon
Post Number: 226
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 12:02 pm: |
|
Under Christie Whitman there was plenty of grant money available to study shared services but our BOT never had an interest or felt it wasn't necessary.
This topic has been around for years but let’s face it you have some powerful unions to run up against to get his done. It's time to take the bull by the horns and a full implementation of shared services between SO & Maplewood should be imitated, ASAP.
If there is a hiring freeze why are applications being taken for Fireman in SO as stated in the News Record last Thursday?
The bottom line is that in order to keep taxes from going through the stratosphere (since they've already surpassed the roof) we need to seriously look at the cost projections of the bonds coming due, school & library maintenance costs, pensions and healthcare costs these should be extrapolated over the next 10 years - when we see this picture it will become obvious that services have to be shared & jobs will need to be cut just to keep our tax increases to single digit.
I hope the state legislature passes a resolution to keep property tax increase to 4% per year for that will be the only way to force our local government to make the hard decisions they thus far have refused to face. The reality is that most of the BOT members will be long gone when the real check comes due and we the taxpayers will be stuck with an outragous bill as our taxes increase and house values fall - we must be proactive or we are surely doomed.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2895
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 1:30 pm: |
|
Politicalmom: You need to look back at the Whitman administration and their handling of grant funds. She had a whole different approach about shared services and the support at the state level was pretty much non-existent. She was also only offereing money for the initial study. Corzine appears to be the first Governor that is considering real funding of shared services or consolidation, but so far it is still just talk - nothing in stone. However, I do think he is sincere and there will be money and support from his administration which is why it is important to take advantage as soon as guidelines are established.
Shared services are not going to be the answer to pensions and healthcare costs. Those can only be solved by working new agreements with unions and municipal agreements with employees. Healthcare premiums have had double digit increases and are currently beyond the control of local elected officials. The answer is the same as we have seen in the privage sector - higher deductibles, co-pays, and elimination of duplication of benefits. For pensions we need to see (and again, this can only come from the state) pensions that mirror those in the private sector (retirement at 65, consistent funding based on conservative actuarial accounting, defined contribution plans as opposed to defined benefit plans, etc).
The biggest savings from shared services will be reflected in the capital budget (and that includes the bonding of equipment and long-term capital budgets).
|
Old and Gray
Citizen
Username: Pastmyprime
Post Number: 405
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 2:35 pm: |
|
They FD isn't hiring...The state is giving the Fireman's test and applicants can sign up for the test to be eligable for a job after the test.
So as police officers & Fireman retire, or seperate from employement, they will not be replaced???? At what point is it cheaper to hire police officers and Firemen or just pay senior officers/fireman Overtime to fill in??? |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 592
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 3:08 pm: |
|
I read an article in the last few days indicating that the legislature will consider (or perhaps the governor proposed?) that individuals not be allowed to hold more than one public office and/or not be allowed to accumulate pension credits from more than one government job. I think Corzine indicated it is one of his top priorities to eliminate the practice of double or multiple-dipping since it strains the pension system.
Good questions, Old & Gray. Isn't it better to reduce staff, when necessary, through attrition? It would make sense if there were a real prospect of SO's dept. combining with another fire department, using another department's services for a fee, allowing fire fighters to take on extra part-time work in other townships, but if there are no plans for any of these, it seems it might be a bad idea. Pushing people in dangerous and high stress jobs to take on a lot of overtime or allowing them too much should have limits.
There are pension plans that have performed excellently if they are managed and invested well. What has been the performance of various pension plans that impact municipal budgets and taxes in NJ? Couldn't the strain to municipalities be reduced by the performance of invested plans? |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 593
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 3:17 pm: |
|
MHD's example of a regional high school is instructive. SO should not get hung up on Maplewood which some have said is not interested in merging. There are many other towns in the area. Any particular town should not be able to slow or prevent SO from acting decisively in its own best interest. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2896
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 3:27 pm: |
|
SOrising: The problem with the pension stemmed from agressive acounting and forecasting. They assumed a very high rate of return for several years. The higher the assumption the lower the required contribution. This allowed the towns and the state to skip pension contributions. The expected returns never materialized mostly because they were unrealistic for anything other than a very short term.
Corzine wants to see the pensions invested where greater gains could be achieved (possibly higher risk too). The strain might be reduced, then again....
|
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 595
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006 - 3:48 pm: |
|
This kind of foolish mindset is like the town administrator projecting and the BOT not challenging significant income from pilots and other fantasy revenue to the town from numerous unfinished development projects in town. The amount they counted this year is a fraction of what he will try to count next and following years, unless he is stopped.
Will the BOT stop him, T. Rosner?
Maybe different employee groups could vote on the level of risk they want for their pension funds and this could be factored into future management of the funds. In exchange for higher income and risk potential in their funds some would have to relinquish guaranteed returns; in exchange for lower risk guarantees, they would not reap additional benefits of higher risk returns. It might come closer to systemic equilibrium (regression to the mean) that way. |
J L Bryant
Citizen
Username: Jeffbryant
Post Number: 55
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 11:45 am: |
|
I'm gonna get back to the basic of this thread and what I see as the root of this topic.
The definition again (from MHD):
Extraordinary Aid is awarded to municipalities who, because of extreme circumstances, would not be able to provide essential services to the community without a substantial increase in their property tax rate.
SO.... first, what extreme circumstances cause our village budget to not STILL be sufficient to provide essential services? Our budget has no 'rainy day' amount to absorb unforeseen extras, say like a 5% wiggle room? (and per notes, above I'm gathering that the State increases were more than 5%, but pls... I'm speaking of practises here, not amounts) Don't we all strive to have 'savings' to address financial blips in our own bankbook? Why should we run the village differently? Again, WHAT extreme circumstances arose, though? Are they really extreme that we need aid?
Second - just what defines an essential service? Well, obviously one sure as h@#$ isn't garbage collection, which, need I remind anyone, is NOT provided via our property taxes like most other towns in NJ (umm, sorry, pet peeve ).
For another, is it part of essential services that village officials get paid (and y'know, I don't even know... do ours?) to serve? Personally given the size of our village, I'd seriously pose that such public 'governing' ought to revert to being altrustic and non-paid (especially since historically I'm certain it was....). So, personally, in this situation (village bankbook comes up short at any point & we "need" extraordinary aid), then non-essential village officials ought to consider serving pro-bono through the crisis. Or at least kick-back (oooops, wrong phrase!) some of their salaries to make up the budget shortfall for that year.
(And this does NOT mean village staff, as in police, fire, dispatchers, town administrators/secretaries/clerks, etc., etc.).
Or, is an essential service to have all village utilities on 24/7 (if they are)? Is it an essential service for the village to have a bldg dept.? a water dept.? a large board of education? cutting all town grass once a week? jitney service? What is essential to running this village?
The point of WHAT are essential services and HOW MANY resources-to-provide-them are required must be clearly defined, if they're not already (& lord knows, without wading into discussions of rosters - staff sizes - that provide true essential services). That way [to get back to the topic] maybe we wouldn't need to APPLY FOR AID.
I recognize I'm touching tinder boxes here, BUT..... more than anything, I'm advocating that our fiscal housekeeping (& HOW we keep house) must be addressed BECAUSE OUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE MUCH MUCH TOO HIGH !!!!!!! Bluntly, we don't need AID, we need budget reform!
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4525
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 11:55 am: |
|
JL,
Currently, the Village officials (Trustees and Village President) do NOT get paid. HOWEVER, a couple of years ago a review of the Village Charter was done and the ONLY significant change proposed is to begin paying the Trustees and Village President.
Last we heard, this was still awaiting approval by the State Legislature & would then go before the voters as a referendum. Not sure if it will be this November or not.
As for your other concerns, you are largely correct. However, the majority of the current BOT generally makes excuses that we have no ratables which is why our taxes are so high. At the same time, they take properties like ShopRite off the tax rolls, they allow Beifus & Sayid to knock down their buildings more than 3 years before construction might begin, they agree to spend at least $170,000 of tax dollars for a sculpture, they subsidize the developer of the quarry with $1.2 million, they shift the majoprity of the Administrator's salary to a tenured position and they refuse to create a commission to study consolidation with Maplewood!! |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 603
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 2:53 pm: |
|
JLBryant, the extreme circumstances this year are the extreme actions of the BOT which is still intending to divert bond money raised for the essential services of sidewalk and street repairs to pay for a sculpture. They are now about to commit this extreme act in the extreme amount of $170,000 or more, which the extraordinary state rebate might cover nicely, as others have remarked, thus covering their extreme tracks in the matter.
Extraordinary state aid, JLBryant, is needed to cover the extreme (although unextraordinary) actions of the BOT which, as their extraordinary spokesman, the extreme village administrator, has pointed out, provides a high level of services to SO residents such as purchasing sculptures with HUD monies and bond monies raised for other things. The BOT's extreme-and-extraordinary-speaking administrator has told them that you don't mind paying such high taxes because you are satisfied with BOT extremes.
How extraordinary of you to say otherwise, JLBryant, and to expose the extreme BOT and administrator as quite unextraordinary after all.
Oh, and PS, JLBryant, although T. Rosner has commented on this thread, he won't notice your remark about garbage service in SO. He thinks everything is peachy keen with the garbage service here, which the BOT has nothing to do with except to make excuses for why they don't follow your and the state's advice about it. Extreme and extraordinary perspicacity on his part.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2899
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 4:35 pm: |
|
SOrising: I asked you in the other thread... but you did not answer. What is your complaint with SOD?
Since you keep posting misinformation, I will state for the record: the BOT was never advised by anyone to do anything different about the garbage service. I have never seen a letter or heard anyone tell me we need to do anything.
SOD... as long as you pay your bill, they pick up your garbage. The only official complaint I ever saw was from a resident who it turns out did not pay her bill. One other complaint that was sent to me was because they missed his house. The problem was corrected and he has never indicated there has been any further problems.
So please tell me what your complaint was and when you made it to village hall. Funny how you suggest we should change garbage carriers just because you do not like them and the majority of the village does not seem to have any problems with their garbage service.
|
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 604
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 10:21 pm: |
|
Unfortunately, mrosner, the archives of MOL belie your claim never to have heard the numerous complaints of residents about SOD. Why would I entertain a disingenuous question, especially when you haven't done your homework? The majority of the village that has no problem with SOD must be the same majority that wants you to illegally spend bond money raised for sidewalk and street repairs to pay for Tau. Your ability to count and comprehension of the majority will is impeccable. |
bets
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 23792
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 10:33 pm: |
|
Mark, I think you're being disingenuous about South Orange Disposal. I recall their last f-up where they lost data about several hundred residents who were paid in full yet showed as delinquent after a server crash. If the search feature was not so sensitive I would link to that and many other threads complaining about the service.
|
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 606
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 10:58 pm: |
|
Old and Gray, if you see this, what do you think about what is happening now in Orange with the fire department? Apparently W. Orange, Orange and Montclair are talking about consolidating and sharing fire departments beforehand, it seems.
Do you know anything more about this? Should South Orange be in these discussions? |
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4528
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 11:08 pm: |
|
Cross-posted from another thread:
SORising,
Your post is very timely. An effort had just gotten underway to put a referendum on the November Ballot to decide whether or not a Joint Consolidation Commission should be formed with Maplewood to STUDY the idea of consolidation and/or shared services. To accomplish this, signatures of registered voters are URGENTLY needed by the end of the month. (Unlike Tau, there is a provision in the State for this petition to be binding to initiate a referendum if enough signatures are gathered)
Go to www.somastudy.org NOW and download a petition, have it signed by you, your spouse & your neighbor immediately. When complete, mail it to:
Jeff Dubowy
669 Mountain Drive
South Orange, New Jersey 07079 |
J L Bryant
Citizen
Username: Jeffbryant
Post Number: 59
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 11:17 pm: |
|
Though this strays from the thread's point of extraordinary aid, since people are mentioning it, can anyone please tell me why garbage collection is not a part of the village's services? |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 608
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 - 11:32 pm: |
|
Ah, JLB, how refreshing to hear from an honest, too-infrequently-spoken voice on MOL.......
There is another recent thread about garbage service in our fair town, started by Virtual It Girl. I commend it to you for an answer. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2901
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:29 am: |
|
SORising: Note earlier in the other thread, I state there were complaints about the billing problems but other than those there were very few. Complaints to me on MOL by anonymous posters is not the same as an official complaint to the village. So again, simple question: What is your complaint with SOD? Sounds like a personal vendetta.
I never stated anything about a majority of people supporting TAU or about how many people supported it or did not support it.
Bets: Feel free to take the time to show me how many complaints about the service other than billing issues (which came about because of the computer crash). If people are unhappy with SOD, they should let the village know with an email or a letter. I don't see changing the service for 5,000 homes because a handful of complaints. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 2136
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:36 am: |
|
But why is SOD the only option in town? What would the village lose by having 2 or 3 choices for homes (and businesses, too)?
In my previous town (Hillsbourgh, NJ) -- homeowners were free to contract with anyone for trash removal. As I recall in my neighborhood, I regularly saw 2 different trash collectors.
It kept prices down (I think), and I found them very accomodating for disposing of large items (just call, get a price, put it by the curb).
I don't have a complaint about service, per se, but even once they fixed their billing, those ridiculous post cards they call bills seem to get lost along the way, maybe every couple of bills.
/p
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2903
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
Pete: From what was posted in another thread there is another option in town. Agreed about the silly post cards. From what I understand, there is an option for an automatic bill payment system with SOD. I have been lucky and have never lost a card, but I would prefer a bill with a return envelope.
Again, if there were a slew of unhappy customers, I would say something has to be done. As it is, I have to assume most are satisfied and why change something that is working.
I would like to hear what SOrising's complaint is with SOD because maybe it would help me understand why we should even consider discussing making a change.
|
MHD
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 4531
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:59 am: |
|
JLB,
About your question why garbage collection is not provided by Village Services - the answer I have always heard is this forces Seton Hall to pay for Garbage. If it were provided by the Village, Seton Hall would get "free" garbage service since they do not pay taxes (other than a small PILOT payment).
I don't know how true or valid this is, but this is what I have always heard. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 2137
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:19 am: |
|
To me its completely illogical (and not reasonable) to think the town should provide trash pick up (which is a household specific cost) but NOT be responsible for curbs and sidewalks!
As noted, in my previous town you could choose which size trash toter to have for your home (I recall 3 sizes from 1 trash company, 2 sizes from the other) -- my neighbors with 2 babies in diapers needed the big toter, and paid accordingly. My other neighbors, a retired couple, had the small one.
I want the town to do LESS not more! Then let me contract for the best options that meet my needs and budget.
/p |
breal
Citizen
Username: Breal
Post Number: 977
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
Re: Extraordinary aid. How come West Orange got so much? Shameless. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 611
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:24 am: |
|
Like many so-called explanations from our on-the-ball BOT, the SHU excuse is a ruse to do nothing.
Sorry Mark, your lying about ever having heard complaints before makes it inadvisable to acknowledge your posturing as anything more than it is. Its a credibility thing. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2906
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:36 am: |
|
SOrising: I see. Best to call me a liar than actually answer a simple question.
|
Josh Holtz
Citizen
Username: Jholtz
Post Number: 577
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 12:06 pm: |
|
SOrising: Calling Trustee a liar through this site is uncalled for. If you want to accuse him of something why don't you do it face to face? Better that than using Southorangevillage.com as a vehicle for your personal vendettas. Last thing I want is to lose the last BOT member who takes the time to post information and answer questions in this forum.
And no - I am not Mark's mother. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 612
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 12:10 pm: |
|
Voters can tell the difference between truth and lies, regardless of who endorses public lying. |
Spitz
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1872
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 12:27 pm: |
|
Here's a link to the Tax Trauma Index compliled by the Star-Ledger (thanks to Sac who posted it in another thread.) Glen Ridge has the highest tax trauma score in Essex County with a 94. Next highest are South Orange, Maplewood and Wext Orange, all with an 89. Although Millburn has the highest average taxes in the state with $15,860, its average house price is $987,413 and its tax trauma score is 58. South Orange has average property taxes of $12,120 and average house prices of $485,215. http://www.nj.com/news/propertytaxes/index.ssf?/str/taxes/trauma.asp. |
Sheena Collum
Citizen
Username: Sheena_collum
Post Number: 773
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 1:15 pm: |
|
SORising - I just don't understand why you're targeting two trustees that most of us will continue to elect/re-elect.
Mark has no reason to lie. He hasn't before and I doubt he is now.
Josh - ditto. And I'm not Mark's mother either, lol. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 614
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 2:09 pm: |
|
Sheena, its a matter of objective records to the contrary. Mark knows there have been numerous complaints about garbage collection because there are records of his remarks to complainers in MOL archives, yet he denies knowing about these complaints. Check the archives and the thread VIG started on garbage collection if you really want to know what Mark has done. You may continue to reelect someone who lies and dissembles to the public but others will not.
Mark's reasons for lying include that he wants to be reelected and may want to run for VP.
As for targetting trustees, any trustee who lies or acts unethically should be called to account for it, so that people who care about these kinds of issues will weigh them in the ballot box. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2907
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 2:21 pm: |
|
Sheena, Josh: Thanks for trying. With some people it is just not worth it. In this case I will just consider the source.
|
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 2139
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 3:49 pm: |
|
Heres a list of searches with "rosner" and "disposal"
35 returns, but most have both those words but are not about trash (e.g., "what we have at our disposal) ONLY these are about South Orange Disposal
Posted on Thursday, March 2, 2006 - 11:04 am:
I know Jeff has had his issues with S. Orange Disposal, but I really do not have any complaints. In 20 years they have never missed a pick-up at my house. I know that if you call in advance you can get anything picked up but there will be an extra charge. They even put the lid back on the trash can most times. I even saw the guy picking up garbage that was all over the sidewalk after the bag broke. I went out with a broom and dustpan and he took it from me and said it was his job (that was several years ago).
I have never had to call so personally I can't comment on the customer services.
From my position as trustee, there really have been very few complaints other than about the billing issues.
Posted on Thursday, June 16, 2005 - 11:51 am:
S. Orange Disposal came a few months ago to discuss their billing problems and to take questions about what they were doing to insure it did not happen again.
Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - 10:13 am:
I asked again about the billing. They seem to be responsive when they are called but I still think they should send a letter of explanation to all the residents. My fear is that some people just pay their bills and figured they missed one.
Again, I requested that they come to a BOT meeting and explain in public if they are not going to notify every resident.
We will see if they show up at the next meeting.
Posted on Wednesday, December 8, 2004 - 3:41 pm:
If anyone has a complaint, they should call or email John Gross (jgross@southorange.org). We will try to help get this problem resolved as quickly as possible. If/when I get relevant information, I will try to post on here.
For the record, MOL is not an official village site and although I might post on here I do not read it every day. It also helps when dealing with these types of complaints to have the resident's name and address.
SOrising -- what other service complaints do you recall being discussed on MOL, with Mr Rosner commenting in the thread? A search does not support your recollecion.
|
Sheena Collum
Citizen
Username: Sheena_collum
Post Number: 774
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 4:03 pm: |
|
Pete - Mark went back and somehow deleted all the threads where he was lying once he knew he was caught.
SORising - I think you lose credibility when you revert to a 'we must oust the machine' mentality whenever things don't go precisely your way. Maybe it's just me but calling someone a 'liar' is basically saying that they have no integrity and I think you're way off base. Mark's responses seem very sensible. I believe if there is a problem with disposal, the proper channel would be to contact John Gross (as Mark said) and he or someone from his office would sit down with a resident and figure it out.
Be careful of your posts - the "You may continue to reelect someone who lies and dissembles to the public but others will not" comment is also out of line as it infers that I, personally, support corrupt people?
You're obviously frustrated about a lot of things but there's no need to take it out on anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with you.
I'm gonna back out of this one now, I've said my peace. |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 615
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 7:40 pm: |
|
As previously stated, Sheena, if you want the facts, look at the garbage thread that VIG started as well as the MOL archives; however, you will need to read the archives in full (unlike peteglider's presentation), where Rosner has read and responded to complaints about SOD. As a trustee, he should know about Mergel's numerous documented complaints to the town as well and the hundreds of people Bets referenced in VIG's thread. Defending the indefensible is a hard sell, Sheena. Do you even contract for garbage service in town, yourself?
I will continue to state facts that don't depend on me to be known. That is, for those who want to know them. You need to keep sight of objective realities rather than assuming this is about you principally, Sheena. It is not, but neither can any attempt by you or another to defend actions that cannot be justified go unchallenged. And it is very clear to those most familiar with the actions and history of SOD that there have been many problems with it for many years and that the town administrator and the BOT have been contacted about it without response except for them protecting a company run by thugs engaged in more than one illegality. You must decide for yourself whether this is acceptable or a good thing to have in the midst of a small town, but you would be mistaken to assume that others will not disagree and challenge you if you choose to defend public officials who defend and indulge such insidious actions. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 2144
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 12:44 pm: |
|
SOrising --
My search was through MOL as far back as it goes. Do post any additional facts you can add. And what are the problems with SOD? You insinuate there are issues, well maybe that is so. But the discussion would be vastly improved, IMO, by a summary of the facts.
Other then the billing issues, I really have had no problems at all in 5+ years with SOD. A number of years ago they missed my house one day, I called, and they came and took care of it.
My issue is that I don't understand why there arn't choices of trash haulers in SO for homeowners --
Pete |
SOrising
Citizen
Username: Sorising
Post Number: 625
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 10:13 pm: |
|
Read through the thread on garbage and recycling that VIG started, Pete. It addresses some of your questions, including why there aren't choices, which is not entirely true. |
