| Author |
Message |
    
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 964
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 12:06 pm: | 
|
Today's Asbury Park Press has an editorial suggesting that in order to achieve long-term tax relief, consolidation must be on the table. South Orange and Maplewood are currently discussing the sharing of services, and the SOM school district is already consolidated.
With 566 municipalities, and 601 school districts, it is estimated that home rule is costing New Jersey taxpayer 20-25% on their property taxes.
http://app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050320/OPINION/503200376/1029 |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 500
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 4:09 pm: |
|
Does anybody recall the reason that the Township of South Orange originally split itself into the Village of SO and the Township of M'wood?
TomR. |
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 965
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 4:28 pm: |
|
I think that Nohero is an expert on the reason for the split. |
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 1068
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 6:01 pm: |
|
It was about property taxes  |
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 966
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Hi Kathy. I'm still plugging away. |
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 968
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 7:09 pm: |
|
TomR - I think you're from Maplewood and I wasn't sure whether to post this in Soapbox or South Orange Specific. I chose South Orange Specific hoping that the SO officals would be more likely to see it.
Certainly both South Orange and Maplewood taxpayers have a big stake in this. Maybe someone from either town can tell us the status of the discussions regarding sharing of services. My understanding was that the two towns have been meeting to discuss how it could be implemented and the cost savings to each town.
It seems that it's an important enough issue to hear what the candidates in the upcoming SO election think. Not just that it's a good idea, but how it should be implemented and what they would do to get it moving. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7956
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 7:36 am: |
|
I think 20% to 25% in savings is way optomistic. This is about the percentage of your and my total tax bill that goes to the Village or the Township. I don't think you are going to need half the police force or fire department, or building department for that matter because of the consolidation.
There would be some savings over the long term in that there would only have to be one department head. However, who is going to be the head guy? Which cops get to remain captains and lieutenants and which get bounced down a grade? How do you spell lawsuits?
Still I think looking into these things would be a good idea.
|
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 969
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 9:13 am: |
|
BobK - We have to look at consolidation or sharing of services, and I hope something comes out of Trenton which requires it. Whatever the consitutional convention comes up with is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
|
argon_smythe
Citizen
Username: Argon_smythe
Post Number: 551
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 11:23 am: |
|
Well we share the school district and just look how that's driven down costs. By all means let's do it for everything!
|
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 970
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
argon - Touche. |
Josh M.
Citizen
Username: Jmaxlaw
Post Number: 228
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 12:26 pm: |
|
argon--
You don't even want to think about the cost of separate school districts.
As for the general issue, I am a huge supporter of consolidation as long as it is actually studied and audited properly. While the assumption is that we would save money-- exactly how much would we save? Also-- who do we consolidate with?
Admittedly, what makes some sense is the consolidation of Essex County. However-- we would need to see some numbers. |
Howard Levison
Citizen
Username: Levisonh
Post Number: 200
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 1:12 pm: |
|
Doublea: I attempted to obtain such information by attending what was posted as an “open” Shared Services meeting Saturday. To my dismay I was told it was "CLOSED" to the public - "because we will be discussing/throwing out ideas". Sounds just like the type information that should be of interest to the public as well as the possibility of contributing to the discussion.
Another justification was that they were going to be personnel type discussions, which I do understand and should be kept confidential.
I am a firm believer that there are a number of opportunities in reducing expenses but also creating revenue streams.
|
Allan J Rosen
Citizen
Username: Allanrosen
Post Number: 145
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 2:15 pm: |
|
The first report from the consultant to the Shared Services Committee is expected to be received around April 8 and in any case should be released on April 11. The committee has made solid progress on the concept of reducing taxes for both towns via sharing services. |
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 972
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 4:09 pm: |
|
That's very good news. |
doublea
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 973
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 4:26 pm: |
|
Howard - I look forward to hearing your ideas on reducing expenses and enhancing revenue. I think this is a subject which has been missing from the debate in recent elections. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page