| Author | Message | ||
     MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 2645 Registered: 5-2001  |
According to Calabrese, we could sell the Tony Smith sculpture for 5x what we pay for it. So, let's sell the damn thing and fund the DRMC. Problem solved! | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 11 Registered: 12-2004 |
Ok, Jim, no problem! Where to begin? Had the concept of SID been implemented 10 years ago, I think the result would have been different in terms of acceptance of the concept. What happened instead, was "Redevelopment." No matter what we try to do, we can not get away from that. When the committee started its analysis, one of the first issues tackled was this "hybrid" delineation of our business district. A portion is governed by the New Jersey Redevelopment law (N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-1) and the rest is not. Therefore, right off the bat, we have a problem in not being able to be even handed. If you look over all the threads on line which have preceded this one, the overwhelming discontent in this community is with the parcels that are in Redevelopment, not the others. The resistance is grounded in the perception that the Trustees are looking for a "solution" from the people who are not responsible for the problem, nor directly affected by the Redevelopment. They do not share in the generous tax abatements, for example. Plus, please do not forget what Trustee Allan Rosen said on TV: the money is not needed for the business district, as much as it is needed for salaries and pensions of others they have hired. I, for one, as you all well know, do not believe this process of Redevelopment was given sufficient preliminary consideration, and the public input was scorned, at best. If you are fortunate enough to have a community with interested, intelligent, and educated citizens, why wouldn't you want their free advice? Enough said, the past is over. Trying to solve the problem requires a much more complex solution, but the solution is definitely not a SID. All that would accomplish, believe it or not, is another job for an executive, an assistant, and their respective salaries, pensions, and perks. We did the math, and we figured it out. We need much more money than the SID could generate to properly manage the downtown, in its entirety, namely both the Redevelopment areas and the rest. Our community must be willing to foot the bill for the luxuries it desired. | ||
| Jim Murphy Citizen Username: Jimmurphy Post Number: 202 Registered: 5-2001 |
If the only thing a SID can accomplish is a jobs program, then why does Maplewood have one? Summit? Morristown, etc? Seems there must be some benefit. Why is it good for all of them and not for us? Help us understand... Is the SID feasibility study available? | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 1322 Registered: 8-2002 |
SID -- is that only for retail businesses? How about acountants, lawyers, doctors, etc. in the downtown area? Would it include SOPAC? If the budget is, say $250k and that's spread out among say 75 businesses - that's $3,300 on average -- maybe not a big hit for Bank of America, but I'd think that's a notable expense, for say the shoemaker, florist, and probably quite a number of small businesses. Their sales would need to increase MANY multiples of that to make up for the lost revenue/profit (that would be one hell of a lot of donuts to sell). /p | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1236 Registered: 3-2003 |
Mark - The problem with what you're suggesting is that 51% of the property owners must approve a SID. If the DMRC is initially set up with taxpayer funding, it's highly unlikely that 51% of the property owners would subsequently agree to being assessed for something for which they were not previouly being assessed. And Elaine's post clearly states that she feels the property owners (and businesses) should not be assessed regardless. I thought this was the weak part of the committee's report. It was discussed that the Village could fund the DMRC initially, and hopefully some other means of funding would be found in the future. But there were no definitive suggestions. As it was proposed, it was really an open-ended proposition. I think there should be something clearly set forth as to what the ultimate funding goal is. Elaine implies that it should be a Village (taxpayer) committment. | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 12 Registered: 12-2004 |
Thank you Trustee Rosner for your response which is appreciated. Since you were also on the committee, you are aware that SID was not the prime solution offered. It was truly shocking to hear Trustee Rosen ignore all our advice and expostulate on SIDS without any public warning. Just curious, what is the position of all the other Trustees with respect to what Trustee Rosen said? I think they should each state if they are in agreement with him or not. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2123 Registered: 4-2002 |
EH: We have not discussed as a board yet. Spitz: I realize that (about the 51%) and that is an issue. My concern is that this is a reversal from what the BOT already agreed to do. I see this as another tactic to kill a DMC altogether. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 7009 Registered: 4-1997  |
If a SID is good for businesses in the village, shouldn't a throng (or at least one) South Orange merchant or property owners be here online cheering for this? The DMC document was nicely detailed and had good ideas of how to create broad representation on its board. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1238 Registered: 3-2003 |
Mark - It may well be. However, I think you will agree that I've been pretty consistent in questioning anything the Village does which is open-ended financially. The committee did an incredible amount of work. I just think there should be some kind of guidelines as to where funding will come from in the future. If it's from the taxpayers, as Elaine suggests, then discuss it upfront. I have to say that when I listened to the presentation to the BOT and subsequent discussion, I was hopeful that some means of funding other than from the taxpayers would be found in the future. Now what I'm hearing is that this may not be the case. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 1324 Registered: 8-2002 |
Dave -- Given the credibility and execution history in SO -- I don't think that the idea for a SID/DMRC is going to get a "gung ho" response -- no matter what. Heck -- whether the $250k comes from our taxes or from the businesses themselves via a SID - I'd say there is more than a little cynicism that something could really happen. Where is the evidence from other towns that this can work? Produce 4 slides -- for 4 neighboring towns that list what's happened and at what cost. (including mistakes). Circulate that among businesses, residents. Add one more slide -- the "SO vision" with funding, objectives, actions. Then there might be some enthusiasm to PAY for this! (mind you, conceptually, it makes a whole lotta sense) If a consensus agrees for the need -- we can figure out how where the budget should come from. Pete | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1239 Registered: 3-2003 |
pete - I've said this before, but perhaps it's worth mentioning again. And it speaks to your concern. I'm pretty familiar with Red Bank. For those of you who know Red Bank now as the "hip city," it was practically a ghost town in the early 90's. As I recall, the downtown had a 40% vacancy rate. The bottom line is that it was through a dedicated partnershp consisting of businesses, landlords and the town that turned Red Bank around. (As a sidenote, it was Merrill Lynch which was persuaded to remain in town rather than moving to a corporate park, which served as the anchor and prime sponsor). Now, South Orange isn't Red Bank. But my point is that in Red Bank, as well as other towns which have succeeded in turning their downtowns around, for the most part it has come through a dedicated partnership between business and town. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1240 Registered: 3-2003 |
South Orange doesn't have a Merrill Lynch to serve as an example of what can and should be done. But Mr. Beifus could have been a leader for the business community. He's been given everything he ever asked for, and yet he's failed miserably. | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 721 Registered: 11-2001  |
I believe that Maplewood has two. One for the Village and one for Springfield Avenue. Both of these SID's have proven successful in implementing positive changes within their business district and attracting new businesses. | ||
| patjoyce Citizen Username: Patjoyce Post Number: 67 Registered: 7-2001 |
The initial recommendation contained a creative financing package by absorbing the Parking Authority and using funds and personnell from the PA to underwrite the project. This suggestion was rejected out of hand by the BOT. That report should be available at Village Hall. It was during those intitial meetings that the pros and cons of a SID were debated. At least half of the members of that board initially believed that a SID was necessary. The final written report was unanimous (save the voting member of the Parking Authority who did not join in the recommendation)in stating that a SID would not be productive AT THIS TIME. That concluson was reached after hearing from several other towns (I specifically remember Mllburn, Montclair and Maplewood) that without a "dedicated partnership", as Spitz has noted, a SID is doomed. There is a significant disconnect between the governing body, business and property owners and some residents when it comes to the direction and management of downtown. Some towns are run by fiat. The down side is there is not much public input, but the upside is usually that projects are completed at a quick pace. Some towns go to great lengths to seek public input on redevelopment/development issue (see Maplewood re: police headquarters). The upside is the public is informed, the down side is projects take a long time to complete. In SO the public does not have much input on what and where development takes place AND redevelopment has proceeded at a snails pace. This has caused serious skepticism in many quarters. If a SID is imposed to merely supplement an already enormous municipal budget and which is used soley to provide services (street cleaning/security) which should otherwise be provided by the Municpal Government, the recipient of that surcharge is being treated unfairly. The second task force was specifically told to ignore funding issues, and it created what it felt was needed to re-energize downtown. The funding question is far less important than the question of independence vs. controlled by the governing body. At least four new positions have been created and funded in the last four years when the BOT felt a problem in the governance of the Village needed to be addressed. If a majority of the BOT favors an INDEPENDENT DRMC it will find the resources to fund it. Patrick | ||
| Jim Murphy Citizen Username: Jimmurphy Post Number: 203 Registered: 5-2001 |
- growler Which is why I can't quite get my arms around why this is good for everyone else but not good for South Orange. Is it the lack of a major player, a la Merrill Lynch? Is it that the loooong redevelopment process has left everyone skeptical? Is it that we've given up concessions (pilots) in most cases that lead the existing businesses to want the same sorts of concessions? (in line with Spitz' post that indicates that the transition of funding has not been addressed) I'll ask again - Does anyone know if the SID feasibility study is available? Mark? Edited to add - Patrick answered some of the questions - thanks. I'll try to get the study from John Gross and report back. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 1327 Registered: 8-2002 |
Spitz -- I grew up in Middletown, spent many days in Red Bank. I remember as a kid going to Prowns hardware store, shopping at Bambergers (and Epsteins, too, I think). I got my bikes and first TV from stores in Red Bank. And we all shopped at the sporting goods store at the corner. Of course there was a 5&10. My Mom was a teacher in Red Bank, too. Red Bank suffered from racial issues and riots -- and at the same time the malls and shopping centers were gaining in popularity. And the down hill continued for years. That said -- Main Street in Red Bank declined terribly -- I think much as our village has -- when shoppers, for the most part, left for the malls. I think the better restaurants -- those along the river, etc. continued to do well. Red Bank had a few strong business partners -- most notably River View hospital. The hospital continued to expand, bought run down buildings and houses, and was an anchor. Lots of added medical buildings/doctors offices. Then, Red Bank finally began to exploit the areas along the river and yacht clubs -- concerts, events, etc. Be interesting if Seton Hall, for instance, could be a better partner (perhaps we should wish for a change of Board and new President). Add a couple of strong businesses (maybe in our town its restaurants?). And then a creative program of events and entertainment. In addition, Red Bank's development of apartments, senior complexes, etc. helped, too. No, we're not Red Bank -- but the elements that worked there (and in other similar towns) could work here, too. Pete | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 722 Registered: 11-2001 |
I cannot think that it would. It does not take one major company to show that there is viable reasons to put a business in SO. It takes a dedicated person(s) that is solely responsible for showing potential businesses why SO is a good place to invest their money. This person(s) would work with the BOT, Chamber, property owners, developers, brokers etc to make sure that the Master Plan (whatever that is) is being followed and placing appropriate businesses in appropriate vacant locations.
I am? Aren't you? As stated before, there is resistance to starting a SID initially however if proposed properly and though out completely then it can be successful. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 1331 Registered: 8-2002 |
So tell my why just businesses should pick up the tab for creating a better downtown? (versus all homeowners?) Don't *all* our taxes go into the same pot to pay for what the town needs? /p | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1241 Registered: 3-2003 |
pete - The most direct answer is that the business owners and landlords are the ones that are most directly effected by a better downtown. They're willing to contribute because they hope to increase business and their profits. I assume that this is the reason that the business owners and landlords agreed to SIDs in the towns that have them. Yes, the residents enjoy a better business district and according to the Village President, our taxes should decrease because the commercial properties are paying more taxes (I don't necessarily agree with this.) But the fact remains that it's the business owners and landlords that benefit most directly. And don't forget, the residential taxpayers (as well as commercial taxpayers) are already paying taxes to cover the debt that was taken out for many of the improvements in the cental business district (the loans taken out to cover outlays in excess of any grants.) | ||
| joecool Citizen Username: Joecool Post Number: 158 Registered: 11-2001  |
Elaine - this is simply not true. Not all property owners do this and not all will. A portion yes, but not all. If the average assessment is say $1,000 and there are 2-4 tenants per building, then each tenant pays about a dollar or $1.25 to have a full-time person in their corner, advocating for the business community. Seems like a good deal. If you get the opportunity for other low-cost or free services because of the SID, then even better. What are the average dues to be a Chamber member? Must be over a $100 a year and does the Chamber offer facade grants or design assistance or supplemental cleaning or promotion? Does the Chamber work for code enforcement or any of the other stuff a SID would? In terms of paying a salary to employees - well you get what you pay for. A volunteer is just that and you can bet that improving the business district will fall on the priority list. You can't have programs without a person to implement them. Volunteers belong on sub-committees where they can best use their talent, interest and limited amount of time. A SID isn't the answer everywhere and maybe with the stranglehold South Orange government seems to have on redeveloping South Orange, it won't work, but it certainly seems like a good many folk are more interested in seeing that it won't work, rather then finding a solution and getting results. Curious. | ||
| patjoyce Citizen Username: Patjoyce Post Number: 68 Registered: 7-2001 |
I believe the task force(s) reports did work to find solutions that would work in South Orange. Another problem with a SID at this particular juncture is that the Village has just granted two hefty tax breaks in the forms of PILOTS to landlords in the business district. How can we say to some property owners, we'll exempt you from our tax scheme to provide incentive, yet tell that owner's neighbor, you have to pay more so that we can keep the downtown clean? Patrick | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 318 Registered: 4-2005  |
I don't see a correlation between a SID and the PILOTS? The SID is not a "tax" per say. Based on what the parameters are, I doubt those with the PILOTS are going to be exempt. Correct? | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 724 Registered: 11-2001 |
Before the town grants PILOTS, this type of long term vision needs to be thought about before signing the deal. Was a townwide visioning or charette process EVER done in South Orange? A good developement deal might have included some sort of clause for payments to be made to a SID in the event that a SID was created? If the properties that are PILOTed are now exempt from any sort of payment to a SID, then we have effectivly painted ourselves into a corner. Maybe it is just me, but the two reports mentioned are also a bit confusing. The DRMC seems to be a hybrid between a SID and a Redevelopment Agency no? Isn't the BoT already the redevelopment agency? and wouldn't creating the DRMC as proposed cause some conflicts with what agency is authorized to do what? Isn't the BoT the only enity that can charge the Planning Board with investigating a redevelopment zone and the BoT the only enity that can ultimately declare them? Typically, the governing body of the SID is called a DMC, which adds to the confusion of the terms being tossed around here I think. | ||
| GlassJoe Citizen Username: Glass_joe Post Number: 41 Registered: 6-2005  |
Sheena- I feel you slipping away. The force is strong within you. Do not give in to S.I.T.H. S.O.,Idiots, Teetotallers, & Hypocrites | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1242 Registered: 3-2003 |
Patick - You say the "the Village had just granted two ....PILOTS..." as a reason a SID was not viable. The PILOT agreements were not approved until about two weeks before the election. If Growler is correct, and wording should have been inserted in the PILOT agreements providing that the PILOTs would would be subject to SID assessments, why wasn't this mentioned to the BOT. There was enough time to do so before the PILOT agreements were approved. It just seems that this is a case where if one wants a reason not to do something, a reason can always be found. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 1885 Registered: 1-2004  |
Sheena- Why would Bunny's cost be higher then El Grecos? Is it because Bunny's is MUCH nicer then El Grecos? BTW -you knoe who is still calling me a liar.  | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 1886 Registered: 1-2004 |
Spitz- since the two businesses are no longer in business, can you please tell us which ones there were? | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 18 Registered: 7-2005  |
Bunny's is more disgusting than el greco... at least you dont die of lung cancer from second hand smoke at el grecos | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 1887 Registered: 1-2004 |
Glock You're entitled to your opinion. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1243 Registered: 3-2003 |
jta - One was on Village Plaza and one was on Sloan St. I don't think it's appropriate to give names. People are certainly entitled to voice their opinions, particularly when it's their pocketbooks that might be affected. But I have wondered whether they still might be around if they hadn't objected to a SID. Maybe someone can help me here. As I recall, there was basically a turf war between some of the organizations. Is this correct, and if so, who were the organizations? | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 1890 Registered: 1-2004 |
Wow I'm surprised to here where these stores were located. I've always thought they were the better part of the town for businesses, especially Sloan Street. It's too bad if they left over this. | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 13 Registered: 12-2004 |
Sheena: The "SID" is not a tax "per se" but it results in one if you are subject to it. Those with the "Pilots" are in the "Redevelopment" zone so they will not share in the "tax." Call it an assessment or a tax, it is the same result to the person paying it. Joecool: I can not imagine a landlord not charging the assessment to the tenant. It would not be normal. Property management is not a charity business. Why do you assume property owners need facade grants, promotions, cleaning or design assistance? What ever happened to self-reliance? Why do I want strangers managing my property for me? Would you be offended if a committee were entitled to tell you how to landscape or paint your home? All we see here is another ploy to take money for reasons other than improvement of the business district. Allan Rosen said it all: We need the money for salaries and pensions. That sums it up. It has nothing to do with the business district. Why don't they finish what they started first? Then try diplomacy. | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 725 Registered: 11-2001 |
Elaine -
It does not look as if self-reliance is really working with the current property owners, does it? Now imagine for a minute, there is an entity in place that will give you some money to help with your facade, help clean up the properties within the redevelopment zone, landscape etc. Are you saying that as a property owner, you would not want any help at all? That you can find it within your budget to do what is required to make your building better looking thus attracting more business and taking responsibility for the betterment of the downtown? I don't know many businesses or property owners that don't want money to help with their investment.
A DMC or SID does NOT manage your property for you. If you want that, hire a private property manager yourself. I don't think that anyone realizes exactly what a SID does despite the reports.
There already are ordinances from the town that say what we can and cannot do to our residential properties. Why then should the commercial property owners not be held accountable for their buildings as well?
I don't see that at all. I see money that could be used to help better the downtown and help property owners and businesses with making the downtown a wonderful place to shop. Are you a property owner? Are you a business owner? Or both? What I think that SO has a vision problem. Nobody knows what the vision of SO is. I don't. Does anyone? Is there a Master Plan to follow? Let's say for instance that a vision study is done by sending out a questionnaire to all the residents and businesses in SO as to what they would like to see the vision of SO be. You take those results and list the top 5 (for example). Then during these "closed door" deals, the residents would at least know that one of the top 5 visions is being worked on. Currently there are closed-door sessions for the parking garage that nobody knew about. But let's say that during the vision making process that parking was in the top 5, then the residents could feel at ease that something was being done to address our vision. Right now everything is being done willy-nilly style in hopes that if some development is done then everyone can relax and the BOT can say that they did something. I don't understand such a resistance from the BOT and the property owners to make the downtown what it should be. What are we afraid of? | ||
| Parkingsux Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 30 Registered: 6-2005 |
The decisions of Piloted Development has caused an inadequacy for the establishment of a SID. The concern is the same as you have indicated. A lack of public input into the decision making process in town. A few recommendations were put forth through considerable effort of committee members who have had the best interest of our village at heart. Unfortunately, Dr. Rosen has now backed us into square one after 4 years of effort. What is noteworthy is that up until the election there was a willingness of the Board to engage in some form of DRMC. Post-election, they simply want to continue total control. There record of achievement and credibility over the Redevelopment efforts as it exists today is totally lacking in openness and in an ability to engage public opinion. Patrick said it. If they want to fund it, they'll find a way. | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 19 Registered: 7-2005 |
I cant get over "SID" it reminds me of sitting in health class | ||
| Parkingsux Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 33 Registered: 6-2005 |
Why do you choose a weapon for your avatar? Do you belong in health class?  | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 319 Registered: 4-2005 |
A SID is the most viable option right now for the town unless people want to wait another several years to see substantial progress. The Politics of Progress – I applaud all the volunteers who made recommendations to the BOT. However, at the end of the day the BOT would accept such recommendations in “theory” as oppose to in “practice”. I don’t know any politician would backtrack and say “We may have been wrong about a DRMC for over 4 years, so now we understand and will implement one” – thus buh-bye reelection. #1 Concern of Businesses and Residents: FINANCES This is what gets me… the SID is a “partnership” between the residents and the businesses which we should embrace. Instead people have opted to pointing the finger at who will benefit more, therefore implying who should pick up the cost. NEWS FLASH – everyone wins when our downtown is great. Commercial properties gains for obvious reasons and residential properties will gain as well. How? Because potential buyers don’t just look at a house without looking at the overall quality and beauty of a town. Also for those people who are saying the “village should find the source of money and pay for it”. Well, that source of money is from taxes and not a miracle fund in a vaullt in Village Hall. Your money is their money. How will the SID operate? NJ law requires SIDs to create an “independent” district management association of professionals. It could consist of a single professional manager with any number of part-time and full time professionals or a volunteer management association. It’s imperative that we work with the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs to implement the most effective way to improve our business district. Side note: Please read the Maplewood Township website to see economic development proposals when "professionals" are more involved... it will blow your mind. Important Numbers and Figures to take into consideration: In NJ, the average SID budget is approximately $300,000, the question about what’s fair - Which businesses pay. How much do they pay? How often do they pay? Can be answered as follows: The individual SID determines the assessment formula it will use. However, property and business owners should be included in its development in order to formulate a fair and agreeable method. Assessments may be calculated as a function of: Property valuation Property owners may be charged as a percentage of the assessed value of their property. For example, Cranford's property owners annually pay 40 cents per $100 of assessed value. Owners in Trenton's SID pay an assessment equal to 4.5 percent of their structure's property taxes, an average of $600 per year. Square footage The assessment may be calculated as some value per square foot of a property. Grand Central property owners annually pay 12.4 cents per square foot of property. Owners included in the 34th Street Partnership pay 19 cents per square foot. Street frontage Owners may be taxed per linear foot of a property's street frontage. For example, the Moshulu BID charges $30 per linear foot of street frontage per year; Journal Square's SID annually charges $40 per foot. BUT WHO DECIDES WHICH ONE WE CHOOSE? THE PUBLIC MUST BE HEARD! Of course and this is how it will happen. With a SID there is also a Board of Directors who serve in an advisory capacity to the village by establishing priorities and providing expertise and experience in decision –making. The Board is made up of: 1) Business Owners 2) Property Owners 3) Local Residents 4) Local Government 5) Non-profit organizations and institutions WILL THE BUSINESSES COME ON BOARD? ...they haven't in the past I dunno... depends on how this issue is presented. Scenario #1: “Do you want another TAX on your business?” or Scenario #2: “Would you be interested in entering into a joint partnership with residents to improve the downtown? Ok? Really… then here’s some information for you…” FINAL REFLECTIONS I don’t claim to be an expert in this topic but from my research, I think this is the best option presenting itself right now. Yes, maybe Dr. Rosen didn’t bring this up at the appropriate time but guess what? We’re talking about and that’s a good thing… Patrick has said that the previous recommendations from committees were that a SID was not the best option “at that time”. Well years have passed… we still have a problem that needs to be recognized and we need to reevaluate once again, whether or not a SID would be beneficial to us. We can speculate about why a SID won’t work all we want, but I challenge anyone to find information on places that have failed to improve once a SID was implemented. I’ve looked through several documents and made phone calls today… I’m still not getting anything. Just my opinions… feel free to offer a rebuttal from the other standpoint. Let’s get all the information out there and maybe the village will be able to come to a consensus on this matter because it is VERY important. SMILE  -Sheena P.S. If you’d like to see any documents and what not that I have, I’d love to share. Just PL me with your email address. Some information above is courtesy of a report entitled "STRATEGIC FRAME WORK FOR COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION" - an Exploratory Study to Establish a Special Improvement District on Springfield and South Orange Avenues, Newark, NJ | ||
| Parkingsux Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 41 Registered: 6-2005 |
So its OK to obfuscate the issue as long as one succeeds at the election. The election issue was pivotal to all candidates who ran. The winners should stand behind their campaign promises. They are proving once again their total lack of credibility and openness to the process of governing. I guess some owe political patronage if one did not expend one personal dollar for the election effort. Hypocrites! No thanks, Sheena. You're right about one thing, there is no need for further discussion. | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 320 Registered: 4-2005 |
I never said there is no need for further discussion... we need it... and we need some sort of consensus. Parkingsux - you and I both know that the election didn't turn out the way WE wanted it to... (with the exception of one person) but we can't keep banking on "in 2 years...." "in 4 years........" etc. See what I'm saying? We must work with the people who are in the positions of authority and not always be the antagonist. Nothing will get accomplished and everyone suffers as a result. GlassJoe - You're such a sweethear, lol. I'm not giving into anyone. If anything, I'm trying to be objective on this. If someone can refute what I'm saying with substantial documentation - then I'll admit a SID might not be the best. But I'm waiting for someone to come up with something that will get done and will get the approval it needs so we're not sitting around 5 years from now talking about "remember on MOL when the SID was being discussed"... | ||
| patjoyce Citizen Username: Patjoyce Post Number: 69 Registered: 7-2001 |
The "not at this time" portion of the recommendation meant at a time when re-development was so non-existent that major portions of downtown looked liked a blighted area. The empty store fronts (shop-rite) and holes in the ground (Beifus and Rug Store site) have not gone away. It is very difficult to get property owners and business owners to pay into a SID and envision what if any benefits would come of it when those major parcels remain the way they are. "Not at this time" meant at a time when many business and property owners were convinced that those who control redevelopment in the governinig body were not inclusive and open in their discussions about the future of the business district. Closed Session discussions are ocurring right now regarding a parking deck, probably the most important piece in the redevelopment puzzle, and the public is told that details cannot be disclosed. A "vision" of how the business district could look where it intersects with the river was presented to the BOT by the River Walk committee. That "vision" which included the position of the parking deck should be discussed and consulted before any further redevelopmen occurs in the CBD. It is easy to ask others to pony up ( I wonder what the student position is on SHU students paying a $100 annual surcharge to the Village to cover Public Safety costs) it is more difficult to create a consensus on what should be done downtown and how can it be afforded. Many other towns who have SIDS now, started with an independent DMC who worked with the CBD to solve problems. Only after the DMC and the CBD came to to trust one another did the discussion of a SID begin. "Not at this time" is not a moment in time but rather a description of the state of the downtown and the practices of those who continue to enagage in shrouded negotiations which involve extremely important public issues. The time will be right when the landscape and climate change. Patrick |
