| Author |
Message |
    
deadwhitemale
Citizen
Username: Deadwhitemale
Post Number: 365
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 12:27 pm: | 
|
A great thread!!!
From what I read here, Mr. Gross has a plate so full that any prurient inferences on line must take into account that he has no time or energy remaining, after dealing with all the local B.S.
Give him a break and a vacation.
DWM |
Eric DeVaris
Citizen
Username: Eric_devaris
Post Number: 28
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 7:40 pm: |
|
It is more than two months ago that the solid arguments presented on this board on PILOTs, prompted me to offer to organize an informational public meeting given by the governing body. Since then, several posters have expressed an interest, no, they have insisted, that such meeting takes place a.s.a.p. before the summer school-break. Two Village trustees, Messrs. Joyce and Rosner, supported the idea. I offered my living room for June 19. The Village attorney Mr. Matthews, set aside my offer and decided: “John and I will be the facilitators for the meeting”. That was two months ago, and we have not a meeting date yet!
Here we are at the end of July, with a developer’s agreement on Beifus expected any moment. We are promised a public meeting when the Trustees discuss the Beifus agreement. But how good a participant to this forum can we, the public be, if we are not appraised of the benefits and drawbacks of an already signed PILOT agreement with the Gaslight Commons?
I realize that Messrs. Matthews and Gross are busy, but this meeting will be of great service to our community, and as such it should be on top of their priority list. WHEN is it going to be??????
Now that Mr. Matthews promised not to read or write on this board any longer, who is going to coordinate the date of the meeting and announce it here? Mr. Rosner?
Eric DeVaris
P.S. Forgive the two-thread posting. The date subject has been discussed extensively in both threads.
|
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 53
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 7:41 pm: |
|
Some questions:
1. As David Lackey noted, how can 2 yeses out of a 6-person Board be valid?
2. What steps are being taken by the BOT to change operating procedure so that a 2-yes vote does not constitute decision-making in the future?
3. Are there rules in place were a citizens' referendum can overturn a BOT 2-yes out of 6 vote?
4. How could Mr. Rosner claim that he could not vote Yeah or Nay on a contract merely because he missed ONE meeting?
5. Things happen incredibly slowly in S.O. as we all know (as one poster suggested, S.O.'s slogan should be "South Orange: Home of the 'Coming Soon' Sign"). Then how is it that the contract for the most important, and costly, Village Employee gets decided so quickly, and a Trustee who has served for FOUR YEARS nonetheless is forced to abstain on the Vote of Confidence (contract) because the vote happened while he was away for a week or two on vacation?
|
tototoo
Citizen
Username: Tototoo
Post Number: 135
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 7:53 pm: |
|
Has anyone here ever heard of tabling a vote, for either (a) lack of quorum, or (b) clearly, not enough of us are informed enough to vote? Just a thought ... |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 184
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 10:47 pm: |
|
Having held a board of trustees position for many years -- I can tell you that to hold up a vote b/c a trustee is absent is sometimes impractical.
Of course, its relative -- for instance on a major budget item I would expect that all trustees would express their opinion.
I also think its worth remembering that the trustees give much of their time to this community. You may not agree with their opinions or positions -- nevertheless -- its worth a thank you now and then.
Pete
|
deepthroat
Citizen
Username: Deepthroat
Post Number: 7
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 29, 2003 - 10:50 pm: |
|
quote:I also think its (sic) worth remembering that the trustees give much of their time to this community. You may not agree with their opinions or positions -- nevertheless -- its (sic) worth a thank you now and then.
Welcome to Maplewood Online -- South Orange Specific, Mr. Steglitz. I'll bend over if and only if you promise to disclothes yourself to the public. Ante up, clerk-boy!
--DT
I'll keep digging, just for you!
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 531
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 9:42 am: |
|
Washashore: I said I abstained because I missed a meeting where other trustees came to a decision. If they had not reached a decision and there was going to be more discussion, then I would not have abstained.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 532
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 9:48 am: |
|
The PILOT /Tax abatements meeting has been rescheduled for Thursday August 7th at 7:30. The meeting will be videotaped and Dr. Rosen says he will make arrangements for it to be shown more than once. I will post the TV schedule when I have that information.
Ed Matthews and John Gross will be the moderators. |
dgm
Citizen
Username: Dgm
Post Number: 128
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 9:56 am: |
|
damn, I'll be on vacation |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 4929
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 9:58 am: |
|
Pretty certain DT's post was a personal attack, so in my new "mr civility" mode, I am implementing the "seasonal suspension": suspension through the summer. |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 54
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 1:59 pm: |
|
Mr. Rosner:
Thank you for your efforts in getting the PILOT Informational re-scheduled in a timely fashion.
1. Where will the meeting be held on August 7th?
2. What forms of advertisement will be used to obtain the maximum number of residents? |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 55
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 2:04 pm: |
|
Mr. Rosner:
Thank you for your efforts in getting the PILOT Informational re-scheduled in a timely fashion.
1. Where will the meeting be held on August 7th?
2. What forms of publicity will be used to obtain maximum resident awareness and attendance? |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 534
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 3:28 pm: |
|
The meeting will be at village hall.
I am doing a mass email and I suggest others do the same. My experience is that word of mouth is by far the best way to get people to come to a meeting. It will be posted on the village web site.
I am not sure if the meeting is going to be advertised in the paper. I will ask Mr. Gross.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 535
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 5:15 pm: |
|
The news-record was notified of the meeting and they should include in the weekly calendar.
|
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 322
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Back to the issue of Mr. Gross' contract....forgive me if this was discussed at the meeting but I was out of town at the time:
Does the contract provide for a SPECIFIC increase in compensation each year or is the increase tied to something like inflation or the CPI? Or...does the contract not address compensation at all?
The reason I ask is that 5 years is an awfully long time, particularly in this economic climate. If a contract is providing for a 5% raise annually, for example, that would be quite troubling for our taxes, when most employers are not doling out increases that size any longer.
Can someone help me understand? |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 358
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 1:12 pm: |
|
I would also like to know what, if any, compensation for assistant emergency management director was voted on. (I'm looking into getting basic cable so I can watch the meetings/rebroadcasts.) Thanks. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 536
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 6:47 pm: |
|
There is no immediate increase in salary for Mr. Gross. He is to be reviewed and a salary survey done with his salary to be negoiated to make sure his salary is commensurate with that paid to other administrators. His contract does provide he is to get salary increases which are commensurate with those increases given to other supervisory personnel. There is also a provision that his salary be 3% higher than the next highest paid employee. There are not however any automatic increases.
|
snshirsch
Citizen
Username: Snshirsch
Post Number: 81
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2003 - 12:34 pm: |
|
mrosner said:
"He went to school and took (and passed ) an exam to be CFO. He has the certificate hanging on his wall. He has prior experience as an administrator. "
These are not qualifications. What are his qualifications? Has he held the post of a village CFO in the past, where has he worked? What test must be passed to become a CFO?, I am not aware of one. The CPA exam is for a Certified Public Accountant, and the CFA for a Chartered Financial Analyst. I don't believe there is a qualifying exam to become a CFO, it is simply a named position, like a CEO, or company president. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 238
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 3, 2003 - 9:22 am: |
|
This week's edition of the News Record ran a first page story saying that Beifus has delivered a draft developer's agreement to the Village. The story says that Village Realtor Joseph Flood said demand for the first-floor retail space was better than expected, and that a large portion of it is already spoken for.
This speaks well for the Village and confirms what many Village residents have maintained,that South Orange is an attractive and desirable place in which to live or do business. The question is, if much of the retail space is spoken for, surely the prospective tenants must have some idea of the rent involved, even if the lease agreement is not final.To determine the ballpark amount of rent,Beifus must have known whether it was going to get a PILOT. How was this done if in fact a developer's agreement which incorporates
any tax abatement has not been finalized. Under N.J. law regarding tax abatements, the amount of rent that can be charged is provided for in the tax abatement legislation. The draft agreement asked for a tax abatement but didn't have any specifice numbers. Who fills in the numbers? |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 239
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 3, 2003 - 9:36 am: |
|
Municipal tax impact to the Village - $250,000. This was the number given in the South Orange Redevelopment update insert in the May Gaslight. This was a PILOT figure since it said "municipal"tax impact. The gross number was misleading since it did not deduct the amount of taxes Beifus was presently paying,just as the $500,000 given for the Gaslight was misleading since it didn't deduct the $80,000 that was already being paid. |
scollins
Citizen
Username: Scollins
Post Number: 35
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, August 3, 2003 - 10:52 am: |
|
doublea,
Some numbers were filled in at election time. Leadership with Vision got $2000.00 each from at least three engineering firms. Not to mention the law firm that gave them $2,000.00 as well. One firm even gave them the money the day after the election.
Check out http://www.elec.state.nj.us |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 537
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 4, 2003 - 11:20 am: |
|
Doublea: I don't think the market value for rents would change because of a PILOT. I am sure Mr. Beifus will be looking to maximize his income.
I think that Mr. Flood wants people and potential renters to think that there is a lot of interest whether there was or not. If he stated there was little interest then I don't think he could get the maximum dollar/sq. foot. Hopefully there is a good interest but I personally do not read anything into his statements.
So, I completely disagree with you as to whether he would have to know whether he is going to get a PILOT (and the BOT has not been asked nor have we discussed giving him one) in order to determine rents.
I will further state, that I have not had any discussion nor have I given any promises regarding a PILOT/Tax Abatement to any prospective developer.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 538
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 4, 2003 - 11:58 am: |
|
Snhirsch: My comments were in response to one question. There is an exam given to be a CFO for municipalities and your comments do not hold for the public sector. The exam is fairly comprehensive and consists of several parts and there are education requirements. Just for the record though since your post is misleading:
to take the exam one must have a high school degree as well as a degree
from a four year college of recognized standing with a major course of study
in business administration, accounting or equivelent subject. (Some college
in other areas with experience can also qualify.)
>
> The applicant must also furnish proofs that he/she has received
certificates indicating satisfactory completion of complete training courses
in municipal finance administration, municipal current fund accounting I and II, municipal capital and trust fund accounting, municipal utility fund accounting, municipal budget preparation and control and principles of
financial management. Finally the applicant must also have received a
certificate indicating satisfactory completion of a complete training course
in the preparation of annual financial statements. These courses are offered
by the Division of Local Government Services or Rutgers University
>
> The exam must be written or written and oral and "shall be of such
character as fairly to test and determine the ability of the person tested
to perform the duties of chief financial officer"
>
> A certificate lasts for two years and renewal requires 3.0 continuing
education units. 1 units equals 10 hours.
If you would like a copy of his resume so you can see what his prior job experience is, I suggest that you contact him.
Mr. Gross has been with the village several years now so clearly this is not about what his qualifications are/were, it has become something more personal.
Scollins: I was very vocal 6 years ago about campaign financing. The system needs fixing at every political level. We asked a lot of people for money and a lot of people gave money. Some people donated to both tickets. Some people who had lawn signs up for the O'Leary ticket also donated to our ticket.
The only time anyone complains is when the ticket they supported does not win. It costs money to run a campaign.
As it is, the voter turnout is low no matter how many reminders are sent, no matter how many phone calls are made and no matter how many lawns signs are put up. The best solution to the problem is for people to go out and vote every election no matter how unimportant it might seem. And they should find out about whom the person/people they are voting for, where they stand, what they have done in the past, etc. A person could win the BOE elections with just absentee ballots because the turnout is so poor.
So, Scollins, instead of trying to imply that there might have been something wrong with a political ticket accepting money from engineering firms, try to figure out how to get people to vote responsibly so that the issue of who gave what to which campaign becomes unimportant.
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 3261
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 4, 2003 - 12:22 pm: |
|
The article in the News Record last week indicated that the proposal emailed to South Orange officials by Beifus included a request for tax abatements. I believe this information was obtained by the paper from an SO Village official.
Technically this probably isn't a "PILOT proposal", but if the information in the paper was correct, certainly indicates the direction the developer is heading in.
|
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 241
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 4, 2003 - 12:50 pm: |
|
Mark: I'll guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens with a tax abatement. The reason I mentioned the demand for the retail space was to reiterate the opinion that others have expressed on this board, viz. that South Orange is an extremely viable and attractive community and there should not have to be any need to provide tax abatements. I understand that you can only speak for yourself, but I wonder about any other discussions that might have taken place. Once again, I reiterate that asking Beifus to landscape the remaining buffer is not a sufficient reason to grant him a tax abatment. The reduced buffer resulted because the BOT agreed to reduce it at Beifus' request,with Patrick Joyce voting against and you abstaining. That's that and I'm not going any further.
My other post dealing with the figures shown in the "South Orange Redevelopment Update" is trying to get some "truth in advertising." The numbers were misleading and clearly were of a political spin. The fact of the matter is that most residents of South Orange probably don't even look at them or if they do, they don't question them. It is my opinion that the powers that be know this and therefore use it to the hilt. How's about we try to stop the politicking and have some truth in advertising. This applies to the Performing Arts Center as well. I know there are many things that you can't control, but maybe you can try to convey the message. Thanks. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 539
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 4, 2003 - 1:23 pm: |
|
The numbers were misleading but yours are not 100% accurate either. The village was only getting $20,000 from the Brunner dealership. The county was getting about $15,000 and the balance went to the schools. So the village now gets $500,000 instead of $20,000.
The BOT votes on the developer's agreement and on a PILOT. The BOT has not authorized any party to negotiate a PILOT agreement, however I know it will come up in discussions.
There is no question that S. Orange is attractive to many developers and retailers. We do understand that we have limitations because of the small amount of space and very few larger locations. There will be over 11,000 sq. feet of new retail space available at Beifus and I think there will be no shortage of retailers. However that is one part of the project and Mr. Beifus will be making a presentation on the whole project (retail and residential). It would not be fair unless the BOT agreed to keep an open mind and listened to his (probable) request for a PILOT.
|
woodstock
Citizen
Username: Woodstock
Post Number: 279
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 7, 2003 - 5:11 pm: |
|
Just a reminder. The PILOT Progam meeting is tonight at Village Hall at 7:30pm. Right?
Waiting For The Electrician, Or Someone Like Him
|
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 334
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 7, 2003 - 5:39 pm: |
|
Will it be televised LIVE? |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 202
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 7, 2003 - 6:29 pm: |
|
I unfortunately have another commitment tonight -- will the meeting go past 9:30? If so, I would stop by.
thx Pete |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page