| Author |
Message |
    
David Lackey
Citizen
Username: Davidlackey
Post Number: 40
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 8:49 am: | 
|
Mark, Allan, Patrick,
Is it safe to assume that any discussions regarding tax abatements/PILOTS for Beifus and New Market will be held in private? These decisions are going to have an enormous impact on residents' property taxes for years to come.
You may take this as sounding negative, but I can hear it coming already..."They won't move forward without huge tax incentives. We want them to build, so we had to bend over backwards and do whatever they asked." Please do not let South Orange taxpayers get taken to the cleaners just because we want a new supermaket. We want lower taxes, too, and if the two largest development projects in town don't pay their fair share, some of us will be very disappointed and others will be downright angry.
The town has already made a large concession to Beifus by allowing the planned 5-floor building to break our maximum height code. Allowing a building to be so much larger than anything else around it should have been incentive enough. Now they want a tax break. I hope they don't end up paying less than they do now for the empty lot. (Now that really sounds negative...sorry.) |
dgm
Citizen
Username: Dgm
Post Number: 137
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 9:10 am: |
|
South Orange, home of the "School Taxes Abated Here" sign. Once you start giving them out, everyone wants one. Just create an eyesore (like Beifus) and demand one.... The school district just has less assessed value to levy taxes on... Perhaps the quid pro quo would be a 10,000 square foot greenspace buffer zone created between the Beifus development and the pool... Just musing, you know... |
scollins
Citizen
Username: Scollins
Post Number: 44
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 10:08 am: |
|
Don't forget the variance that Beifus got
(directly from the BOT, bypassing the Planning Board) allowing them to build into the pool area.
Who pays for that? |
scollins
Citizen
Username: Scollins
Post Number: 45
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 10:43 am: |
|
Don't forget the variance that Beifus got
(directly from the BOT, bypassing the Planning Board) allowing them to build into the pool area.
Who pays for that? |
patjoyce
Citizen
Username: Patjoyce
Post Number: 25
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 10:48 am: |
|
David - I don't believe the discussions should occur in closed sessions. Without revealing sensitive financial data of the developer, the financial impact of any proposed abatement could be debated publicly by elected officials. The proper progression should be that the Finance Committee of the BOT should receive a presentation regarding proposed tax incentives. (Those meetings are open to the public) That committee should discuss pros and cons and then report to the BOT at the ensuing conference agenda meeting. The board as a whole should discuss pros and cons at that public meeting, take public input at the next regular meeting, and then publicly vote on a resolution or ordinance depending upon what is required. The argument that the board does not want to tip its hand by discussing the issue publicly does not work in the municipal government model. The financial impact of the decision affects every resident of the Village and therefor every resident of the Village should have an opportunity to weigh in.
Patrick |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 370
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Well stated, Patrick. Bravo! |
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 373
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 1:22 pm: |
|
Following up on comments by David & dgm, to me it seems rather simple - these developers want something - fine - but there needs to be a "cost".
Beifus wants a tax abatement - have him rehabilitate the pool and/or the pool locker rooms and/or the pool concessions and/or the pool landscaping in exchange. These improvements will make his property more desirable & will "give back" to the community.
New Market wants a tax abatement - have them help fund a rehabilitation of the firehouse and/or the train station. These improvements will make his property more desirable & will "give back" to the community.
Pulte wants the road in the Quarry to be private - have them "donate" some of the lots on Underhill/Harding as Open Space and/or fund sidewalks along the rest of Tillou Rd. These improvements will make his property more desirable & will "give back" to the community.
These developers know the pressure is on for progress and the public is tired of seeing "Coming Soon" signs. Let's not give in right away & give them everything they want without them giving us something in return.
Seems simple to me. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 271
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 5, 2003 - 3:15 pm: |
|
From the Asbury Park Press, Sept. 5, 2003
"Asbury Park council OKs tax abatements"
" The City Council has adopted an ordinance to allow the beachfront developer to go ahead with previously agreed-to tax abatements for the buyers of proposed condominiums on the waterfront.
As set up, owners of the new condominiums in the prime renewal area.... would pay 52.5% of the city's tax rate on the sale price of their unit for the first five years, said Thomas Neff, an attorney representing the city on tax abatements.
The payment would be based on the sale price and not the assessed value, which is usually used for tax payments. Buyers would pay 77.5% of the tax rate for the second five years.
The tax abatement, which sets up a payment in lieu of taxes, would end after 10 years....
Councilman John Hamilton said before the vote that he would support the tax break because council had agreed to it in its earlier deliberations and agreements with Asbury Partners (the developers).
But Hamilton said his concern was that the payments that will be made will bypass the city schools, which need to be funded to encourage parents to move into the city.
"What this doesn't do is get money into the school system," Hamilton said."
doublea editorial comment: Asbury Park is an Abbott District which receives 95% of its school funding from the state, and yet a PILOT is a concern. 'nuf said.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page