| Author | Message | ||
     doublea Citizen Username: Doublea Post Number: 279 Registered: 3-2003 |
At last night's BOT meeting, the 2003-04 municpal budget was presented for final adoption. When several members of the BOT voiced concern that the 4.5% increase in the budget on the table would lead to a budget increase of 15-22% in 2004-2005, it was agreed to not vote on the budget as proposed but to basically go back to the drawing board to see what cuts could be made on the cost side. Patrick Joyce said that we were in a "crisis" situation, and most of the members of the Board agreed. This was really a scary picture and maybe sometimes it takes a crisis to force people to take action. I am not being critical or negative here but just reporting what happened, and it is a very tough road ahead. No doubt there will be dialogue on this board on this subject, and hopefully it will be constructive; anyone watching last night's meeting has to be seriously concerned about the severity of the problem. I know that several trustees read or post on this board and maybe that can be helpful. In explaining why South Orange is in this position, Trustees Steglitz and Rosen referred to the fact that Seton Hall, which owns 15% of the property, in terms of assessable value, is tax exempt. Trustee Steglitz said Seton Hall pays "little if nothing " to the Village, by way of an in lieu of payment. Trustee Rosner, earlier this year you said that Seton Hall paid $150,000 as an in lieu of payment. Is this correct, and what does Seton Hall pay? By way of information, based on a $14 million municpal budget, every 1% increase or decrease in revenues equals $140,000. Thus, by way of illustration, if SH in fact $150,000,this would result in a decrease of 1.07% in municpal taxes paid by other South Orange taxpayers. | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 381 Registered: 5-2001 |
Looks like there wasn't any response yesterday due to MOL being down. Now that it's back up...let the debating begin..... I agree we are in a crisis situation & serious steps need to be taken...like evaluating EVERY position in the Village & see if headcount can be reduced. Re-evaluating all raises that have been given recently. Questioning why employees of the Village do not contribute to Health benefits like most of us do at our jobs (especially in light of the excuse given that the majority of our tax increase is due to healthcare costs). Verify timesheets for Village employees like Ed Matthews, who are spending half their day reading MOL (is the Village being charged for this time??) | ||
| CageyD Citizen Username: Cageyd Post Number: 6 Registered: 6-2003 |
Regarding finding ways to cut costs - beyond having employees pay some of the cost of their health coverage which absolutely should take place - are their bigger things that can be done? Has it every been considered to work with Maplewood and combine certain departments like the police dept, public works, etc. The two towns are pretty small and we could both probably save money by more closely joining our towns services. Also, re: Seton Hall has anyone ever approached them to relocate their bookstore to town? I have seen other colleges do this. The bookstore is usually run by a large bookstore chain and the back of the store is text books and the front is a regular store. This way the town could benefit from a new bookstore and bring more people into town, and fill up some of the blighted empty storefronts in town. | ||
| alison Citizen Username: Alison Post Number: 50 Registered: 6-2002 |
The bookstore idea is a great idea! | ||
| Allan J Rosen Citizen Username: Allanrosen Post Number: 9 Registered: 4-2003 |
Seton Hall pays no (zero)taxes and does not contribute an in lieu of taxes donation. It does pay their share of the sewer assessment (a user fee). | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 599 Registered: 4-2002 |
Doublea: Allan was referring to the main campus. The PILOT I referred to at one point was for property that is outside the campus. I think the agreement calls for them to pay $143,000 although legally not required. My feeling is the state gave them this exemption and the state should pony up the money or change the legislation. Three years ago I suggested (and the news-record put it in the paper) that each full-time student be assesed $50.00 a semester to be used towards the village's public safety departments (Police and Fire). This would have generated over $500,000 a year and at no cost to the university. And what parent would not want to give $100.00 a year to help insure their child's safety? Well, the university has consistenty refused to add this line to the tuition bill. I plan to raise the issue again this year. It is time for SHU to realize they have a moral responsibiliy even if they do not have a legal one. The portion paid to health benefits is negotiated and will be discussed during the next round. It is an issue that has been raised in the past and clearly needs to be addressed as a priority. The operators of the bookstore insist that it the best placement of the store for the university and them is on campus. I know I asked the same question a few years ago because it seemed like such a good idea to move it to the downtown. As for sharing services, it would seem that there could be some savings. It would seem that partnering with Maplewood would make the most sense in the long run, and both villages need to address this issue soon (this was raised by Trustee Rosen at the last meeting again and he has been the most consistent in trying to get both towns moving). | ||
| susan1014 Citizen Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 42 Registered: 3-2002 |
You know, when I was in college, money was very tight. Adding $50-100 dollars to the miscellaneous fees that I had to pay would have been a very real burden to either financial aid, my family or my meager on-campus budget. I'm sure that the campus is already paying for campus security forces to cover the routine stuff. Tell me that other campuses assess a "tax" for local policing, and I'll consider changing my opinion. Certainly this has not been true at any of the colleges that I've been at. I think the idea is that a college is an asset to the town. | ||
| doublea Citizen Username: Doublea Post Number: 280 Registered: 3-2003 |
mrosner: I guess you've answered the question, but when you said $150,000 earlier this year, I was under the impression that it was for the main campus. Your answer to me at that time was in response to my comment that I know that several years ago Monmouth University started making an in lieu of payment to West Long Branch of $100,000, which no doubt has increased since then. As mentioned at the BOT meeting Monday evening, the Village incurs substantial expenses for the fire and police departments, which would not be incurred without Seton Hall. On another note, the last I heard was that the game plan for SOPAC was to have Seton Hall acquire the three empty stores west of the trestle on So.Orange Ave. for use as classrooms for their theater dept. Is this still the plan and if so, would these stores then be tax exempt? | ||
| Dan Shelffo Citizen Username: Openspacer Post Number: 58 Registered: 6-2001 |
I have been reading about colleges collecting fees from students to support Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGs.). Almost all of the students are unaware that these fees are being assessed. In order to not pay them the student must be aware of them and decline payment. Most colleges just collect the fees and pass them on. Maybe we could ask SHU to alert students to this practice and ask the student to divert the fees to a public safety fund, which goes to fund S.O. Police and Fire departments. Also, during a tax review with my accountant, he noticed that my contribution for my health insurance was being deducted after taxes. He suggested that my company make this deduction before taxes. It requires some administration on the part of the employer but in the long run the company saves money by reducing the payroll tax and in my companies case each employee saved about $1,000 in taxes. This might help soften the blow of a Village employee taking on some of the expense of health insurance. The accountant was Anthony DeFranco who is in S.O. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 600 Registered: 4-2002 |
Susan: My daughter graduated college last year and is now in law school. I realize that money is tight. However, the question is about fairness and SHU rely's on the village for police and fire protection. The village has a population of 17,000 persons. SHU has an average daily population of about 10,000 persons. It is easy to see why we need their help. SHU was given the names of several schools that give significant contributions to towns including at least two that had an add-on to the student's bill. While it is nice to have a college in town, the cost factor is enormous. By the way, SHU also usues our ballfields, tennis courts, etc. Many campuses have their own facilities. One way or another the village needs SHU to step up and contribute more to the village financially. Dan: The village would put in a plan that allows for pre-tax dollars to be used to pay for health benefits (I am in that business, so I would know to do). Doublea: SHU has not decided if they want those two stores yet, but they will probably be used by SOPAC. | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 5132 Registered: 5-2001  |
What is the assessed value of SHU's property? | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 226 Registered: 11-2001 |
For the amount of times I have to call the police on the students partying on our block at 3am and waking up my family, $50-$100 per student probably would cover it however how many of our resources are used on other blocks for the same reason(s)? | ||
| nwyave Citizen Username: Mesh Post Number: 98 Registered: 1-2003 |
I think we should think twice about letting those two store fronts be used by SOPAC. Those properties seem to be prime spots (not to mention their architectural look) if the downtown does ever get developed and/or if SOPAC is built. If thats the case, they would be ratables for the town. Why take them and put them with SOPAC which would not generate tax revenue? In my opinion, we have got to think along tax revenue lines - what will keep taxes down - use by SOPAC, if I understand correctly, will not benefit our taxe base. It would be nice to have SOPAC if it turns out to be feasable from a tax perspective. If its going to wind up costing residents, either in hard dollars or in lost revenues by taking properties off the tax roll, I would seriously question whether we should go forward with this project. Our tax situation dictates this and articles such as that appearing in todays Record does do much for the town. Residents have to be given the impression that extraordinary measures are being taken and we are dealing with this crisis accordingly and taxes one way or another will be kept under control. Otherwise, I believe that what Trustee Steglitz said the other night at the BOT meeting will occur - an exodus from the town. That would be truly unfortunate. | ||
| vermontgolfer Citizen Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 75 Registered: 12-2002 |
Mark, Is there any research available or if not could the town somehow get supporting information from other university towns, that may do just such a fee program, that we could then use to help support our position with SHU? Dave, At the meeting the other night, I think it was Allan who said that SHU would represent about 15% of the rateables, if they were taxed, I think. | ||
| growler Citizen Username: Growler Post Number: 227 Registered: 11-2001 |
Does anyone know what Montclair State does for their town? Or other colleges in NJ towns? | ||
| doublea Citizen Username: Doublea Post Number: 281 Registered: 3-2003 |
Today's News Record reports that in November, N.J. Transit put the property in question up for bid and a developer named Mylenki bid $316,000 for the property and was scheduled to close the end of this month. Mylenki says the Village never put in a bid. Now South Orange is threatening to commence condemnation prceedings against Mylanki if he goes ahead and acquires the property. So in other words, not only will it cost S.O. for the legal proceedings, but as nwyave says, the properties won't be on the tax rolls. Where was the planning in this? | ||
| Dave Ross Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 5137 Registered: 5-2001 |
So I guess the next question should be: what is the total budget and what % is the $150,000 that SHU is paying? Does Drew University pay taxes to Madison? It may be a better comparison, as it's affiliated with the Methodist Church. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 223 Registered: 8-2002 |
Montclair is a state school, so that example may not be the best comparison. It would be interesting to look at other Catholic and private colleges, in metro/suburban areas, say Boston College (my alma mater!), Notre Dame, St. Joe's etc. I might add, though, since SHU is diocesan and not run by an order (e.g, Jesuits) -- this could impact their stinginess. I know nothing about their finances and don't want to imply I do -- but unless they are fully independent (university vs rest of the Newark diocese) -- it might mean they are pretty cash strapped right now. I did a quick google search -- and didn't find any info specific to the universites I posted above. Did find that the aldermen in Newton talking similarly about BC as we are about SHU (not enough payment in-lieu of taxes!). Pete | ||
| patjoyce Citizen Username: Patjoyce Post Number: 27 Registered: 7-2001 |
I know that a couple of years ago a citizen group did some research in this area and I'm trying to track it down. When I find it I'll post it. On a personal note Pete, I'm an Eagle also (A&S '79). Patrick | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 601 Registered: 4-2002 |
Dave, I don't have an exact number, but I am not sure a comparison using assessed values would make sense. They have a large number of students and staff using only 37 acres. Nwyave, Doublea: NJ Transit and the high bidder have known that S Orange has intended to use the property. NJ Transit wanted to go ahead anyway to find out what the property would get on the open market. The theory behind SOPAC is that it will be a destination and therefore will be a draw to bring people into the downtown. That will increase the value of the other real estate in the downtown eventually increasing the ratables. In other words the total value of the downtown would be greater with SOPAC than without it (this is the reasoning, although I have had some other thoughts about the project). I do not know if Drew has an agreement with Madison. The problem with getting the kind of information that would help build a stronger case is that there is no way to obtain without calling each town/city to find out (I am talking the whole country and not just NJ). I think in our case, the argument is already very strong and SHU would rather not put up a cent as long as they are not legally required to do so. |
