South Orange BOT election

To their credit, SOForward's web site lists this as one of their platform goals:

"Revive the Citizens Budget Advisory Committee to maximize taxpayer value."

Having been co-chair of the CBAC for the past 5 years, I can tell you that it has been treated as an afterthought, allowed to dwindle to just 2 members, and not been involved in the process of drafting the budget for at least that period of time.  I think that a lot of this fell on the shoulders of Barry Lewis, who was very good at keeping the budget under the cap, and thus reducing the need for an advisory committee's input.  But the new budget raises taxes by 1.99% and the outlook going forward is concerning.  

At the most recent CBAC meeting, where we reviewed the budget that had already been introduced to the BOT on first reading, I noted that in the future this committee should be consulted throughout the process and needs to expand with additional members who have expertise in the various components of what typically makes up a municipal budget.  

mrincredible said:
For what it's worth Sheena also lists the new website as an achievement.
You can find it among her many other awesome achievements. 

The website that Torpey was allegedly working on?

yahooyahoo said:

mrincredible said:
For what it's worth Sheena also lists the new website as an achievement.
You can find it among her many other awesome achievements. 

The website that Torpey was allegedly working on?

No, sadly Torpey's efforts all wound up in the trash because he was paying an inexperienced hack to develop a municipal web site from scratch.  Nothing ever came of it.  Sheena and I had a meeting after she was elected and one of the things we talked about was a new web site.  We both agreed that buying one off the shelf was the right thing to do.  The new web site is a product from a company that produces municipal web sites as its primary product.  Could it be better?  Yes.  Is it way better than what we had 4 years ago?  Hell yeah.  But it is cheap, supportable, and maintainable.  

yahooyahoo said:

mrincredible said:
For what it's worth Sheena also lists the new website as an achievement.
You can find it among her many other awesome achievements. 

The website that Torpey was allegedly working on?

 Lol.  That website never materialized and Sheena did the right thing to go with a reputable vendor, Civic Plus, that provides the platform for a majority of Municipal websites.  

yahooyahoo said:
The website that Torpey was allegedly working on?

 I thought both sites were both referring to the current SO website.

Excited for Sheena's second term!

Did anyone else see this post on Deborah's campaign page?  Did she forget she has been on the Board of Trustees for 12 years (and on the Public Works Committee for a majority of those years) and is the one who votes for the funding to re-pave streets?  Bizarre!

 (although it is the Village Engineer who makes the recommendation on the specific streets to re-pave based on a quantitative analysis of many factors)

DDF's street was paved last year.

There is one million per year in the budget for repaving.  She ought to know that.  She votes for the budget.  It costs $300  per foot to pave.  I learned that by attending the public DPW meetings.  She is on that committee.

Unfortunately I feel like I'm talking to my drinking buddies on this thread.  We pretty much all agree.

No we don't. 

Getting streets paved is a gigantic budgetary problem.  Many people really don't pay attention to the budget and don't understand why they can't get their street paved - "what do we pay all of these taxes for?" 

It's understandable. It's difficult to explain to someone who is paying these taxes why their street can't be paved. There is a list that the town engineer compiles ranking streets - my street is no. 14. I found that out by emailing the town engineer. I don't know when that will be. 

ThT list can also change if there is an emergency or major issue on another street.  But the pot-o-cash doesn't change much.

mayhewdrive said:
Did anyone else see this post on Deborah's campaign page?  Did she forget she has been on the Board of Trustees for 12 years (and on the Public Works Committee for a majority of those years) and is the one who votes for the funding to re-pave streets?  Bizarre!
 (although it is the Village Engineer who makes the recommendation on the specific streets to re-pave based on a quantitative analysis of many factors)

Well, Tuxedo Park pavement IS particularly bad.  And I DO mention it to Village officials whenever I see them, so it's nice to see that someone is listening.  

FilmCarp said:
It costs $300  per foot to pave.  I learned that by attending the public DPW meetings.  She is on that committee.

If it costs $300/foot to pave, then the average SO homeowner pays enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of their house (assuming houses on both sides of the street).  It's unacceptable to let the streets get to this condition.  The property values on those streets suffer, not to mention repair costs for cars hitting potholes.  We simply need to allocate more of the budget to paving, and find other places to scrimp and save. 

mayhewdrive said:

yahooyahoo said:

mrincredible said:
For what it's worth Sheena also lists the new website as an achievement.
You can find it among her many other awesome achievements. 

The website that Torpey was allegedly working on?

 Lol.  That website never materialized and Sheena did the right thing to go with a reputable vendor, Civic Plus, that provides the platform for a majority of Municipal websites.  

 Regardless. I told Sheena that I thought the website was a turd in the punchbowl. It has all the info you need, but it's impossible to find it unless you use google to find it...

Rob_Sandow said:
 
If it costs $300/foot to pave, then the average SO homeowner pays enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of their house (assuming houses on both sides of the street).  It's unacceptable to let the streets get to this condition.  The property values on those streets suffer, not to mention repair costs for cars hitting potholes.  We simply need to allocate more of the budget to paving, and find other places to scrimp and save. 

 Let’s play - assuming the AVERAGE street costs $300k to re-pave, what should be cut to come up with enough money for 1-2 additional streets each year (let’s say $500,000)?  Or do you want an additional 2% increase in taxes?

Rob_Sandow said:
 
If it costs $300/foot to pave, then the average SO homeowner pays enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of their house (assuming houses on both sides of the street).  It's unacceptable to let the streets get to this condition.  The property values on those streets suffer, not to mention repair costs for cars hitting potholes.  We simply need to allocate more of the budget to paving, and find other places to scrimp and save. 

 I think we have what, 46 miles of road.  By my rough math that's about 70 million bucks to pave them all.  We are already running a pretty lean ship.  I wish we had a few more employees, frankly.  So how much do you want to raise taxes?

72.86 million, to get a little closer.

Rob_Sandow said:

FilmCarp said:
It costs $300  per foot to pave.  I learned that by attending the public DPW meetings.  She is on that committee.

 
If it costs $300/foot to pave, then the average SO homeowner pays enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of their house (assuming houses on both sides of the street).  It's unacceptable to let the streets get to this condition.  The property values on those streets suffer, not to mention repair costs for cars hitting potholes.  We simply need to allocate more of the budget to paving, and find other places to scrimp and save. 

I have 150 feet frontage. 150 x $300 = $45,000. My across the street neighbor has 150 ft. frontage, so we would split the cost, or $22,500 each.  My tax bill is higher than the average. The average tax bill in SO is $18,000, of which 25% or $4500 goes to South Orange. My neighbor's $4500 and my $4500 = $9000  - that's a total of $9000 to South Orange for the entire year. (It would be more if I used my actual taxes.)  The cost to pave the 150 feet in front of my house costs $45,000 - that's a heck of a lot more than your "enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of (my) house."

Cramer lots of lots in SO have more like 50 foot frontage so your math works. About 7500 simoleons to pave a 50 foot frontage.

This is one reason I would never run for Trustee. The municipal budget allows for making a small percentage of the population happy at any given time. 

And probably some of the people whose streets are getting replaced gripe about it. 

cramer said:
I have 150 feet frontage. 150 x $300 = $45,000. My across the street neighbor has 150 ft. frontage, so we would split the cost, or $22,500 each.  My tax bill is higher than the average. The average tax bill in SO is $18,000, of which 25% or $4500 goes to South Orange. My neighbor's $4500 and my $4500 = $9000  - that's a total of $9000 to South Orange for the entire year. (It would be more if I used my actual taxes.)  The cost to pave the 150 feet in front of my house costs $45,000 - that's a heck of a lot more than your "enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of (my) house."

 I like your math cramer, please run for the BOT. If I could turn back the clock to when my taxes were $18,000 I would settle for a dirt road and a flashlight.  I'd buy one of those houses myself but not easy to sell the one I have with these mega tax bills.

Street paving is in the capital budget. The 2018 capital budget provided for a total of $8.885,000 for the years 2018 - 2023. $1,385,000 for 2018 and $1,500,000 for the years 2019-2023. 95% of this is done through bonding. 

You have to scroll to the bottom of the budget to get to the capital budget. 

http://www.southorange.org/DocumentCenter/View/1362/South-Orange-2018-Budget---State-Form-Introduced---signed

Morganna said:
 I like your math cramer, please run for the BOT. If I could turn back the clock to when my taxes were $18,000 I would settle for a dirt road and a flashlight.  I'd buy one of those houses myself but not easy to sell the one I have with these mega tax bills.

My taxes were $18,000 22 years ago, and that is only because I appealed.  

mayhewdrive said:
 Let’s play - assuming the AVERAGE street costs $300k to re-pave, what should be cut to come up with enough money for 1-2 additional streets each year (let’s say $500,000)?  Or do you want an additional 2% increase in taxes?

FilmCarp said:
 I think we have what, 46 miles of road.  By my rough math that's about 70 million bucks to pave them all.  We are already running a pretty lean ship.  I wish we had a few more employees, frankly.  So how much do you want to raise taxes?

First, I would divest real estate.  The Baird, IMHO, is a luxury we can't afford.  We can either renovate it and use it as Village Hall, or we can sell it, but we can't afford $10M to renovate it and just continue to use it as a rec center.  It's under utilized as it is.  Walk through it at 2:00 on any weekday afternoon if you want to see what I mean.  The Connett Building is an albatross as well.  It is deeded to the Village with a covenant that it has to be used for a "Library purpose".  Since it's not really suitable for a modern library, it sits, underutilized, but costs a fortune in upkeep.  I say call the bluff of the covenant and threaten to give it back.  See how that turns out.  

Next, put the streets on a realistic pavement schedule that would allow them to be milled and topped on a regular basis, maybe every 15 to 20 years.  As it is, we pay so much for paving because the streets are allowed to get so bad that they need to be completely rebuilt from gravel on up by the time we get around to fixing them.  Some of this has to do with installation of Belgian Block curbs and storm sewers, but that work is mostly complete now, so the cost could/should be lower. 

How about leaning on PSE&G a little to make sufficient repairs after they dig up street after street?  The patches they put in place are dreadful. 

Look, I'm not saying it will be easy or painless, and anyone who knows me knows that I believe raising taxes should be a last resort, but property values really do suffer when prospective buyers have to drive through what looks like a battlefield in order to go look at a house in a residential neighborhood.  Paving just needs to be prioritized higher than it currently is.  

Rob_Sandow said:

mayhewdrive said:
 Let’s play - assuming the AVERAGE street costs $300k to re-pave, what should be cut to come up with enough money for 1-2 additional streets each year (let’s say $500,000)?  Or do you want an additional 2% increase in taxes?

 

FilmCarp said:
 I think we have what, 46 miles of road.  By my rough math that's about 70 million bucks to pave them all.  We are already running a pretty lean ship.  I wish we had a few more employees, frankly.  So how much do you want to raise taxes?

First, I would divest real estate.  The Baird, IMHO, is a luxury we can't afford.  We can either renovate it and use it as Village Hall, or we can sell it, but we can't afford $10M to renovate it and just continue to use it as a rec center.  It's under utilized as it is.  Walk through it at 2:00 on any weekday afternoon if you want to see what I mean.  The Connett Building is an albatross as well.  It is deeded to the Village with a covenant that it has to be used for a "Library purpose".  Since it's not really suitable for a modern library, it sits, underutilized, but costs a fortune in upkeep.  I say call the bluff of the covenant and threaten to give it back.  See how that turns out.  
Next, put the streets on a realistic pavement schedule that would allow them to be milled and topped on a regular basis, maybe every 15 to 20 years.  As it is, we pay so much for paving because the streets are allowed to get so bad that they need to be completely rebuilt from gravel on up by the time we get around to fixing them.  Some of this has to do with installation of Belgian Block curbs and storm sewers, but that work is mostly complete now, so the cost could/should be lower. 

How about leaning on PSE&G a little to make sufficient repairs after they dig up street after street?  The patches they put in place are dreadful. 

Look, I'm not saying it will be easy or painless, and anyone who knows me knows that I believe raising taxes should be a last resort, but property values really do suffer when prospective buyers have to drive through what looks like a battlefield in order to go look at a house in a residential neighborhood.  Paving just needs to be prioritized higher than it currently is.  

 Interesting thoughts..although I think these ideas mostly mitigate FUTURE spending and don't do much to reduce current spending to come up with another $500k/year.  

You know as well as I do that the vast majority of Municipal spending (and frankly, any organization) is on personnel.  Which is why ideas like the FD Consolidation with Maplewood makes so much sense - both for cost savings AND increased service/efficiency.

FilmCarp said:

Rob_Sandow said:
 
If it costs $300/foot to pave, then the average SO homeowner pays enough in taxes every 6 months to pave the street in front of their house (assuming houses on both sides of the street).  It's unacceptable to let the streets get to this condition.  The property values on those streets suffer, not to mention repair costs for cars hitting potholes.  We simply need to allocate more of the budget to paving, and find other places to scrimp and save. 

 I think we have what, 46 miles of road.  By my rough math that's about 70 million bucks to pave them all.  We are already running a pretty lean ship.  I wish we had a few more employees, frankly.  So how much do you want to raise taxes?

Street paving is the best example of how accepting density improves SO's budget situation.

When SO allows a new apartment building, even with hundreds of people living there, it doesn't add an inch to the street grid that SO has to plow, protect, and periodically resurface.  Yes, the number of students won't be zero, the new residents will occasionally need emergency services, and the new residents might increase the Library's circulation, but overall, the financial benefits are disproportionate to whatever the increase in the service load is.  

IMO, accepting some high-rises is the most effective local-level solution to our tax crisis.  

Let’s put those high rises on your block

annielou said:
Let’s put those high rises on your block

 Pretty sure Runner_Guy lives in one of those now.

Rob_Sandow said:
First, I would divest real estate.  The Baird, IMHO, is a luxury we can't afford.  We can either renovate it and use it as Village Hall, or we can sell it, but we can't afford $10M to renovate it and just continue to use it as a rec center.  It's under utilized as it is.  Walk through it at 2:00 on any weekday afternoon if you want to see what I mean.  The Connett Building is an albatross as well.  It is deeded to the Village with a covenant that it has to be used for a "Library purpose".  Since it's not really suitable for a modern library, it sits, underutilized, but costs a fortune in upkeep.  I say call the bluff of the covenant and threaten to give it back.  See how that turns out.  
Next, put the streets on a realistic pavement schedule that would allow them to be milled and topped on a regular basis, maybe every 15 to 20 years.  As it is, we pay so much for paving because the streets are allowed to get so bad that they need to be completely rebuilt from gravel on up by the time we get around to fixing them.  Some of this has to do with installation of Belgian Block curbs and storm sewers, but that work is mostly complete now, so the cost could/should be lower. 

How about leaning on PSE&G a little to make sufficient repairs after they dig up street after street?  The patches they put in place are dreadful. 

Look, I'm not saying it will be easy or painless, and anyone who knows me knows that I believe raising taxes should be a last resort, but property values really do suffer when prospective buyers have to drive through what looks like a battlefield in order to go look at a house in a residential neighborhood.  Paving just needs to be prioritized higher than it currently is.  

 I’m fairly certain they cannot sell it. What have you found that would allow it? The property has a deed, AFAIK, that requires it to be used perpetually for public use.