Darkness on the Edge of Town

Last night was a meeting of the Board of School Estimate - a joint body of representatives from Maplewood, South Orange and the Board of Education - to vote upon the proposed capital budget for the current year. While the total amount being considered was $4,555,753 for a variety of projects, such as roof replacements, mechanical upgrades, sidewalks and parking lots, the one issue that garnered the most attention was the expenditure of $50,000 for lights at the Underhill Field sports complex.

This issue came before the Board of Education 1.5 years ago, when they were planning to spend $100,000 (of the $200,000 total project cost) from the operating budget. For a variety of reasons, the School Board voted against that, but the project never went away. Since that time, I have heard from many residents who live near the property and have concerns that lights on a turf field will negatively impact their quality of life. As we heard last night, the lights are proposed to be in use an average of 5 nights per week during the Fall and Spring.

Although I was inclined to not support the project, once I learned that no effort was made to notice homeowners that live near the property (not to mention the fact that the vote was held during a snowstorm), I felt strongly that the process was flawed and I could not vote for a project that we KNEW the public has concerns about, but were not informed about the meeting. In fact the vote was not even posted on the District website or covered by any of our local media, so unless someone reads the fine print in the legal notices of the newspaper, they would not even have known the vote was taking place.

When a someone buys a home, they have the right to expect a certain quality of life based on the location of the home. If you live next to a train track, you have to expect a certain level of noise. If you live next to a park, you have to expect a certain level of activity in the park. If you live near a football stadium, you have to expect some level of inconvenience due to noise or parking. However, in this case, the residents did NOT have the expectation of games and the associated noise (and light) running into the nighttime hours. A big reason that applications go before a Planning Board is so if dramatic changes are proposed to occur, public hearings are heard, restrictions are imposed and memorialized and everything is documented in an open, transparent and fair way. However, for some unknown reason, we are told that a Board of Education is exempt from this process. That just makes no sense to me.

In this day and age of belt-tightening and cutbacks, spending money on a luxury like field lighting seems inappropriate. To make things worse, to do it without the people most impacted invited to participate in the dialog seems just plain wrong. Unfortunately, my colleagues did not agree and the funding was approved. However, I am proud to have voted "no" on behalf of the residents who couldn't.

Santa Claus is Coming to Town

This week we continued our Budget Workshop series by reviewing the Capital Budget and identifying the priorities for the upcoming year. There were a total of $11.3M in projects that were suggested, with about half of that money coming from existing capital funds, and the balance coming from new capital, grants, open space fund and the operating budget. The biggest projects anticipated to be addressed in 2011 are:

• Village Hall renovation
• Resurfacing about 10 streets
• Improvements to the Crest Drive Firehouse
• Planning for the Baird renovations
• Open Space Acquisitions
• Next phase of the River Corridor project

Another topic discussed was the Holiday Schedule for Village employees in 2011. After doing a comparison of current holidays in the Village, it is apparent that the Village is quite out of line with other organizations. For example, most corporations provide 7 holidays to employees, typically:

• New Year’s Day
• Memorial Day
• Independence Day
• Labor Day
• Thanksgiving Day
• Day After Thanksgiving
• Christmas Day

The Federal Government adds the following for their employees:

• Martin Luther King's Birthday
• President's Day
• Columbus Day
• Veterans Day

and eliminates the Day After Thanksgiving for a total of 10 holidays.

South Orange, further adds:

• Lincoln's Birthday
• Good Friday
• Election Day
• Christmas Eve
• the Day After Thanksgiving

for a total of 15 holidays annually, in addition to 4-5 weeks of paid vacation! In this day and age of cost cutting, downsizing and increasing efficiency, it seems quite excessive to provide the equivalent of two full months of paid time off each year.

I'd love to hear how many holidays YOU get in YOUR job.

Pay Me My Money Down

As we wind down the year, it's time again to ramp up the Budget discussions for 2011. This past week, we held the first Budget Workshop and focused on the subsidy for the four nonprofit organizations that receive money from the Village - Youthnet, Community Coalition on Race, SOPAC and Main Street.

We began with an overview of the outlook for 2011 and 2012, in general. The "good" news is that if we kept everything flat, we would "only" have a 3.5% increase in 2011 (if we find another $240k in revenue or cuts) and a 7.6% increase in 2012. (Once again, the biggest drivers being healthcare and pension increases). However, this does not account for having ANY capital expenditures (street paving, significant building improvements, Fire Equipment etc) which obviously is not realistic. So, as a result, we once again are faced with the big challenge of weighing our options and determining if there are additional "revenue enhancements" (ok...tax increases) or spending cuts that can be found.

With that framing the discussion, we reviewed the budgets of the 4 nonprofits in intimate detail and their respective financial requests:

• Youthnet - requested $15k; accepted by the Board with the suggestion that Youthnet should work to increase its fundraising from the community
• Community Coalition on Race - requested $22.5; after a lengthy discussion, concerns were raised about the expenses for the organization, such as payroll for 3 employees, rent expenses and $200/month in telecommunications expenses. In addition, as discussed previously, the CCRs involvement in divisive and political issues continues to be a concern of the BOT. No decision on funding was reached.
• SOPAC - requested $337,000, an increase from the $229,500 that was provided in 2010. Extensive discussion was held and, in the end, the BOT agreed to maintain the same level of support as 2010 ($229,500) for now, with the option to revise it closer to SOPAC's requested amount once we had better clarity on the rest of the budget.
• Main Street - requested $50k; accepted by the Board but it was noted that the additional $12k provided last year for Downtown After Sundown will be raised by the Citizens Public Safety Committee for 2011.

In addition, we agreed to ensure there were contractual agreements between the Village and each of these entities to ensure that they are performing to service levels specified and meeting goals specified by the Village.

We obviously still have a LONG way to go for the upcoming Budget with many more Workshops to come.

Light of Day

This evening, I was invited to participate in a "Light Walk" with representatives from Seton Hall. This was organized by SGA president, Melissa Boege, to allow us to see the streets of South Orange at night through the eyes of students. Together with Police Chief Chelel, we walked from the Wilden Gate, along Eder Terr, College Place, Fairview Ave, Gardiner Ave, Riggs Place, Grove Road and Turrell Ave during the nighttime hours to observe the residential streets at night. Over the years, there have been a number of muggings outside the Seton Hall gates and we are always looking for ways to reduce crime.

The most glaring issue I noticed was the huge number of homes that did not bother to simply have a porch light turned on outside. In all neighborhoods, especially where the homes are relatively close to the street, the light provided by porch lights makes an enormous difference in the perceived (and real) safety of the area. We all love the gaslights in South Orange, but everyone knows that they provide limited light, resulting in dark sidewalks which is only further exasperated when homeowners do not keep their home lit up.

It is so simple these days to install a light sensor on your porch light which causes the light to automatically turn on at dusk and turn off at dawn. The incremental energy cost of leaving a light on all night is so minuscule that it is probably the simplest and easiest thing you can do to protect your home, as well as the pedestrians that walk along the sidewalks at night.

I encourage everyone to spread the word to your friends and neighbors - for the benefit of everyone, please turn on your porch light and keep it on all night!

Does this bus stop at 82nd St?

At last night's Public Safety Committee Meeting we had a discussion about the school bus service that is provided to students in the West Montrose neighborhood who attend Marshall School. The origin of the conversation was from a discussion with the Board of Education last year when we were reviewing the budget and we were informed of the existence of this bus route because it was declared a "hazardous route". As a result of this designation, all 32 children in the neighborhood are provided bus service to school, which dictates the need for an added bus and bus driver, costing the school district between $25,000 and $50,000 each year.

Apparently, back in July 2001 the Board of Education was going to discontinue this bus route because the State determined that any bus routes for children who live less than 1.5 miles from school are considered "courtesy routes". To get around this, some residents at the time lobbied to have this route deemed a "hazardous route" instead, which would require the School District to provide a bus. That practice continues to this day.

The irony of the entire situation is that Marshall School services children in Kindergarten through 2nd grade (kids who are typically 5-7 years old) and are too young to walk to school by themselves. As a result, if a bus were not provided, the likely outcome is that they would be driven to school by their parent and the notion of the route being "hazardous" is a red herring.

As a parent of a 3rd grader at South Mountain School, I completely sympathize with the challenges parents have in getting their kids to school on time while also trying to get themselves to work on time. When my daughter was in Kindergarten & 1st grade, she went to school at South Mountain Annex, which is probably about a mile from my house. However, since the school is up an extremely steep hill without any sidewalks, we were forced to drive her to school and adjust our work schedules. In hindsight, should we have lobbied to have our route designated "hazardous", as well, so we could receive busing from the District? Likewise, I imagine there are MANY neighborhoods in town that take "hazardous" routes to school.

Should busing be provided to all students? Should all busing be eliminated?

I'd love to hear what you think.

Dirty Boulevard

Two weeks ago at a Public Works Committee meeting, we were joined by several property owners who were outraged over the current condition of our downtown. They noted problems such as gum on the sidewalks, litter, hanging baskets with no visible flowers, planting beds not mulched/filled with weeds, peeling paint on gas lamps/trash cans, awnings covered in bird excrement and crooked signs. They even went so far to bring pictures to show specific examples of these issues. While we have discussed most of these issues at one point or another, I can't say that I disagree with their concerns and share their frustration that these issues remain.

Clearly, beautification of the downtown is a complex problem - a combination of people who have no regard for the town and will freely litter, together with an aging infrastructure (the sidewalks and Gaslamps have been there for over 12 years), melded with SOME property/business owners who do not properly care for their property/sidewalks, combined with sporadic and inconsistent Code Enforcement, in conjunction with limited resources (people and money) for Public Works. The question then becomes how to solve the problem. Should all taxpayers pay for additional resources? Should the business/property owners bear the sole responsibility?

There have been at least three times over the past 10 years that the concept of a Special Improvement District (or Business Improvement District or Downtown Redevelopment Management Corporation) has been proposed to help fund dedicated resources for this constant maintenance that is needed to keep our town attractive and competitive. Each time the idea was killed off, largely by merchants who were opposed to this "tax" being imposed upon them by the Government.

Now, several property owners are suggesting that THEY take the lead to help create some structure for downtown cleanliness and beautification. Will this make a difference and gain consensus or are they simply revisiting the same idea that has been repeatedly rejected? I'm intrigued to learn more and am curious what you think.

W(Rec)k on the Highway

Last night's BOT meeting was largely dominated by discussions centering around the Recreation Department. Specifically, how to better manage the basketball courts at the Baird and what to do about the upcoming vacancy in the position of Assistant Director of Cultural Affairs.

The basketball courts adjacent to the Baird Center have been the site of several recent controversies - most notably a "pistol whipping" on May 27, 2009 and most recently an enormous impromptu "tournament" on May 21, 2010 which attracted literally hundreds of kids from Newark and surrounding towns and which required a large police response to disperse. As a result, Trustee Gould, Chair of the Recreation Committee, has discussed among the committee the idea of constructing an attractive wrought iron fence around the courts to better control access to the facility. To me, this sounds like an optimal solution which would have a minimal cost impact and would ensure that the courts can be properly controlled when they are "open" and can also be closed when they are unsupervised at times when the Baird Center is closed. By enclosing the courts, players can be directed to enter through the Baird Center and could even be asked to sign-in. If too many people want to access the courts at once, access could be restricted to a safe number of participants. Apparently, this is exactly how the courts used to be operated several years ago before they were re-done and it seemed to work well. I think installing a fence now is an easy solution to prevent a recurrence of the serious problems that have occurred in the past.

The other issue raised and discussed was how to handle the resignation of the Assistant Director of Cultural Affairs. While the resignation of any staff member is always a loss, we also have to view this as an opportunity to better rationalize our staffing and spending on Cultural Affairs. We all agree that cultural affairs is an important part of our lives, however the Village currently spends an enormous amount of money on these activities through the Baird, SOPAC, the Library and the School District. There is now a great opportunity to better consolidate these services, particularly in light of the resignation of the Executive Director of SOPAC and ongoing discussions with Maplewood on "sharing services" with respect to Recreation. The tax burden in our community is still way too high and we have to capitalize on opportunities like this to do everything we can to maintain quality services so residents want to move and stay here, while also reducing that tax burden so residents can afford to stay here.