While I love serving the public, I despise politics. And, the only thing worse than a politician is a career politician. Because I never wanted to be considered either, after careful consideration, I have decided not to seek a third term as Trustee in the South Orange Municipal election on May 14. Instead, I have determined it is time to focus my time and energy on both my family and on my professional career, as well as pursuing other interests.
It has been an incredible honor and privilege to serve the community for almost 6 years. Despite the multitude of meetings, challenging personalities, late nights and difficult issues, it has been a true pleasure volunteering to help our Village. Far too many people run for office for the wrong reasons - whether to advance a personal agenda, obtain a better job or for their own self-promotion. For me, it was always simply about representing our residents and I tried to do that as best as I know how. While I am well aware there have been plenty of people who disagreed with me on various issues, I can only hope the legacy of my tenure can be that as a watchdog for fiscal responsibility, ethics, transparency, process and open communication, which were many of the tenets that I initially ran on back in 2007.
Without question, I made my share of mistakes and learned many lessons along the way. I sincerely thank everyone for the wisdom and guidance you provided to me over the years. Through neighborhood meetings, committee meetings, asking questions at Trustee meetings, Maplewood Online, interactions with staff and literally thousands of emails to/from residents, I learned so much about the Village and about myself. I always tried to make myself as accessible as possible, shared everything I could, voted for things that I felt were in the best interest of the Village, opposed things that were not and asked the questions that I thought the public wanted and needed to know.
I remain committed to completing my term with the same zeal over the next couple months and perhaps, someday, might consider getting back involved. But for now, the time has come to pass the torch to someone who can hopefully carry forward the principles I tried to uphold while bringing a set of fresh perspectives and new ideas to our Village. For anyone interested in throwing their hat into the ring, please feel free to reach out to me at MichaelCGoldberg@gmail.com to help you understand the issues and the challenges we face and to get my perspective of the time commitment required. (The deadline for filing petitions is March 11.)
I'll have much more to say and many people to acknowledge over the coming months, but for now, Thank You South Orange!
Monday, January 28, 2013
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Sandy
Now that the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy has finally passed and everyone in South Orange is generally back to their normal routines (except NJ Transit), I wanted to take a moment to recognize and thank some of the amazing efforts that occurred in the days immediately following the storm. First and foremost, the South Orange Village staff who always do a great job, went above and beyond in their efforts. Specifically:
- Public Works for working around the clock clearing the roads for days on end (from trees, leaves and snow...often all at the same time)
- Police and Fire for keeping everyone safe during and after the storm dealing with countless calls and issues
- Village Clerk for organizing all the logistics for the presidential election and the relocation of polling places that did not have power
- South Orange Library and staff - for providing a safe place for people to charge their devices and stay warm, while also acting as a Shelter at night
- All other departments for continuing to do their jobs, while dealing with the countless challenges and disruptions that the storm provided
Additionally, I want to thank all of the places in town that opened their doors for people who did not have power - from SOPAC, to numerous Houses of Worship, to many businesses to ordinary residents who opened up their homes. These countless heroes allowed people to get online, do work, have a warm place to sleep, a home-cooked meal or just be together in a time of need.
The last point regarding residents is one that I found so inspiring that I want to expand upon it. Not only did people open their homes to each other, but the efforts that residents undertook to help each other was astounding. For example, there were many streets in town with power on only one side of the street. Those residents helped each other out by stringing extension cords across the street to help their neighbors who did not have power. There were also countless stories of people helping each other with reconfiguring their gas boilers to bypass the electrical ignition, allowing them to have heat. While these probably were not the safest ideas in the world, and not something I would generally recommend, people did what they needed to do to help each other out in a time of crisis.
In addition, residents who volunteer for the South Orange CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) stepped forward to volunteer their time to help spend the night with those who needed a place to stay at the South Orange shelter.
When it became abundantly clear that PSE&G did not know the extent of the power outages, residents banded together and crowdsourced a Google map of all streets in Maplewood and South Orange to visibly map the power outages (http://goo.gl/maps/16AFW) across the two towns. This map was posted online and updated as new information was provided.
With the disastrous communications from NJ Transit, residents created a SOMA Commuters Facebook Group (http://www.facebook.com/SOMACommuters) and a SOMA Commuters Twitter account (@SOMACommuters) to provide up to the minute updates on commuter-related information in order to help their neighbors navigate the confusing and inconsistent information needed to get them to work. Now that the worst has passed, this free "service" is still continuing and has become one positive outgrowth of the storm.
Lastly, in the aftermath of the storm, residents recently came together to organize and attend a group clean-up of our parks in order to help both the Village and the Public Works department who simply have too much to do.
While there is no question there is plenty to learn from this storm in order to improve for the next time, the hard work of all Village staff, together with the spirit of cooperation and neighborliness that residents demonstrated all across town to help each other, was so amazing and exemplified the true essence of our community. As we head into the Holiday Season, let's all be mindful of this spirit and continue to work together and help each other in any way we can - all year round. Happy Holidays!
Friday, October 5, 2012
Wrecking Ball
Three years ago, in September 2009, I wrote a blog post with an update on the proposed Village Hall renovation project and on December 19, 2011, I shared a presentation at the BOT meeting with the baseline time and cost estimates for the project at that time. At the September 24, 2012 BOT Meeting, the Architect and Construction Manager for the project provided a public update. Now that things are moving ahead with the project, I just wanted to re-cap recent updates on the single largest project the Village has undertaken in many years.
Since the presentation in 2011, a number of activities have occurred over 2012:
Currently, it is anticipated that the construction project will begin around June 2013 and last for at least two years with the cost estimate for the entire project currently at approximately $5.7M. However, until we receive actual proposals to do the work and until the work gets underway the duration and cost is just an estimate, based on the information that we know right now.
Once Village Hall is vacated, it is expected that "formal" Village Meetings (i.e., BOT Meetings, Planning Board Meetings and Board of Adjustment Meetings) will be held at SOPAC and routine committee meetings will be held in the Baird Center. Further details of this still need to be finalized and will be communicated publicly at that time.
I share everyone's concerns about the inherent risks for such a costly project, but want to be straightforward about where we are currently and what we expect going forward. As with ANY project, the budget and duration is likely to change as things progress, but with the guidance of the construction manager and the support of Village staff, the goal is to minimize and mitigate the risks.
I will continue to provide periodic updates as the project evolves. In the meantime, please feel free to post any questions or comments on this blog or send them to me directly at mgoldberg@southorange.org
Since the presentation in 2011, a number of activities have occurred over 2012:
- A bid was advertised and a contract was awarded to Jay Shapiro and Associates for $207,816 as the Construction Manager for the project
- The architect has largely completed the design for the building and completion of Construction Documents is underway
- A decision was reached to temporarily relocate Village Hall staff during the project to mobile offices (i.e., trailers) that will be located on property owned by the Village on 2nd Street
- A decision was reached to implement a geothermal HVAC system and a change order for $53,870 was issued to HMR architects for the design of the HVAC system and the design of the temporary office space in the trailers
- We were informed that an updated asbestos assessment was required in order to perform a proper asbestos abatement. A contract was issued for $17,750 for the assessment and a separate contract for the abatement will be awarded, once the assessment is completed.
Currently, it is anticipated that the construction project will begin around June 2013 and last for at least two years with the cost estimate for the entire project currently at approximately $5.7M. However, until we receive actual proposals to do the work and until the work gets underway the duration and cost is just an estimate, based on the information that we know right now.
Once Village Hall is vacated, it is expected that "formal" Village Meetings (i.e., BOT Meetings, Planning Board Meetings and Board of Adjustment Meetings) will be held at SOPAC and routine committee meetings will be held in the Baird Center. Further details of this still need to be finalized and will be communicated publicly at that time.
I share everyone's concerns about the inherent risks for such a costly project, but want to be straightforward about where we are currently and what we expect going forward. As with ANY project, the budget and duration is likely to change as things progress, but with the guidance of the construction manager and the support of Village staff, the goal is to minimize and mitigate the risks.
I will continue to provide periodic updates as the project evolves. In the meantime, please feel free to post any questions or comments on this blog or send them to me directly at mgoldberg@southorange.org
Friday, September 14, 2012
Code of Silence
Since the publishing of a story in Sunday's Star Ledger about recent discord on the South Orange Board of Trustees, I have received many comments and questions about what is going on. Most people have been incredibly supportive and sympathetic about the dysfunction, but some people have asked where this came from and what can be done about it.
By way of background, over the past few months a number of critically important requests for items to be added to the Board of Trustees meeting agenda have been denied by Village President Torpey. The process is (and has always been) that Department Heads and Trustees submit requests for items to be placed on the agenda a week or so in advance of the meeting. Generally, all items were simply included unless they needed further vetting in a committee or were redundant with another request. However, over the past few months the list of rejected items has included the following important issues that impact all residents:
This all came to a head in early July, when I learned at a Public Safety Committee Meeting that the Police Chief was also instructed to stop sending reports about criminal activities to the Board of Trustees. Since I have been on the Board of Trustees in 2007, the Police Chief would share periodic updates about specific crimes or arrests that occurred in town, on the premise that the Board should be informed if anyone inquired about the situation. However, I noticed that starting in May 2012, the BoT was no longer receiving these reports. After being told that the Chief was told by the Village President not to send the reports to the Board, I raised the issue at the July 9 BOT Meeting. The Board of Trustees agreed the reports should be received by the full BOT and a formal policy was adopted at the subsequent meeting to codify this.
As these topics were discussed at public meetings (and by the public on Maplewood Online), a reporter at the Star Ledger picked up the story by watching excepts of videos that were posted online:
and contacted members of the Board of Trustees for comment.
Ironically, all of this occurred back in the earlier part of the Summer and for the most recent BoT Meeting on September 10th, all requested agenda items were listed and the Police Chief has resumed sharing reports of police activity with the Board of Trustees. So, hopefully these problems have now been put behind us and, in reality, the Star Ledger article was "old news". Hopefully these discussions and the attention generated by the article has accomplished everyone's goal - to return to real transparency and open government in South Orange.
By way of background, over the past few months a number of critically important requests for items to be added to the Board of Trustees meeting agenda have been denied by Village President Torpey. The process is (and has always been) that Department Heads and Trustees submit requests for items to be placed on the agenda a week or so in advance of the meeting. Generally, all items were simply included unless they needed further vetting in a committee or were redundant with another request. However, over the past few months the list of rejected items has included the following important issues that impact all residents:
- Marylawn Development
- Hiring of a Business Recruiter
- Moving Elections to November
- BOT Meeting Agenda Process
- Assembly Bill S-1534
- New Water Supply Source
- PBA Collective Bargaining
- OPIEU Collective Bargaining
- South Orange Commons (Beifus Site Redevelopers Agreement update)
- Personnel Investigation
- Code Enforcement Staffing
- East Orange Water Commission
This all came to a head in early July, when I learned at a Public Safety Committee Meeting that the Police Chief was also instructed to stop sending reports about criminal activities to the Board of Trustees. Since I have been on the Board of Trustees in 2007, the Police Chief would share periodic updates about specific crimes or arrests that occurred in town, on the premise that the Board should be informed if anyone inquired about the situation. However, I noticed that starting in May 2012, the BoT was no longer receiving these reports. After being told that the Chief was told by the Village President not to send the reports to the Board, I raised the issue at the July 9 BOT Meeting. The Board of Trustees agreed the reports should be received by the full BOT and a formal policy was adopted at the subsequent meeting to codify this.
As these topics were discussed at public meetings (and by the public on Maplewood Online), a reporter at the Star Ledger picked up the story by watching excepts of videos that were posted online:
and contacted members of the Board of Trustees for comment.
Ironically, all of this occurred back in the earlier part of the Summer and for the most recent BoT Meeting on September 10th, all requested agenda items were listed and the Police Chief has resumed sharing reports of police activity with the Board of Trustees. So, hopefully these problems have now been put behind us and, in reality, the Star Ledger article was "old news". Hopefully these discussions and the attention generated by the article has accomplished everyone's goal - to return to real transparency and open government in South Orange.
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Chimes of Freedom
Lately, there has been alot of misinformation about the Village's plans for moving municipal elections to November and I thought it would be worth clarifying the situation.
A majority of the Board of Trustees has agreed, in principle, to move our municipal election to November, starting in 2013. In fact, an ordinance to implement the change was drafted by Village Counsel and was requested to be put on the May 14 meeting agenda. (However, the Village President chose to omit the request, along with 3 other agenda requests, for an undisclosed reason which I can only assume was because he did not support the idea, despite the verbalized desire of a majority of the Board for the election move. The suppression of agenda items by one person is simply contrary to what a democracy is all about. Each member of the Board has the right to express themselves on any topic, but stifling that expression is simply unacceptable.)
Similarly, moving the election to November will improve the democratic process by increasing voter participation as has been shown in towns like Mahwah which already moved their non-partisan municipal election from May and held their election in November 2011, resulting in a 41.6% turnout, compared to a 16.2% turnout in the prior May election. In addition, another 19 municipalities (out of 86 nonpartisan municipalities) have also agreed to move their May non-partisan Municipal election to November starting in either 2012 or 2013. (and over 85 percent of School Boards in NJ have also decided to move their non-partisan elections from April to November: http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20120222/november.html).
Likewise, voter tunout in South Orange is also far less in May (dropping to a record-low 11% in 2011) than in November as shown by the following chart that was compiled by the Charter Review Committee:
Year May November
2005 26% 48%
2007 36% 24%
2009 18% 45%
2011 11% 29%
Aditionally, moving the municipal election to November will save taxpayer money. According to the Charter Review Committee, municipal elections in South Orange that are held in May cost approximately $22,000 every time they are held. Clearly, moving the municipal election to November and consolidating all elections at one time will eliminate this extraneous expense. Quite simply, moving the municipal election to November will save money and increase voter participation, which is a win-win for all taxpayers and residents.
I initially had my own concerns about moving the election to November due to the perceived fear of partisan influence in our non-partisan elections. However, I ultimately weighed the potential for greater voter participation in our democracy as far more important. It is a simple fact, based on historical data, that in everyone's busy lives, people are more likely to be aware of and participate in an election when it occurs in November.
Since the next South Orange municipal election is not scheduled until 2013, we do not need to act immediately and ultimately the Board of Trustees agreed to observe the results of the 2012 November non-partisan elections in other municipalities in order to have more data before formalizing the move for South Orange in 2013 later this Fall. There has also been some consideration to include this as a referendum on the ballot in November since moving the election will also extend the terms of all seven members of the current Board of Trustees.
However, just like placing all requested items on a public agenda, moving elections to November seems to be the most obvious choice for an open, transparent and participatory democracy.
A majority of the Board of Trustees has agreed, in principle, to move our municipal election to November, starting in 2013. In fact, an ordinance to implement the change was drafted by Village Counsel and was requested to be put on the May 14 meeting agenda. (However, the Village President chose to omit the request, along with 3 other agenda requests, for an undisclosed reason which I can only assume was because he did not support the idea, despite the verbalized desire of a majority of the Board for the election move. The suppression of agenda items by one person is simply contrary to what a democracy is all about. Each member of the Board has the right to express themselves on any topic, but stifling that expression is simply unacceptable.)
Similarly, moving the election to November will improve the democratic process by increasing voter participation as has been shown in towns like Mahwah which already moved their non-partisan municipal election from May and held their election in November 2011, resulting in a 41.6% turnout, compared to a 16.2% turnout in the prior May election. In addition, another 19 municipalities (out of 86 nonpartisan municipalities) have also agreed to move their May non-partisan Municipal election to November starting in either 2012 or 2013. (and over 85 percent of School Boards in NJ have also decided to move their non-partisan elections from April to November: http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20120222/november.html).
Likewise, voter tunout in South Orange is also far less in May (dropping to a record-low 11% in 2011) than in November as shown by the following chart that was compiled by the Charter Review Committee:
Year May November
2005 26% 48%
2007 36% 24%
2009 18% 45%
2011 11% 29%
Aditionally, moving the municipal election to November will save taxpayer money. According to the Charter Review Committee, municipal elections in South Orange that are held in May cost approximately $22,000 every time they are held. Clearly, moving the municipal election to November and consolidating all elections at one time will eliminate this extraneous expense. Quite simply, moving the municipal election to November will save money and increase voter participation, which is a win-win for all taxpayers and residents.
I initially had my own concerns about moving the election to November due to the perceived fear of partisan influence in our non-partisan elections. However, I ultimately weighed the potential for greater voter participation in our democracy as far more important. It is a simple fact, based on historical data, that in everyone's busy lives, people are more likely to be aware of and participate in an election when it occurs in November.
Since the next South Orange municipal election is not scheduled until 2013, we do not need to act immediately and ultimately the Board of Trustees agreed to observe the results of the 2012 November non-partisan elections in other municipalities in order to have more data before formalizing the move for South Orange in 2013 later this Fall. There has also been some consideration to include this as a referendum on the ballot in November since moving the election will also extend the terms of all seven members of the current Board of Trustees.
However, just like placing all requested items on a public agenda, moving elections to November seems to be the most obvious choice for an open, transparent and participatory democracy.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Mary's Place
There has been a lot going on in South Orange, so it has been a while since I updated this blog. However, one of the biggest issues currently looming is the threatened demolition of the Graves mansion owned by Marylawn of the Oranges on Scotland Rd. In addition to the demolition of a significant historic building, a potential development of a residential apartment building on the site is also rumored, despite the violation of the present zoning that would require.I have heard from many residents who are upset about this situation and many of them came out to Monday's Board of Trustees meeting to express their opposition for this demolition/development and to express their support for the creation of a Historic Preservation Commission.
The idea of a Historic Preservation Commission has been considered by the Village for MANY years and some background can be found on the Village website at http://www.southorange.org/historicpreservation. Ultimately, having such a commission in place would be a good thing for the Village to help preserve our architectural history, and on May 14, the BOT unanimously passed the ordinance on First Reading which creates a Historic Preservation Commission. The Ordinance must now be reviewed by the Planning Board and be brought back to the Board of Trustees for a public hearing and Second Reading, which is currently scheduled for June 11.
I completely sympathize with the residents who are concerned about a development that threatens their neighborhood, having gone through the same experience when 198 apartments were proposed to be built in the quarry, in MY neighborhood over 10 years ago. At the time, we were told by the Village that "This fight has been fought...this property will be developed". It was incredibly frustrating to be told there was nothing we could do, but in the days before Facebook & Twitter, we banded together, created a website, raised money, hired an attorney and fought the proposal for 5 years, until a compromise for 62 million-dollar townhouses was eventually approved.
I would like to urge Marylawn to work with their neighbors and with the Village to identify a better solution than the wholesale destruction of a significant building that could never be replaced. (and to not pursue a development project that is not supported by the current zoning)
People move to our community for many reasons including our proximity to NYC, our vibrant and diverse population and - yes - our unique and charming architecture and history. As a community, we strongly value our past and take great pride in it. In fact, the Board of Trustees recently approved the renovation of our own historic Village Hall, which will come at considerable expense. Yet, we felt that preserving our heritage was a key value in the community and something that was worth doing.
I am well aware of the economic challenges that everyone is facing these days. However, there are always alternatives that can and should be explored, and with enough creativity, I am sure a viable solution to what is currently being proposed can be found.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Easy Money
Last year, South Orange residents were quite surprised to receive their tax bills, which showed an increase of 4% in the School portion of the bill. With the average homeowner already paying over $15,000 per year in property taxes and the school taxes making up the large majority of our bill, that resulted in a material increase during a year when people were still seeing flat or declining incomes.
Last November, I along with other members of the Board of School Estimate made it crystal, crystal clear that the Board of Education should not raise taxes any higher than 2% going forward. While I am well aware that the 2% “CAP” imposed by the State ALLOWS for increase greater than 2% (due to exemptions, cap banking etc), that does not mean that it SHOULD be done, except under extremely dire circumstances. This year, that was clearly not the case.
This year, the Board of School Estimate was asked to approve a tax levy increase of 2.16% overall, which equates to a tax rate increase of 2.73% in South Orange (due to the equalization between Maplewood/South Orange and the hybrid rate that is calculated due to differing fiscal years for the Municipal and School budgets). While 2.16% is not radically larger than 2% in the grand scheme of things, when we are starting with such an enormous base to begin with, every dollar adds up and in the end, 2% means 2%. It’s that simple.
Ultimately, when it became apparent that the Board of School Estimate would not support the proposed increase greater than 2%, the Administration brought forth an alternative, which reduced $165,000 from the capital budget and the overall increase was brought to exactly 2%. I commend the Administration for working with the Board of School Estimate to meet our request, as well as for implementing a much improved process for reviewing the budget this year. (In years past, the Board of School Estimate was presented the budget during a workshop 2 weeks in advance of the vote, whereas this year, budget discussions occurred over multiple meetings during the year beginning last summer)
For next year, I have asked them to improve things even further. The Administration speaks of a variety of important “gaps” – the achievement gap, the District Factor Group gap and the gender gap. However, they never discuss or even consider what I like to call the Tax Gap; that is, the additional expense it costs to live in South Orange and Maplewood versus surrounding communities. South Orange and Maplewood are already among the highest taxed communities in the state of NJ with a material tax gap between us and many of our neighbors. Last week, I took a look at the local press of some surrounding communities to see what THEIR school budget increases were this year and found the following:
With these other communities rising well under 2% (or some even decreasing) and South Orange/Maplewood proposing increases of 2% or higher, the tax gap will only widen, making our communities less attractive for new residents and less desirable for existing residents to remain. This is just untenable.
As the parent of a 4th grader in the District, I want nothing more than a high quality education for my daughter and for ALL kids. However, this MUST be done in a more fiscally prudent manner for the sake of all residents. I urge the Administration and Board of Education to think creatively and to actively explore what surrounding communities are doing which enables them to provide high quality education, with much lower tax increases than we are being asked to approve.
Last November, I along with other members of the Board of School Estimate made it crystal, crystal clear that the Board of Education should not raise taxes any higher than 2% going forward. While I am well aware that the 2% “CAP” imposed by the State ALLOWS for increase greater than 2% (due to exemptions, cap banking etc), that does not mean that it SHOULD be done, except under extremely dire circumstances. This year, that was clearly not the case.
This year, the Board of School Estimate was asked to approve a tax levy increase of 2.16% overall, which equates to a tax rate increase of 2.73% in South Orange (due to the equalization between Maplewood/South Orange and the hybrid rate that is calculated due to differing fiscal years for the Municipal and School budgets). While 2.16% is not radically larger than 2% in the grand scheme of things, when we are starting with such an enormous base to begin with, every dollar adds up and in the end, 2% means 2%. It’s that simple.
Ultimately, when it became apparent that the Board of School Estimate would not support the proposed increase greater than 2%, the Administration brought forth an alternative, which reduced $165,000 from the capital budget and the overall increase was brought to exactly 2%. I commend the Administration for working with the Board of School Estimate to meet our request, as well as for implementing a much improved process for reviewing the budget this year. (In years past, the Board of School Estimate was presented the budget during a workshop 2 weeks in advance of the vote, whereas this year, budget discussions occurred over multiple meetings during the year beginning last summer)
For next year, I have asked them to improve things even further. The Administration speaks of a variety of important “gaps” – the achievement gap, the District Factor Group gap and the gender gap. However, they never discuss or even consider what I like to call the Tax Gap; that is, the additional expense it costs to live in South Orange and Maplewood versus surrounding communities. South Orange and Maplewood are already among the highest taxed communities in the state of NJ with a material tax gap between us and many of our neighbors. Last week, I took a look at the local press of some surrounding communities to see what THEIR school budget increases were this year and found the following:
- Livingston 1%
- Millburn .65%
- Montclair 0%
- West Orange <1%
- Springfield 1.84%
- Summit 0%
- Caldwell - .64% DECREASE
- Berkeley Heights – 1.7% DECREASE
With these other communities rising well under 2% (or some even decreasing) and South Orange/Maplewood proposing increases of 2% or higher, the tax gap will only widen, making our communities less attractive for new residents and less desirable for existing residents to remain. This is just untenable.
As the parent of a 4th grader in the District, I want nothing more than a high quality education for my daughter and for ALL kids. However, this MUST be done in a more fiscally prudent manner for the sake of all residents. I urge the Administration and Board of Education to think creatively and to actively explore what surrounding communities are doing which enables them to provide high quality education, with much lower tax increases than we are being asked to approve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)