Get Ready For A Tax Backlash

The township is going to regret the lack of explanation in the cover letter that went out! I had calculated a 2.616 rate based on the bill and was completely shocked -- my bill's not outrageous in the grand scheme of things because I have a small house, but jeez, some folks will really be freaking.

Hey Larry,
According to Hartnet, your tax bill is a bargain. In other words from your government, GFY.
Meanwhile, the construction has started on the Woodman Fieldhouse, even though the fact that they will have to hire a full time staff to operate the gym that will be built has never been discussed. Their salaries, pensions and benefits will just be added to your tax bill. The cost overruns will also be picked up by you as "emergency funds" just like it was for Fortunato, The football field and the baseball field. The person running it all, is one of the highest paid administrators on the state. The former principal at Rand is now another paper pusher for her $150k salary, benefits and pensions. They will hire to replace her at the same amount. The BOE budget is more then 2/3 of that bill you just received.
Dont you see the value here Larry?
No I dont see it either, but hey were diverse, so smile.

"The BOE budget is more then 2/3 of that bill you just received."

where do you get that figure?

My favorite part of Hartnett's letter:

"In these challenging times tax-wise, Township officials are constantly striving to keep in balance the need to control costs...

Remember that a big portion of your money goes to the county coffers as well. County government in NJ... promoting total redundancy and waste for 200 years! And now complete with fancy, invisible crosswalks!

THEY may have their fancy croswalks but WE have tax-funded Hoola-hoop artists!

We also have $700,000 in "extra" spending for the microburst, for which we've never received details!

How much for emergency tree removal? How much for overtime?

And, Jimmy? You know all the dollars for the field house? What do you think is going to happen with operating costs for the new school? NO ONE is talking about it! What, are they hoping the concern will just go away? Hey folks, if there's going to be 150 more kids in the school, there's going to be teachers for them, and all the other costs!

How about some answers? Not even the "hidden $1MM insurance refund" will cover this!

We also have $700,000 in "extra" spending for the microburst, for which we've never received details!

How much for emergency tree removal? How much for overtime?

And, Jimmy? You know all the dollars for the field house? What do you think is going to happen with operating costs for the new school? NO ONE is talking about it! What, are they hoping the concern will just go away? Hey folks, if there's going to be 150 more kids in the school, there's going to be teachers for them, and all the other costs!

How about some answers? Not even the "hidden $1MM insurance refund" will cover this!

Where can I find the huge list of people with the tax decreases?

This town hemmorages money. Its unbelievable. What a joke. New school rankings, what are we #90? only 80 lower than our neighbor, Glen Ridge. Maybe more resources should go to edukayshun and not to sports-related field houses and the desecration of old wood trees.

Loving those crosswalks. By the way, not only are they ugly, but you can't actually see them when you are driving. Other towns do not seem to have such an aversion to stopping for pedestrians - could be you can take the NYC transplant out of NYC, but you can't take the sh@tty driver out of the NYC transplant?
Bah!

This is not funny at all. I think I'm going to be sick.

Those fuckers. There is an election coming up, right? Well, I hope folks stop talking and start running.

The problem I fear is that once a new council starts cutting the budget, folks will go crazy. As it stands now, I only ever hear folks scream about 3 or 4 programs.

If they cut the school budget by 10-20% who out there will support it?

I'd like to have an elected School Board and have the budget put before the people.

That said, we are overtaxed!!!

I'll bet busing accounts for more than 10% professor. Should it be cut?

"Where can I find the huge list of people with the tax decreases?"

Why?

BTW, my property taxes went down about 6%.

And don't get me started about the idea of a property tax to begin with. Tell me why if I take care of my house, put my after-tax dollars into it (instead of going on vacation, cars, drugs, etc.) to fix it up while my neighbor lets his house go (he goes on vacation, buys a new car, has great drugs...) I end up paying more in taxes.....

Tell me.

Here's an idea: Town employees should have a chart to provide service comiserate with the taxes folks pay. Teachers too. So my teacher wife should give the better education to those kids who parents pay more in taxes.

Unworkable? Obviously.

And I understand how those with more should pay more, but come on. Much like the fed income tax where the top 1% pay 30% of taxes, this is crazy. As my illustration above shows, this class warefare seems to penalize those who work hard and delay gratification.

Flat tax anyone?

I agree the letter from town manager or tax assessor could have been more clear to indicate you are being billed retroactively for 1Q and 2Q tax difference. (only if you were unfortunate to have an increase!)

Also even though ASI lowered my assessment in February 2007 (I did not appeal diretly to Essex Tax Board) the town didn't even bother to update their records and the estimated bill reflects a much higher incorrect assessment. They've had almost 6 months to get the right assessment number in the bill processing before they were printed, but instead they expect all of us (with increases)to front them (and those who got decreases)some extra cash until they get around to fixing INCORRECT assessment figures on November bill. Who processes our tax bills anyway? is it the town or an outside vendor? this one is useless and doesn't even reflect the new "estimated" tax rate so they once again obfuscate that we just got hit with a 7%+ overall tax increase. This is another item that COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE been explained in the manager's cover letter (it wasn't)

Just another example of poor communication and the taxpayer be damned attitude from this town council and manager.

"Dear Montclair:
I didn't bother to explain this to you in my letter because you wouldn't have understood it anyway. There are comlpex, tricky reason that only I can understand. Pay up suckers!"

"The BOE budget is more then 2/3 of that bill you just received."

where do you get that figure?

From one of the people who is at every town council meeting and who I sat close to at the Board of School Estimate meeting where they approved the beast.

i though barista posted a story about a possible tax problem (possibly a hike of 16%) if we don't refinance something. i haven't seen much since, so the details are foggy. I think the refinancing was voted down, so does that mean we're staring down a large increase for next year?

I'll bet busing accounts for more than 10% professor. Should it be cut?

Yes!!!!!
Let the kids walk (mine included) to the closest school.

Busing is in the order of $1MM to $3MM on the $100MM budget.

If the school is at $100MM, and the town at let's say $50MM, and the Country at perhaps $30MM, that would make the town about .28 of the total.

The incredible increases in BOE spending come from the support staff that has been added over the years. A LOT of it is for Special Ed - something like 1/3 of the total budget. Mandated by the state and the federal government, it should be paid for by the state and federal government.

One might also look into all the $120K plus salaries at the BOE, including the newest "assistant" job that's just been created.

Hartnett talks of professional financial management, yet I wonder if he could show documentation for all the $700K in payments that went out during the microburst. Was anything more than sending an invoice in to the town required in order for a tree service to get paid, for example!

And how does professional financial management relate to the lack of proper insurance coverage on the upper montclair train station?

Special ed is 1/3 of the total budget?!?!? I assume you mean 1/3 of the total school budget, but still...

Am I alone in feeling cheated by the income limits imposed by our governor's real estate tax rebate? Since when do we penalize tax payers above arbitrarily imposed income brackets?
And while we're at it, why can't New Jersey pass a proposition to roll back local taxes the way California residents did? That would get my vote, for sure.

"Since when do we penalize tax payers above arbitrarily imposed income brackets?"

Where have you been? This is precisely the method favored by Democrats for wealth redistribution. It's the "progressive" in Progressive.

(of course, they're against it if they are on the "bad" end of the deal. Then it's an INJUSTICE! To be remedied, of course, by simply moving the borderline above them, then it's SOCIAL JUSTICE!)

(witness the AMT)

Total current BOE budget is about $102mm for 2007-2008. You can see the BOE budget here:

http://www.montclair.k12.nj.us/district/budget/07-08/budget_07-08.pdf

Special Ed is 24% of the overall school budget.

Not every cost category is broken out. I seem to recall seeing a figure of approximately $1mm for annual busing costs, but I forget where.

And yes, johng, I feel cheated by the income limits on the property tax rebate. It's a backdoor income tax.

I know of a great townhouse in Verona for sale with affordable taxes.

This person, Special Edward, seems to draw an outrageously high salary!!!

/what? Oh, nevermind.

A few questions:

Do you really think the next round of elected officials will be any better? How many members of the current town council were incumbents?

As long as there is no incentive to cut spending, then spending will not be cut!

Our brilliant president has set a precedent in that one needs not even to have to generate any revenue increases to offset increases in spending. Actually, he lowered collections (tax cuts) didn't he?

Why should our town council behave differently?

Last year, over 50% of all mortgages were without any downpayment. Overall, the average mortgage downpayment was 2%. If it's right for our elected officials, then it is right for us, I suppose?

I own a 2-family in Montclair that I paid $480,000 for in 2004. It was recently assessed at $640,000. I complained to ASI and they took it down to $620,000 without an explanation. We just received our papers and 13%annualtaxhike vs. the Township of Montclair is on the docket of the NJ state tax court. By the way, our house was assessed by a mortgage assessor at $500,000 at the time of purchase and we have nut sunk a stinkin' dime into it. We also had our house evaluated by two local realtors and neither thinks we could obtain even $575K for it, even with their optimistic bias.

What kills me is that as a Montclair tax payer, I'm footing the bill for the town lawyer who is going to defend the shoddy work of ASI. Of course, if it was up to Ed Remsen, my children would be footing the bill.

The Corzine property tax refund sham didn't help much either. From the 1% sales tax increase, I will receive a whopping $1,000 back in property tax relief. Not only am I in AMT, but now I will receive the same $1,000 in relief as someone making $95,000 more than me per year. Corzine's cap of $10,000 is so regressive to the middle class that he should be ashamed!

As usual, the rich get richer, the poor get some crumbs and the middle gets screwed!

I hope some of the wealthy put aside some cash for personal security details. We're really not that far away from the rich needing them.

Someone please update the Barista crime map to illustrate the highway robbery going on in Montclair.

"Our brilliant president has set a precedent in that one needs not even to have to generate any revenue increases to offset increases in spending. Actually, he lowered collections (tax cuts) didn't he?"

Did you know the defecit has fallen 50% since 2004?

Can someone also tell us why, in the name of all that is sacred, WHY do we pay taxes for the year that they assess in July? Who came up with this stupid, cockamamie, incomprehensible system??!!?! 3rd and 4th quarters are always higher because we have to make up for the new tax rate, or something like that, blah blah blah, I have asked it for years and never understood it. If the rate is going up, why not do it in January!! Tell us then, not 6 months later! The whole thing is absurd!

I lived in CA when Prop 13 first passed. We lost some services the first couple of years (I noticed it in the schools, as I was a student then) but, Guess WHAT! They learned to make do with less!! [GASP!] Of course, San Diego's sales tax is now something like 8.25% and it's on everything including clothes... so like anyplace, they put a nickel in your hand, and take a dime out of your back pocket.

Stop the bleeding! Stop spending my money! I will have to pitch a tent at 205 Claremont if this keeps up!

" Not only am I in AMT, but now I will receive the same $1,000 in relief as someone making $95,000 more than me per year. Corzine's cap of $10,000 is so regressive to the middle class that he should be ashamed!"

You see? If the system were adjusted (so that HE didn't get soaked) everything would be fine, I'd bet.

Perhaps we might try to establish a fair tax system that punishes no one?

Flat tax anyone?

It would be interesting to see applied. Let's say 10% across the board so someone making $100,000 a year actually pays proportionately the same as someone making $20,000.

With property tax, I think the most fair way to do it would be by:

Total cubic feet in a building x $X.XX + total square feet of property not taken up by a building x $Y.YY.

I'm sorry, but if you have more property / a bigger house then you should have to pay more taxes (you're taking up more space).

But, I do think taxing someone more because they've got a pool or re-did their kitchen is kind of stupid and unfair to people who are either taking advantage of their hard work or at the very least keeping their house in nice order.

That being said: This most recent article is just driving home how much I won't be able to afford a house in this town... Even if I get the money for a house, the taxes will kill me.

"Total cubic feet in a building x $X.XX + total square feet of property not taken up by a building x $Y.YY."

It's not about space. (what an utterly BAD idea). It's about value?

Why?

Because the "stake" in the total community's monetary value is represented by the value of your property. You stand to gain MORE than someone who's stake is smaller, thus you are responsible for more.

ROC = Republican on crack

Bush has increased spending by nearly 50 percent since taking office, while at the same time repeatedly cutting taxes primarily on the wealthiest," Conrad said. "Debt has exploded on his watch -- rising from $5.8 trillion in 2001 to approximately $9 trillion by the end of this year."

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSWBT00724820070711?feedType=RSS
http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif

You and Remsen use the same math! Once you learn the difference between the national debt and the deficit ROC, then I might consider one of your demented diatribes as being potentially truthful.

Next you'll try to tell us that 9/11 caused the debt to double as destroying Iraq was necessary. Or perhaps global warming is good for global farming. Mission accomplished?

Flat tax anyone?

If you are subject to AMT, you effectively pay a flat federal income tax. There are only 2 AMT tax brackets: 26% and 28%. Once you trip over into AMT the typical regressive rates are meaningless.

ROC,

I am new to this whole concept of property tax (having only rented up to this point in my life, I've never really cared).

Why, exactly, is it a bad idea to charge someone based on how much property they have? Wouldn't that be a more fair assessment than letting some arbitrary committee most interested in maxing out their profits choose what features you, the hard working home owner, have so carefully and meticulously added to your property?

Feel free to use small words. Like I said, I'm new to this whole concept (and probably going to look soon. Even if it's not in Montclair).

ROC

The real question is "why is there still a deficit"? I'm all for lowering taxes if there is a corresponding reduction in spending.

Bush's federal spending increases would make a democrat blush.

Folks--

I said cut the school budget so YES cut the damn budget. Do you really believe a 10% cut in the transportation budget will matter? C'mon. Those fools at Valley Rd. PISS MONEY AWAY. The best think to do might be to starve them and make them accountable.

But you all MAKE MY POINT. You complain, but what would you cut? Nothing. Because everything is precious to someone.

The good thing is, as much as I hate it. I make more $$ living around here than if I were to move South. So for now, those fuckers got me bent over and holding my ankles.... THANK YOU SIR, MAY I HAVE ANOTHER.

Who is this special ed and why is he so dang expensive?
If you have a special ed, shouldn't you foot more of the bill instead of spreading the taxes around to others who's eds are not special or those, like me, who have no eds at all?

"Why, exactly, is it a bad idea to charge someone based on how much property they have?"

So an empty Hahne's building should be charged more tax than the prosperous Whole Foods market?

How "much" property doesn't always correlate to the value of the property.

ROC,

I was referring specifically to occupied houses.

Would I have loved it if Plofker had to pay taxes on the Crisco houses before they got their COs? Absolutely.

But, deep down, I know that would be wrong.

Excuse me! I see that Special Ed is "only" 24% of our $100MM bill, thus we "only" spend $24MM on it.

But I also see that if you look at the entire number of personnel devoted to Special Ed, in 2006-7 it was 337.80 Full Time Equivalents and the ENTIRE school system had 1095.35 FTE's.

That means OVER 1/3 of the entire school system's staff is dedicated to special ed.

There's 1,200 Special Ed students, and close to 6,700 total students, or less than 18% of the student body.

That means that over 33% of the staff is being used to educate less than 18% of the students.

I also note that Special Ed, at least in the 2006-7 budget had 9.5 Psychologists, 5 Social Workers, and 1.2 Behavior Specialists.

How many of these professionals do we have to support the kids who are not "special ed" but could use extra help handling their emotional or learning problems that are keeping them from their potential? What about those kids?

(oh, and forget about the gifted who can't even get ONE 1/2 time administrator).

Does this sound fair?

"I was referring specifically to occupied houses."

Ahh, so then a 1.1 million dollar house on Crisco court (on a small lot) should pay more than a 800K house on a hugh lot?

To 13%, who wrote: "Our brilliant president has set a precedent in that one needs not even to have to generate any revenue increases to offset increases in spending. Actually, he lowered collections (tax cuts) didn't he?"

No, collections are up: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg2001.cfm#_ftn1

But spending is up even more.

The latter makes my blood boil.

And then this: "while at the same time repeatedly cutting taxes primarily on the wealthiest,"

EVERYONE who paid federal income tax got a tax cut. And who are those who pay federal income taxes?

Even after the Bush tax cuts, the top 10% of income earners earn 44.35% or all income, yet they pay 68.19% of all income taxes.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html

"Even after the Bush tax cuts, the top 10% of income earners earn 44.35% or all income, yet they pay 68.19% of all income taxes."

That's not enough IMHO. Look up what the top tax brackets were in the 1930's. History is doomed to repeat itself. When Rockefeller was paying 90 cents for every dollar he earned, why didn't he just quit? Cause he was not a greedy prick like all of you fools who think that once you earn it, you should get to keep it all. I beg you to look up what percentage of his income Corzine paid in taxes for the past 5 years. It's half of what I paid and I'm not making 6 figures. Corzine, on the other hand averages 8 figures on a bad year!

The future of this country will involve a lot of barbed wire fences and private security details to keep us lower classes from raping your wives and children. I can only hope the ROC's and Walter Mitty's of this world wake up and smell the coffee before the erosion of wages on the middle class results in mass chaos and the violence that comes along with it.

The future of this country will involve a lot of barbed wire fences and private security details to keep us lower classes from raping your wives and children.

Well, with your propensity to violent rape of children (your statement, not mine), it's no wonder that you classify yourself as "lower class" -- you could win the lottery tomorrow and forever be doomed to be seen as lower class. How dare others be smarter, harder working or -- yup -- luckier than you. Those f***ers must pay! Let's institute those marvelous tax rates of the 1930's in order to replicate that marvelous economy.

Now all of you, stop your bitching! Oh, remember when you were outbidding to get into this place, now your are cursing your tax bill. Well, guess what? Someone has to pay for all of you to be here and it's you.

So, shut the f**k up and deal with it! Sell yourself in the street if you have to, just pay your taxes. You created it, now you live with it.

If you are wealthy, it doesn't affect you, but if you are scraping by with your interest-only mortgage and your over-priced casa--you have a big f*n problem!

Good luck and good night!

hahahahahahahahahaha

My goodness.

Child rape, mass chaos, praising the economy of the thirties? All because of the tax code?

Rockefeller's lack of greed? The guy because of whom anti-trust legislation was invented?

13%, you are a member of the "reality based community" I take it?

Yes indeed. Let's look at the 1930's, an era known as THE GREAT DEPRESSION.

No growth, 25% unemployment, misery and hopelessness few of us can imagine.

To some deranged minds, however, it is a desirable model because those with more suffered too.

13%: Do you really expect anyone to rally around your rants of envy and resentment?

13%, usually its interesting to read your posts, but you've gone off the deep end here. the taxes in montclair will continue to climb, especially if the town doesn't refinance. it has some of the most expensive schools for some very mediocre performance. Take a look at any state school scorecard. I don't understand why people who don't like montclair don't move out. Is the diversity that big a draw? Are there no restaurants outside of town?

"So an empty Hahne's building should be charged more tax than the prosperous Whole Foods market?"

You make a great point. Would the higher tax on the Hahne's building force the owner to upgrade to generate revenue a la Whole Foods and not sit on the property for 20 years causing blight?

i thought the comments regarding hahnes and whole foods were confusing....if whole foods makes more money, it's taxed as income. That doesn't have anything to do with property tax.

Ahh, so then a 1.1 million dollar house on Crisco court (on a small lot) should pay more than a 800K house on a hugh lot?

No the proposed formula was Total cubic feet in a building x $X.XX + total square feet of property not taken up by a building x $Y.YY. That takes into consideration the bohemoth size of the house and the lack of any yard.
Might as well buy a condo as move into Crisco. At least with a condo you would probably have a maintained pool for your money.

Curmudgeon gets my vote for mayor and/or BOE president. Yes, we do need to serve the Special Ed students but I have long believed we are administrator-heavy in this district. I wear many, many different hats at my job - why can't they? What does Ms. Trigg-Scales do when she's finished revamping the curriculum for the year? Can she make copies and stuff envelopes? Can she fill in as a Special Ed psych or social services contact? Do we really need NINE psychologists?! Eliminiate one and them maybe we could also properly serve the G&T kids with a REAL program, instead of that sham called SAIL.

By the way, assuming the houses are equal, would it be fair to tax a property on 1 acre on Upper Mountain the same as 1 acre on Mission Street? I know this is a stretch but I don't think size alone can determine what's fair.

I've heard Oregon has no property tax at all, and instead uses sales tax or some other tax to make it up.

And having lived though the repercussions of Prop. 13 in California, I am all for trying it here. Maybe then we can finally elimiate government waste and duplicitous jobs.

Easy Rider: Montclair doesn't collect income taxes; that's the state and the feds. Property taxes are our humble burg's only real source of revenue.

i didn't know that, thanks walter. no wonder prop taxes so high

jimmy, et al.

This is not hard to understand. With a "size" formula, you would certainly end up with larger houses/property being taxed at a higher rate than smaller houses, even if some smaller houses were appointed better and worth more.

In fact if such a scheme were to become a reality, people would start buying and sprucing up smaller houses because they could place untaxed value there. You would encourage tightly packed, very expensive McMansions.

Imagine the subdivision possibilities as people sought to reduce their lot size as much as possible.

I know this might be hard for the liberal mind to comprehend, but the tax code isn't meant to encourage or discourage anything. It's a mechanism for everyone to pay their fair share.

If you have a more valuable property then your "share" of the township's whole value is greater. You will benefit more (financially) from a well run town, so you should pay more.

ROC,

Maybe it is just my own opinion that open land is worth more than buildings (if only in philisophical worth) that led to my thinking.

But, as usual, you do make a good argument.

Agreed, my rape stuff was a bit over the top! It just sucks how I'm really in the sour spot when it comes to my families AGI and my horrible reval from ASI has nearly put me over the edge. I'm really hoping that the town will settle with me prior to my tax case going to trial since obtaining the services of a lawyer will eliminate a nice chunk of my anticipated savings.

And for those avid readers of the GOP sponsored Cato Institutes and The Heritage shams (ROC and the like), perhaps you will consider the cause of the market crash and resulting depression. Is it different than the impending recession/depression? The real wage of all but the upper classes has taken a huge hit at the hands of this administration. When housing prices adjust downward 20 to 30% over the next two years and all of the equity people have relied upon to get by the last 6 years dries up, the craps gonna hit the fan.

And if it wasn't for those high taxes during the thirties, we wouldn't have a lot of the infrastructure that we rely upon today including the Lincoln Tunnel, Triborough Bridge an electrified NorthEast Corridor, etc. And that is just the PWA. There was also the CWA, the CCC and the TVA among others. I suppose those were not valuable to conservatives. Although they did manage to return employment back to near 1929 levels by 1939.

Guess which president initiated the first tax cut after the 30's?

13% wrote:

Do you really think the next round of elected officials will be any better? How many members of the current town council were incumbents?

Answer:

Yes. When people don't pay attention, we get people like, well, the guy that's running our country.

I think that from now until the next municipal election people will be paying attention.

I look forward to people who are willing to devote their time to making Montclair a better place. These will be people who will not complaing "Hey, I have a real job."

I look forward to people by adopting a long term vision. Restructuring, and sewer authorities are not long term. Something has to be done about the "income" side and tax increases are not the sole answer. Sensible development is. And, by the way, turning every free space of land into a parking deck is not very smart thinking.

I also look forward to bringing some of our extensive resident experience and knowledge into the "process." At the time of the discussion of the restructuring of the debt 10 people stepped forward with comments. These were folks whose "real jobs" were top Wall Street positions in Capital Finance, Municipal Finance, Investment Banking, and Banking in general.

Although they were able to turn the council's mind around, why aren't residents like these used ALL the time for projects throughout the town? I'll bet you we have some engineers who could help, as well Landscape Architects, highly experienced educators from other districts, university professors, etc.

Thus, I look forward to the people who will be running and trust that they will be people who admit that they don't know all the answers; that they are willing to look at what other towns have done; that they are willing to consider "large" visions both for the town and for the board of ed.

We have the people to make the town great.

And lastly, I look forward to the elections in '08.

"And if it wasn't for those high taxes during the thirties, we wouldn't have a lot of the infrastructure that we rely upon today including the Lincoln Tunnel, Triborough Bridge an electrified NorthEast Corridor, etc. And that is just the PWA. There was also the CWA, the CCC and the TVA among others. I suppose those were not valuable to conservatives. "

I am surprised such things are valuable to liberals. Don't you care about the environment?

What, exactly, do you think ushered in the "car culture" but public highway projects?

Sorry you're in the "Sour spot" but, remember, it's a main tenet of "progressiveism" that there be such sour spots in the first place. Welcome to the wealthy class!

Honestly, it seems like for any liberal the "rich" in need of soaking begins just above HIS pay grade.

I don't know why you're so concerned with the middle class anymore since you're now wealthy anyway.

according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, in 2006, 53.7 percent of all federal income taxes were paid by those with incomes over $200,000. Those with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 paid 28.3 percent of all individual income taxes. Thus those with incomes over $100,000 paid 82 percent of the total.

Isn't that progressivism implilmented?

Isn't that exactly what Democrats want?

I agree Curmudgeon! I also believe that people are actually dying to volunteer to help solve our townships problems. I know that I am. Unfortunately, this town council seems to ignore most of our offers. The way-finding sign ordeal illustrates this point exactly.

What we are missing is the incentive in all levels of government to control costs.

As long as tax revenues can always be raised to cover increases in spending, then there really is no incentive to stop spending. Hence the plethora of tax abatements and variances for the Plofkers and the continual increase in property taxes for all. Don't even get me started on the pension issue which will eventually bankrupt us.

"What we are missing is the incentive in all levels of government to control costs."

There is ever only one "incentive" which produces results. Cut the taxes. Give them less to spend and they will spend less.

Here is how to caluclate the size of government. Take the total tax receipts and add the maximum amout they are allowed to borrow.

Cut one, preferably both of those and goverment will shrink.

If there is not an significant effort, with new policies, ordinances, a meeting with the housing court judge, to made wealthy absentee landlords clean up their 4th Ward (Maple Ave) properties and rent to decent families, no one on this Council will get my vote.

I don't need my Councilperson telling me that the filth at 86 Maple Ave, 107 Maple Ave, 114-117 Maple Ave, "WILL ALWAYS BE THAT WAY." I need her to propose some policies, ordinances, programs to educate the public on how to report violations, and have a ask the judges to come out and take a look at these houses, driveways, on Maple Avenue (Woodland-Lincoln). Tenants at 86 and 107 throw open garbage out the front, pile up five feet of unhealthy garbage in the back, pile of trash on the 2nf flr balcony. Will the 18 wheeler truck always be allowed to park on Woodland across from the playground forever?

Why should I pay (close to $11,000yr)taxes and have to live with this mess and have my property values diminished by it? Is this considered quality of life anywhere else in Montclair? So, why does it "always have to be that way down here?"

Maybe the way to go is get a lawyer and sue the Township, and specific officials, including the judges who are supposed to penalize violators, for failure to enforce the laws.

Because, If I don't pay my August 1 tax bill, I penalized. How can absentee landlords be allowed to destroy my quality of life and property values, every day, without strong penalties? All I hear are excuses about "the laws that do not permit assertive Code Inspections." And a Council person who does not seem to know how to propose ordinances.

ROC,

The problem with your simple analysis is that there IS a need for a social net. I totally agree with you that smaller government funded by less tax revenue is the key, but who is going to take care of those who do not take care of themselves? Certainly not most of the wealthy folks I know? They want to keep every penny they earn, since they earned it! Sounf familiar?
Do you propose we let them rot?

Nana,

I agree with you. The law should be enforced. But you never answered my question on this in another thread.

Let's say the township starts to enforce the ordinances and tickets a lot of people. And let's say 80% of the new citations are in a part of town with a large minority population.

Can an NAACP/David Herron suit be far off?

13%

So if I understand your position.

1) You are for FDR style large public funded infrastructue.

2). A "Social Safety Net"

3). Some sort of government run healthcare (mentioned in another thread)

4). Vastly reducing the national debt.

5). Low taxes.

Uh, huh. Good luck with that.

It's possible, ROC, if we can convince France to take over our job as world policeman.

Most of the comments above make a lot of sense. Nevertheless, at some point we have to step back and realize that our high RE taxes are going to price Montclair out of the market unless one of two things happen: (1) our relative taxes go down compared to similar municipalities or (2) our schools become better. There is little reason for people with school age children to buy an equivalent cost house in Montclair (rated 188/354)when there are similar choices next door like Glen Ridge (18/354) or Verona (57/354). Or how about Ridgewood (20/354) or Livingston (27/354)?
I appreciate and love this town, and it is wonderful, but at some point the thought of having to throw in an extra $40K+ per child for private school negates a lot of what makes Montclair special.
I am not saying in any way that the schools are terrible, but we live in a competitive environment where our children come first. I can justify 25K - 45K/year in local taxes if I'm getting a good education for one or more kids, but not for mediocrity.

It is not surprising that complaints and confusion about the fairness or unfairness of real estate property taxes would devolve into political sloganeering about the income tax.

The local real estate tax is based on the total market value of the property. The theory being that the more valuable properties should pay a proportionately higher share of the cost of municipal services. It cannot be fairly based on volume of occupied space (land and building) because then the very large hanger-like decrepit building on a large undesireable lot next to a highway and pig farm would be taxed more than the new home of fair size on a average size lot in the most desireable section of town. Hence the tax assessor must, with the assistance of experts, arrive at a fair market value for each property to be taxed. The real estate tax is not designed to be progressive - i.e., for richer people to pay a greater percentage than poorer people - although it works out somewhat that way because, by and large, rich people own more valuable properties than poor people.

On the other hand, it is politically and socially good policy for an income tax to be progressive. A flat tax is not acceptable. Taking 15 per cent from someone making more than 500,000 is not the equivalent of taking 15 per cent from someone making 20,000. For the weathier person it is a nuisance, for the poorer person it's a hardship. It is entirely just that persons earning under a certain amount pay no income tax at all that that the rate of tax increases with fair increments for those above the minimum level. I would have no problem with Corzine paying 50 percent of his income in income tax.

For those people who believe they should pay for only those governmental services they actually use, ala the sales tax, I can only say - Get Real.

I can justify 25K - 45K/year in local taxes if I'm getting a good education for one or more kids, but not for mediocrity.

You are paying that for layers of administrative fat and a sheer lack of accountability. When you speak out against it at BOE meetings they effectively give you the finger. But smile people, because were diverse.

"I would have no problem with Corzine paying 50 percent of his income in income tax."

Perfect!

That should really be the motto of the Democratic Party:

"I have no problem having someone else pay 50% income tax".

"I can justify 25K - 45K/year in local taxes if I'm getting a good education for one or more kids, but not for mediocrity."

You are paying that for layers of administrative fat and a sheer lack of accountability. Yet when you speak out against it at BOE meetings they effectively give you the finger. But smile, because were diverse.
Remember the field house and the gym staff to be hired. Did they ask anyone before adding to head count?

I would have a BIG BIG problem with Corzine paying 50% of his income in taxes, and it's not because I like him.

It is becaue I want to make as much as he did, and my opportunity to do so would be crushed if I lived under a system that engaged in confiscatory tax polciies only to satisfy the basest emotions of spite and envy.

From each according to his ability to each according to his need. Speculator: please tell me where that has EVER worked and why don't you live there?

Johng makes an interesting point, but perhaps it is too short sighted.

Those of us who live in Montclair at great expense value the many things that are unique to this community and we do no plan to give it up to save a few bucks.

The problems catalogued daily on this blog are frequently over-magnified.

Take the school statistics. They do not look good on their face but may not be meaningful. The school still turns out many excellent people who do very well in higher education and in life. The statistics are dragged down by a significant under class of needy students. But the schools represent a closer approximate of the real world that our children will have to deal with the rest of their lives. I don't think that running away from reality does your children any favors. In fact, one of the benefits in Montclair is that we can deal with the diversity and it becomes and advantage.

Spectator,

I wonder if you'd apply the same kind of "[the stats] do not look good on their face but may not be meaningful." approach to, say, heart surgery survival rates of the hospital for your impending bypass?

As a Republican myself, I cannot believe ROC and Mitty on this issue. If I were making 8 million a year I would have no problem with paying 4 million in taxes.

Actually ROC, I would, if the survival rate meant that my hospital handled primarily the most difficult cases. Survival rates can be a misleading statistic with hospitals.

Spec,

What gets done with that 4 million?

If you had it would you invest it? Perhaps in a business?

What's the government going to do with it?

Who will be more productive with that money? (the fairness issues aside)

Spec: First make the 8 million, then tell me how deserving the government is of half of it.

ROC I am beginning to lose respect for you reasoning power.

Your confusing the issue. What is done with tax money - i.e. spending - is an entirely different issue. We probably agree on what should be done with tax money, or better yet, what should not be done with tax money.

But how you raise the money for spending we agree on, that is the issue we are discussing. So stick to the topic and don't give use conservatives a bad name.

Well said.

(walt)

spec,

What is your reason to support a 50% tax rate if not the "good" it can do?

Sorry, but what happens to tax money is very much a part of the discussion.

Large tax rates take capitol away from efficient uses and pass it to inefficent uses.

If I were making as much as Corzine did (what was it, millions a year), then I would have no problem giving up half my salery in income tax.

Half of a million is still almost 10x what I'm making now (before taxes) and I'm doing ok by myself.

Honestly, I have a hard time imagining what people with a household income of over $300k could possibly do with that much money. Even with two or three kids I would think that $100k a year after taxes would be more than enough for most people to get by.

Listen Mitty, I hate taxes more than you do...so my advice to ROC applies to you.

We are spending billions for the defense budget...and I will be damned if Corzine shouldn't be spending more than me to defend his wealth, his neck and his children.

"...damned if Corzine shouldn't be spending more than me to defend his wealth, his neck and his children."

He is. You understand percentages, right?

Come on ROC, where the hell did you go to school? The subject of taxation scrambles your reasoning.

First: We agree that Government must perform some fuctions, right?

Second: We agree that to finance these functions we have to imposes taxes, right?

Third: We disagree that Corzine should pay a larger percentage of his income for taxes than I do.

So stop intectually slobbering about wasteful spending and who is more productive and other totally irrelevant topics - Please.

Spec: I don't hate taxes. In fact, I am trying to keep emotions out of this. When you do that, you can begin to recognize the destruction power that would rest in a government imposing the kind of hyper-progressive tax system you advocate.

And to Mike: Consider that some people want to do more than just "get by."

Hey, I am with you Mitty, on the destructive power of high taxes. Destroys incentive, results in misallocation of resources, forces decision making based on taxation rather than economic and productive issues, etc .etc.

BUT, a certain amount of taxation is unavoidable and we are discussing how that tax burden should be allocated to the citizens. If the expenditures are essential and cannot be avoided, then does everyone pay the same amount (impossible) or do people with lots of money pay lots more???

They do.

Incidentally, I am not sure that Geo Soros puts his money to better use than Geo Bush puts our tax money. (chuckling out loud)

"then does everyone pay the same amount (impossible) or do people with lots of money pay lots more???"

They DO pay lots more NOW. Yes.

You've got it!

15% of 8 million is "lots more" than 15% of 200K.

I am not against taxes. We need as little as we can get by with. And the amount of "pain" should be fairly distruibuted.

Progressive tax rates are clearly, and by definition, unevenly (i'd say unfairly) applied. What is your argument for having them?

"They do", Mitty?

Do you mean that if I am paying 15 percent of 500,000 it is entirely fair for Corzine to be paying only 17 percent of 8 Million?????

Well ROC, let's start at the bottom....do you think people under a certain income limit should pay no tax at all???

Fair?

I think what wouuld be fair is a system in which one's share of income taxes is proportionate to one's share of all income earned.

Similarly I would find it fair if one's share of real estate taxes is porportionate to the value of one's property in relation to the value of all properties. (Remember real estate taxes? That's how this began.)

So if your $500,000 represents x % of all income earned in an ecomony you should pay x % of all the income taxes collected. Same with Jon Corzine. That's fair.

But it's not what we have now.