--- about those new, large apartment buildings.
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
To avoid thread drift. On another thread are comments about the multi-family, high rent buildings that are being put up over town. Who stops these? The town council or the planning board?
How does zoning get changed to eliminate the opportunity for these to proliferate?
Council man Dafis has expressed concern about unbridled building, my words, and expressed the hope that more care be given to the granting of these multi hundred apt. complexes . I fear that at least for now he is a voice crying out in the wilderness.
Basically the Planning Board must give the final approval to begin construction. Do you think that if the bull dozers are ready to go they can be stopped at that point? Take a lot of pictures of Memorial Park.
yahooyahoo said:
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
Total conflict of interest, in my humble opinion.
yahooyahoo said:
yahooyahoo said:Total conflict of interest, in my humble opinion.
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
Only if he stands to gain materially
max_weisenfeld said:
yahooyahoo said:Only if he stands to gain materially
yahooyahoo said:Total conflict of interest, in my humble opinion.
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
Also, under NJ law, the Mayor (or equivalent under whatever form of government has been chosen by the municipality) is a member of the Planning Board for each municipality.
max_weisenfeld said:
yahooyahoo said:Only if he stands to gain materially
yahooyahoo said:Total conflict of interest, in my humble opinion.
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
The interests do not have to be financial. It's simply bad governance. The law that dictates the planning board structure needs to be rewritten.
It's not really the job of the Maplewood TC and S.O. BoT to "stop" or even to start development. A developer submits a proposal and plan and the local government has a process to review it and to have the public access that review. More times than not it's approved with various changes in size/scale, design, public access, number of below-market rate units and so on. In the case of the old post office building, the town was more involved, purposely designating the area a zone for redevelopment.
Regarding zoning, I'm not aware what specific changes have been made to accommodate these, but it's not as if single family homes are being bulldozed and multi-unit commercial buildings are put up in their place.
My experience is there are folks who are for this development (or at least accepting of it) and those who oppose it, and there's almost nothing one side can do or say to change the mind of the other.
We are ones who can reduce/end the proliferation of multifamily/mixed use buildings by speaking out at planning board hearings and TC meetings. It would be helpful to come armed with facts demonstrating negative impact on infrastructure, ambiance, and real property values while being prepared to counter arguments on need to develop more affordable housing, have units available for single adults and empty nesters, increase the overall tax base, etc. There are winning arguments on both sides of this issue. Those speaking in opposition need to be familiar with them and able to counter them convincingly. It also helps to organize by running candidates for the TC who are opposed to continued expansion of development of multifamily housing in town and having persons opposed to the continued development of multifamily housing submit volunteer forms to serve on the planning board. In the latter case, it would be helpful if these prospective volunteers had strong backgrounds in urban planning, architecture, and other related skill sets.
nohero said:
max_weisenfeld said:Also, under NJ law, the Mayor (or equivalent under whatever form of government has been chosen by the municipality) is a member of the Planning Board for each municipality.
yahooyahoo said:Only if he stands to gain materially
yahooyahoo said:Total conflict of interest, in my humble opinion.
The TC and Planning board want those buildings. Mayor DeLuca is on both. The math is easy on that one.
New Jersey Revised Statutes Title 40 - MUNICIPALITIES AND COUNTIES Section 40:55D-23 Planning board membership.
The law basically give the mayor control over most of the planning board. As I said in the previous post, it needs to be rewritten.
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
Forgive me if this has been answered elsewhere - 2 questions
1. What is being built on Valley across from Columbia H.S.?
2. Is there any truth to the rumor that Gleasons plans to close and build apartments on the lot?
Everyone complains about taxes but when the Governing Body in its small sphere of influence does something to increase rateables everyone complains
It appears that the powers of a Planning Board are substantially restricted
apple44 said:
....
Regarding zoning, I'm not aware what specific changes have been made to accommodate these, but it's not as if single family homes are being bulldozed and multi-unit commercial buildings are put up in their place.
.....
That's the point. The reason multi-unit buildings are not put up on Tuscan or where ever is because those streets are designated R-1 or R-2.
If citizens agree that the new developments are undesirable, then the zone designations need to be changed. That goes back to my question. Does the T.C. change designations or just the planning board?
apple44 said:
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
re
LOST said:
Everyone complains about taxes but when the Governing Body in its small sphere of influence does something to increase rateables everyone complains
It appears that the powers of a Planning Board are substantially restricted
http://www.hillwallack.com/?t=40&an=15620
That goes back to a question I raised at another thread. Are these new buildings a net gain to the community? Is the net increase in tax income offset by increased expenses to the town?
How many new enrollments in the school system came from these building? How much has income increased?
I agree that a building is more attractive than a vacant lot. Would single family houses have been an even more attractive use of the land?
author said:
apple44 said:The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
Also John Harvey pointed out......and no I don't have the figures.....but the number of TC members who serve on overlapping committees is practically incestuous , which leads me to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands.
author said:
author said:Also John Harvey pointed out......and no I don't have the figures.....but the number of TC members who serve on overlapping committees is practically incestuous , which leads me to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands.
apple44 said:The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
^^^^^^^
THIS
the TC members are elected by the people of Maplewood. Would you prefer that these important issues are decided solely by unelected and unaccountable volunteers?
I don't like Trump, but that doesn't mean that I want to limit the power of the Presidency. As far as I know no-one in "The Resistance" has advocated that the President should not appoint Cabinet Members or Members of Federal Commissions.
But people who don't like Vic DeLuca seem to want to change the nature of the Municipal Government.
It’s been my observation that many people wrongfully assume the power of any local government to either “put in” developments or to prevent a particular land owner or business owner from developing a particular property as they see fit as long as it fits within the existing court-tested codes.
A local government cannot just pass any restrictive law that they choose to see fit and not expect it to be successfully challenged in court if it is an ultimately determined to be an unlawful law. It is in fact, the job of the TC attorney to advise and to keep the TC and taxpayers out of such trouble based on precedent that would only cost taxpayer money in a losing court battle.
Frankly, we should be grateful that they do have limited powers as we would otherwise perhaps not be too keen to oblige their every whim. Certainly we should not be blaming them for not exercising powers that don’t exist or cannot be made to exist under state or federal constitution.
I’ve lived here for over 30 years and it seems to me that all that the new housing and high real estate prices indicate is simply that a lot of people want to live here. I hope they keep wanting to live here (despite the property taxes which everyone has also been complaining about for my 30 years).
I will grant and have complained to friends that a certain aesthetic or “pace” (for lack of a better word) can change as a town changes but it seems to me that that is the nature of a community. Each generation defines their town by their purchases.
If I saw empty apartment buildings or real estate prices tumbling, THEN I’d be really worried.
author said:
apple44 said:The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
Yes, I am aware of the distinction and assume others here are as well.
The S.O. village president is directly elected by voters, and people there seem to have similar complaints about "over development," perhaps more than in Maplewood.
author said:Also John Harvey pointed out......and no I don't have the figures.....but the number of TC members who serve on overlapping committees is practically incestuous , which leads me to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands.
No, that's a criticism which is based on a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of how local government operates. Having an elected member of the governing body sit on a committee does not lead "to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands".
author said:The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
Every member of the Township Committee serves a three-year term. They have to stand for election every three years.
At the start of every year, the members of the Township Committee select one of their number to serve as Chair - which office constitutes the office of Mayor for a Township Committee.
Everyone is up for election every three years - two up for election, two up for election, and one up for election in those three years. The office of Mayor is subject to a new choice every year.
It's not that bad a system.
Speaking of Newark, years ago I was involved in a case on behalf of City Council, which had to sue the Mayor because he was selling property they said he didn't have the right to sell on his own. Sometimes councils and mayors have fights over who gets to decide something. Less likely with a Committee form of government.
author said:Also John Harvey pointed out......and no I don't have the figures.....but the number of TC members who serve on overlapping committees is practically incestuous , which leads me to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands.
I serve on one of the advisory committees. The TC member who serves as a liaison to this committee is non-voting and serves as a conduit to/from the full TC requesting input on issues before the TC and reporting back to the full TC on ways in which the voting members feel the TC can be more responsive in the area of concern on which we were appointed to advise. To the best of my knowledge the other advisory committees work in a similar fashion.
apple44 said:
author said:Yes, I am aware of the distinction and assume others here are as well.
apple44 said:The Mayor is not elected Mayor by the townspeople. The Mayor is one of 5 TC people who is voted into office by his/hers fellow TC members. Yea I know that makes it an ultra refined version of Democracy. The current Mayor survived a bid to replace him with another TC member after the last election. I am from Newark which used to have this system. Wisely it was replaced allowing voters to elect their Mayor by pulling their own lever. I would like to see this put into place here.
I don't know why that's a conflict of interest. The mayor is elected and it seems reasonable to have elected officials on the boards and sub-committees. A true conflict of interest would be if someone on the planning board (or a close family member) is employed by or somehow directly benefits from the work of the developer, architect and so on.
The S.O. village president is directly elected by voters, and people there seem to have similar complaints about "over development," perhaps more than in Maplewood.
Some people in South Orange are opposed to development. Others support it. Most don't pay attention or attend meetings. But as pointed out by others, we can't just arbitrarily say yes or no to developers.
ml1 said:
the TC members are elected by the people of Maplewood. Would you prefer that these important issues are decided solely by unelected and unaccountable volunteers?
Sort of like the Paris Commune. You are getting warm.
joan_crystal said:
author said:I serve on one of the advisory committees. The TC member who serves as a liaison to this committee is non-voting and serves as a conduit to/from the full TC requesting input on issues before the TC and reporting back to the full TC on ways in which the voting members feel the TC can be more responsive in the area of concern on which we were appointed to advise. To the best of my knowledge the other advisory committees work in a similar fashion.Also John Harvey pointed out......and no I don't have the figures.....but the number of TC members who serve on overlapping committees is practically incestuous , which leads me to the conclusion that a tremendous amount of authority is concentrated in very few hands.
Between high school and college I worked for a great urban renewal firm. It was the era of the Model Cities program and money flowed out of Washington to facilitate the program. We must have had 16 offices across the country,
By dint of my job, every piece of paper, memos, sometimes bids flowed through my hands. I was more knowledgeable in many ways than all four of our VP's
We had a newly hired, veteran public relations director and his young female assistant who seemed to be forever leaving for doctor's appointments.
When I could I hung close to Al in an attempt to soak up a journalists facts of life. My first experience working in a place with cubicles. It was many tears pre Dilbert but it was still a fate worse than death.
Anyway in an attempt to be useful, all the suits did that, Al submitted a memo to the President with a few recommendations. He soon received his reply with more red marks on it than one of my
physics papers. The most red were over the comments about citizen committees. The only thing I can print is that they "are a sop""......After that it went into language that would have made my
father, who was a coal miner, avoid repeating in mixed company.
When I was older, I attended Union meetings with my father. It's in the blood. The language there
would melt steel coated with asbestos.
If there is a moral think it would be to avoid citizen committees and become an accountant. Don't let your child grow up to be a cowboy.
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
HUGE Rummage sale to benefit the Bloomfield High School Robotics Team Sale Date: Apr 27, 2024
More info
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
-
'Beethoven's Wrong Note: A Steampunk Opera'
May 12, 2024 at 2:00pm
Advertisement
To avoid thread drift. On another thread are comments about the multi-family, high rent buildings that are being put up over town. Who stops these? The town council or the planning board?
How does zoning get changed to eliminate the opportunity for these to proliferate?