Demolishing Homes In Maplewood
Jaytee said:
Would combining the public works save money, how? By cutting staff?
Would combining the police save money, how? By cutting staff?
Would combining the fire departments save money, how?
Less vehicles to maintain? How?
I’m pretty sure we won’t be saving money, in fact the opposite is true.
Agreed. Just the cost of name change plus reorganization would be more expensive than you might think. Then there is the cost of making policies and procedures consistent in both towns, uniform communications so employees of both towns could communicate with each other (a problem with uniformed forces using radio communication), computers would have to be able to communicate with each other too, a problem if different software was being used in each town, etc. Unless services were being cut, the same number of vehicles would be required and there would be no staffing cuts either. Any extra availability a staff member might have has been eliminated through existing interlocal and shared service agreements. The list of start up expenses is considerable. Nobody would be saving on taxes long term either. Both Maplewood and South Orange are among the most heavily taxed in the State.
With municipal departments I think the savings comes with a couple of things.
Like reduction in building requirements. A combined DPW could consolidate activities and vehicles at one location. The current SO DPW is pretty much right on the border with Maplewood. You could close down the DPW yard in Maplewood and sell that property for development. Maybe they leave a smaller station with a couple of snowplows or something along those lines.
Likewise the municipal offices could be consolidated in the Maplewood township building and they could reduce the amount of office space that’s being rented in South Orange. It might be nice to leave a tax payment office, or a permitting office for building permits, in South Orange.
Savings could also be realized by eliminating management positions. A consolidated Police Department would only need one Chief, for instance. I’m having trouble finding what the Chief in each town makes, and how much of a hierarchy there is.
Theoretically you could do this without laying anyone off, just wait for attrition to thin out the existing chiefs, deputy chiefs, etc. But it would limit promotion opportunities for officers in the department. So there’s a human cost to pay.
joan_crystal said:
Agreed. Just the cost of name change plus reorganization would be more expensive than you might think. Then there is the cost of making policies and procedures consistent in both towns, uniform communications so employees of both towns could communicate with each other (a problem with uniformed forces using radio communication), computers would have to be able to communicate with each other too, a problem if different software was being used in each town, etc. Unless services were being cut, the same number of vehicles would be required and there would be no staffing cuts either. Any extra availability a staff member might have has been eliminated through existing interlocal and shared service agreements. The list of start up expenses is considerable. Nobody would be saving on taxes long term either. Both Maplewood and South Orange are among the most heavily taxed in the State.
Really?
How do you explain this?
Cost savings come in many areas, but none of them will be huge by themselves. I think the only real savings in DPW will come from one fewer administrator, but there will be other efficiencies. If one town has one guy who is truly expert with certain things he can work in both towns, and vice versa. One arborist can handle both towns. I think there is real savings in the current South Orange Village town engineering system that Maplewood could benefit from. Consistency between towns would grow over time and lead to more efficient work flow. I can see one Building inspection office being a big area of improvement.
I think as younger people finally get to run things some of these ridiculous biases against merging will disappear quickly. I also think that South Orange is better run these days than Maplewood.
sac said:
joan_crystal said:
When consolidation was last on the ballot, about 80% of South Orange voters were in favor of consolidating and about 80% of Maplewood voters were opposed. Form of government was not a factor since the consolidation commission, had it been created, would have been charged with determining the form of government for the new entity.
When it was last on the ballot, South Orange town government was a mess. That is no longer the case. If anything, SO folks might be a little leery of Maplewood town government currently.
My recollection was that Maplewood tax bills would have gone up and South Orange tax bills would have gone down with consolidation. Hence the voting results you see above.
As for S.O. government, Alex Torpey was a total disaster. Sheena brought some much needed decorum and stability to S.O.
yahooyahoo said:
My recollection was that Maplewood tax bills would have gone up and South Orange tax bills would have gone down with consolidation. Hence the voting results you see above.
As for S.O. government, Alex Torpey was a total disaster. Sheena brought some much needed decorum and stability to S.O.
Not sure how that would have worked, as property taxes are based on the assessed valuations of each home as a percentage of the total assessment.
If that was the perception, it was incorrect.
Agreed on Torpey. Don't forget Janine Bauer on the good side as well.
jimmurphy said:
Really?
How do you explain this?
Different communities? There are mergers that make sense where participating municipalities complement each other. Maplewood and South Orange are too similar and already participate in too many shared service agreements for there to be much in the way of significant cost savings in the event of a merger.
jimmurphy said:
Not sure how that would have worked, as property taxes are based on the assessed valuations of each home as a percentage of the total assessment.
If that was the perception, it was incorrect.
Agreed on Torpey. Don't forget Janine Bauer on the good side as well.
Based primarily on each town's share of the school tax bill based on comparative real property values in the two towns.
joan_crystal said:
Based primarily on each town's share of the school tax bill based on comparative real property values in the two towns.
But in the event of a merger, the homes would likely be assessed at the same time, and there would be no “each town’s share,” there would be each home’s share. If the values are higher in South Orange, they would still be higher.
If your real answer is that you like being separate for sentimental reasons, just come out and say it.
But there are real savings to be had or we wouldn’t have been going down this road on services. There are more to share and it would be more efficient if we were one town. The state would give us money to do it.
DanDietrich said:
…
I think as younger people finally get to run things some of these ridiculous biases against merging will disappear quickly…
^^^ This
jimmurphy said:
^^^ This
you guys really believe this? I think you might be unpleasantly surprised.
jimmurphy said:
joan_crystal said:
Based primarily on each town's share of the school tax bill based on comparative real property values in the two towns.
But in the event of a merger, the homes would likely be assessed at the same time, and there would be no “each town’s share,” there would be each home’s share. If the values are higher in South Orange, they would still be higher.
If your real answer is that you like being separate for sentimental reasons, just come out and say it.
But there are real savings to be had or we wouldn’t have been going down this road on services. There are more to share and it would be more efficient if we were one town. The state would give us money to do it.
Jim-
I'm not against merging. I'm just stating there's an initial adjustment that would take place to property taxes. Maplewood would go up and S.O. would go down. I'm not sure if that's still the case. Yes, eventually they would all be assessed at once but a transition would take place. Some will win, some will lose. Just like any assessment.
yahooyahoo said:
Jim-
I'm not against merging. I'm just stating there's an initial adjustment that would take place to property taxes. Maplewood would go up and S.O. would go down. I'm not sure if that's still the case. Yes, eventually they would all be assessed at once but a transition would take place. Some will win, some will lose. Just like any assessment.
So it’s a good deal for SO to merger because their taxes will go down, and Maplewood would go up. So tell me again how are we saving money by merging?
Essex county is not very good at managing money, reasons why millburn and short hills want to become part of morris county. I honestly don’t think merging will help anyone save money.
Newark is a money pit.
yahooyahoo said:
Jim-
I'm not against merging. I'm just stating there's an initial adjustment that would take place to property taxes. Maplewood would go up and S.O. would go down. I'm not sure if that's still the case. Yes, eventually they would all be assessed at once but a transition would take place. Some will win, some will lose. Just like any assessment.
As it is, each property in both towns is assessed and a total is established. That total is allocated to each town based on the collective assessment in each town.
Once combined, each house would be assessed. Can’t see why that assessment would change based on the fact that the towns are combined.
Explain to me the mechanism whereby S.O. taxes would go down and Maplewood’s would go up.
Jaytee said:
you guys really believe this? I think you might be unpleasantly surprised.
Evidence please, not opinion.
Jaytee said:
So it’s a good deal for SO to merger because their taxes will go down, and Maplewood would go up. So tell me again how are we saving money by merging?
Essex county is not very good at managing money, reasons why millburn and short hills want to become part of morris county. I honestly don’t think merging will help anyone save money.
Newark is a money pit.
let’s see yahooyahoo’s response to my question before jumping to this conclusion.
jimmurphy said:
But in the event of a merger, the homes would likely be assessed at the same time, and there would be no “each town’s share,” there would be each home’s share. If the values are higher in South Orange, they would still be higher.
If your real answer is that you like being separate for sentimental reasons, just come out and say it.
But there are real savings to be had or we wouldn’t have been going down this road on services. There are more to share and it would be more efficient if we were one town. The state would give us money to do it.
The homes are being assessed at the same time now. Our regional school district is the primary reason why the same revaluation company is valuing all properties in both towns this year. If you want to reduce taxes, don't look to a merger of Maplewood and South Orange. Look to the way in which public schools are funded in NJ and to unfunded mandates such as the recent 23% increase in health insurance costs for Municipal employees. Factor in the fact that neither town has sufficient commercial and industrial properties to offset the burden placed on residential property owners in both towns.
joan_crystal said:
The homes are being assessed at the same time now. Our regional school district is the primary reason why the same revaluation company is valuing all properties in both towns this year. If you want to reduce taxes, don't look to a merger of Maplewood and South Orange. Look to the way in which public schools are funded in NJ and to unfunded mandates such as the recent 23% increase in health insurance costs for Municipal employees. Factor in the fact that neither town has sufficient commercial and industrial properties to offset the burden placed on residential property owners in both towns.
This is a red herring response, I’m afraid.
Why have we combined the school district?
Why have we combined the courts?
Why have we combined the Fire departments?
Why have we combined the Rec departments?
Why is Princeton seeing cost savings after combination?
Why is the State paying for municipalities to share services, and even merge?
To say there are no cost savings is to ignore all evidence to the contrary.
jimmurphy said:
This is a red herring response, I’m afraid.
Why have we combined the school district?
Why have we combined the courts?
Why have we combined the Fire departments?
Why have we combined the Rec departments?
Why is Princeton seeing cost savings after combination?
Why is the State paying for municipalities to share services, and even merge?
To say there are no cost savings is to ignore all evidence to the contrary.
We did not combine the school district. The school district existed before Maplewood and South Orange split. Previously they were one town. We have not combined the recreation departments. Under a shared service agreement one town does youth soccer for both towns and the other does youth t-ball and baseball. The court is not combined. Maplewood provides the court space to South Orange for a fee. The fire departments did merge recently after more than 20 years of negotiation.
There will definitely be savings in many small areas. If you combine police forces and hire one or two more patrolmen per shift they can better cover hotspots and possibly reduce some overtime. If a plow going down a street can just keep going instead of stopping at an artificial border that gets more efficient. These aren't big things, but they increase efficiency. Keep hitting the low hanging fruit. We will get there.
Interesting how the topic of tearing down and renovating a single house morphed into discussion of doing same to entire towns. Synecdoche.
Would be great to have a snow plow go the entire trajectory of valley, SO ave, Springfield ave and prospect st, without stopping. Shut down the DPW at Boyden, let the staff report for duty at the SO site, build an apartment complex on Boyden, while we’re so desperate for apartments, tear down all the commercial properties along Newark way. One chief and one lieutenant, sell off the police cars in maplewood and have the police go back to patrolling in pairs, after all those explorers in the SO department are better. We can save $$$$$
Jaytee said:
Would be great to have a snow plow go the entire trajectory of valley, SO ave, Springfield ave and prospect st, without stopping. Shut down the DPW at Boyden, let the staff report for duty at the SO site, build an apartment complex on Boyden, while we’re so desperate for apartments, tear down all the commercial properties along Newark way. One chief and one lieutenant, sell off the police cars in maplewood and have the police go back to patrolling in pairs, after all those explorers in the SO department are better. We can save $$$$$
are you just trying to be obtuse? You aren't usually like this. You can't eliminate the boyden dpw site, of course, because the workload and equipment needs won't change. But you know that. And you are just making crap up about the police . I thought things were discussed on MOL, but it seems it's just becoming old people telling kids to stay off the grass.
mrincredible said:
With municipal departments I think the savings comes with a couple of things.
Like reduction in building requirements. A combined DPW could consolidate activities and vehicles at one location. The current SO DPW is pretty much right on the border with Maplewood. You could close down the DPW yard in Maplewood and sell that property for development. Maybe they leave a smaller station with a couple of snowplows or something along those lines.
Likewise the municipal offices could be consolidated in the Maplewood township building and they could reduce the amount of office space that’s being rented in South Orange. It might be nice to leave a tax payment office, or a permitting office for building permits, in South Orange.
Savings could also be realized by eliminating management positions. A consolidated Police Department would only need one Chief, for instance. I’m having trouble finding what the Chief in each town makes, and how much of a hierarchy there is.
Theoretically you could do this without laying anyone off, just wait for attrition to thin out the existing chiefs, deputy chiefs, etc. But it would limit promotion opportunities for officers in the department. So there’s a human cost to pay.
This truly is an incredible post…Dan and Jim can be on the planning board….
oots said:
new life
you have the best view. It will be better than it was before, and no one will remember what it looked like before. See, it’s not a complete tear down, you leave the original first floor exterior walls, and build up.
mrincredible said:
With municipal departments I think the savings comes with a couple of things.
Like reduction in building requirements. A combined DPW could consolidate activities and vehicles at one location. The current SO DPW is pretty much right on the border with Maplewood. You could close down the DPW yard in Maplewood and sell that property for development. Maybe they leave a smaller station with a couple of snowplows or something along those lines.
Likewise the municipal offices could be consolidated in the Maplewood township building and they could reduce the amount of office space that’s being rented in South Orange. It might be nice to leave a tax payment office, or a permitting office for building permits, in South Orange.
Savings could also be realized by eliminating management positions. A consolidated Police Department would only need one Chief, for instance. I’m having trouble finding what the Chief in each town makes, and how much of a hierarchy there is.
Theoretically you could do this without laying anyone off, just wait for attrition to thin out the existing chiefs, deputy chiefs, etc. But it would limit promotion opportunities for officers in the department. So there’s a human cost to pay.
Municipal offices could not be consolidated in Maplewood Town Hall because there is not enough space in the building for what is there now. A consolidated administration would either require some departments to be in different buildings or the construction of a new much larger municipal structure. South Orange is renting the court facility due to lack of space for a municipal court in SO. Even with the Fire Department merger, which became a separate entity, all three of the existing fire houses were kept.
The same number of management positions would likely remain with one new "super manager" imposed over the existing structure.
DanDietrich said:
... You can't eliminate the boyden dpw site, of course, because the workload and equipment needs won't change.
Hey Dan, I understand your point about the workload needs. Regarding the equipment, my personal opinion is that there is plenty of space at the South Orange dpw yard to expand there. I am not an expert by any means but there is a lot of space down there.
There might also be some opportunity to eliminate redundant equipment. That’s for more experienced planners to work out.
(They might have to have a plan to move vehicles to higher ground during potential flood conditions because it’s close to the river.)
Joan you make good points about how the administrative offices couldn’t handle all the employees from both towns, as well as your concerns about whether the management structures could be reduced in a significant way. I will admit I don’t have enough information to make a truly educated statement about these aspects of a merger. I know there isn’t really room to build an addition to existing Township Hall in Maplewood. But maybe I’m wrong?
The last point I’ll make (for now) is that these are not changes that would result in cost savings in the short term. Joan you are absolutely right about the upfront costs of integrating two town governments into one. This is, in my mind, a solution for long-term sustainability of the two towns. And no, taxes wouldn’t go down. But they might go up a trifle less slowly.
joan_crystal said:
We did not combine the school district. The school district existed before Maplewood and South Orange split. Previously they were one town. We have not combined the recreation departments. Under a shared service agreement one town does youth soccer for both towns and the other does youth t-ball and baseball. The court is not combined. Maplewood provides the court space to South Orange for a fee. The fire departments did merge recently after more than 20 years of negotiation.
It does not surprise me that you know the particulars in greater detail than I do. Especially given your background in government administration in NYC.
What does surprise me is that you do not see that the soccer and baseball and courts and school district and fire department statuses as what they are - means to achieve economies of scale or more efficiently use resources by combining, sharing, etc. The same things that would happen in combining the municipalities.
Speaking of NYC, the boroughs used to be separate cities, right?
I’ll leave the conversation as it is clear that nobody’s minds are particularly open on the subject, as is the case in most internet discussions.
Big opportunity just sitting there . It’ll happen in a couple of decades, I guess…
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
I stand corrected on the combination. Thanks for confirming the multiple zip codes.