Township of Maplewood Considering Purchase of Parking Lot Behind Arturo's/Village Coffee
Red_Barchetta said:
OliveBee said:
This is the same pattern from the same people who flipped the Police station for the WC. and the WC is drowning in renovation costs...2M slated with only about 55K per year income- a real success (not). Should these people be allowed to do this all over again with this track record of poor judgement?
Stop right there. At the time of the Police station project the TC consisted of Mayor Fred Profeta, Ian Grodman, David Huemer, Ken Pettis, and Kathy Leventhal. NONE of these people are currently on the TC.
Hey wait a minute, I wonder what two of those people are up to these days?
It's positively Orwellian how some people are trying to send the actual history of the MPD debacle down the memory hole. they are trying to absolve the actual guilty parties and pin it on people who had absolutely nothing to do with it.
shameless.
RobinM2 said:
sac said:
The town doesn't charge merchants for other municipal parking in the village area, so I don't see why they would do so for this lot.
This contemplates spending our money to provide parking for private businesses. I do not want them to spend my tax dollars to help private businesses make money. Should we buy the parking lots next to the Burger King or the liquor store? No, of course not. Sure we have some Muncipal lots around town, but this is a privately owned lot that is currently available for patrons to park and shop in the stores. Why should we buy it when it is already available for parking? If there was a lot that is not currently used for parking, and buying it, would open more parking spots, maybe, but this doesn't do that. There is no net benefit to us for this transaction unless we charge the stores a fee to continue using the lot for parking. It isn't our problem if the stores lack parking. Providing parking for your customers is the responsibility of a business. This is just common sense or am I missing something?
The town is already leasing these parking lots. Of course it may be legitimate to question that, although I don't think it is necessarily a bad (or unusual) thing for towns to provide 'shopper parking'. But the current proposal is to change from a lease to a purchase. As I understand it, this is because the owners are increasing the rent so it may now make more financial sense to buy.
. ....
We have been leasing it for 40 years. Translation: Your tax bills have been paying for those parking spots for 40 years (without the town even owning them). ....
But have we also not been collecting taxes on the property from the present owners. If purchased, we would lose that income, plus pay for the property and its upkeep.
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
. ....
We have been leasing it for 40 years. Translation: Your tax bills have been paying for those parking spots for 40 years (without the town even owning them). ....
But have we also not been collecting taxes on the property from the present owners. If purchased, we would lose that income, plus pay for the property and its upkeep.
My guess is that's all part of the calculation. Might not make sense. Do we even know for sure if the owners are interested in selling?
Grab what you can, claim the balance via any number of eminent domain arguments, and let the holdout owners sleep on whether or not the price to be awarded them will be fair enough.
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Not really.
Red_Barchetta said:
OliveBee said:
This is the same pattern from the same people who flipped the Police station for the WC. and the WC is drowning in renovation costs...2M slated with only about 55K per year income- a real success (not). Should these people be allowed to do this all over again with this track record of poor judgement?
Stop right there. At the time of the Police station project the TC consisted of Mayor Fred Profeta, Ian Grodman, David Huemer, Ken Pettis, and Kathy Leventhal. NONE of these people are currently on the TC.
Hey wait a minute, I wonder what two of those people are up to these days?
Well, that seems to end THAT part of the conversation...
yahooyahoo said:
The numbers are simply appraised values of the lots they want to purchase. The 70 page report is there to support the appraisals. That is all.
There is no financial analysis to support why Maplewood should do this.
joan_crystal said:
Town just sent out an e-mail blast with the numbers. Check out the town website for a copy of the appraisal information.
Should the town really release their internal analysis showing their IRR and when they break even? When they can make money on the property? Doesn't that undermine their negotiations?
Woot said:
yahooyahoo said:
The numbers are simply appraised values of the lots they want to purchase. The 70 page report is there to support the appraisals. That is all.
There is no financial analysis to support why Maplewood should do this.
joan_crystal said:
Town just sent out an e-mail blast with the numbers. Check out the town website for a copy of the appraisal information.
Should the town really release their internal analysis showing their IRR and when they break even? When they can make money on the property? Doesn't that undermine their negotiations?
If they are justifying the purchase on this basis then, yes, they should present the numbers.
As soon as the town releases their internal calcs, the current owners have more negotiating power. That would make no business sense. When I buy a house I don't tell the current owners how much I can afford so they renegotiate an amount to maximize their profit and eliminate mine.
The "rent" the township currently pays for the land is roughly equivalent to the taxes owed on that portion of the land. My assumption is that the current problem owner wants to increase that rent so much that it would end up costing us taxpayers too much, so the purchase makes more sense in the long run.
It would be great if we could get over this ridiculous FUD and trust that out township officials are doing everything in their power to do what's best, despite terrible and unwarranted accusations from a handful of vengeful residents who are acting like Republicans trying to unsuccessfully repeal Obamacare for the 70th time.
ArchBroad said:
As soon as the town releases their internal calcs, the current owners have more negotiating power. That would make no business sense. When I buy a house I don't tell the current owners how much I can afford so they renegotiate an amount to maximize their profit and eliminate mine.
The "rent" the township currently pays for the land is roughly equivalent to the taxes owed on that portion of the land. My assumption is that the current problem owner wants to increase that rent so much that it would end up costing us taxpayers too much, so the purchase makes more sense in the long run.
It would be great if we could get over this ridiculous FUD and trust that out township officials are doing everything in their power to do what's best, despite terrible and unwarranted accusations from a handful of vengeful residents who are acting like Republicans trying to unsuccessfully repeal Obamacare for the 70th time.
+1
ArchBroad said:
As soon as the town releases their internal calcs, the current owners have more negotiating power. That would make no business sense. When I buy a house I don't tell the current owners how much I can afford so they renegotiate an amount to maximize their profit and eliminate mine.
but you can't invoke eminent domain and pay the appraised value. I'm generally not in favor of town taking property via eminent domain. But in a case like this, in which the land is already being used for public parking, it's a pretty clear instance in which public use would justify eminent domain.
ArchBroad said:
As soon as the town releases their internal calcs, the current owners have more negotiating power. That would make no business sense. When I buy a house I don't tell the current owners how much I can afford so they renegotiate an amount to maximize their profit and eliminate mine.
The "rent" the township currently pays for the land is roughly equivalent to the taxes owed on that portion of the land. My assumption is that the current problem owner wants to increase that rent so much that it would end up costing us taxpayers too much, so the purchase makes more sense in the long run.
It would be great if we could get over this ridiculous FUD and trust that out township officials are doing everything in their power to do what's best, despite terrible and unwarranted accusations from a handful of vengeful residents who are acting like Republicans trying to unsuccessfully repeal Obamacare for the 70th time.
+2
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Very few people want to see the Womens Club razed. They question the wisdom of its purchase
Years after the fact the use there is minimal. It has become a new home for Rent Club, once a month
and occasional other activities such as an indoor farmers market. It is a drain on the budget and
should have been left in the hands of the nice ladies who owned it. Some subsidies from the
town might have been a nice help to them. Believable
reading recent news about this issue, it appears that at least one property owner is taking a harder line on compensation from the town for the land used for parking. Putting one + one + one together, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that there are people in town who are trying to box the TC into choosing from a short list of alternatives that are likely to be unpopular with a lot of voters. I know politics ain't beanbag and all that, but I don't see how these types of machinations are advancing the good of the township and the good of the village. I do see how it might be advancing the agenda of people who hope to elect new members to the TC.
ctrzaska said:
Red_Barchetta said:
OliveBee said:
This is the same pattern from the same people who flipped the Police station for the WC. and the WC is drowning in renovation costs...2M slated with only about 55K per year income- a real success (not). Should these people be allowed to do this all over again with this track record of poor judgement?
Stop right there. At the time of the Police station project the TC consisted of Mayor Fred Profeta, Ian Grodman, David Huemer, Ken Pettis, and Kathy Leventhal. NONE of these people are currently on the TC.
Hey wait a minute, I wonder what two of those people are up to these days?
Well, that seems to end THAT part of the conversation...
Hardly................the point is there does not seem to be an efficient Master Plan for the growth and
well being. of the Township I am sure there is a Master Plan filed away somewhere and if so it needs a good hard
review.
author said:
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Very few people want to see the Womens Club razed. They question the wisdom of its purchase
Years after the fact the use there is minimal. It has become a new home for Rent Club, once a month
and occasional other activities such as an indoor farmers market. It is a drain on the budget and
should have been left in the hands of the nice ladies who owned it. Some subsidies from the
town might have been a nice help to them. Believable
according to Fred Profeta in 2010, the decision to put the property on the tax rolls was done at the advice of counsel, so apparently it was not legal for the WC to remain tax exempt: http://patch.com/new-jersey/maplewood/womens-club-members-speak-out-at-township-meeting
I agree that was a shame, but if that's the law, that's the law. And once that action was taken, there were very few options left. And at the time the township bought the property the only other viable option was razing the building and developing the land.
it's easy for people to carp from the sidelines if they aren't the ones who have the responsibility of following the law, and then choosing from a limited set of options for a piece of property.
Yes, they should share.
Woot said:
yahooyahoo said:
The numbers are simply appraised values of the lots they want to purchase. The 70 page report is there to support the appraisals. That is all.
There is no financial analysis to support why Maplewood should do this.
joan_crystal said:
Town just sent out an e-mail blast with the numbers. Check out the town website for a copy of the appraisal information.
Should the town really release their internal analysis showing their IRR and when they break even? When they can make money on the property? Doesn't that undermine their negotiations?
There was no financial analysis done for the Women's Club. The TC said, "woohoo more parking!" And they bought it.
It's a money pit and we will pay a multiple of the original purchase price to keep it open and functioning.
ml1 said:
author said:
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Very few people want to see the Womens Club razed. They question the wisdom of its purchase
Years after the fact the use there is minimal. It has become a new home for Rent Club, once a month
and occasional other activities such as an indoor farmers market. It is a drain on the budget and
should have been left in the hands of the nice ladies who owned it. Some subsidies from the
town might have been a nice help to them. Believable
according to Fred Profeta in 2010, the decision to put the property on the tax rolls was done at the advice of counsel, so apparently it was not legal for the WC to remain tax exempt: http://patch.com/new-jersey/maplewood/womens-club-members-speak-out-at-township-meeting
I agree that was a shame, but if that's the law, that's the law. And once that action was taken, there were very few options left. And at the time the township bought the property the only other viable option was razing the building and developing the land.
it's easy for people to carp from the sidelines if they aren't the ones who have the responsibility of following the law, and then choosing from a limited set of options for a piece of property.
Once the ladies of the Womens Club lost their tax exempt status they had no choice but to sell the property.
There was no compelling reason for the Township to buy it
It is an underused , expensive to maintain and drain on the tax dollar building
The TC did not have to purchase the Women's Club. There was another buyer. However, the neighbors complained a lot about loud parties, etc.
The TC bought it and rents it out for loud parties, etc.
Go figure.
There was no other buyer for the WC. The neighbors filed a lawsuit and the other buyer withdrew his offer. The choice was watch it torn down and replaced with multifamily housing or save it. The people elected to act in the best interests of Maplewood chose to save it. I personally believe that in the process they saved an irreplaceable gem but (unlike a few others on this board) I realize this is just a personal opinion and that because I was never elected to serve, nor have I volunteered my time in that capacity to serve, my personal opinion on what constitutes valuable architecture should hold no sway in policy decisions.
All this argument about Post Office Vs Woodland Vs other purchases is moot. It's done.
Dont you see how the constant complaining, attempts to make giant issues out of nothing, and continued attempts at character assassination actually makes some of you look like a group of bitter, disgruntled, paranoid, self appointed, arrogant, desperate pseudo experts with a huge grudge against those in office. Believe it or not, I'm not trying to insult anyone - just raise awareness about how you may look to the rest of the world. Your credibility has disappeared. Your support has disappeared. Its sad that you cant see it.
author said:
ml1 said:
author said:
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Very few people want to see the Womens Club razed. They question the wisdom of its purchase
Years after the fact the use there is minimal. It has become a new home for Rent Club, once a month
and occasional other activities such as an indoor farmers market. It is a drain on the budget and
should have been left in the hands of the nice ladies who owned it. Some subsidies from the
town might have been a nice help to them. Believable
according to Fred Profeta in 2010, the decision to put the property on the tax rolls was done at the advice of counsel, so apparently it was not legal for the WC to remain tax exempt: http://patch.com/new-jersey/maplewood/womens-club-members-speak-out-at-township-meeting
I agree that was a shame, but if that's the law, that's the law. And once that action was taken, there were very few options left. And at the time the township bought the property the only other viable option was razing the building and developing the land.
it's easy for people to carp from the sidelines if they aren't the ones who have the responsibility of following the law, and then choosing from a limited set of options for a piece of property.
Once the ladies of the Womens Club lost their tax exempt status they had no choice but to sell the property.
There was no compelling reason for the Township to buy it
It is an underused , expensive to maintain and drain on the tax dollar building
I would agree that many people would not say there was a compelling reason to buy the WC. The reason was that the only other alternative at the time was tearing it down and developing the site for another purpose. Not everyone believed or believed that saving the building was an important use of that money.
however, probably as many people thought that it was. I happen to think that the township would have lost something important if the WC was torn down. and if they building becomes too far deteriorated to repair, or becomes too much of a burden, it can still always be sold in the future (and likely at a profit).
ml1 said:
Red_Barchetta said:
OliveBee said:
This is the same pattern from the same people who flipped the Police station for the WC. and the WC is drowning in renovation costs...2M slated with only about 55K per year income- a real success (not). Should these people be allowed to do this all over again with this track record of poor judgement?
Stop right there. At the time of the Police station project the TC consisted of Mayor Fred Profeta, Ian Grodman, David Huemer, Ken Pettis, and Kathy Leventhal. NONE of these people are currently on the TC.
Hey wait a minute, I wonder what two of those people are up to these days?
It's positively Orwellian how some people are trying to send the actual history of the MPD debacle down the memory hole. they are trying to absolve the actual guilty parties and pin it on people who had absolutely nothing to do with it.
shameless.
You are correct...there were others involved, some of whom are still involved in our local government...or recently stepped down. The two you mention have obviously decided that the crappy reality of the plastic station house changed their minds. People evolve and move forward, sometimes, thankfully for the better. and I very much respect those who do step up and acknowledge same.
ml1 said:
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.
Who do you know who wanted to save the PO but "would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed" ? I know no such person.
Please provide the (Village) facts.
Red_Barchetta said:
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
. ....
We have been leasing it for 40 years. Translation: Your tax bills have been paying for those parking spots for 40 years (without the town even owning them). ....
But have we also not been collecting taxes on the property from the present owners. If purchased, we would lose that income, plus pay for the property and its upkeep.
My guess is that's all part of the calculation. Might not make sense. Do we even know for sure if the owners are interested in selling?
The TC stating that they want to purchase and are negotiating with the property owners (which they are not - one has stated that they haven't even been contacted) is a first step toward eminent domain. not so kosher.
Featured Events
-
Go "Back to the '70s" with The Maplewood Glee Club and Special Guests from CHS
May 19, 2024 at 4:00pm
Rentals
Advertisement
I'm still astounded that people who wanted to save the Post Office would have been perfectly happy to see the Women's Club razed.
unbelievable.