All posts by brigidmcmenamin

Budget Tricks

Uncategorized,

When you pay property taxes to Chatham Borough or Township, approximately two thirds of your tax dollars go to pay 90% of the cost of running the Chatham schools – around $86 million per year.

That’s a big deal, because how the School Board chooses to spend your tax dollars pretty much determines the quality of education your children get – and the resale value of your house.

How will the School Board opt to spend your money next year? How much will they raise your property taxes?

Find out this Monday, April 24, 7:30 pm, when our School Board votes on the 2023/2024 budget.

Ever wonder who is responsible for making sure our school tax dollars are well spent?

Certainly not our Chatham Borough and Township officials. Yes, they collect the property taxes, but they have no control over the amount of money that goes to the schools – or how it’s spent.

Almost equally powerless are Chatham Borough and Township residents. Sure we pay the property taxes, but we have virtually no control over how the School Board spends our money.

Why? Because we lost control of our schools in 2015, when our School Board decided to stop letting us residents vote on the annual budget.

(For details, click here: https://chathamchoice.org/2015/10/lost-your-right-to-vote-on-the-school-budget/ or go to the 1 hour 46 minute mark here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbel8dtNRMc)

Since 2015, Chatham parents and residents have had a voice in the operation of our schools only on the rare occasions when the School Board was looking to exceed last year’s budget by more than 2%. That’s rare because the 2% cap excludes certain frequent increases in health and pension costs.

Result? The Chatham School Board is seldom held accountable to anyone.

Consider the $86.3 million budget (linked below) that our School Board expects to adopt at its April 24 meeting. That budget fills 103 pages but it isn’t terribly illuminating. (What, for instance, are the “other purchased services” that are up 100% over last year? p. 13, Line 78100)

Even if there were something dreadful buried in those pages, Chatham residents couldn’t stop it, because the increase over last year’s budget falls under the 2% cap.

And that cap is elastic. For instance, this year’s proposed budget includes a cap bank, which will allow the School Board to exceed the 2% cap by $1 million next year – without triggering a vote on the budget. (p. 31)

Most troubling is the way the proposed budget treats capital spending. It shows a “decrease in capital improvements” next year (p. 13), when in reality the School Board plans to raise our property taxes so it can spend an extra $850,000 on security doors. (p. 32)

The proposal to build security doors falls outside the 2% cap because the School Board has decided to let Chatham residents vote on it next November, along with a proposal to spend an extra $975,000 on full-time teacher’s aides {paraprofessionals.) (p. 33)

Both of those so-called “second questions” seem like worthy causes. If the School Board cannot cover them in the regular budget, then taking them to the voters in November is the right thing to do. But the way the School Board has done it is wrong.

Trouble is, the School Board has positioned both proposals as permanent increases in our property taxes, and in the base budget used to calculate the 2% annual increases going forward, which will yield even higher property taxes.

That may be fine for paying full-time paraprofessionals, because that’s a recurring expense. It is not fine when it comes to installing the security doors, a one-time expense that cannot justify a permanent increase in the school budget.

What would the School Board do with that money in subsequent years? The second question about the security doors doesn’t say.

Why would we allow the School Board to raise our taxes permanently by $850,000 (plus 2% annually forever) without explanation?

That doesn’t seem to comply with NJ Fiscal Accountability law, which forbids using such a proposal to raise money for “any capital outlay(s) necessary for health and safety reasons” Section 6A:23A-12.1 (a)(3) and requires such proposals to be worded clearly, “specifically identifying the program purposes” Section 6A:23A-12.1 (a)(6) https://casetext.com/regulation/new-jersey-administrative-code/title-6a-education/chapter-23a-fiscal-accountability-efficiency-and-budgeting-procedures

See for yourself here: https://casetext.com/regulation/new-jersey-administrative-code/title-6a-education/chapter-23a-fiscal-accountability-efficiency-and-budgeting-procedures/subchapter-12-tax-levy-growth-limitation-separate-voter-approval/section-6a23a-121-voter-authorization-to-exceed-tax-levy-limitation-separate-proposals

The solution is for the School Board to edit the second question to make the purpose explicit, fit the security doors into its regular budget, or else simply reframe that proposal as a one-time expenditure.

If the Board refuses to make that simple correction, we’ll face a tough choice in November: either vote down the security doors or accept a permanent increase in our property taxes for no clear purpose.

See the proposed budget here:

SDOC-Preliminary-Printable-Budget-2023-2034.PdfDownload

You can find budget summaries here:

https://www.chatham-nj.org/domain/1622

Good news about the River Road Project

Redevelopment, River Road, , ,

Our Borough Council got some good news at its April 10 meeting.

Retired Bloomfield Fire Captain Robert Penn reported that the apartment project going up on River Road is far safer than he had expected. Check out his words at minute 1:29:28:

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=123

With that, Captain Penn put to rest most of the fire safety concerns he had raised at the March 27 Council meeting.

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=121 Go to minute 1:56:56

Of course, our volunteer fire fighters are still hobbled by ancient fire trucks and have no good way to put out fires in the growing number of electric cars.

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=121 Go to minute 53:00

Priorities & accountability

Winds of change?

Redevelopment, ,

Can your town suddenly decide to zone one lot differently from its neighbors? No. That’s “spot-zoning.” It’s illegal in New Jersey.

But there is an exception if the lot is arguably “blighted” or “in need of redevelopment,” according to a state law designed to help poor towns attract new construction. It allows what amounts to legalized spot-zoning.

For years, real estate developers have abused that exception.

They’ve used it to get around normal zoning laws in towns that have no trouble attracting investors.

They’ve used it to sweep away normal zoning rules for properties that aren’t blighted or needy at all.

They’ve used it to qualify for whopping property tax breaks that enrich the developers at the expense of residents.

Sometimes they’ve used it to get title to public land without the normal checks and balances.

The courts usually turn a blind eye to that kind of abuse.

Now it seems the state Supreme Court is beginning to tighten up the criteria for designating a property “in need of redevelopment.”

In a case published this month, the Court rejected the designation of the West Orange library as an “area in need of redevelopment” within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5(d) simply because it was old, out of style, and needed repair. The Court also put to rest the idea that the mere assertion that a place is dilapidated, obsolescent, etc. will suffice, or that courts should defer to the township’s judgment on that score.

https://www.njcourts.gov/sites/default/files/court-opinions/2023/a_45_21.pdf

To satisfy N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5(d), the township must show both:

1) evidence of “dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout”; and

2) that, as a result, the premises “are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.”

Great news for anyone concerned about reckless overdevelopment,

What would you like to see in the center of Chatham Borough?

Uncategorized, , , ,

Come see what the developer has in mind for Post Office Plaza, and share your views with the Historic Preservation Commission:

Tuesday March 21, 7:30 pm, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level.

Here’s what they’re considering:

2023.2.27-BCUW-Chatham-Council-Meeting-2Download
8622-1620-Updated-SITE-REV.-2-2-22-2023Download

https://chathamborough.org/component/dpcalendar/event/historic-preservation-3-1679441400?Itemid=809

Priorities & accountability

Uncategorized, , , , , ,

Why would our Chatham Borough Council even consider gifting our River Road PILOT money to anyone when we’re in such desperate need of fire trucks and other necessities?

That was the elephant in the room at the Monday, 3/13 meeting of our Borough Council.

River Road

The elephant got loose during a presentation by a principal of BNE, the developer of the massive, stick-built apartment project going up at the corner of Watchung Avenue and River Road.

Asked if our volunteer fire department has the equipment, the manpower, and the training necessary to fight a real fire at River Road, the presenter, a principal with the developer, BNE Real Estate Group, said, “Yes, currently Chatham Borough has what they need to fight a fire in that building.” See the video linked below starting about 1:18:00.

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=119

Is that true? No.

Brave, dedicated, and skilled as they are, our volunteer firefighters need more personnel, more training, and far newer fire trucks than Chatham Borough has – or can provide anytime soon, according to longtime, respected Borough resident Robert Penn, a former captain in the Bloomfield Fire Department who worked in the fire service for 44 years and has taught classes in Building Construction and Advanced Firefighting Tactics and Strategy. (Go to minute 37:46 in the following video:0)

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=106

Chatham’s fire trucks are so old and obsolete that they pose a risk to the safety of residents and fire fighters alike, says Penn.

https://patch.com/new-jersey/chatham/fire-safety-concerns-prompt-chatham-resident-call-new-equipment

In the event of a real fire at the River Road development, our volunteers would have to wait for help from surrounding towns.

The problem isn’t new or partisan. It dates back at least a decade, when the other political party controlled the Council. It will take years to get the necessary equipment.

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/a-firefighter-s-response-to-mathiasen-s-letter-on-post-office-plaza

https://www.newjerseyhills.com/robert-penn-requests-chatham-look-into-replacing-outdated-apparatus/image_f38c5cac-6f49-5c16-acb2-4ced7f6655ba.html

https://www.newjerseyhills.com/chatham_courier/news/chatham-to-hire-consultant-to-help-craft-fire-apparatus-replacement-plan/article_1bbc2229-7f63-521e-a17a-a33703f740d9.html

Popular Borough Council Member Len Resto is working on getting the fire trucks we need. It will cost a bundle. The Council should use our PILOT money for tax relief and fire trucks, not for gifts. Certainly not without the informed consent of Chatham residents.

That the Council would even consider giving away our PILOT money without our consent is mind boggling. It’s a great example of what can happen when we don’t hold our elected representatives accountable for their decisions.

If the Council explains the situation, and residents vote to give away our PILOT money anyway, that’s their choice. But residents are entitled to know what’s at stake before any decisions are made.

Check out this letter:

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/it-s-our-money-use-borough-pilot-revenues-to-reduce-property-taxes-and-cover-necessities

For more information, click here:

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/chatham-borough-council-do-the-right-thing-concerning-pilot-not-merely-what-s-legally-permissible-or-expedient

Do the right thing

Redevelopment, River Road, , , , , ,

What will Chatham Borough Council do with the Borough’s PILOT revenues from the River Road project?

Will the Council do the right thing?

Find out here: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/it-s-our-money-use-borough-pilot-revenues-to-reduce-property-taxes-and-cover-necessities


Learn more here: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/chatham-borough-council-do-the-right-thing-concerning-pilot-not-merely-what-s-legally-permissible-or-expedient

Attend the 3/13 Council meeting in person or on Zoom here: https://www.chathamborough.org/component/dpcalendar/event/mayor-council-meeting-13-1678750200?Itemid=809

Like to pay lower property taxes? Or at least not pay more than necessary?

Uncategorized

New Jersey suffers the nation’s highest property taxes, and they usually increase at least 2% per year – plus whatever it takes to cover certain exempt expenses, like health care and pensions for retired municipal workers.

In Chatham Borough, our property taxes will continue to increase even more than 2% per year unless our Council gets smart, and chooses to spend the millions in revenues expected from River Road for necessities – and easing our tax burden – rather than for luxuries and gifts.

How will the recent revaluation affect my property taxes?

Uncategorized, , , , , ,

Chatham Borough recently took a fresh look at the market value of taxable real estate in town as of October 1, 2022.

We’ve all seen the results: significant increases in the assessed values the Borough will use to calculate our property taxes.

Will those higher assessed values mean higher property taxes?

What do soaring property values portend for taxpayers?

Not necessarily. The Borough revaluation shouldn’t increase your property tax bill unless the value of you property has risen faster than the total value of taxable real estate in Chatham Borough – the tax base.

You can estimate the actual effect of the reassessment on your property using this handy online calculator provided by the firm doing the reassessment: http://asinj.com/revaluation/docs/taximpact/443/Chatham%202023%20Revaluation%20Tax%20Worksheet.pdf

The calculator is easy to use:

Just fill in Boxes A and B with the values shown in your reassessment letter and last tax bill. The calculator will do the rest, comparing the change in the value of your property with the change in the value of all taxable property in the Borough, and using the estimated new tax rate in Box E – 1.488% – to predict how much your property tax bill will go up or down. The answer will appear in Box H.

Beware: The result you see in Box H paints a rosy and misleading picture.

Your actual tax bill will probably increase a good bit more than the calculator indicates in Box H, because the estimated 1.488% property tax rate shown in Box E is almost certainly too low.

The new tax rate estimate shown in Box E is probably too low, because it does not take into account likely looming increases in this year’s local budgets.

How do we know the new estimated tax rate doesn’t take into account those looming local budget increases? The proof is in last line, below the calculator, where it says the estimated 1.488% tax rate in Box E assumes our Borough and School District budgets will stay at 2022 levels.

Fat chance. Both the Borough Council and the School Board are fixing to increase their spending in ways that will probably mean significantly higher property tax bills all around.

While it’s certainly possible that the Council and School Board really do need more money to fulfill their respective missions, we shouldn’t blindly accept annual tax increases. They should go through normal channels and ask taxpayers for what they need

It’s possible the Borough Council could even REDUCE our property taxes simply by: 1) increasing the tax base (for instance selling excess tax exempt Borough real estate); 2) using the proceeds for urgent needs like a new fire truck; 3) using new sources of revenue (like the PILOT payments) for other absolute necessities (like affordable housing at Post Office Plaza); 4) putting off spending on inessentials; and 5) flatly refusing to make outright gifts using taxpayer funds.

Instead, some Council members seem bent on doing just the opposite, which will make your property taxes continue to increase.

For instance, some members of our Council aim to gift a portion of the Borough’s PILOT revenues to the School District.

With so many pressing demands on our Borough funds, you really have to wonder why any Council member would even consider giving away Borough money – especially to an entity like the School District, which already has far greater resources than does the Borough.

The reasons offered for that gift are based on myths:

MYTH: The PILOT payments are “found money” – extra funds for the Council to spend as it pleases.

FACT: The PILOT payments are Borough assets, property of the taxpayers.

We earned that PILOT money by granting the developer a property tax exemption for 30 years. Though the Council is free to spend -or squander – that money on pet projects and discretionary gifts, that isn’t the right thing to do.

The right thing for the Council to do is to use the PILOT money with the same care and discretion they would if the developer were required to pay full property taxes.

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/chatham-borough-council-do-the-right-thing-concerning-pilot-not-merely-what-s-legally-permissible-or-expedient

If that PILOT money were from normal property taxes, the Council couldn’t spend it on a whim. By law, the Council would get only 102% of what it got last year – plus enough to cover certain exceptional expenses. The Council would be required to use the balance of the funds to lighten our property tax burden.

That is exactly how the Council should use the PILOT money – unless we residents and taxpayers agree otherwise.

MYTH: Right or no right, the School District DESERVES a portion of the River Road PILOT payments, because it would have been entitled to a portion if the Council were collecting real property taxes on the project.

FACT: Even if the River Road developer were paying full property taxes, the School District would NOT be entitled to a portion of the additional property taxes collected.

Why? The School District’s share of our property taxes is NOT based on the amount collected. No matter how much – or little – the Borough collects in property taxes, the School District gets the same amount: 102% of what it got last year, plus enough to cover certain extra expenses. The Borough Council has NO OBLIGATION to give the District any extra property tax funds.

MYTH: Even if the School District isn’t automatically entitled to a portion of the PILOT payments from River Road, it should get a portion, to make up for the additional cost of educating school children who will move into the River Road development.

FACT: The prospect of additional school children does NOT entitle the School District to any additional funding from property taxes

Higher district-wide enrollment might get the School District of the Chathams a little more state aid, but that’s a drop in the bucket, making up only about 5% of our School District’s nearly $85.6 million budget for the current 2022-2023 school year.

Whether school enrollment skyrockets or plummets, the Chatham School District is entitled to the same 102% of what it got from property taxes last year, along with enough money to cover certain exempt expenses.

And in the Chathams, enrollment isn’t increasing. It’s falling. It has been falling for years, and the Superintendent has predicted it will continue to fall until at least 2029.

When even an increase in overall, district-wide enrollment wouldn’t entitle the School District to any additional school property taxes, a few more children in the River Road developmentcannot justify arbitrarily gifting a share of the Borough’s own PILOT revenues.

MYTH: If the Borough doesn’t choose to share its PILOT payments with the School District, our schools will suffer.

FACT: The School District of the Chathams is pretty well insulated from financial pressure. Its budget tops $85 million – more than twice that of the Borough and Township combined – and the District enjoys an absolute right to local property tax funding in the amount of 102% of what it got from Borough and Township property taxes the year before, plus enough to pay certain other expenses, totaling approximately 90% of its annual budget, and our School District also routinely qualifies for state and federal aid.

Is it possible that our School District nonetheless really needs even more local funding than it’s already guaranteed by NJ law. Yes, sure.

If the School Board does in fact need more money to run the schools, it can and should get the necessary funds directly from the taxpayers, in a referendum or second question, same as Westfield’s school board is doing: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/westfield/sections/education/articles/westfield-schools-early-budget-figures-above-nj-s-cap-voters-will-choose

For the Borough to simply give away much-needed Borough PILOT money to the School District would be like giving away New Jersey tax dollars to the U.S. Department of Defense – a far bigger entity with its own funding source.

MYTH: Giving PILOT money to the Schoool District would force the developer to pay its fair share of school costs.

FACT: Gifting PILOT money to the District would have NO effect on the developer.

All that gift would do is deprive Borough taxpayers of our chance to use the funds for urgent necessities like a new fire truck – or perhaps a tax break.

There is no justification for the Council to simply gift our PILOT funds to the School District, and darn good reasons not to make such gifts: Not only would it be financially irresponsible, it would also be tantamount to an end run around School District parents and residents. Such gifts would raise the specter of partisan meddling in our schools.

Even a small gift to the School District would establish a dangerous precedent, and the dollar amount could be adjusted upward each year, as former Borough engineer Vince Denave noted at a 2021 Town Hall.

If the Council is considering take such risks, it should explain why – and get the informed consent of residents BEFORE making any decisions.

Take the high road

Uncategorized, , , ,

The Chatham Borough Council is drooling over the prospect of getting millions in PILOT revenue from the massive, 259-unit rental housing project under construction on River Road.

Those PILOT revenues rightfully belong to the taxpayers of Chatham Borough.

Our Borough Council should use the taxpayers’ PILOT money to lighten our tax burden, not to wield more power.

If the River Road project were subject to regular property taxes, it would increase the Borough’s tax base, possibly reducing our property taxes.

But the BOE wouldn’t get any of that additional tax revenue – not unless the taxpayers voted to give it to them.

That’s exactly what the Council should do with the PILOT payments.

Instead, the Borough Council is negotiating to allocate some of the PILOT money outside normal channels and without public scrutiny or consent.

That prospect doesn’t sit well with longtime Borough resident Bill Heap, a respected Planning Board member and successful businessman.

“PILOT money is our money, and you have an obligation to be transparent,” Mr. Heap told the Borough Council on Jan 23, urging them to run the decision by voters, at minute 36:05: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=106

But so far, the Council seems bent on simply divvying up the taxpayers’ PILOT money in the back room and without public scrutiny.

For instance, they’re prepared to hand over some of the taxpayers’ PILOT money to the School Board.

That would be bad for Chatham Borough and for the School Board.

It would deprive the Borough of funds it needs to meet absolute necessities, like new fire apparatus.

Gifting Borough funds to the School District could leave the School Board beholden to the Council and ensnare our schools in party politics.

Our School Board shouldn’t put itself in that position. The School Board already has ways to get all the money it needs.

Even with declining enrollment, the School Board automatically gets 102% of last year’s budget, plus whatever it takes to meet certain other expenses.

With school parents making up the biggest voting block, the School Board can raise additional funds simply asking the taxpayers to vote on that by the normal, aboveboard process of referendum or second question.

Here’s how Bill Heap explained the issue at the December 12 School Board meeting, at minutes 2:27:29 and 2:50:20:

You think that simply giving PILOT payments to the Board of Ed might reduce our property taxes? No. It wouldn’t reduce our taxes at all.

The Board of Ed would get the PILOT money ON TOP of AT LEAST 102% of last year’s school budget, to which they’re entitled by law.

What’s more, at least half of any PILOT funds given to the schools would, in effect, benefit nearby Chatham Township, though it bears none of the burdens associated with the River Road project.

Bill Heap’s argument against allocating PILOT money to the Chatham schools without public consent has the support of Stewart Carr, a civic-minded, longtime Township resident and registered municipal advisor.

Mr. Carr has urged the Board of Ed to “take the high road and not ask the municipality for extra [PILOT] money, but rather ask the taxpayers directly for that money.”

Check out this clip from the Feb 6 meeting of the BOE, at minute 1:26:31

Chathamites who are in-the-know agree that the Borough Council should not spend the PILOT money without the approval of residents:

Do you approve of the Council’s plans to divvy up the PILOT money without consulting the public?

Would you prefer that the Borough Council let us decide how to use our money – or simply use it to reduce taxes?

Don’t wait until it’s a done deal!

Come to the Borough Council meetings on Feb. 13, and Feb. 27, 2023 at 7:30 PM, Borough Hall, upper level, 54 Fairmount Avenue.

Also tell the Mayor & Council here: https://chathamborough.org/government/mayor

Tell the School Board here: https://www.chatham-nj.org/page/63

Time to weigh in on the proposed design for Post Office Plaza

Uncategorized, ,

Alert: this Monday 2/27, the Borough Council will vote on a new site plan that dropped on Friday, adding a surprise third floor to the 2-story project our Council revealed in December, as shown below.

Don’t miss this chance to see and comment before it’s too late to make a difference.

Come to the Council meeting this Monday 2/27, 7:30 pm, at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level.

8622-1620-Updated-SITE-REV.-2-2-22-2023-1
2023.2.27-BCUW-Chatham-Council-MeetingDownload

What do you think of the proposed design for Chatham’s Post Office Plaza?

View of the proposed building from the railroad tracks
… a slightly different design

You’re going to pay for it, so you’re entitled to have your say!

Share your views now, while there’s still time to make a difference.

E-mail Borough Administrator Steve Williams ([email protected]), Professional Planner Kendra Lelie ([email protected]), and us ([email protected]) with your comments and questions.

Some residents have asked, for instance:

What will the place look like from Bowers Lane, or from the public parking lot?

Will the route along the south side of the Post Office Annex (leading from our public parking lot to Bowers Lane) still be a road, or only an alley?

Should we place the first floor windows a little higher to make the headlights less annoying to first floor residents? Or might taller bushes suffice?

Will there be a sidewalk between the parking lot and the building?

Will the requisite electric charging station take up one of the scarce 17 parking spaces? Will non-residents be allowed to use it?

Where will the new residents park their bikes, scooters, and strollers?

Where will the dumpsters go?

Any potential for trouble with runoff? https://ecode360.com/6793963#6793963

Please comment below and by e-mail to Borough Administrator Steve Williams ([email protected]), Professional Planner Kendra Lelie ([email protected]), and us ([email protected]).