Register for NAToday.net email updates. Enter your e-mail address here:


 

 

 

 

 

gWhen will EnCap start listening and stop planning without community input?

EnCap, Pitman continue to forge ahead no matter what homeowners want or think!

 It seems EnCap and there #1 supporter Mayor Russ Pitman could care less what the voters or residents think.

Mr. Pitman, a lame duck who was soundly defeated in the Democratic Primary lends his name to flowery press releases promoting a project no one seems to want nor endorse other than Pitman and the people at EnCap.

Now EnCap wants the Borough to move out sixteen companies that don't want to move. They want the Borough to do the dirty work of implementing eminent domain and condemnation. It's important to note that none of these companies want to move. That all of these companies pay property taxes and employ hundreds of North Arlington residents.

Despite that reality, Mr. Pitman continues to infer that eminent domain seizure is a last resort.

The hard reality is that eminent domain will be the action of first resort. Encap will not occur without the application of eminent domain.

When will Mayor Pitman and EnCap admit this simple fact?

While EnCap tries to move at wharp speed to get what it wants in this lopsided agreement, a majority of council members are forced to call a special meeting so that funding can be secured to evaluate this awful proposal. Despite the overwhelming opposition, the majority of North Arlington voters and the majority of the governing body is being stone-walled by Pitman and his appointees.

And while this new coalition of council members who want to put the best interests of the community first, Pitman and the minority want this governing body to approve a so called "Fair Share" plan that will officially saddle North Arlington with low income housing!

This governing body needs a third-party evaluation of this agreement before approving any COAH mandated, low income housing.

This is just another example of political appointees trying to drive long-term public policy decisions they have no right to decide. These political appointees will be replaced along with Mayor Pitman come January 1st no matter who wins on November 7th.

The time has come for these people to step aside, not force their will on a community that does not agree with this course of action.

Now EnCap has announced the acquisition of 22 acres from the the NJMC that was formerly owned by the BCUA, the site of the now dormant garbage transfer station.

Funny how EnCap never discloses the purchase price of 22 acres 10 miles west of midtown Manhattan. This property is one of the last open space opportunites with pristine views of the New York City skyline.

Isn't it strange that the cost is a secret to North Arlington homeowners?

Why is Mayor Pitman aware of this acquisition and press release celebration while the majority of countil members remain in the dark?

EnCap has purchased this property to saddle North Arlington with nearly 400 condominium units.

Who in North Arlington was part of this decision?

What resident, elected official or community group had a say in this unilateral approach to the urbanization of the Borough?

Once again, EnCap offers zero impact costs, just more rhetoric how they know what's best for North Arlington!

When will EnCap read the handwriting on the wall? When will they realize this in-your-face, we'll do what we want approach doesn't work?

When will Mayor Pitman take into consideration the electorate's wishes?

How can you be a neighbor when everything your proposing is full of holes, questions, criticisms and challenges for the Borough of North Arlington?

The process in which EnCap has received approvals from this community by a majority of four is almost Orwellian. The fact that EnCap and Mayor Pitman simply ignore election results, verifiable polling data and other reliable gages of public sentiment is almost unprecedented.
EnCap has failed to produce a single piece of evidence, documentation or data that shows any support for anything they represent despite spending tens of thousands of dollars on cable ads, direct mail and full-page ads in the area's weekly newspapers.

How do you continue to move forward without a shred of public support? How do you not look in the mirror and say, we need to rethink our plan and garner some semblance of community support?

The fact that state legislators continue to ignore the people of North Arlington while raking in large campaign contributions from EnCap's lawyers borders on an arrogance that will be exposed in next year's legislative elections. Those who pretend to support the community will be defeated in 2007. The same way Mayors Kaiser, Guida and Pitman met their fate at the polls, the same will happen to those who have no interest in what the people of North Arlington really want when it comes to redeveloping these meadowlands parcels with a plan that has true grass roots support.

One man and one ticket in this race continues to stand alone in their fight against EnCap.

Councilman Peter Massa along with his running-mates Al Granell and Sal DiBlasi stand tall when the rest of the elected officials of this region run and hide.

These three men are what stands between overdevelopment, eminent domain and construction of low income housing here in North Arlington.

flagNew Jersey's budget blues only add to North Arlington's financial woes.

"North Arlington homeowners will find themselves taxed out of oblivion."

What a difference five months make.

After easily defeating a Republican challenger who couldn't seem to get out of his own way, Democratic Governor Jon Corzine now must deal with the financial realities that face New Jersey.

Glowing rhetoric about no new taxes or fully funding the state's popular homestead rebate program have been replaced by a proposed penny increase in the sales tax and a $13 million cut in Extraordinary Aid to municipalities like North Arlington where taxes are scheduled to increase once again.

With Democrats controlling the executive and legislative branches, it will be hard for the Corzine Administration to blame the other side of the aisle. While municipalities and school districts prepare for the worst, one must wonder what North Arlington is doing in wake of this impending budget crisis?

North Arlington is now under a county order to fund a property revaluation which will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. With real property assessed at 61% of market value, homeowners should mentally prepare themselves for higher values and even higher tax rates upon reassessment!

The chilling effect of state deficits and shrinking revenues has caused the state to under fund state pensions by nearly 30%. That fiscal woe now asks the state's 536 municipalities to pony up more in pension expenditures as well as the spiraling cost of employee health benefits. With North Arlington increasing salaries and adding new employees, how will the Borough close the estimated $2 million dollar budget deficit that currently exists unless a quick deal with EnCap plugs that budget hole?

Add to the equation decreasing host fees and the eventual addition of tipping fees as an anticipated expenditure, and North Arlington homeowners will find themselves taxed out of oblivion.

Some semblance of financial leadership is sorely needed.

North Arlington simply doesn't have the revenue base to sustain the current size of local government. With all the host fees and state aid squandered beyond the municipal tax levy, North Arlington continues to live beyond it's means.

Someone needs to step forward and say enough is enough.

The fiscally responsible thing to do is put a freeze on all new spending for at least one year. Raises need to cease and painful decisions need to be made.

The only way to stop the bleeding is to stop the spending.

Democrats initially made the right choices but have strayed from that fiscal discipline.

If homeowners are ever to get a break, they need to put pressure on local government and demand fiscal accountability.

The band-aid approach to fiscal management needs to cease.

flagNA's failing test scores.

Who's going to take responsibility for poor performance?

By any reasonable standard, the North Arlington school district continues to flounder and lag behind in standardized test scores.

North Arlington public schools continue to limp along despite voter approval of school budgets and generous raises to teachers and administrators.

The question must be asked, who's to blame?

This year's results were no better than last year's horrid performance.

In 11th grade testing, the statewide failure rate for math was 24.5% and 15.0% for Bergen County districts.

The failure rate in North Arlington was 31.8%!

The failure rate for language testing was 16.8% statewide and 10.8% here in Bergen County.

In North Arlington, the failure rate was a ridiculous 29.7%!

A problem clearly exists and it's time the district put forth an action plan to increase test scores!

Year-in and year out the district makes the tragic mistake of apologizing and rationalizing academic failure.

When "special needs" school districts in Hudson County are out performing North Arlington students, the time has come to look in the mirror and accept the reality that change should have been implemented yesterday!

In last year's school board race the incumbent candidate virtually ignored these academic inefficiencies and was rewarded with another term of office.

When will this school board take real action? When will this school board demand academic accountability from the superintendent, administrators and the teaching staff?

Parents and homeowners certainly have a right to be upset given the continued failure on these state tests.

When 55% of your property tax dollars is dedicated to public education, you expect the money to wisely invested in some semblance of academic success.

That just isn't the case here in North Arlington.

This year the incumbent trustee decided not seek re-election. Given the poor test scores and continued mediocrity when compared against like districts, it's easy to understand why he seek another term.

The two candidates in this race for one seat have a moral obligation to the parents, students and voters to develop a platform and agenda that addresses the issue of failing test scores.

Mr. McDermott and Mrs. Bellucci owe the voters and taxpayers of community an explanation as to why we don't compete academically when stacked up against area public schools.

With a soft economy and real estate sales cooling off, homeowners don't enjoy approving school budgets that raise taxes while lending no lift to student achievement. The time has come for the parents of this district to demand public accountability in the delivery of education here in North Arlington.

If apologists for academic failure and employees of the school district continue to dominate the voting in school elections, nothing will change.

The time has come for Superintendent Stringham and this school board to develop standards and procedures that translate into academic achievement.

This upcoming school election must become a referendum of student testing. Those who truly care about public education and this community's children can no longer watch test scores continue to slide.

flagBeverly Murphy: Pioneer in Local Reporting

Former Managing Editor of The North Arlington Leader was the source of local news for a generation of readers!

We would be remiss not to acknowledge the passing of former North Arlington Leader Editor Beverly Murphy, who served as a conduit for local news in an era of "single source" information.

Beverly Murphy was without question a reliable source for local news and the one individual who kept local government responsible and accountable!

In an age where reporters seek everything but the news, Beverly Murphy was a fixture at council meetings, planning board meetings and meetings of the board of education. Murphy not only reported the actions of these events, but asked the tough questions when it came to the government's expenditure of our tax dollars!

Murphy's front-page of The North Arlington Leader not only addressed the news, but it set the standard for how government would relate to the electorate. A fiscal conservative, Murphy was unafraid in her tough questioning of elected officials and served voters very effectively as this single source for local government.

Tall, attractive and fashionable with a flair for good conversation and humor, the news seemed to find Beverly Murphy.

Her Ridge Road office was a right of passage for the politically ambitious and those making the news. Mayors, council members and trustees to the North Arlington Board of Education would regularly visit her to "spin" their side of the current issue of the day!

Either in person or on the phone, the politically connected wanted to be in Bev's good graces!

For most North Arlington residents, The Leader was the only source of hard news about NA. While the dailies from time to time would assign beat reporters to cover a specific political campaign or issue, it was Beverly Murphy who framed the local political dialogue.

Murphy's insistence on providing her readers on the cost of government was a sore spot for many public employees and union leaders who frowned upon her decision to post the salaries of teachers and other municipal personnel on the front-page for all to see.

Like her or not, Beverly Murphy was gutsy and let the chips fall where they may!

While The Leader's editorial bias was Republican, Murphy had strong working relationships with members of both political parties. Not a Republican or a Democrat, Beverly Murphy was a strong personality who resisted political interference and protected her political independence.

It was Beverly Murphy's close coverage of the operation of local government that led to the formation of a citizen's group named The Alert Citizens. It was this group that unsuccessfully sought a change of government in 1979 that would have eliminated partisan elections and instituted a municipal manager within the proposed charter.

It was Murphy's coverage of local government that brought the governing body to hire its first full-time administrator.

It was Beverly Murphy who covered the actions of an ambitious young councilman named Len Kaiser who would eventually become the borough's longest serving mayor!

In age where the weekly's sole purpose was to cover hard local news, Beverly Murphy had no peer.

Today, North Arlington has three weeklies, two dailies and this website that tries to accomplish much of what Beverly Murphy did alone on a manual typewriter in her Ridge Road office.

NA TODAY salutes the passing of Beverly Murphy. A tough and independent reporter who told it like she saw it!

EnCap: Partner or Profiteer?
 
As time winds down on the governing body to approve the EnCap proposal, who is protecting taxpayers and homeowners from a plan that will bring close to 4,000 new residents to North Arlington upon completion?
 
Sources close to the negotiations now tell NA TODAY that the proposed agreement doesn't even address EnCap's tax appeal seeking an assessment reduction on properties never exposed to the open market.
 
How can you partner with an entity that rejects the very assessments of land that will be worth millions upon rehabilitation?
 
EnCap now doing business as Cherokee Investments will apparently urge this governing body to impose eminent domain on profitable firms and companies to move forward with this redevelopment scheme.
 
Why should North Arlington's governing body even consider eminent domain as an option to assist a private developer? Where is the public interest? How is there a public concern?
 
Who will pay North Arlington's legal fees to fight in court with companies that pay taxes and provide jobs?
 
Where is the public interest in assisting a developer who is seeking to "relocate" companies that actually pay property taxes to the community while Encap challenges property assessments in court?
 
The ratable myth has come full circle.
 
Increased ratables do not lower taxes on homeowners.  
 
EnCap is determined to get an agreement signed, sealed and delivered without a shred of public input or consent. The last line of defense for homeowners is the North Arlington Borough Council.  Is this governing body going to let the developer provide it's own impact consultants to rationalize approval? What is different from this scenario than the previous scenario under the guise of the now defunct Redevelopment Authority which sought to do exactly the same thing?
 
The timeline of determination of this proposal needs to be set by North Arlington, not EnCap.
 
If the borough needs additional time to properly evaluate the proposal, where is the harm in such a decision? Why the rush to judgment on the dubious advice of lawyers and consultants? 
 
What public interest do they represent? Who really cares what they think?
 
Where in this region has EnCap enjoyed any public support? Lyndhurst? Rutherford? Kearny? North Arlington? What report or document exists that homeowners want this massive development taking place in their backyard in the first place? What public official has politically benefited from allying themselves over taxpayers in support of this highly controversial and questionable leap of faith?
 
As stated time and time again, what is the financial benefit to EnCap versus the impact on North Arlington? How do current homeowners benefit from this project? How will schools and services be impacted? Who will make those determinations?
 
EnCap or a credible third-party? More specifically, wasn't a committee being appointed to look at this very proposal? Is there a single objective point-of-view being considered in this process as it applies to impact and cost to the homeowners of North Arlington?
 
The details and fine print of this proposal have been presented. It's up to those elected, not appointed to protect the community from a process that can't be changed a year or three years from now. Lawyers don't speak for the public. Lawyers and political appointees don't set public policy.
 
You can't close the barn door after the horse has left the stable.
 
Elected officials set the tone and agenda for the weary voter begging for tax relief.
 
The time for credible and sensible evaluation of this project is today and now.
A redevelopment strategy that seeks a return on investment
 
Porete Avenue could be transformed again under plan offered by Cherokee
 
It's too early to speculate what will be the final plan for North Arlington as it applies to Porete Avenue and the borough's Meadowland parcels in wake of the major revisions offered by Cherokee Partners last night.
 
What was once a marketed as a golf community and resort has been changed to reflect more open space, recreational facilities as well as more housing. While the proposal is no longer vertical, the amount of housing and its impact on essential services needs to be closely monitored and scrutinized.
 
Local Democrats in the late 1980's and early 1990's were highly critical of the Kaiser Administration's commitment to revitalizing Porete Avenue calling the folly a "white elephant." A charge that so deeply infuriated local Republicans they handed out white chocolate elephants at a press conference touting the highly controversial policy.
 
Fifteen years later and several million dollars in capital improvements now finds Porete Avenue being drastically altered once again.
 
While the previous efforts were noble, the latest proposal to transform this blighted portion of the borough has a component that Porete Avenue never had before - an investor seeking to make a profit.
 
The reality is that the previous redevelopment of Porete Avenue just didn't work. There was is no market for industrial space with no access to Route 3 or 17 when you could easily find better locations in Lyndhurst, Rutherford, East Rutherford or Kearny. With the exception of the one large warehouse constructed, the area for the most part remains unproductive and unprofitable to the borough given the level of investment by taxpayers.
 
But as North Arlington grapples with this new proposal, other serious questions loom in the process.
 
For one, the closure of the baler facility will cause North Arlington homeowners to assume the cost of tipping fees like most municipalities. The fees could be as high as $1 million dollars annually.
 
This lost revenue needs to be considered in any final agreement.
 
The issue of traffic also demands expert analysis. Previous efforts to link North Arlington to 3 & 17 have died in other planning efforts. Given the potential for thousands of new residents, what is the strategy to provide new access to this portion of the municipality? What state and federal funds are available to help cover the costs? Is light rail or links to PATH options that could in fact take place down the road?
 
Most importantly, what is North Arlington's financial exposure should this real estate market begin to correct itself as inflation seems to set in?
 
How will increased interest rates effect buyer activity when so many units will be available for purchase?
 
Mayor Pitman has instituted a series of what has been dubbed "circuit breakers" to effect any changes or conditions that could have an adverse effect on North Arlington. It will be interesting to see how this policy could be applied and how it effects the long-term conditions of any final agreement.
 
If nothing else, this departure from industrial redevelopment to residential housing is a process that deserves to be public and open.
 
We trust that this will be the case and that other issues surrounding North Arlington's long-term financial health will also be addressed from the standpoint of protecting the homeowner.
Solve the problem.
 
Sunset Avenue resident Bob Norcia seems to be on a seven-year odyssey to get anyone to investigate his claim that a neighbor is using his residence to conduct some sort of scrap metal business.
 
Mr. Norcia wrote to the former mayor in 1998 which resulted in a ticket being issued in 2000.
 
But five years later according to Mr. Norcia, the problem still persists.
 
Mr. Norcia has apparently brought the problem to the attention to the North Arlington Board of Health as well as the borough's construction official.
 
Nothing has changed.
 
Thousands of local monthly Meetups - find oneMr. Norcia brought his case back to the North Arlington Mayor & Council on September 15th and pleaded for the body for help.
 

According to The Leader, the Borough Attorney explained "we don't enforce the law."

If the Mayor and Council can't instruct borough employees to enforce the law, who can?

Why hasn't the Construction Official or the Board of Health followed up on these complaints? Why isn't the Borough Administrator working closely with Mr. Norcia in seeing that his problem is being solved? Has the Administrator taken the time to visit the site in question?

What is the procedure to field and process homeowner complaints here in North Arlington? If no guidelines exists, isn't it time for those department heads to adopt a responsible plan-of-action?
 
Elected officials like Mayor Russ Pitman are part-time positions. But North Arlington has a Construction Department, Borough Administrator, Health Department and Police Department to assess what exactly is happening next door to Mr. Norcia on a day to day basis. 
 
This is what these people are paid to do.  Why is it taking seven years to solve such a problem?
 
Councilman Peter Massa is absolutely correct in his assessment of the situation. Why can't this municipality create a process that generates a constituent services program that takes the onus off the taxpayer and places it where it belongs  - with local government officials?
 
Elected officials are in the business of customer service. More importantly, North Arlington employs many well paid individuals who should be instructed to find the time to help solve the problems of local homeowners. These individuals have an obligation to these homeowners weary from years of property tax increase after property tax increase that was eliminated by Mayor Pitman last year. Mayor Pitman is working hard to change the culture of local government. That can't happen unless borough employees pitch-in and do the same!
 
Maybe the time has come for the Mayor & Council to consider having all department heads at all public meetings so that they may address these day to day concerns and instill the accountability the homeowner expects. 
 
Mr. Norcia is a homeowner who deserves assistance and help. If the people employed by the borough don't have the time, energy, ability or interest in helping Mr. Norcia, maybe its high time the borough find people who can help Mr. Norcia and solve the problem! 
 
There was a time when the "customer was always right." In government, the homeowner is the customer and that same mentality of customer service to taxpayers is essential if local government is to improve the lives of those paying the bills!
No help from Trenton
 
Area legislators do little to correct North Arlington's inherited fiscal woes
 
Unless North Arlington can find some last minute infusion of revenue, there will be a municipal property tax increase in 2005.
 
The announcement by state officials that North Arlington will only receive $330,000 in Extraordinary Aid despite a history of fiscal incompetence by Mayor Pitman's predecessor speaks volumes to the lack of support local Democrats are receiving from the state.
 
While Mayor Pitman and local Democrats walked door to door with Senator Jon Corzine and the Democratic legislative candidates just a couple of days ago, that political support seems to go assumed.
 
North Arlington is the only community in the 36th legislative district of any size that has an all-Democratic governing body. No Democrat who's ever won a seat in the General Assembly or NJ Senate has won without the support of North Arlington voters.
 
North Arlington is a must-win community in one of the state's more competitive legislative districts.
 
Yet North Arlington's share of Extraordinary Aid has been reduced from a high of over $1 million dollars in the late 1990's to a mere $330,000 today.
 
While North Arlington's financial woes have mounted, support from Trenton has decreased.
 
North Arlington, like Dumont inherited a fiscal nightmare. Yet Dumont's call for increased aid has been heard.  A series of property tax increases, outrageous bonding, over expenditures, overdrafts and deferred charges have brought havoc to North Arlington's financial picture. Compound the spending spree with the squandering of temporary host fee and North Arlington is without question a municipality with serious needs the state should address in a serious fashion.
 
While Dumont received $600,000 in state aid, North Arlington received slightly more than half that amount for the second consecutive year.
 
One must wonder what local Democrats have to accomplish to be rewarded. The all powerful North Arlington Republican Organization, which held a stranglehold on local government for more than two decades has been reduced to rubble. The party has been swept in every election district for two consecutive years and didn't even bother to file candidates in 2005. Mayor Pitman made the tough choices and laid off dozens of employees while cutting spending nearly a million dollars.
 
Pitman has restructured the borough's debt and has said no to high density housing.
 
The Democrats made the wise decision of selling the borough's aging water utility so that homeowners won't be stuck with millions of dollars of upgrades the borough cannot afford.
 
In short, the Democratic majority made the tough decisions the prior administration ignored for too long.
 
But despite these tough decisions, the borough's financial woes have fallen upon deaf ears. While other municipalities received state aid increases of 10, 20 and 27%, North Arlington got the same as last year which was decreased by $170,000 a year earlier.
 
One would think in a $29 billion dollar budget there would be room to provide meaningful financial assistance for a community in search of help.
 
If North Arlington is forced to raise property taxes, the district's legislative representatives should ask themselves what could have been done to help the local homeowner.
 
They seem downright indifferent.
 
There is no free lunch.
 
Suggestions of EnCap building North Arlington a high school is just pie-in-the-sky rhetoric that just isn't realistic!
 
In another letter to the local press, Independent council candidate George McDermott suggested that he supports housing units that will promote school-age children instead of restricting new growth through the active adult component. In his letter, McDermott is quoted as saying "I support brownfields to greenfields, not turning North Arlington into a retirement community."
 
If Mr. McDermott is concerned about the cost and impact EnCap will have on the borough's current homeowners, the last thing he would be promoting is housing that drastically increases not only the population, but the overall impact on municipal services including public schools.
 
Here are some statistics worth noting:
 
* 43.6% of all North Arlington residents are over the age of 45
 
* Of the 4,129 households that make-up North Arlington, 63% of these households include an individual over 65.
 
* Of the 4,129 households that make-up North Arlington, 53% or 2,196 individuals currently receive Social Security benefits.
 
* Of the 13,107 people who reside in the borough, 22% or 2,942 residents are over the age of 65
 
The demographics demonstrate an aging community. School population is not increasing and poll after poll conducted by local Democrats suggests absolutely no support for construction that will dramatically increase the size of the borough's school district.
 
The notion that North Arlington should accept thousands of units in housing that will in turn increase the student population in exchange for a high school borders on the absurd.
 
For starters, no developer is going to commit to building a new high school. Secondly, have the supporters of a new high school even considered the real cost to taxpayers?
 
Here in New Jersey $6 billion dollars was dedicated to the construction of 161 schools by the very bureaucratic Schools Construction Corporation. The SCC to date has built just six schools with another thirty-two under construction. According to a Star-Ledger report, only half of the 161 schools will be constructed because the $6 billion will be wiped out! That means for $6 billion dollars New Jersey will have constructed roughly 80 schools at cost of about $75 million per school!
 
In Trenton, the SCC halted construction of a 800-student elementary school currently costing taxpayers $28 million dollars. Between 1991 and 2000, 391 public school facilities were constructed in Ohio, Kentucky and Michigan at an average cost of $8.4 million dollars and 86,000 square feet. Keep in mind prevailing wages were only paid in half of these projects. A 2003 study by The Beacon Hill Institute showed that project labor agreements which limit builders to union-only personnel increase bid and construction costs about 14% per square foot!
 
The construction trades in New Jersey are dominated by union labor. The cost of new construction in New Jersey is the most expensive in the nation when it comes to school construction. In places like Georgia, new school construction for classrooms at the high school level is about $65  a square foot. Kitchens run about $110 a square foot and restrooms run about $63 a square foot according to a 2001 report by that state's Superintendent of Schools. Georgia's costs are far less expensive being a Right to Work state that discourages union shops.
 
Let's assume that a new high school isn't possible financially. The renovation costs of a building occupied prior to 1950 could cost as much as $50,000 per instructional unit. That would not include Architect's fees nor contingencies, change orders or other construction delays that come with any large scale renovation project.
 
At the state level, of the $6 billion dedicated to new school construction, $500 million has been expended on cost overruns and change orders. The current cost to construct a new school on the SCC's watch is roughly $184 a square foot. With an average square footage of roughly 86,000 square feet, the cost to build a new high school could be easily estimated at nearly $16 million dollars without a single change order or cost overrun. When factoring these costs, the bill for a new high school at the minimum would be conservatively $20 million dollars!
 
None of this includes the costs of additional teachers, books, electricity, water, desks, maintenance, transportation, health benefits, pensions or the other operational costs of public education here in New Jersey.
 
From a practical standpoint, why would any developer commit to the construction of a public facility they have no obligation to subsidize? Secondly, the Board of Education has no standing in the negotiations between the developer and the Mayor & Council. Will the governing body look to minimize the impact of school costs, or will they embrace literally hundreds of new students they currently cannot accommodate? The governing body will certainly negotiate a school impact fee if that's the direction of the project.
 
Mr. McDermott seems to pride himself in doing the research necessary to tackle the issues facing North Arlington. In the case of supporting a new high school, he shows himself to be woefully uninformed and ignorant. Mr. McDermott lacks any real knowledge of cost and impact. His support of a new high school he thinks should be paid for by EnCap is simply ridiculous.
 
Mr. McDermott may not support turning North Arlington into a "retirement community." But giving EnCap a blank check for unlimited increases in the borough's school population makes little sense in the short and long-term redevelopment process.
Time for a "Proposition 13" approach to property taxes here in New Jersey?
Caps on property taxes is what weary homeowners really need from Trenton lawmakers.
 
What good are rebates and so called tax relief if property taxes continue to increase?
 
The political gimmicks that dominate Trenton have played themselves out and the bipartisan incompetence when it comes to tax relief is obvious by those who own property here in New Jersey.
 
The 1978 tax revolt in California led by the late Howard Jarvis forever changed that state's ability to raise taxes year after year.  The average home in the state of California pays about 1% in property taxes of the assessed value of the home while New Jersey's three-tier tax scheme of school, county and municipal taxes continues to spin out of control!
 
Acting Governor Dick Codey could certainly leave a huge imprint on state government by legislating a hard cap on the state's property taxes. Free of campaigning and fundraising, Governor Codey has the opportunity not only to drastically help homeowners, but help his party's nominee in November by handing him a signature issue on taxes that all would easily embrace.
 
In the state of Nevada, Assembly bill 489 caps tax increases on single-family, owner-occupied residencies at a modest 3%.
Commercial properties would be capped at 8%, and new growth construction (such as Encap) would be taxed at current levels.
 
In California, Proposition 13  caps property tax increases at 2% per year until the property is sold. In effect, if you own a home in California prior to 1978, your property taxes have risen 54% in 27 years!
 
Instead of "smart growth" schemes to stick traditional suburban communities with COAH mandated, low income housing, state officials should be protecting those who live in these thriving towns that reject the notion "urbanizing" South Bergen is somehow a good thing for homeowners and home values.
 
If legislators are serious about helping their constituents, it will take some real out-of-the-box thinking such as capping property taxes as a real solution to the most over regulated, over taxed, over burden homeowners in this nation.
More Gambling is not the answer.
 
With horse racing revenues dwindling, how does more gambling options at The Big M change anything?
 
When the Meadowlands Sports Complex was sold to voters in the early 1970's, the revenue assumptions were optimistic and quite frankly, unrealistic.
 
But voters saw horse racing not only as a form of gambling, but as a night out. A new form of entertainment for the region at a new venue that was clean, accessible and affordable.
 
But times have changed.
 
The horse racing industry is no longer a revenue generator for the Meadowlands Sports Complex. The average handle does not guarantee the kind purse money to attract the big-name horses, jockeys and stakes races.  In fact, casino gaming revenues from Atlantic City now subsidize the track to the tune of $86 million dollars. Gambling is no longer an isolated industry in places like Las Vegas, but a growing source of revenue for dozens of states all over the country.
 
In short, government at all levels have embraced the revenues of gambling in all forms.
 
This once untapped source of revenue now seems all tapped out.
 
Voters rejected the notion of statewide gambling in 1975 because of the fear of organized crime and slot machine on every corner. The voters approved casino gambling under the assumption the revenues would not only fund education, but redevelop the aging seashore community of Atlantic City.
 
While most would agree that casino gambling has had a positive impact on Atlantic City, why is it New Jersey seems to face an annual crisis called the state budget process?
 
While some make the case that slot machines at The Meadowlands will bolster track revenue, others argue persuasively it will only cannibalize the same revenue that's derived from the casinos of Atlantic City. If you're a slot player, why take a bus to AC if you can hop in your car and just drive to the track?
 
While state officials seem interested in maximizing gambling revenue, what is being done to control the growth of state government? It seems no matter how many revenue sources are generated, the size of state government is never controlled, but fueled to become only larger in size and scope.
 
The issue is not more revenue, the issue is less state spending.
 
Should state government depend on gambling as a larger and larger source of revenue? We believe state government should take the more appropriate role of monitoring expenditures and outlays and capping these costs to relieve the overburdened taxpayer from wasteful spending.
 
In the meantime, the Meadowlands can certainly use a face lift. Now 30 years old, the Big M needs to change with the times.  What about changing the whole marketing proposition of the facility? What is being done to enhance the experience of the consumer?
 
If the business of hosting horse racing in New Jersey in the end is unprofitable, is there an exit strategy in place to redevelop the site into something that makes sense for sports complex officials?
 
Tough questions that deserve thoughtful answers.
NORTH ARLINGTON CHITTER CHATTER
 
Someone should remind defeated Independent council candidate George McDermott the campaign is over.
 
After being crushed 3-1 and losing the popular vote by 2,500 votes, the self proclaimed "Public Advocate" went on the attack in The Leader accusing Democrats of running a "quiet campaign."
 
McDermott seems to think a campaign should be judged by how many times you can embarrass yourself at public meetings. Thank goodness the public knows better. McDermott doesn't quite understand the concept that voters actually agree with Democrats on the important issues like property taxes and selling the borough's aging water utility.
 
McDermott claims to be personally offended because he thinks the Democrats didn't address the issues. The Democrats supported a zero tax increase budget and sold the water utility to keep taxes stable. They supported a massive layoff plan to keep future budgets in check.
 
What exactly did McDermott support?
 
Having someone write letters for the local press is nice, but it doesn't gain the respect of the voters George!
 
Look for McDermott to continue his one-man campaign for "truth, justice, and the American way!"
 
With Democrats now controlling all seven seats of government, one wonders if the various school employees who regularly trash Pitman and the Democrats will continue their divisive ways?
 
When will Schools Superintendent Ollie Stringham put a lid on the anti-Pitman rhetoric?
 
Several top Democrats are urging Mayor Pitman to endorse a slate of candidates in the upcoming school elections just to get back at these "Pitman haters."
 
"Democrats are tired of the partisan politics coming from the school board. All they seem to do is play politics and raise taxes. Enough is enough," said one former school trustee.
 
Comments attributed to one North Arlington retail furniture store owner went over like a lead balloon with local Democrats.
 
"This guy gets a great deal for air rights and blames the town for the parking problem? What is NA doing to open that parking lot? The parking problem was created because of agreements negotiated by Kaiser," said one angered insider upon reading the latest edition of The Observer.
 
Who will replace Steve Tanelli as the borough's Recreation Director? Sources say the list has been cut down to three possibilities with a decision to be made shortly.
 
Councilman-elect Peter Massa and Councilman-elect Phil Spanola are expected to play an important role in future policy decisions as they pertain to the NAPD.
 
"Pete and Phil are ex-cops. They understand how the department operates. Mayor Pitman will be depending on the two of them to get the politics out of the PD," said a source close to Pitman.
 
With Rutherford Mayor Bernadette McPherson expected to be named Freeholder Director, support continues to build for Mayor Pitman to be added the Democratic Assembly ticket in 2005.
 
"Pitman is the most popular local mayor in district 36. County Democrats would be wise to add Pitman to a ticket that badly needs a jumpstart. If Democrats lose in 2005, the Republicans will have two possible candidates for the state senate against incumbent Paul Sarlo in 2007. It would make sense to nominate the best candidate and Pitman fits the bill," contemplated one district insider.
 
Sources say EnCap Holdings is finally willing to work with Pitman and the Democrats to reach the best deal possible.
 
"EnCap needs a cooperative North Arlington. The issues put forth by the local leadership will be addressed. EnCap finally gets it," said one happy Democrat.
 
But while Democrats seem ready to finally work with the developer, others claim NJMC Commissioner Len Kaiser will oppose any deal negotiated with North Arlington.
 
"He's bitter. He's lost and he has no influence. Pitman is what matters in North Arlington, not Len Kaiser, " said another insider familiar with the situation.
 
Who do local Democrats prefer for Governor in 2005?
 
"Many local Democrats like Dick Codey and hope he runs. Some believe US Senator Jon Corzine would have a tough time winning a general election given his very liberal voting record. Look what happen to Kerry. In the US Senate, you are exposed on thousands of votes. Codey is regarded as a local favorite who understands the needs of suburban towns. Codey seems to be the local choice if a decision needed to be made," said another NA Dem.

MORE REPUBLICAN CHAOS

Something close to hatred of Mayor Russ Pitman and the local Democrats seems to drive the NA Republican Party.

Unfortunately, that feeling is driving the Republicans off a cliff!
 
In less than two years, North Arlington voters have rejected four long-time GOP incumbents in Len Kaiser, Charles Belmonte, Frank Caputo and James Herrmann. Mr. Herrmann would find himself rejected again in the span of six months with his illegal appointment to the vacancy of James Ward who resigned without explanation.
 
The final shoe dropped last week when four-term incumbent Joseph Whittles decided against continuing his uphill battle to retain his seat on the council. Sources close to local Democrats say the decision was a wise one since he was already trailing Democrats in a recent poll conducted by Neighborhood Research.
 
Mr. Whittles joins Susan King as the other incumbent who chose not to run again. Reports say Mrs. King will probably not finish the remainder of her current term as she apparently plans to relocate to Florida.
 
For Republicans, the electoral process they dominated for so long has become nothing but a but a series of defeats, resignations and withdrawals. For the political strength of the local GOP has shrunk to nothing more than a unorganized band of embittered partisans who relentlessly attack Mayor Pitman, right or wrong!
 
These extremists absorbed another political blow when Joe Whittles decided enough is enough. Compounding the sting was the unexpected withdrawal of Brian Heinzmann, the GOP challenger who saw nothing wrong with signing the petition of independent hopeful and municipal employee, George McDermott.
 
Sources say two new candidates will emerge shortly replacing Whittles and Heinzmann.
 
Brian Fitzhenry, a partisan member of the North Arlington Board of Education is apparently eager to take on the Democrats.
 
Beware what you wish for young man!
 
Mr. Fitzhenry was just reelected to a three-year term in April to the school board. So much for keeping to your promise to serve the voters for that term of office. But Fitzhenry has been part of the GOP farm system for some time. He's a Kaiser protªgª whose name was nominated to fill the Ward vacancy last December. With a bench that is less than deep, Fitzhenry's presence on the ticket may reenergize a party desperate for success.
 
But Fitzhenry is part of that wing of the Republican Party that divides North Arlington.
 
Fitzhenry is part of the rhetoric that pits parents versus seniors, homeowners versus the municipal employees. Mr. Fitzhnery seems to believe that all volunteers are Republicans. That property taxes can't be stabilized. That employees always deserve a raise even when results don't reflect any progress. His record of raising taxes and salaries at the Board of Education is in complete opposition to the cries of homeowners who simply want tax relief now!
 
Fitzhenry's "them versus us" scare tactics is not something voters plan to embrace anytime soon. 
 
The central question for Mr. Fitzhenry is what will he bring to the governing body? If he opposes the layoffs, what would he done differently? Is he suggesting more salary increases and more spending?
 
Most importantly, does Mr. Fitzhenry have the guts to stand up to Len Kaiser and work with Mayor Russ Pitman for the betterment of North Arlington? The problems caused by 22 years of one-party control have taken their toll on the borough's finances. Squandered host fees, excessive bonding, out-of-control spending and outrageous salaries are the reality that now faces North Arlington. Will candidate Fitzhenry have the courage to break from the party line and actually work in a bipartisan fashion to fix North Arlington now?
 
The last of the seven GOP incumbents that ran this community for the better part of two decades will disappear from the political landscape as of January 1, 2005. Does the GOP have the ability to change, or will it become further marginalized under the failed leadership of Mr. Kaiser?
POLITICS HAS NO PLACE IN THE CELEBRATION OF MEMORIAL DAY
 
It's a shame some people use volunteer groups for the purpose of partisan politics.
 
There are several members of the local Republican Party who desperately want to see Mayor Pitman fail in his objective to stabilize taxes and trim the size of local government. Some of these individuals are also members of the volunteer Fire Department.
 
For whatever reason, the Fire department decided not to participate in the borough's annual Memorial Day parade. The reasons range from a sense of "disrespect" to allegations of budget cuts preventing their attendance.
 
Any reasonable person would concur that if these individuals really wanted to participate, they would have. These alleged reasons for not participating seem half-baked and with little supporting evidence.
 
To boycott a Memorial Day Parade is a very callous way to make a point. The mere thought of this happening while Pitman's predecessor served as mayor is nonexisistent.
 
It would have never occurred.
 
But because Pitman is a new mayor and not a Republican, many believe he has received little cooperation from these partisan types who can't seem to put the betterment of the community over petty politics.
 
All would agree the North Arlington Fire Department does an excellent job of protecting the community.
 
They serve an important purpose and function that shouldn't be tinged by the stench of politics.
 
The fact the department would post a press release on the Republican website, www.NAIndependent.com does little to change the perception that they stand on the side of the local GOP. There is nothing independent or objective as it applies to the content on that website. 
 
How does this perception of taking political sides help the reputation of the department and those members who don't want to be treated like a political football? We would imagine many members have little interest in politics and just want to serve the community.
 
So why use a Memorial Day parade to take such a position?
 
The Fire Department doesn't have to march in any parade. But why deprive children and neighbors the opportunity to see the borough's fleet of fire equipment and the men who serve the community?
 
It seems to us that the volume of politics and partisanship is currently dictating the relationship between the department and this administration. It's counterproductive to the smooth operation of the municipality.
 
We believe cooler heads must prevail.
 
Government functions should not be effected by political posturing that only divides the community.
 
The parade was for and about those who served. It was about those who currently serve this great country in time of war and conflict. It's disturbing that the service of those who died for this country as well as those who serve would somehow find themselves and this day part of a petty, political controversy.
 
It just doesn't make sense.
 
The veterans of this community are both Democrats and Republicans.
 
Neither party has a monopoly on patriotism or service to this community. It is a day when all should forget political disagreements and come together for the betterment of the borough.
 
We're hopeful this kind of political posturing and rhetoric will cease and that both sides will put aside these petty differences and do what's best for the community they all claim to know and love.
"MIXED MESSAGE"
 
KAISER'S UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT OF ENCAP UNDERMINES PITMAN, NA HOMEOWNERS WHO WANT HOUSING QUESTIONS ADDRESSED!
 
Former Mayor Leonard Kaiser is a player in the world of Bergen County politics. He is the six-figure Executive Director of the Bergen County Utilities Authority (BCUA) and a member of the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission (NJMC), the oversight agency of the billion dollar EnCap proposal.
 
More importantly, Kaiser is an unconditional supporter of EnCap. He does not question a single aspect of the proposal and has pushed for 1,550 units of housing without hesitation! His support of this proposal flies in the face of homeowners in North Arlington who have serious questions regarding the amount of housing as well as the density and effect on essential services.
 
Ironically, Kaiser led the opposition in 1979 as a North Arlington councilman to stop luxury condominiums from being constructed. It was his opposition that derailed the proposal and instead saddled North Arlington with a garbage transfer station. Incredibly, it is that site which is slated for the very housing constru