Plainfield's 2010 budget and property taxes - part one

I have a lot to share about the municipal budget, having served as an elected official through 5 city budgets and 6 school board budgets in the last 15 years. This is the first of three blogs concerning the Plainfield 2010 budget and will serve as an introduction to the process.

The budget process starts with with the Mayor and administration drafting and introducing a budget to the Council. At the time of introduction, this budget is sent to the NJ Department of Community Affairs. From that moment, the budget is in the hands of the Council. Its final form and adoption is the responsibility of the Council.

It is mid October and the City Council has yet to see a budget or even get an estimated property tax increase. The final adoption typically takes place in October, November or December. In a particularly difficult year, it might take until January. By the way, the budget year starts in July - the previous July, not the following one. To be fair to local government, the state rules make it impossible to strike a budget before the year begins and almost impossible with the first three months of the year! Still, it is worrisome that the Council hasn't seen or heard anything about the administrations budget.

Once we get the budget, the City Council will hold budget hearings to review each departments requests in depth. In my five years on Council, these hearings have led to the Council making various adjustments, mostly to cut expenditures. Examples include reductions in police and fire overtime pay and many cuts to to non-personnel budget lines that were underspent in the previous year. There were a few areas where Council increased expenditure such as staffing for road repair crews.

One aspect of the budget that often gets overlooked is the capital budget for expenditures having an expected life of at least 5 years. I did get a look at the 2010 proposed capital budget Thursday night at the Planning Board meeting (Planning Board reviews this first and sends its recommendations to the Council). The administration is proposing bare bones capital expenditures, probably a good idea in the current economic climate. Most expenditures are for grant funded projects, with the exception of engineering for next years road paving program which would be bond funded.

The second part of my budget blog will be more exciting - I promise. Something unusual happened at the last Council meeting that went under most people's radar. I will need a little more time to post on that.

The City Council and the Mayor

When Plainfield government does something good, the credit is shared by elected officials. Then things are not right, the blame must be shared. More importantly, the solution must be a shared decision.

Those of you who follow local government may see that something has changed with the Council. Concerns about the performance of city hall are increasingly expressed by Council members. Some of these concerns come out at public meetings and others must, by law, be addressed privately.

You will know how well the Council is working together and how well we are working with the Mayor by tracking some current issues between now and early 2010:

• 2010 budget - how will we rise to the challenge of reducing expenses to stay within the state requirement of a maximum 2.5% increase in expense over 2009. This will require more cooperation between the Council and Mayor than ever.
• If lay-offs and union contract give backs are part of our budget solution, will the Council speak with one voice. Will the Council and Mayor speak with one voice. When there are differences in strategy, will all parties put their cards on the table respectfully and make compromises to achieve real solutions?
• Will the Council get straight answers by the next Council meeting to questions regarding the transfer of Dudley House to a private not for profit organization?
• Will the Council and the Mayor ensure that the Muhlenburg Community Advisory Group has a fully operational complaint procedure so that citizens know where and how to make complaints and that they are resolved within specified time frames?

These are some of the current concerns/issues that our city government is charged to deal with. Get out your score cards to measure the performance of each Council member, the Council as a whole and the Mayor. We all need to be held accountable individually and even more importantly, as a team. It will take a team approach to navigate Plainfield through some very challenging problems and times.

Monday night Council agenda

I am posting to alert citizens to the fact that there are two new items on the Council's agenda for Monday's business meeting:

1. A resolution for the transit oriented vision study. The city will apply to use $80,000 from our Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) fund to pay Rutgers and NJIT to assist Plainfield in creating a vision for our downtown and along our rail corridor. I plan to vote yes for this resolution.
2. An ordinance creating an IT position including a salary range and job description. I will vote yes for this also.

These items should have been on the agenda for last Mondays meeting. I was expecting to see them at that time. It is unfortunate that we are not following our normal procedure for these important and necessary initiatives. I hope an explanation is provided for this. Nevertheless we need to move forward on both fronts.

Since I have been very involved with the vision proposal I can shed more light on that process than on the IT initiative. We have been working hard with Rutgers and NJIT to craft the vision proposal so it meets Plainfields needs. There has been input from the Council, the Mayor, City Administrator and the Planning Board members. This proposal has received attention from the Courier News (a favorable editorial this past spring) and I have reported on it at several Council and Planning Board meetings. In addition to meeting Plainfields needs the study needs to align with the academic calendars of both partner institutions. We have a timetable that all parties agreed to and it includes an approved Council resolution by 8/17. That sets the stage for an application to the state UEZ office and eventual approval so that all partners can get to work this fall and into 2010. So I am not happy that this was not up for discussion last week and I promise to have a full discussion this coming Monday. But we need to approve this resolution now.

I should also note that there is a lot of speculation that the Monarch tax abatement will be put back on the agenda Monday. I have not heard this and I do not believe that a group of Council members would orchestrate such a move without disclosure to the rest of the Council. Call me naive but we will know for sure on Monday. This has become a hot button issue because people are upset about their taxes and PMUA fees. When this does come back to the Council and if we do vote on it, many will say a yes vote puts you in the developers and Jerry Greens pocket. All I can say is that neither Jerry Green or the developer has lobbied me for this tax abatement. I am not categorically against tax abatements and am still gathering and weighing the facts in this particular proposal. If I do vote against it, I will still be open to the possibility of tax abatements in the future if I think they will help Plainfield.

Lets focus on the facts and not the personalities.

The Passing of Rick Taylor

Rick Taylor was a unique figure in the history of Plainfield. As Lois and I became more involved in the 1990's in the political life of Plainfield, we saw Rick as larger than life, a media star who was not content to see Plainfield as a small, out of the way place. We came to know him first through the Courier-News, the Star-Ledger and even the network tv news.

In some ways he put Plainfield on the map with his amazing ability to use the news media to promote his interests. The details of local government he left to others but he worked his way onto a bigger stage with his connections to Jesse Jackson and other African American leaders. To his credit many residents and people who worked for him during his time as Mayor of Plainfield were helped to see Plainfield in a broader context.

Lois was involved in one of his mayoral campaigns (she was into local politics more than I was in those days) and I also knew Rick as a fellow not for profit executive director from his work at Grant Avenue Community Center. I always liked that after his government service ended he stayed connected to city government and attended Council meetings. I will miss his blunt manner and sometimes poetic way of speaking. I liked how he carried himself - like he knew he had to be reckoned with and you'd better know it too. I didn't agree with everything he did as an elected official but when you wanted some action or decision to happen in Plainfield, you wanted Rick Taylor on your side more than anyone else in town.

My condolences to Mayor Ricks family and close friends.

Tax Abatements

Generally speaking Plainfield should not be categorically for or against tax abatements. Each situation should be carefully analyzed for benefits and disadvantages to Plainfield. The best tax abatement is a wise investment of taxpayer resources for current gain and increasing future benefits. The worst is an ill conceived special interest benefit that saps resources from our city. The two tax abatement proposals on the July City Council agenda are somewhere in the middle.

First the senior citizens apartment tower proposal on Park Avenue. I voted for this and it extends the current tax abatement by an additional 16 years and increases the owners annual tax payments. So property tax payers are seeing this apartment building pay a larger share of taxes but for a longer period of time. I did not like the idea of adding the 16 years, even with the increased tax payment. But I voted yes. I am not a fan of apartment towers. They have a higher potential for crime and drug dealing when located in low income neighborhoods. We are seeing some demolitions nation-wide and I think it is a good trend. The tower in question is for senior citizens and with proper maintenance such an apartment building has good prospects for staying a good neighbor. This tax abatement, I am told by our city administrators, will inject needed funding for building upgrades. So my yes vote is an ambivalent one but based on the future benefit of a well maintained, viable senior citizen apartment building.

The more controversial tax abatement is proposed for the Monarch on East Front Street. I voted yes on first reading to keep the door open. It is in Plainfields interests to do what we can to support this project. We have already contributed the land with the benefit of a new senior citizen center. No additional assistance was requested by the developer when this project was approved. Now we find ourselves in a down economy and the developer has come back wanting more from Plainfield property tax payers.

I have requested a cost-benefit analysis from the City Administrator. That will be a major influence in my vote on second reading. It has to be clearly demonstrated that the 5 year tax abatement cost to taxpayers will be more than offset by the increased taxes from more rapid condo unit sales. I also have to be convinced that this ordinance will truly prevent a significant trend towards renter occupied units.

While I await more information from the city's administration, I have proposed to my colleagues the following amendments to the ordinance, should it be approved:
1- require unit owners to prove they are occupying their units on an annual basis
2- make the tax break available only for owners who keep their units for the 5 year period the abatement would be in effect.
Thanks to Dan Damon for posting these ideas on his blog.

Last but not least, I asked questions at the last Council meeting about the property taxes on the land and improvements for the Monarch and when the taxes on the building units goes into effect. Those questions could not be answered so I requested the Tax Assessor be present at the next meeting. This ordinance requires clear factual answers to the Councils questions. Anything less needs to result in the defeat of this tax abatement.

The November Election

Maybe its the history of fighting political factions in Plainfield. Or maybe its bad feelings in the aftermath of a spirited mayoral contest. Whatever the reason, I have heard that some local politicians are concerned that I am not supporting the Democratic ticket in the November election.

I am a Democrat, always have been and always will be. I am disappointed in the local primary election outcome. But that is water under the bridge now that the primary election is over. I am supporting the whole Democratic ticket from Governor Jon Corzine on down. That includes Mayor Robinson-Briggs.

More than ever, Plainfield needs all levels of government to work together for the good of the city. One example is the need for City Council and the Mayors office to work as partners to engage the community in creating a vision for our Downtown train station area and the whole rail corridor. There is no other way forward for Plainfield.

A Victory for Plainfield

Readers have probably seen Rashid Burney's blog on the sale of the Catherine Webster Home on Franklin Place. His kind words about the selling agent are deserved (Lois Mattson is that agent -she happens to be my wife). Considering the flack she took during the lengthy sales process (2 years!) Rashids' comments are appreciated by my family.

At the risk of sounding self interested, I feel compelled to say a few things in response to those who made unfair accusations about Lois and her role in the sale:

1. To Jerry Green who made tasteless and untrue insinuations about my "real estate family", if you were more in touch with your community, you would know that there is no-one more dedicated to her community than Lois. She has never asked for recognition for the volunteer work she has done over 30 years for the Plainfield Youth Soccer Club, the Plainfield YWCA, the Plainfield Symphony and the Cook School Parent-Teacher Organization, to name a few of her causes. Assemblyman -Lois and I are still waiting for an apology.

2. To the Crescent Ave neighbors who pressured the city and the Webster Home owner to address property code violations, you were right to express those concerns and it was to Lois' credit that she did not take those complaints directed at her personally. She was not the owner but as the owners realtor, she did everything she could to deal with those concerns. I think we can all agree that the new owners intention to make the Webster Home a single family home is a near miraculous outcome. They will be responsible for code compliance and I believe they have a serious commitment to improvement of their new property and the neighborhood as a whole.

3. Lois was bound, as a realtor, to keep certain real estate information confidential during this lengthy sales process. Some criticized her for not violating her business code of ethics because they did not understand. Others did understand but criticized anyway.

I look forward to meeting the new owners and wish them success as new neighbors. The Crescent Avenue neighborhood has had its ups and downs over the years. The soon to be renamed Catherine Webster Home is an encouraging example of how this neighborhood can be revitalized, much like the property around the corner on East 7th Street renovated by Faith, Bricks and Mortar. Our new neighbors have gone through an arduous process to buy their home and if they are as persistent as Lois in meeting their goal, the Crescent Avenue neighborhood will be moving in a positive direction.