The Hoboken Tax Reform Coalition
Hoboken Revolt Going Back To It's Core Mission-The Budget
Hoboken Tax Reform Coalition is a great name. I was wondering when this group was going to go back to it's core foundation and start discussing the budget and how to reduce it by category. These are the types of entries I would come to expect of a website of this name.
If I was a New Hoboken resident and stumbled upon this site, I would think they would want to see active conversation in regard to the budget.
Would it be possible to take portions of the budget and open them up for discussion?
I would also be interested in discussing ways to enhance our budget and bring income producing ideas and concepts to the table to increase the city's budget.
With all the brain power that goes to this website, shouldn't we attempt to solve problems and create solutions?
Just a thought. We could create a master list of issues, ideas and pro-active solutions that are non-political and help the city by delivering our solutions.
Help Hoboken.
David A. Liebler
Tags: 2011, budget, city, council, dawn, hoboken, mayor, zimmer
Views: 0
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by scott m siegel on
-
David:
1) Knowing the surplus is important. While you may trust our auditor it seems that our newest council member (who you supported) and our soon to be new Council President do not. They both have stated that it is 2X as big as reality.
2) The rating agencies believe that a municipality should have 5-10% of budget in reserve. Do you concur? If 5% is good for an "A" rating and 10% for "AA", which would you choose?
3) Is financing our debt one year at a time prudent or risky?
4) The Zimmer administration/council majority have cut (or will by 12/2) $4.25mm from a $60mm municipal levy. The minority, $250m (I'm splitting the HHA agreement). Who has done a better job in reducing our municipal tax rate? The total annualized cut is equal to 7.25%. Is that bad, okay or great?
5) The auditor says we should reserve $8.5mm for anticipated 2011 expense increases? Do you agree?
6) If so, how much of the $10mm surplus should be returned? Or do you keep the tax rate higher instead?
-
Permalink Reply by David A. Liebler on -
Scott, when you say " You Supported" it has such a tone to it. I did not have the time. EatDrinkHoboken.com VIP Card, Restaurant Week, Halloween activities and the event that you are talking about (I Think) was the Hoboken Volunteers-Ocktoberfest at the Elks Club to support Project Play and The Homeless Shelter....then Yes, I supported Tim and the Hoboken Volunteers.
On a campaign level, I was not involved. Tim is a good friend and I know he is taking the city council position that he was elected to very serious and wants to do good things for the 4th ward and Hoboken.
Scott, your constant attacks on the issues are overwhelming......Consider this for a moment....my blog entry said, "We should review sections of the budget-one at a time-to voice opinion-to help make recommendations. That was it!
Stick to the issue and stop banging away.....who would want to post a blog if they are constantly beaten down.
When did this website become the Scott Siegal show?
Relax buddy!
scott m siegel said:David:
1) Knowing the surplus is important. While you may trust our auditor it seems that our newest council member (who you supported) and our soon to be new Council President do not. They both have stated that it is 2X as big as reality.
2) The rating agencies believe that a municipality should have 5-10% of budget in reserve. Do you concur? If 5% is good for an "A" rating and 10% for "AA", which would you choose?
3) Is financing our debt one year at a time prudent or risky?
4) The Zimmer administration/council majority have cut (or will by 12/2) $4.25mm from a $60mm municipal levy. The minority, $250m (I'm splitting the HHA agreement). Who has done a better job in reducing our municipal tax rate? The total annualized cut is equal to 7.25%. Is that bad, okay or great?
5) The auditor says we should reserve $8.5mm for anticipated 2011 expense increases? Do you agree?
6) If so, how much of the $10mm surplus should be returned? Or do you keep the tax rate higher instead?
-
-
David please answer the questions instead of deflecting. In Hoboken we have 2 factions. One I believe is fiscally responsible, one is not. The questions I asked will give our readers a good sense on where you stand on the issues and whether or not your side agrees with you, since that is the purpose of your post, isn't it?
-
Permalink Reply by David A. Liebler on
-
I will wait to see a real conversation about the budget specifics, broken out for conversation by HobokenRevolt.com not super blogger Steven Siegel. Saying Hoboken is broken out into two fractions is exactly the problem. There were only 11-12,000 voters out of est. 45,000. That is 20-25% of the Hoboken population. Whether you voted for Mayor Zimmer or you did not does make up 2 fractions and I understand that, but keep in mind there are many other people.
Old Hoboken, New Hoboken, The Seniors and Affordable Housing and the Housing Authority are the four main target audiences that people mention in Hoboken. I am sure there are more. Like the New Hoboken non-voter who all they see if people bashing one another. It is actually sad. It's one of the reasons why New people do not want to get involved.
Less anger and more productivity would make Hoboken a better place.
David
scott m siegel said:David please answer the questions instead of deflecting. In Hoboken we have 2 factions. One I believe is fiscally responsible, one is not. The questions I asked will give our readers a good sense on where you stand on the issues and whether or not your side agrees with you, since that is the purpose of your post, isn't it?
-
-
David no anger. Stick to the issues. You wanted a conversation and I posed what I think are good questions. Why not just answer them?
-
Permalink Reply by David A. Liebler on
-
It was not the format that I was looking for. I was trying to open up dialogue between the hobokenrevolt community.
I was not attempting to get into a Scott Siegel debate on your issues. Stop always trying to call everyone out on Your issues and Stop demanding what you will never get.
Let's be civil. Let's bring up one part of the budget to discuss.
Someone could cut and paste a portion and we can discuss.
Make recommendations. Be constructive. Argue if we like. Come to mutually agreed upon resolutions, with comments and suggestions.
First we decide on a list to discuss each week.
Professional.
David
scott m siegel said:David no anger. Stick to the issues. You wanted a conversation and I posed what I think are good questions. Why not just answer them?
-
Permalink Reply by FAP on -
Scott stop asking David questions! David came here to start a dialogue not to have some sort of back and forth on the issues he brings up.
:)
-
Permalink Reply by David A. Liebler on
-
FAP if you think this is constructive, I gotta say.....it's not.
I was doing something constructive with my blog post, something WE could ALL discuss.
Don't you think that would be better, then a one on one debate?
I wasn't looking for a debate, but a conversation.
FAP said:Scott stop asking David questions! David came here to start a dialogue not to have some sort of back and forth on the issues he brings up.
:)
-
Permalink Reply by FAP on
-
Constructive isn't hey you guys should do some work and I'll watch. Constructive is digging into the details and lending a hand. Scott asked you very fair questions on a topic you brought up. If you can't have a dialogue on the topic you bring up what are people going to talk to you about?
Dave, if you want to be constructive start by addressing Scott's questions. His questions go to the very heart of how the budget works and what could be reasonable expectations for a good budget outcome.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Kurta on -
Settle down, all of you, lest you feel my wrath.
Now, we we were saying?
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Kurta on
-
[Though lacking the customary smiley face, the prior post was written with humorous intent. FYI, as they say]
.
-
Permalink Reply by InfotainMe on
-
David A. Liebler said:Scott I respect the fact that you are as aware of the topics as anyone and I am impressed that you go to all the meetings and blog in your name, but when my comments are about something completely different and you make it into something else..I have no time for that.
Stick with one issue at a time. There is enough press and blogging already about this issue that it doesn't need to be brought up at every chance.
There are other issues and one has nothing to do with the other.
Stay on topic!
scott m siegel said:Potential voter fraud which threatens the sanctity of our voting system is also important isn't it?
David, it's completely artificial to decouple the issues of the actual size of the surplus and vote-buying.
If 2 of a 5 person majority are loudly and consistently lying about the size of the surplus, that's a major problem. Lies become truth through repetition. If citywide elections begin with a +400 bought-vote lead for the chief sponsors of that lie, this city is headed over a cliff.
Until the person - who was just revealed to have sidestepped regulations to donate $13,000 to the person whose campaign is under state AG investigation for election fraud - publicly acknowledges what the true financial circumstances of the city are, we live in real peril.
And there is no more appropriate subject for a website with a primary focus on tax reform.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2012 Created by Administrator.
Powered by
