Councilors Cary Africk and Renee Baskerville were the lone dissenters Tuesday night on a measure authorizing Montclair to use eminent domain to acquire an abandoned lot next to the Montclair Police Department for use as a police parking lot.
Deputy mayor Roger Terry quoted the township attorney as saying that the lot’s owner had not been cooperative in responding to the town’s offers to buy the lot, saying that an eminent domain authorization was needed “to wake the owner up.”
Councilor Rich Murnick said he hoped that the threat of eminent domain would be enough to get the owner to begin communicating. Mayor Fried said the parking lot acquisition was part of the town’s 2006 master plan, and had been requested by the police department since 1999. Councilor Nick Lewis sought to reassure the public that authorizing eminent domain involved due process, including multiple appraisals. “People think ‘Big Brother,'” he said. “We’re not talking about running out and beating people over the head.”
But Audrey Hawley, a citizen addressing the council, admonished the council to drop the plan “during this time of economic crisis when you’re trying to round up every dollar that you can.” She added that the police department has functioned without the parking lot for years
Council Cary Africk agreed that times had changed since the 2006 master plan was adopted. “The whole world has changed,” he said.
Indeed the theme of how much things had changed — the fact that Montclair is millions of dollars over budget — was sounded often during the meeting, particularly when the subject of employee salaries came up.
The council voted to postpone adoption of 2009-2011 salary ordinances, even though contracts had already been negotiated, until its next meeting, in hopes that unions will make new concessions.
“We cannot and will not have the highest taxes in New Jersey,” Fried said. “Taxpayers cannot afford the cost of basic services. There’s going to be pain.”
The council, however, did authorize $1.186 million ($1.126 million to be financed by bonds) to implement a quiet zone at Montclair train crossings. The history of the quiet zone and the town’s eight-year 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. whistle ban, which was set to expire in June, is explained here. The quiet zone’s cost is related to capital improvements that make train crossings safe without loud warnings. Improvements include “quad gates” at Grove St. and Bellevue Ave. From the town’s Quiet Zone FAQ’s:
A quad gate is a set of four gates, as opposed to the two gates that are at our crossings now. In a quad gate system, two gates “interlock” on each side so that a vehicle cannot “serpentine” around the gates and cross the tracks when the gates are in the closed position. A median is an 8″ high center divider that extends up to 100 feet away from the tracks. It prevents a vehicle from going into the opposite lane to cross the tracks.
It’s just not right to use “eminent domain” to muscle (Councilor Murnick even calls it a “threat”?) a landowner out of his property simply to make it into a parking lot. It’s not an emergency need for the greater good.
Montclair will now have to spend a ton of taxpayer money on legal fees for an eminent domain legal battle that in every likelyhood will and should fail. The fact that “small” little arrogant politicians feel that they have the power to “take” someone’s property is mind boggling – not to mention scarry as hell. Now a private citizen who legally owns a piece of property is at the mercy of the poor planning of the Town of Montclair and its police force who needs more convenient parking arrangments. Trying to “force” a private citizen to sell their property is about as unAmerican as it gets. This is the danger when small people have big power. Be careful – – they may need parking where your home is……….
I am opposed to the use of eminent domain for this purpose, especially if it will require a ton of taxpayer money to cover legal fees.
If Montclair would steal someone elses property so their PD can park whats next? This is one of the lamest reasons for this use I’ve ever heard.
I still can’t believe what took place in Long Branch where they threw hundreds of long time residents out of their homes and erased an entire community so they can put up some cheesey beachside resort. That case should go into text books concerning government abuse.
Eminent domain for this purpose is wrong and the residents of Montclair should be outraged because some politician with a cockamaimy maybe coming after your property next.
Eminent domain if needed should be used to benefit the entire community not this.
One other thing, that property is now off the tax rolls so montclair loses that revenue.
Wow. This is an abuse of eminent domain. As I understand it, the owner uses the lot for the overflow of cars for his dealership. How does offering him the assessed 300k+ value for his property make up for the lost space he needs for his business. What would be the replacement cost? I can see why he is reluctant to sell, and I can see him having a case for getting more $$$ than the Town initially offered him. Why don’t they do a swap and give him the Orange deck that is not good enough for the police. I’m sort of being fascetious, but not completely. This is pretty appalling, and the legal costs will be pretty high for both sides. What a waste for a parking lot.
The town should not be able to take this guys property, however, the owner should be made to keep up his property to an asthetic minimum. This guys lot is a real eyesore.
Last night’s meeting:
Cary: “STOP SPENDING MONEY! I mean other towns agonize over spending $40,000 and Montclair spends $500,000 or $1,000,000 or whatever and doesn’t blink!”
(jump cut)
Clerk: “all those in favor of spending 1.2 million on the Montclair ‘quiet zone'”
Cary: “aye”
Wow, $1.2M? Seriously?
I know it’s popular to bash NJ Transit because the number of people served is relatively low compared to the money spent, but….
How many people live within a few hundred feet of a railroad crossing and are asleep between 7 PM & 7 AM? 10? 15? 25 people?
How many of those people moved to town before trains existed?
What’s particularly pernicious about this is that Terry suggest that this is just a strong arm tactic rather than a legitimate case of Eminent Domain. In his words, “”to wake the owner up.”
That’s really an abuse power.
Hey Deb!
Do us a favor? Break this into two subjects? One the Quiet Zone, the other the Police Parking lot?
That way we can make progress on the discussions.
Thanks!
Cary
That’s really an abuse power.
How so?
The owner needs to realize that his parking lot will be better used by the police department as a, you know, parking lot.
So Mayor Fried, we can’t even afford “basic services”, yet we have an extra $2M to blow on this?
I’m sure the unions will be more than happy to step up and make financial sacrifices while the town continues to spend, spend, spend on everything else. – Sarcasm off.
‘The council voted to postpone adoption of 2009-2011 salary ordinances, even though contracts had already been negotiated, until its next meeting, in hopes that unions will make new concessions.
“We cannot and will not have the highest taxes in New Jersey,” Fried said. “Taxpayers cannot afford the cost of basic services. There’s going to be pain.”‘
OK I know this is off topic but if you want to talk about WASTE of money… yesterday we got a letter from the Census that said, Dear Resident, next week you will get the Census in the mail!
They sent us a letter, to tell us that in a week, they are sending us another letter.
!!!
How Much of my money did that Waste!? Not to mention the cheesy TV commercial aired during the Super Bowl?
I know that when *I* have no money, I can’t buy anything, plain and simple. If you go to the ATM machine to get $20 and it Doesn’t Exist in your account, then you Don’t Get your $20. What is so hard about this for Big Brother to understand? Stop Spending my Money on Stupid Things!
Meantime Montclair is essentially stealing (for $300K) a person’s private property so that workers don’t have to walk a block and 1/2 to get their cars?
Can someone please reimburse me for the roughly $1,800 I spend per year to park 2 blocks from my place of employment??
Meantime we can spend over $1M on train gates, but my kids’ school is going to be *wrecked*, for want of $90K? Has logic flown out the window here?
Audrey Hawley… admonished the council to drop the plan “during this time of economic crisis when you’re trying to round up every dollar that you can.” She added that the police department has functioned without the parking lot for years.
Dear Audrey, thank you.
“Do us a favor? Break this into two subjects? One the Quiet Zone, the other the Police Parking lot?”
That way we can make progress on the discussions.”
By “progress” he means he wants to criticize possibly spending a million on the police station and not have to defend his vote to spend 1.2 million on the quite zone.
Kay, I made that same rant when that letter came.
“this is a letter to inform you a letter will be coming”
our tax dollars at work.
…the quite quiet zone.
Aside from the issue of eminent domain, which by the way I find appalling in this instance, what is the town doing spending money on non-essential projects at a time like this? What is it going to take to “wake up” the council?
Montclair’s municipal government doesn’t need more property. Police cars should be out on patrol. Staff in the police building needs to be cut. With Montclair’s population going down, we need a municipal council that is smart enough to reduce government, not increase it.
This Roger Terry guy has never seen anything he doesn’t want to buy. We need to get rid of him, fast.
The police currently have parking available nearby. Buying the lot will cost the town and the legal fees to use eminent domain laws will cost the town money.
Not being able to continue having the current quiet zone will actually result in an increase in taxes for most people.
The quiet zone impacts many many many more than the 25 people suggested by Rob. Right now there is a quiet zone and in order to maintain it, new federal laws require upgrades to street crossings in order to not start hearing four loud blasts at every single crossing.Which would start at 5am. Even homes not adjacent to the tracks but a block or more away would hear the 4 blasts so it’s more like several hundred homes, and businesses that would be impacted. So would a number of parks and recreational areas making entire neighborhoods less desireable.
When they all apply for a revaluation based on a 10% – 20% or more decline in the value of their properties (just check the numbers with real estate agent) as a result of no longer living in a quiet zone, the town will lose those annual tax revenues from those properties. The rest of the citizens will pay more annually.
Fiscally, it makes sense to pay once to mitigate a problem that will cost the town more annually in lost tax revenues.
The two issues are separate.
How about we let the owner of the parking lot operate it as a pay for use parking lot. He could give priority to police building occupants if he wanted. Let them pay to park like all the rest of us do.
ROC reminds me of Randy Pausch’s high school football coach, who yelled at him constantly during practice and never seemed to let up. Pausch complained to one of his teammates, who replied, “When they ignore you, it’s even worse,” or something to that effect.
So take heart, Cary.
“This Roger Terry guy has never seen anything he doesn’t want to buy.”
Amen. Terry must be a salesman’s dream at a timeshare pitch.
Keep in mind that the cost of the quiet zone has doubled since it was approved. We hired a consultant who came up with the original estimate for maintaining the quiet zone. If it was my dime, I would have sued the consultant for incompetency. Oh wait, it IS my dime.
Roger Terry is annoying. I recall him stating at a town council meeting where they were debating the need for a community center that he is not that well off. How much will that pension pay him until his death? You’re pretty well off their Terry. Stop wasting my money!
So what will this police parking lot acquisition cost us by the time it is said and done. One million? Two million? Never trust a number issued from a Montclair town council member. Everything always doubles. Can’t wait to see what we will pay for the new town center (upgrade to South Park Street. What was once 500k should go for 1.5 million. Lay off teachers and then spend millions for unnecessary parking lots and streetscapes. This town council is fcucked.
While I am generally against the use of eminent domain for anything other than “blighted” properties, it does seem crazy to spend that much on a parking lot. Has the DeCozen owner noticed the value of commercial property dropping in the area? Maybe he should be grateful anybody is even interested in it.
Regarding the train tracks, it is sad that we need to spend $1m on improvements to the crossings because people can’t obey flashing lights and have to drive around the gates. Et tu, Darwin?
Maybe he should be grateful anybody is even interested in it.
Reminds me of Whitey Bulger’s “offer” to purchase Stippo Rakes’ liquor store in South Boston years ago.
WB: “Sell me that liquor store?”
SR: “No, thank you.”
WB: “Sell me that liquor store.”
SR: “Ummm, no thank you?”
WB: places revolver on table “Sell me that liquor store.”
SR: “Yes Mr. Bulger.”
I started typing a long response.
It’s a waste of time. How’s this instead:
WHAT THE &*&* IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?!?!?!?!?!?
When are they going to stop spending our money? Nope. Let me restate that. When are they going to stop spending the money we don’t even have. $1+ million bond for a quiet zone. Unbelievable. How much of that is for the grade crossings within a few hundred feet of train stations, where the trains will still be required to blow whistles on entering the station anyway.
Absolute idiots.
How many people live within a few hundred feet of a railroad crossing and are asleep between 7 PM & 7 AM? 10? 15? 25 people?
How many of those people moved to town before trains existed?
Jerseygurl has it right. Hundreds of homes are impacted by the loss of the current quiet zone. The train horns are 96 decibels and are blown 4 times at each grade crossing – the horns can be easily heard a 1/4 mile away from the crossings. There are 11 grade crossings in Montclair, so hundreds of families would have to deal with this. Also consider that the last train goes through town at about 1:20am and the first at 5:00am. That leaves only about 3 1/2 hours per night when no horns are blown. As JG said, that creates a strong case for tax revaluation, and the rest of the town would have to pick up that tax burden.
And I don’t buy the “how many of those people moved to town before trains existed” argument. There was no way of foreseeing that the federal government would change the rules on quiet zones and that Montclair would potentially lose the 7pm to 7am quiet zone. No one was complaining about the status quo – it was the fed gov’t that changed this to an all or nothing scenario and set up the new rules.
Unvelievable.
Although I am disappointed that the ultimate cost of the trains crossing upgrades has escalated up from earlier estimates, I do believe that this will ultimately be money well spent. This will be a permanent improvement in the quality of life for much of the Montclair area that is directly adjacent to the train. If you look at a map of Montclair, it is easy to see that a significant amount of residential properties and commercial districts would be affected. When faced with the new Federal regulations, without these changes we would not have been able to preserve the previous 12-hour whistle ban that currently exists. Taking into account the upcoming weekend service that will extend to stops up to Little Falls, that would only compound the issue. While I do understand the comments about folks who chose to live near the tracks should just deal with it, I ultimately agree with those who referred to the potential for negative impacts on property values and ultimately lower tax revenue would have a more adverse effect on the township.
Spicoli and getaclue…
You know $1.2 million is a lot to spend based on arguments rooted in theoreticals… in normal times, nevermind when your town is flat broke.
To argue that the property values are going to be affected in any measurable way… and then to leap even further in saying this would justify reassessment is just a bit too shaky. The homes in Montclair that are near the train stations are valued because they ARE that close to the train and adding a few more train horns to the mix will not drive their value down. That’s just not realistic.
Further, let’s be clear about what the change in the federal regulation means. Right now, Montclair has a quiet zone between 7pm and 7am. The vast majority of the trains in Montclair move through in the hours between 7am and 7pm and blow horns all day long. Currently there are only 5 inbound trains and 8 outbound trains at night and 4 inbound and 2 outbound in the morning that actually observe the whistle ban as they come through during the quiet hours. There are approx 65 trains through Montclair each day and with the exception of these few early morning and late evening trains, they all blow whistles now at grade. So, I don’t see the public clamoring for a solution to this detrimental problem. After 7pm you are getting one train per hour and the last one rolls through slightly after 1am.
We’re probably losing some of these late and early trains with the service cuts now anyway and as much as it annoys many, we’re not likely getting overnight or full weekend service anytime soon.
So train horns don’t seem to spell disaster for property values in Montclair and I don’t hear anyone saying they are having sleepless nights because of train horns. $1.2 million still worth it?
The greatest part of course is that at a grade like Walnut Street the however-many hundred thousand dollar improvement will be built… and then the trains will still have to blow the whistle on approach to the station platform … 100 yards away.
Great investment for a town in a fiscal crisis.
With all due respect for the posters above, and I mean that, I find it crazy that people who buy houses near train tracks expect their complaints about train noise to be taken seriously. I feel for you, but you bought a house near the train tracks knowing what it meant. Were you really expecting the rules to stay the same forever when you bought your house? The argument that the feds changed the rules really doesn’t do it for me. The fed, the state, the town, change rules and laws all the time and we all adapt. Just because the status quo changes doesn’t mean home owners get compensation or special dispensation. Did anyone ever promise these homeowners that the noise levels would remain the same forever? Did you expect that the train schedule would never change? Weekend service has been in the works for years and it’s not been a secret that it was coming.
And forgive the mix of stories and metaphors, the train has really come off the tracks in this country when it comes to eminent domain.
the prof would like to associate himself with fine the comment from his good friend from State Street.
Sorry dxrrxd, but you should speak to a real estate professional who will indeed tell you that areas that are within earshot of whistles (from 7pm to 7am and on weekends once those trains run), would lose 10% – 20% of their value. That loss will have to be made up by the rest of the tax paying population on an annual basis.
The last train at night and the first morning train have not been cut – it’s the ones in the middle of the day that are part of the service cuts. The majority of the trains run at rush hour, much of which is actually covered in the current quiet zone.
The interruption of sleep for homes within up to 1/4 of a mile is not just an annoyance, it’s a health risk which is one of the primary reasons property values would go down if horns starting blasting at 4 times crossings at 1am (right now there are NO horns at all required at crossings during the quiet zone).
So this is a one time expense to deal with a problem that in the long run will cost much more if it is ignored.
A $million-two for quiet zones? What’s the point? If a driver “serpentines” around the VERY VISIBLE barriers we already have at grade crossings – and gets hit by a train – that’s the drivers problem; he/she made a bad (and illegal) choice. Why should this cost me money? Perhaps we should be expected to take personal responsibility for our actions – break the law….pay the price!
Stop wasting my money!
I hear all the homes on Watchung, Grove, Valley, Ridgewood and Broad St. are working to get the County to pay up because of all the “noise” coming from those busy streets.
And the homes around Edgemont park are freaking out over the geese poop.
They want cash too.
So do the homes around the football field, but they only want to be paid on Saturdays during the Fall.
please explain how the noise is a health risk. How close are you to the train’s horn?
So just so I understand, Prof, SSP et al; you see no negative impact to the Township and it’s residents if trains were required to use their horn 4x at each crossing, up to 20 hours and 7 days a week?
“After 7pm you are getting one train per hour and the last one rolls through slightly after 1am.”
Dxrrxd-this shows you know nothing about the trains. Theres a Hoboken and a Manhattan direct each way an hour. That 4 trains, not one.
State Street-so if someone sells his house to a Metal head and the new guy blasts his music all night, by your logic, the neighbor should have forseen this right?
If your such a great prognosticator, then you must have the stock market cornered.
I don’t think anybody said there would be no negative impact – just that spending $1.2M on this won’t yield a net positive.
At least that’s what I’m saying.
I’m honestly not certain about whether or not I support the quiet zone, but I’m more pissed that the price doubled and no one ever seems to care about it when it does.
As for buying by the tracks, you would hope that a person making the single largest purchase in their lifetime would do some research prior. NJTransit could sell the right of way to a freight operator that decides to haul radioactive waste through your backyard and you have absolutely no say in the matter.
The quiet zone primarily benefits those that live near the tracks. They should have to pay for it. This is really not a case of for the public good, even though it is being promoted that way. It’s a case of for the public who were too stupid to understand the implications of purchasing a home near a railroad right of way and asking the smarter ones who paid more for their property further away from the tracks to bail their dumb-asses out.
Here is my post from July 17th 2008:
“I am not as big a fan of the quiet zone as most here are. We are only one of two towns in Jersey who either have or are applying for quiet zone status. The other town being haughty Westfield. Once can not control taxes by spending 700+K on a mostly frivolous spend. Property values maintained, I hardly agree. The rumble of the diesel engines will not be eliminated nor will the impending increase in rail traffic going forward. When a homeowner sells their home adjacent to the tracks, are they going to tell the potential buyer that their won’t be train whistles, but you’ll still feel the rumble? Good luck with that argument. Well anyhow, I’m not sure how your consultant came up with such a low cost to provide the necessary upgrades at the crossings to pass the fed regs on establishing a quiet zone. I went to the federal site where you can create your own estimate and my numbers were closer to 1.5 to 2 million. I hope this consultant knows what he’s doing. When the cost comes out to 1.5 million, will you still agree that it is a worthwhile spend? When the final cost comes in, I’ll be sure to attend the council meeting so I can say, “I told ya so!”
So with that said, I already attended a recent town council meeting and stated, “I told ya so!”
Rob – please elaborate, how do you quantify that this will not yield a net positive? Based on what??? If you capitalize the one time cost ($1.2 mil + interest) over the life of the whistle ban (lets call it 25 years, could be more or less) then what is the cost per year? I’ll estimate $60,000 per year. If using the assumptions of 5- 10% lower property values to those properties that back up the the tracks (hundreds) and 10-20% for those directly on the tracks (50-100 homes) then it is easy to see that this probably would yield a “net benefit”, or at least break-even. Yes these are just back of the envelope assumptions I will throw out there, but the bottom line is that if the Township were to implement anything resembling a new limited quiet zone after the June deadline established by the Feds, then the cost would be much more, and more timely to implement.
Getaclue,
You need to get a clue about how property taxes work. The town doesn’t lose any revenue with or without a quiet zone extension. They will simply raise everyone’s property taxes to make up the difference. The only loss is the potential property value (not the taxes) of the properties adjacent to the tracks. Keep in mind, those buyers already paid less for their homes than their neighbors homes located farther away from the tracks when they originally purchased these homes.
You ought to reuse your envelope for something more practical, like sending your neighbors a thank you note for graciously making up for your financial loss due to the lack of planning when purchasing your home.
Stuw, I don’t live that near the train, but I still don’t want to hear the horns blaring through town on the weekends when I am out and about. I benefit from the train to commute, but chose to live in Montclair to find some sense of tranquil suburban life. I understand how taxes work, and a less desirable town will create a tax revenue shortfall for everyone and you underscore my point that the tax burden will shift to ALL residents, and perhaps even more unfairly then the amount I estimate.
Maybe Montclair should put up giant Jersey barrier walls on either side of the tracks.
Jerseygurl,
“you should speak to a real estate professional who will indeed tell you that areas that are within earshot of whistles (from 7pm to 7am and on weekends once those trains run), would lose 10% – 20% of their value.”
You’re joking right? Who are these “real estate professionals?” Those are based on what factual evidence? This is how you respond to an argument based in fact?
I’d also clarify that we are unlikely to be getting any 7pm-7am trains on weekends so there would be no change in the number of train whistles from the status quo with the addition of weekend trains. The weekend service will be daytime service. Right now, as I’ve pointed out numerous times, the trains are required to whistle during the day. They also will still be required to whistle at the station platforms.
For the record my home is about 75 yards from the tracks and one of the stations. So bring on your 10-20% reduction my home value from the learned real estate professionals and tell the town council to stop spending money so I can afford the $#*$#8ing property tax bill that will allow me to KEEP my home and not sell it.
First of all, it’s not a “bail out”, it’s a one time cost to mitigate a problem that impacts a large portion of two town wards that is the result of new federal regulations and will ultimately cost the town in lost tax revenues if not dealt with.
It’s a shame you feel the need to call your fellow citizens stupid, and dumb asses. Many town problems arise that by your standards would only impact a small portion of residents should be ignored, even if in actuality they impact us all in some way. By your logic, those of us who were not stupid enough to have kids should not have to pay for public schools ? Or those of us who were not stupid enough to live near Edgemont Park knew that goose poop would be a health issue? Or those of us weren’t stupid enough to buy near Brookdale Park knew there would be a dog park one day in the future? How about when one of the county roads needs to be widened – all those stupid people living on Valley or Watchung deserve to lose curbfront property because they should have known better?
And if NJT decided to transport radioactive waste from Hacketstown to Hoboken, there would be enough opposition from elected officials and citizens nowhere near the tracks to put a stop to it. Even though they would only be protecting the dumb asses within a block or two of tracks.
jimmy229oz,
https://www.njtransit.com/pdf/rail/r0030.pdf
There are 4 inbound and 7 outbound trains total post 7pm. If you have another source that says there are 4 per hour, I’d love to find all this extra service!
I live about a stones throw from the tracks so I think I also have a good idea from daily experience.
I’m not sure why I’m still arguing this point. The vote is over. Cluelessness carries on in Montclair.
JG, I doubt very much that within earshot will lose you 10% to 20%. The folks right on the tracks may get something like that, but that’s a big range, and they will have to fight to get their assessment changed. It’s not a given. It’s hard to quantify. Those thinking there will be a loss of tax revenue for the town are assuming that assessments will change. I don’t see every resident “within earshot” filing appeals, and I don’t see everyone who does being successful. So it’s debatable if any loss in value will be borne by all the town’s residents, or by the homeowner when they sell. And even then it will be hard to separate any loss from the natural appreciation in value over time that comes with homes in MTC.
getaclue, no one said their would be no impact, the question is who bears the burden. And I’m not saying an effort should not be made to lessen the impact of the noise, but in my eyes $1m plus is way too much for all taxpayers to bear. The needs of the few do not outweigh the needs of the many.
jimmy, not sure where to go with your interesting logic, but let’s try this…If you move in knowing that Eddie Van Halen lives next door, and expect him to only play his jams from 7am to 7pm forever because that’s what he has been doing, you’re being hopeful, if not naive. The train tracks didn’t just move in. They have been there, they will be there, the schedules will change, more and less trains will run, etc. Who knows, in the future newer trains may move even quieter and maybe they’ll devise a system that does not require loud horns. If that happens, will the homeowners give back the increased value of their property? Do you think they would allow their assessments to increase without a fight? No, they would get the windfall until the town reassesses their property. So, in the reverse, the effected residents should do what they need to do to change their assessment, not expect the town to fix the problem for them.
“will ultimately cost the town in lost tax revenues if not dealt with.”
NO IT WILL NOT!!!!!!!!
(Portion of comment removed by the editors.)
House (A): Next to track pays $9 in taxes
House (B): Next to track pays $10 in taxes
Total tax revenue to town = $19.
After realtor promised property value drop occurs:
House (A): Next to track pays $8 in taxes (after appeal)
House (B): Next to track pays $10 in taxes
Total tax revenue would appear to be $18, but here is what happens. Town must maintain their tax revenue so they raise both of our taxes by 50 cents.
House (A): Pays $8.50
House (B): Pays $10.50
Town still takes in $19!!!
You paid less for your home when you bought it knowing that it was cheaper due to proximity to the tracks. Now you are asking your neighbors to pay to maintain your property values. I’ve heard the argument before. If we don’t do this, everyone’s taxes will increase. Well guess what? Our taxes will go up either way, regardless of it being due to paying for the crossing upgrades or making up the difference in your lower property value.
But go on and tell me something that I don’t know my friendly neighbor.
By the way…the whole issue is moot. When the original $680,000 was approved, they will never abandon it.
I spoke loudly about it back in 2008. I also write letters to the Montclair Times and air my opinions at town council meetings. I do not tone the message down. It matters little either way. They just keep on spending. Has there been any discussions as to when they pull the plug the police parking lot. Most likely not. Even if the legal costs of fighting for it through eminent domain triples its price. This is how it is done in Montclair. It’s just a town that can’t say no.
“will ultimately cost the town in lost tax revenues if not dealt with” – that is not a given and if it does happen any estimate about the hit the town will take in revenue at this point is a guess.
“By your logic, those of us who were not stupid enough to have kids should not have to pay for public schools?” – ??? you knew the rules when you moved in. You live here, you pay taxes.
“Or those of us who were not stupid enough to live near Edgemont Park knew that goose poop would be a health issue?” is this effecting property values and is the town compensating residents who live nearby?
“Or those of us weren’t stupid enough to buy near Brookdale Park knew there would be a dog park one day in the future?” Same as above. The folks near the dog park can file an appeal of their assessment. As far as I’m concerned all of the moving of the dog park is nuts.
“How about when one of the county roads needs to be widened – all those stupid people living on Valley or Watchung deserve to lose curbfront property because they should have known better?” in this case there may be some compensation, but again, they would have to work to get their assessment changed, just like the folks on the tracks should.
There will be no loss of revenues either way. It amazes me how few people here understand property taxes and their impact on town revenue. The only way the town loses revenue is if the town council lowers their budgets. There could be one home left in Montclair and no commercial ratables. If the budget is 400 million, then that single homeowner will be responsible to pay for it. Even if his house is worth one shiny penny.
House (A): Pays $8.50
House (B): Pays $10.50
Town still takes in $19!!!
Well, thats kind of how it works. Before that happens, the town bonds the underage and then pays interest on it over time. Then, when it gets around to it, the rates are raised for everyone as you said.
“There are 4 inbound and 7 outbound trains total post 7pm. If you have another source that says there are 4 per hour, I’d love to find all this extra service!
I live about a stones throw from the tracks so I think I also have a good idea from daily experience.”
Interesting. Im holding the latest printed schedule (11/8/09) in my hand and there are 12 outbounds and 7 inbounds every day after 7pm. So 19 total trains divided by 6 hours 7p-1a)=3.17 trains. So I was wrong when I said 4. Sorry smarty pants.
please, thats S****y P***s.
Its the rules, or some may go and cry.
SSP – by your logic, everyone who bought a house in Montclair did so with the knowledge that taxes are high. To paraphrase your position, “Were you really expecting your taxes to stay the same when you bought your house?. The argument that you don’t like this particular expense just because it does not benefit you doesn’t do it for me.”
Memories are a bit short in this town. The biggest cause of increased train volume and train noise – the introduction of mid-town direct service – was also a huge net benefit for the entire town. It is widely accepted that mid-town direct service had an immediate and large impact on real estate values in Montclair, benefits that are measured in the tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars for most home owners. Now there is a backlash over a one-time expense of approximately $100 per house to control the noise? There seems to be a lack of perspective on this issue, but it’s a moot point.
OK
Here’s where we are on this thread, which was originally about 1. The Police Parking Lot and 2. The Quiet Zone.
Item #2 passed, last night. Done. Gone. We can talk about it but it’s history.
Item #1 is about to get going. The $500,000 for the lot could very well lead to the $1MM for the third floor refurbishing, the who knows how much for the structural repairs, etc.
There is also talk of making the parking lot for the police a parking DECK for the police.
So, which should we discuss? Something where we can effect change, or something that already happened?
Well, there’s the subject at hand and then who’s speaking.
If someone says “With all the talk of financial “disaster,” spending should be stopped.” just before voting to add 1.2 million to the town’s debt, there is an issue of credibility.
Because if it’s ok to borrow 1.2 million in our current fiscal distress for less noise, why isn’t it worth a million for a better police station; or for a pedestrian mall?
Is it a budget crisis or isn’t it Cary?
Cary, at this time, in our town, in this economy, they are about the same thing – pissing away money that we don’t have.
Jerseygurl, it seems to me that the property value of those homes are already depressed becauser of their proximity to the tracks. That is why those home owners could afford those houses. I don’t see how quiet zones will materially affect the values.
Besides, I live nowhere the tracks and the value of my house has gone down 10-20%.
Getaclue, you should. You can’t capitalize the cost over 25 years just because that is the life of the ban but over the useful life of the equipment you install, which could be as little as 5 years. You also can’t capitalize the interest. That is a period expense (i.e., you expense it when you spend it).
Cary,
Would it be possible in the future to include the estimated annual dollar assessment per household & duration when discussing (and when Council votes) of each capital expenditure?
Can the Joint Capital Comm also publish a list of above (plus current), by category, with projects over $1MM as line items, of all capital debt-both municipal & schools?
I absolutely abhor eminent domain. It is one of the most frighteningly and easily misused laws on the books. to clean someone’s property as imminent to “wake them up” is a clear bully tactic in the gross misuse of the law. If someone owns a property that you want but they do not wish to sell to you, and then to out right to steal it from them masquerading behind “eminent domain” it’s just — it’s frightening to think that such a person, or group of people, could be in such a position of power, everything but rest thing for any of us to do is to send a letter expressing ourselves to our local representatives who voted upon and allowed such a measure to be taken. A person’s private property is a person’s private property no matter what state it is in. I have seen the mentioned eyesore parking lot and while I do not find it pleasant to look at and while I understand it could make a good parking lot for the police station, I respect and support a person’s right to keep their private property if they do not wish to sell it.
— End of rant —
Yup, in this case, that’s what it amounts to. Bullying.
“A person’s private property is a person’s private property no matter what state it is in”
I happen to disagree with this to an extent. While I do not support eminant domain, there has to be a standard that is upheld in the commununity.
Otherwise, no one would need to make repairs to their house, mow their lawn or fix their sidewalk. They could leave rusting washing machines in their yard. There has to be minimum guidelines so residents know ho to treat their neighbors in a way that doesnt bring down property values.
When property looks like it is abandoned, it is treated as such by the community. Its hard enough to get residents of this town to refrain from throwing trash in your maintained yard. Let the maintenance go and see how much harder it gets.
That said, the town should not take this property. The owner needs to clean it up though. Its an atrocious wreck.
A standard of what Jimmy, beauty? Aesthetics? I agree it’s an ugly lot, but its such a funny notion that one can legislate some standard of “beauty”.
If he let the lot go feral, removed the pavement and let it fill in with weeds, I’d think it was an eyesore, but I’m sure lots of people would think the lot “going back to nature” was beautiful.
Sorry, Jimmy. that’s life. There’s beauty and ugliness, fashionably dressed people and slobs, nice looking empty lots and ugly ones.
Scrap the Master Plan…its obviously become totally obsolete and un implementable due to current changes in economy and need for self sustainability of any project from now on. Its seems to be the reason why old ideas in the wrong place and the wrong time are just pushed through into being (like the New Washington School) without respect to people or current realities. The Master Plan seems to have been created for a vision of Montclair that has since failed over time.
“If he let the lot go feral, removed the pavement and let it fill in with weeds, I’d think it was an eyesore”
Roc, have you been by there? He did and it is.
not recently. I’m going buy the photo which looks paved or at least “graveled” and I don’t see a lot of weeds. I have no doubt it’s an ugly lot. And slovenly people ride the subway, that’s life jimmy.
So ROC, if your neighbor totally disregarded his property to your detriment, you would say oh well?
Somehow I doubt that.
“I’m going buy the photo which looks paved or at least “graveled””
The picture is taken in winter, hence it cant be weed choked.
unless there was some code violation, what could I do other than politely ask jimmy. I certainly couldn’t take the property by eminent domain, say.
you could also call the town and have them fine the person. here’s a little clip from the township codes, it’s pretty subjective, especially when it comes to “morals”.
Declaration of policy. It is hereby declared that there exist in the Township of Montclair structures used for commercial, business, industrial and nonresidential purposes which are or may become in the future substandard with respect to structure, equipment or maintenance, and, further, that such conditions, including but not limited to structural deterioration, lack of maintenance and appearance of exterior of premises, infestation, lack of essential heating, plumbing, storage or refrigeration equipment, lack of maintenance or upkeep of essential utilities and facilities, existence of fire hazards. inadequate provisions for light and air, and unsanitary conditions, constitute a menace to the health, safety, morals, welfare and reasonable comfort of the citizens and inhabitants of the Township of Montclair. It is further declared that by reason of a lack of maintenance and progressive deterioration, certain properties have the further effect of causing blight and initiating slums; that if the same are not curtailed or removed, such conditions may grow and spread and necessitate in time the expenditure of large amounts of public funds to correct and eliminate the same, and that by the adoption of the regulations and restrictions herein contained, slums and blight may be prevented and neighborhood and property values may be maintained and upgraded, nonresidential uses and neighborhoods may be better maintained and the public health, safety and welfare protected and fostered.
My neighbor Gurl? That quote you have there is for commercial property only.
there is also nothing about fines in that quote, gurl.
Actually that whole thing basically says “derelict commercial property sucks” It does’ t really offer up a remedy. Sounds like a preamble to the commercial codes or some-such. Only the actual codes would be actionable.
“unless there was some code violation”
Thats just it. There are those codes for homes, to keep a minimum standard of care.
When property looks like it is abandoned, it is treated as such by the community.
I dont condone eminant domain, but in this case, the owner cant act like they have done everything they can, as they havent done the first thing.