Things are getting interesting

Just when it seemed that a consensus had built for increased development to boost ratables and help ease the homeowner tax burden, a group calling itself the Teaneck Coalition for Community Preservation has burst onto the scene to raise community awareness of three large scale projects.

To be fair, this opposition is not of the simple NIMBY variety. A level-headed flyer circulated recently in certain neighborhoods raises a number of important questions about a proposed residential development on the site of an old soap factory near Herrick Park and urges residents to attend the Planning Board meeting on August 10 to voice their concerns.

One of those questions the TCCP raises stands out as perhaps the most important of all- "Will this development cost the township more than it will yield in taxes?" Given that a private entity is seeking government action to re-zone an area for its benefit, it is certainly crucial that the Township not take this step in order to appear pro-development and inadvertently disadvantage Teaneck's taxpayers.

The question is, if it can be proven that this and other development projects provide a net economic benefit to Teaneck while complying with the dictates of the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Adjustment, will the TCCP drop its opposition, or is the TCCP really just an angry group of neighbors in disguise? All of Teaneck is watching.

Resolution confusion

"I don't understand why anyone would reject what I consider a benign resolution condemning the mailings of unsigned letter and character assassination." -Councilwoman Jacqueline Kates, as quoted in Suburbanite, July 26, 2006

Here's why a majority of the Council declined to pass a seemingly harmless resolution condemning illegal campaign tactics. It also happens to be the reason why the previous Council did not consent to a resolution protesting the actions of the Port Authority Police when they allegedly detained Teaneck residents inappropriately earlier this year. And it goes a long way towards explaining why certain Council members will never bend to the will of the Teaneck Peace & Justice Coalition and endorse signing the Council's name on an anti-USA Patriot Act resolution, too.

The role of the Teaneck Township Council is not to right all of the world's wrongs. The role of the Teaneck Township Council is to govern Teaneck. No member of the Council condones illegal campaign tactics. But the Council does not need to pass a resolution to prove it. Councilman Gussen recognized this when he stated that the resolution, as uncontroversial as it may have been, was "a diversion from the clear goals that we have." The last thing we need is a municipal government distracted by non-binding resolutions. We have real issues to tackle.

Spare us

Talk about gratuitous- in the cover article of this week's Suburbanite, Howard Prosnitz goes out of his way to point out that "all three Orthodox Jews" voted against a resolution condemning illegal campaign tactics at a July 18th work session while "the council's three female members . . . voted to adopt the resolution." I wonder if future articles will supply the breakdown by height, eye color, and sexual preference.

A FAB Council meeting

Tuesday's Township Council meeting contained an interesting debate on what one might assume to be a rather dry topic. Resolution II on the meeting agenda sought to authorize the creation of an Advisory Board on Finance (aka Financial Advisory Board or FAB), comprising representatives from the Council and the Board of Education as well as residents appointed by those two bodies, whose responsibilities would include reviewing proposed budgets, considering opportunities for shared services, and "[exploring] opportunities for cost savings." The resolution was ultimately approved by five of the six Council members present (with former Mayor Jacqueline Kates the lone dissenter), but not before a relatively rare public debate among Council members that may have afforded Teaneck residents a glance at what goes on when members meet behind closed doors. If the Council can conduct all its business at the same high level displayed on Tuesday, with both pro and con sides advancing well thought out arguments while displaying both great conviction and great civility, Teaneck will be in very good hands.

Given the dozen or so advisory boards and commissions that the Council has created over the years, one might not expect the addition of another to ruffle too many feathers. However, Teaneck Board of Education President Judith McKay spoke out against the resolution as proposed, opining that creating an official body to look over the shoulder of the elected officials who bear the responsibility for prudently formulating school budgets would be inappropriate. While the Council may choose to authorize the FAB to assist it in reviewing a school budget in the event one is defeated and then sent to the Council, McKay felt there was no reason to introduce the group into the BoE's process, though the BoE would cooperate and supply whatever documentation were requested of it. Kates took up this argument when it came time for the Council to discuss the resolution, pointing out that as it stands now, "any citizen can review the budget," and therefore passing a resolution that invites the BoE to submit to this extra layer of oversight was not justified.

However, Councilman Gussen, with support from Mayor Katz, who wholeheartedly endorsed the idea of having a "fresh set of eyes" scrutinizing spending of taxpayer funds in the interests of fiscal responsibility, resolutely defended the resolution, pointing out the importance of having a specialized group with particular expertise combing through budgets and advising decision makers. Other new members of the Council, clearly eager to start making good on campaign promises to an electorate fixated on taxes and spending, threw their support behind the resolution, noting that it was a key recommendation of a task force on taxes and Teaneck's visioning project (as resident Alan Sohn mentioned in the public comment period). The fact that the FAB's recommendations, like those of other advisory boards, would not be binding on elected officials probably smoothed the way for passage of the resolution as well. What could be more appealing than a no cost way to demonstrate the Council's commitment to using resources wisely?

As this Council gets down to business, residents can be encouraged by the commitment councilmembers are showing to faithful stewardship of taxpayer funds. They can be equally encouraged by the thoughtful way in which councilmembers are approaching their responsibilities in pursuit of that ideal.

Note: you can read more about this issue here.

Strange bedfellows and ulterior motives

An article in today's Record purports to unmask the donors behind E3 ("Excellent Education for Everyone"), a New Jersey organization known for its support of school choice. The organization itself claims to make no effort to conceal its sources of funding, and it probably would not surprise anybody that many of the organization's backers are aligned with the right wing. What might be surprising, however, is the fact that many decidedly non-right wing individuals and organizations have lined up behind E3 in its push for reform of the educational system through competition and school choice.

The fact that diverse groups have seen fit to join together to question the status quo has, naturally, infuriated the New Jersey Education Association, which is locked in an aggressive propaganda battle with E3. In fact, reading between the lines of the Record article, it seems that some of the facts about E3's links to the Right came from sources within the NJEA, whose website, according to the Record article, labels E3 a “front group … backed by right-wing money.” It is hard not to laugh at this sort of rhetoric given that the NJEA is itself a front group backed by left-wing teachers’ union money. On the issue of credibility, or lack thereof, it appears that the two sides are on roughly equal footing.

The real question, of course, is not one of motives, but of actual problems and solutions. Here, too, there is plenty of room for disagreement, due at least in part to the standards of research in the social sciences. That is how E3 and the NJEA can differ so markedly over whether school choice improves educational outcomes. It seems that both sides in the debate would benefit from reading Jay P. Greene’s book, Education Myths, which injects a dose of serious statistical analysis and logical thought into a complicated discussion. While the preponderance of the evidence may point toward some of the diagnoses proffered by E3, we need not feel constrained to follow its policy prescriptions. But if we truly want what is best for New Jersey, we ought not deliberately obfuscate the issues, as the NJEA appears to be doing to preserve its own pecuniary interests.

Where do we sign?

Bloomberg reports on a tantalizing proposal from Governor Corzine that would award funding to municipalities that reduce property taxes. With details sketchy at this point, it is hard to judge whether the plan to borrow against revenues from the state sales tax increase makes any sense whatsoever or whether it has a chance of ever being implemented. But it would certainly be welcome help after years of declining state contributions to local governments.

One wonders whether Teaneck is set up to compete for these state grants, if they become a reality. The flip side of the relative purity and civility of our non-partisan local government is that we lack natural allies on the regional and state levels. State Sen. Weinberg has certainly demonstrated her loyalty to Teaneck in the past, but one wonders whether Teaneck could come out a winner in a mad scramble for cash given the state of New Jersey politics today.

Of course, in theory, the Corzine plan is supposed to be reward those towns that take steps to merit the aid from Trenton, which raises a different question. Can a new and relatively inexperienced Council push through the measures necessary to qualify for the grants?

Let's hope Teaneck's government would be able to mobilize itself to grab the carrot before we get whacked again with the stick.

No quick fix

The truly frustrating thing about the situation described in the Bergen Record's special report on the high cost of public sector employees is that it is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Most informed citizens were already aware that serving as a teacher or police officer is not without its perks. Some might even have made their peace with the fact that they are constantly asked to dig deeper into their pockets to support the next pay or benefit increase for someone whose compensation already grows more rapidly than theirs does. What they might not know is how it got that way.

The writers at the Bergen Record have done a good job exposing the inner workings of a system permeated by union influence in which the individual taxpayer rarely gets a fair shake. As the problem is structural, the only real solutions are long term ones that involve a total overhaul of the system. And we know who will standing there to block that.

Painful truths

The Record's Mike Kelly has a striking take on the tragic shooting death of young Ricky Lee Smith. Kelly notes the difficulties Teaneck police detectives are having in locating eyewitnesses to the events that transpired early Sunday morning and wonders why nobody alerted law enforcement officials ahead of time that gang members were expected at the gathering. Despite the fact that warnings had allegedly circulated among partygoers to be wary of the hardened gang members who would be in attendance, the TPD received no advance notification of the potential for violence to erupt.

Kelly presents a number of plausible explanations for the lack of communication between residents and the authorities, including one that is rather distressing, coming as it does from the author of Color Lines, in which Kelly chronicled the turbulent aftermath of the shooting death of another teenager in Teaneck (that of Phillip Pannell in 1990). "The outright mistrust of police in far too many black neighborhoods" could be to blame for the fact that nobody got in touch with the police, he suggests.

If that was indeed the case, then the recent labor strife between unionized officers and management is far from the most serious issue facing the Township and its uniformed personnel. The real concern is that we might not have not come all that far over the past sixteen years, despite all the civilian boards, community policing programs, diversity initiatives, and other measures that have been taken to repair relations between Teaneck police and the community. We'd all be wise to heed Kelly's admonishments and work hard to put aside our differences when a serious issue arises, if for no other reason than the safety and welfare of our children.

Sensationalism at the Suburbanite

Was it just an attempt to spice up a slow summer news week, or is there a really a risk that "rents may skyrocket," as the front page headline of the July 5th edition of the Suburbanite speculates?

The sum total of the evidence for an impending jump in Teaneck rents appears to be the fact that new Council member Michael Kevie Feit refused comment on the issues of rent control and vacancy decontrol when questioned by reporter Howard Prosnitz on June 27. Prosnitz suggests that Feit's silence may indicate that he intends to abandon his campaign promise to uphold rent control ordinances.

As discussed here previously, the makeup of the new Township Council does not necessarily preserve the precarious balance that had previously existed on rent control issues. If all new Council members stick to the positions they articulated during the campaign and veteran Council members do not change their views, a majority of the Council would oppose going to full vacancy decontrol. Were Feit to change his tune on the issue, it would only return the Council to a 3-3 deadlock (with Mayor Katz recusing himself). In either case, a major change to the status quo seems highly unlikely.

Even if the balance of power does shift in favor of a deregulated rental market, chances of a significant rise in overall rents materializing are slim. Tenant rights advocate Mitch Kahn, quoted near the end of the Suburbanite article, concedes that Teaneck's rents are already "very close to market level." This calls into question former Council candidate Ronald Schwartz’s alarmist claims, also cited in the piece, that jettisoning rent control would have a “devastating” effect on renters in Teaneck and that “many families would lose their homes.”

¡Qué barbaridad!

There is much to admire about the leadership of our neighbor to the south, the Borough of Bogota. Mayor Steve Lonegan (pictured), a prominent figure statewide, runs a tight fiscal ship and could teach Teaneck a lesson or two about maintaining a useful municipal website. While his political views oftentimes fall far from the mainstream, his principled adherence to sometimes unpopular positions is a breath of fresh air among all the flip-flopping and pandering that plagues New Jersey politics.

In the latest instance, however, one might wish he'd abandon his stubborn commitment to his positions. The Record reports that Mayor Lonegan and other borough officials are protesting the placement of a Spanish-language billboard advertising McDonald's iced coffee in Bogota. The supposed reason for their opposition is that they find the billboard offensive, because it "sends the wrong message" and "doesn't help people who live in this country and need to learn English." They claim they would protest just as loudly if the billboard were in Italian, German, or any other language other than English.

This is preposterous. Commercial billboards promoting beverages carry no didactic message. It is pretty darn obvious that Mayor Lonegan and his supporters on this issue don't want Bogota to project the image of an immigrant enclave that is home to poor Spanish speakers. And for that, shame on them.

Hizzoner

The mayoralty of Teaneck is not often confused with a position of great power. However, the largely ceremonial position, which Elie Katz captured on Saturday by a 6-1 vote of the Council, can serve as a bully pulpit for Township affairs. Historically, the Mayor has had the ability to set the agenda for municipal government, even if marching orders are only issued by the consensus of the Council, which itself generally seeks to act in concert with public opinion.

It is therefore worth examining the statements Mayor Katz made to the Record after his selection for clues as to the direction in which he hopes to steer Teaneck over the coming years.

"I look to a future that we can create and build upon," Katz said. "We have a unique opportunity to increase revenue to our town through new development."

Katz also pledged to help make municipal government more "user friendly" for residents, businesses and township employees.

This is not mere boilerplate. While many Council candidates, both victorious and defeated, made similar comments during the election season, contrast Katz's comments to those of the newly elected deputy mayor, Lizette Parker.

"I look forward to working with the council to put forth an agenda that will help the residents of Teaneck by improving services, bringing ratables to town and bridging the divides that fall within our community," Parker said.

Contrast them again with what outgoing Mayor Jacqueline Kates told the Record about her objectives just prior to her installation as Mayor in 2002.

"Kates said she is looking forward to shepherding the township's new master plan, which guides land-use decisions. She said she also would focus on improving relations between different groups in town, and would encourage the public to participate in a townwide 'visioning process' that will result in guidelines for future policy" (Teaneck mayor passing the baton; Backs a colleague as his successor, Bergen Record, June 4, 2002).

Katz is signalling that he intends to take a pragmatic approach to governing Teaneck, focusing on hard issues like the homeowner tax burden and governmental red-tape rather than wading into the murky waters of "uniting the community" and other areas in which success is impossible to measure and government has little to contribute. Since Katz is a popular figure with broad appeal and a well-deserved reputation as an advocate for all of Teaneck, some residents may be disappointed that Katz does not intend to use his position to
influence intracommunity relations. Others will be justifiably pleased that a man who has substantial experience in both the realms of policy and politics has chosen the former to be the centerpiece of his first term in office.

Youth is served

Brian Aberback points out an interesting fact in his write-up of Saturday evening's Council Reorganization Meeting: six out of seven sitting Council members are between the ages of 24 to 35. According to the U.S. Census, the median age of Teaneck residents was 38.4 in the year 2000. This makes young adults the single most overrepresented demographic in municipal government. Now I understand why Ronald Schwartz, Joseph Harris, and other mature Teaneck personalities were so upset about "block voting."