Washing his hands of the soap factory
In a somewhat unusual public statement on a matter before the Planning Board, Council member and Planning Board member Elnatan Rudolph expressed his opposition to the proposal to construct condominiums and townhouses on the site of the former soap factory adjacent to Herrick Park today. The following was circulated this morning:Put aside any questions about the motivations behind Rudolph's decision to directly publicize his view here. Whether he is trying to rehabilitate his battered public image or not, this is a significant moment.For the past several months, I have been intently listening at Planning Board and Council meetings to what residents and experts have been saying about development in Teaneck . As a result of this process, I am prepared to say that I do not support high-density development on the old soap factory site.
Residents don't want it, and while our planners maybe recommending, it is just not right for that neighborhood, or for the broader community. High-density development there will overburden our roadways and lead to congestion that is unwarranted.
I highly recommend that the owners of the property go back to the drawing board and get real about what is right for their neighborhood and Teaneck as a whole.
Despite this opinion on this one site, I remain committed to responsible development. It is what's best for our town. We must stabilize taxes. We can't go up 5 - 10% every year. We must revitalize Teaneck . It has grown stagnant on Teaneck Road , Cedar Lane the Plaza and Degraw Avenue . I also believe we should focus on the Municipal blacktop, American Legion Drive , Teaneck Road, the Plaza and Degraw Avenue . I oppose riverfront development as set forth in the Birdsall plan.
Teaneck is a progressive community. We are all proud to call it our home. Many of us think our home could use a little work. I agree and that is why I am here.
Why? Because it begins to take us from the fantasy world of proposals and consultants' reports and hysterical neighbors fretting about the future of the quiet suburban town they reside in to the world of reality, in which both proponents and opponents of increased development face the realization that Teaneck is not going to change too much anytime soon and taxes are not going to come down much by boosting ratables. Time to tamp down the outrage and move on to confront some of the other significant issues facing Teaneck.
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 12:44 PM
17 Comments:
Finally a statement. I agree, the property needs to be studied further and a more realistic plan needs to be put together.
There never was a fantasyland view in the minds of any council members in the majority. That fantasy view was a strawman created by the Puffers. This statement merely affirms where the majority stands and has stood all along.
Rudy is realizing that his political career in Teaneck is down the drain. He is grabing for the rope, hopefully it's to late.
My my, I must be in dreamland -- Rudolph listening to residents? Or did his constituents on the other side of town near the soap factory get him to understand the broader picture at last? As for his opposition to development along the river, that's clearly NIMBY speaking. He's still dreaming if he thinks a zero increase budget is possible without massive personnel layoffs and cuts in township services that we have grown used to for years. People deserve raises when they do a good job, especially when they are asked to take on extra responsibilities each year...Would he go without a raise?
What's objectionable is opposition to both development and to cutting services.
What will the taxes on your house be like ten years from now if there is no development? Who will be able to pay the astronomical amounts?
To 6:04 Anonymous:
Zero percent is just a dream, so let's not even try to approach it. If we got a service yesterday, we should get it tomorrow. Development, why bother, there is really nothing to develop. Public employees, they are all overworked as it is.
Pretty much summarizes the results of the last few town councils if not their spirit. This town council, too early, to tell if they can deliver on their rhetoric.
However, something has to give. When the new tax bill hits, what will happen to people on fixed incomes and members of the middle class? What will happen to Teaneck's diversity then?
Zero based budgeting may not deliver a zero percent increase, but it will highlight the tradeoffs we need to start making to get this process under control.
Just one example. The library. An excellent and widely used institution. Dumb tradeoffs - reduce the number of librarians or reduce weekend hours (despite it being the time of heaviest use). Intelligent tradeoff - why does the library open each day at 9 during the week? Even if you assume a good level of use by seniors, pre-schoolers and stay-at-home parents, couldn't that population be served by a 12pm oppening. My intent is not to pick on the library, but to suggest that we have to start getting smart about this.
How come Englewood got developed? Why can't we follow their path?
Englewood got hosed and so did Teaneck. Teaneck is going to wind up spending, picking up the slack in their services. Englewood can't support the development, for example they only have one fire department. Also, the topography and design of Teaneck is totally different than Englewood. It just can't be done. The real question is did the residents of Englewood benefit by the increased development in terms of ratables vs tax cuts to property owners.
The answer is NO.
I was there with my brothers and our families to watch the council discuss the Fire Department budget.Only some members of council looked to be trying to cut fat to keep from hurting emergency services. They were the ones with Mayor Katz. Union President Hunter told them to bring in more revenue.
To that I say, how about it? Make more income for the town so the taxpayers don't take it out on us and themselves by shortchanging safety.
Would someone please explain why the township's outlay in expenditure should go up much more than inflation each year?
How many of Teaneck Police or Firefighters live in Teaneck? Not many if any, as soon as they are on the department they hightail it out of town.
Benefits for town employees should reflect what corporate americas benefits look like. Employees should pay a for some of their healthcare and the pentions need to be looked at as well as years served. There's no reason why Township employees should be retiring at 55 with a full pention when the rest to the township residents are humping to NYC into their 60s.
Extend higher base salaries to employees--it's the free benefits that's killing the town.
Firefighter...
Does that mean that next election, your union won't be supporting the people who oppose Mayor Katz, like you did last time and the time before that?
Lets start with removing council salarys. The sit on your hands action taken by ALL members past and present has finally caught up. As long as there continues to be oposition about removing a tree or a piece of grass in the township than there will be no development. Even if there was development, WAKE UP ALL, Teaneck has changed. 28 cases of graffiti in Dec. alone. Gang presense alive and well. Garbage all over the streets and sidewalks in every shopping district with the exception of C.L. Do you realy think development will help these issues? And you question why most of the public employees do not live in town?
tdf ff: I don't find Teaneck to be the blighted hellhole that you depict but perhaps that's because I work in places like the South Bronx, Bed Stuy and Newark where crime, graffiti and trash are real problems. Let's not exaggerate Teaneck's woes. I don't know about the members of the police and fire departments but most of my children's teachers have been Teaneck residents.
The only teachers that live in town are ones where the spouse has a salary to support high taxes. Then that spouse mouches off the teachers benefits because their better, thus increasing taxes and dependency on an already burdened system.
Swurgle
Than you are living in a bag.
It seems to me from reading your prior post's that you are well educated on Teaneck and it's politics. If so, than you should also know the facts that I have pointed out are true. Which of my points are exaggerated?
Sure, if you are comparing Teaneck to the towns you mention, than it is utopia. EUREKA. Why do you think the bad element is moving here.
The fact of the matter is, tfd ff, you wouldn't live in Teaneck if the streets were clean enough to eat off of. And there's nothing new about that, is there?
Post a Comment
<< Home