Listed on the agenda for the 3/17 meeting is an Ordinance that eliminates the Shade Tree Commission. What is even more surprising is that no one on the Shade Tree commission was even given a hint that this would happen. This decision was apparently made by Mayor & Council without input from the commission or the public. The Shade Tree Comission has been responsible for the planting and maintenance of the shade trees located between the curb and sidewalk throughout our town. These trees are part of what makes Hammonton the beautiful community it is. I think we can all see the real motivation behind this ordinance. The council is shifting the costs of maintaining these trees from the town to the homeowners. It is just another in the long line of cuts to the services this town is supposed to provide. No more trees will be planted, the trees already in existence will not be trimmed or cared for by the town, and any trees that become a public safety issue will not be removed by the town. Now the homeowners will be held responsible and have to pay for all of these services that the town used to take care of. We are getting less and less for the taxes we pay. When will it stop.
Why is the Mayor abolishing all of these committees and commissions that previous councils have set up to perform designated tasks for our Town. Apparently other people felt these issues were important enough to put these committees in place, what makes him smarter than everyone else? It seems that he just wants all the power for himself. MUAC, Shade Tree, and Rent Control all disbanded under Hammonton First control. Is this your government "For the people, Not the Politics", seems pretty darned political to me!!!!
The Shade Tree Commission did a good job chopping lots of trees down. Now the county will do that for the town. Will they be willing to cut them down as fast as the Shade Tree Commission did? I think the Shade Tree Commission last planted a tree about 3 or 4 years ago so no big loss there.
The Shade Tree Commission hasn't planted trees because this council refuses to give them any budget to do that with. It may be important to the people of this town, but if it's not important to Hammonton First, then the hell with the rest of the town. HF gets what it wants, the rest of us get the leftovers.
The Shade Tree Commission did a good job chopping lots of trees down. Now the county will do that for the town. Will they be willing to cut them down as fast as the Shade Tree Commission did? I think the Shade Tree Commission last planted a tree about 3 or 4 years ago so no big loss there.
After the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down, you would think they would have used some of the money to plant a couple of trees.
They didn't have any money for cutting down trees either. In the last two years most of the trees that have been cut down were done by the highway department. There has been a backlog of trees that are considered a public safety issue and that backlog still exists. So what the town has done has shifted the responsibility for paying for these trees that we already know must be removed to protect the public to the taxpayers. The town doesn't want to have to include these trees in their budget and they found a way to do that by dumping the cost on the residents. And believe me, your figureof $200,000 is greatly exagerated. Don't you remember Jerry Vitalo begging for a mere $5,000 at a recent meeting? The town had put $30,000 in the original budget for removal of these dangerous trees this year, but when they found out they could get the tax rate to zero, they decided to take this out of the budget and make the residents pay for it themselves.
And the Town has not given the Shade Tree Commission any money for planting trees for several years now. This is a tragedy for a town that claims our tree lined streets to be one of our biggest assets.
The number spent on cutting down trees in this town is amazingly high. The money to plant trees was always there, it was just always spent on cutting more down. We are the only town in Atlantic County left with a Shade Tree Commission. The county & state takes care of the roads where there is not a Shade Tree Commission. However, if you have one you are stuck with taking care of their roads yourself.
The Shade Tree Commission did a good job chopping lots of trees down. Now the county will do that for the town. Will they be willing to cut them down as fast as the Shade Tree Commission did? I think the Shade Tree Commission last planted a tree about 3 or 4 years ago so no big loss there.
After the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down, you would think they would have used some of the money to plant a couple of trees.
$200,000, now you're really stretching it. The Shade Tree budget is far far less than what Hammonton First said they spent on the last election.
Actually, just in 2005 the Shade Tree Commission went over $100K. That's for just one year!
Then say that in 2005 it was that. You're implying that last year it was $200,000. I think the shade tree should be abolished too but let's not stretch the facts.
Actually, just in 2005 the Shade Tree Commission went over $100K. That's for just one year!
Then say that in 2005 it was that. You're implying that last year it was $200,000. I think the shade tree should be abolished too but let's not stretch the facts.
It clearly states "the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down." That is a fact. It's a lot of money. That is especially true since all the other towns in the county have their county and state roads taken care of by those entities at no additional taxpayer cost. We already pay income tax for that.
Are you saying that if we do not have a shade tree commission the state or county will take care of the dead trees that are on the backlog list of approvals by the shade tree commission, some dating back to 2006? If there is a dead tree on Peach Street, the state will come in and take it down? Where is this information coming from?
Are you saying that if we do not have a shade tree commission the state or county will take care of the dead trees that are on the backlog list of approvals by the shade tree commission, some dating back to 2006? If there is a dead tree on Peach Street, the state will come in and take it down? Where is this information coming from?
We've constantly heard from Hammonton First of how we must preserve the trees. The Gazette even wrote many stories about it. Now they say nothing. Regulary Hammonton First supporters write about trees and their value to the community. They even had new trees put in downtown.
Actually, just in 2005 the Shade Tree Commission went over $100K. That's for just one year!
Then say that in 2005 it was that. You're implying that last year it was $200,000. I think the shade tree should be abolished too but let's not stretch the facts.
It clearly states "the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down." That is a fact. It's a lot of money. That is especially true since all the other towns in the county have their county and state roads taken care of by those entities at no additional taxpayer cost. We already pay income tax for that.
doesn't make much sense to have a shade tree commission if they don't plant shade trees but just spend thousands of dollars cutting trees down
Actually, just in 2005 the Shade Tree Commission went over $100K. That's for just one year!
Then say that in 2005 it was that. You're implying that last year it was $200,000. I think the shade tree should be abolished too but let's not stretch the facts.
It clearly states "the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down." That is a fact. It's a lot of money. That is especially true since all the other towns in the county have their county and state roads taken care of by those entities at no additional taxpayer cost. We already pay income tax for that.
doesn't make much sense to have a shade tree commission if they don't plant shade trees but just spend thousands of dollars cutting trees down
You can blame Hammonton First for that. They didn't barely give Shade Tree any money to do maintenance and planting. With all the dead trees in town, safety came first.
Actually, just in 2005 the Shade Tree Commission went over $100K. That's for just one year!
Then say that in 2005 it was that. You're implying that last year it was $200,000. I think the shade tree should be abolished too but let's not stretch the facts.
It clearly states "the Shade Tree Commission spent over $200,000 in the last few years cutting trees down." That is a fact. It's a lot of money. That is especially true since all the other towns in the county have their county and state roads taken care of by those entities at no additional taxpayer cost. We already pay income tax for that.
doesn't make much sense to have a shade tree commission if they don't plant shade trees but just spend thousands of dollars cutting trees down
You can blame Hammonton First for that. They didn't barely give Shade Tree any money to do maintenance and planting. With all the dead trees in town, safety came first.
200 thousand to cut trees down over the last few years seems like a lot of money couldn't at least some of it be used to plant a tree or two?
That's the point I think everyone is missing here. It is not only the safety issue that will suffer. Yes, the Shade Tree commission has concentrated on safety and the removal of dead trees for the last several years because council has not given them any budget to do anything else. Council should feel it is important to replace these trees and provide the Shade Tree Commission with funding to do just that. Instead, they just get rid of it all together and pass all of these costs on to the taxpayers!!!!
That's the point I think everyone is missing here. It is not only the safety issue that will suffer. Yes, the Shade Tree commission has concentrated on safety and the removal of dead trees for the last several years because council has not given them any budget to do anything else. Council should feel it is important to replace these trees and provide the Shade Tree Commission with funding to do just that. Instead, they just get rid of it all together and pass all of these costs on to the taxpayers!!!!
if the 200 thousand shade tree spent over the past couple years wasn't enough money--- how much exactly did the Democrats want them to have spending more money on shade tree would mean more taxes is that okay with the dems
In 2006 the Town spent $5,991.63 in tree removal and in 2007 $16,011.17 which totals $19,002.80. This figure seems to be a little bit lower than the number you falsely report. Even with the money spent, there is a backlog of trees that need to be dealt with that council now wants the taxpayers to pay for out of their own pocket. The town has not allowed the Shade Tree any money for planting over the last two years. There was $1,000 in the proposed budget for this year, we will have to see if it is still in there after tonight's introduction of the new budget.
Maybe you can stop in at the meetings and learn a little about costs. You made a $6 million mistake on the debt. On the police budget, you miscalculated by over $2 million. Now you missed the amount spent on cutting trees by thousands. I know, you\'ll say it is someone else\'s fault you made all these mistakes.
The debt was a miscalculation because I was not aware that a bond anticipation note had been sold on the town hall project. I stand by the other numbers.
So admin, in your view of the budget we don't have to pay health insurance, medical benefits, police dispatchers, pension contributions, and payroll taxes? I guess if you calculate things that way you certainly can afford to spend a lot more than HF is doing. Of course, how do you propose handling all those bills when they come due?
The budget review form I have does not breakdown these costs by department. A determination of how much each of the categories you mention actually belong to the police department would have to be done to come up with a real figure for us to use as a comparision. But if you use the numbers from the budget review that include every employee for the entire town, adding all of the categories you ask to be included come to $4,505,540.26 which equals $551.95 per address. Again, the actual cost would be higher for commercial taxpayers and lower for households. But all costs would be much lower after deducting out all of the other town departments.
The budget review form I have does not breakdown these costs by department. A determination of how much each of the categories you mention actually belong to the police department would have to be done to come up with a real figure for us to use as a comparision. But if you use the numbers from the budget review that include every employee for the entire town, adding all of the categories you ask to be included come to $4,505,540.26 which equals $551.95 per address. Again, the actual cost would be higher for commercial taxpayers and lower for households. But all costs would be much lower after deducting out all of the other town departments.
-- Edited by Admin at 15:17, 2008-03-17
Did you also add the police dispatcher costs as well as all the costs of the cars, their insurance and the gasoline in there? Tbe good news is that you are getting closer... much closer than the first number you posted.
Yes I took all of those things from the budget report, but for all departments since it doesn't seem that we do it by department yet. This may be some software that would be woth looking into so that in the future we could make decisions for each department much quicker. It might also help spot abuses much more quickly. I would assume it would make the budget process much easier also.
