this is not an actual photo
The questions below are a compilation of those from the editors and readers of The Oakland Journal. They were submitted to all the candidates. Candidates were welcome to answer any or all questions over the course of the last week. The Journal appreciates the time and consideration Councilman Di Pentima took in answering these questions in a timely fashion, and links to late responders are available at the end of the page.
All the candidates have stated that they intend to seek out the input, or assistance, of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce in terms of improving downtown Oakland and the local business climate in general. What would you expect from the Chamber of Commerce in terms of their input in improving downtown Oakland?
When I was Council President in 2007, I created three additional liaison posts to address areas in the community where I believed greater dialog and input needed to take place. Those posts where for the Library, Community Organizations and Downtown Improvement. I appointed Councilman Chris Visconti as the Downtown Improvement liaison for several facts one of which is that Chris is a member of the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber has had input on the plan as well as the residents who attended the planning presentations the Mayor had given in 2006 and 2007. There have been no secrets in terms of what the vision for the plan is and what it will do for the Community. As we move forward with other aspects of the plan people will be given the opportunity to express their ideas and any additional input from the Community is always welcome.
As budgetary restraints will probably prohibit municipal funding for any major improvements to the downtown area, what efforts do you see the town being able to perform to improve the look?
The good part of the Mayor’s downtown plan is that is never called for the improvements to be funded by the taxpayers. What we will look to do is exactly what is taking place in the community of Haledon where they are doing roughly $3.0 million in downtown improvements that will eventually be paid for through grants. Their plan calls for mostly street-scaping type of work, where as our plan is more ambitious in that it includes provisions for housing as well as some commercial development that will aid our community in helping to increase commerce (shopping) and added jobs through commercial growth such as the addition of Walgreens, Starbucks, etc.
Of course, as we have said all along a big part of the plan calls for the addition of sewers connected to the downtown area. Without a sewer connection, no additional growth will be possible, as the area cannot sustain additional volume using septic systems.
Many residents see taxes going higher and little return on their money, are you in favor of a financial analysis that would compare Oakland’s services and taxes with those of surrounding municipalities in an effort to find areas for improvement?
I am not sure all residents feel this way; at least this has not been the experience I have found in my three years on the council. As a general statement, residents in New Jersey are over taxes, which is why we are in the unenviable position of being the highest taxed state in the country when you add income taxes, property taxes and sales taxes together. The major issue with our taxes situation has more to do with the portion of our taxes that fund our school system than it does with municipal taxes with about 65% of each residents tax bill going to support our school budgets and 25% going towards the support of municipal services. This is not to say that it is the school boards faults or that we cannot do more at the municipal level, but the school funding formula is broken and everyone knows it including our officials in Trenton. For example if the costs related to special education were funded as they were promised at 100% our community would pick up approximately $3.0 million in additional funding that our residents would not have to pay for and that would have a significant reduction impact on our tax bills.
When you compare Oakland’s tax rate to that of the other communities in Bergen County you find that we are well below the average tax rate. For 2007, the average Bergen County Town’s total tax rate per $100 dollars of assessed value was $2.284 compared to Oakland’s rate, which was $1.907. Even when you compare the municipal tax rates, you see that Oakland’s rate of $.461 is much more favorable to the average County municipal rate of $.702.
Now, our opponents in this year’s election have gone around telling folks we need to be more like Ridgewood and Glen Rock. The municipal tax rates in those two communities are $.655 and .468 respectively and their overall tax rates in 2007 were $2.791 and $2.228, which is significantly higher than what Oakland residents paid in 2007. If people think their taxes are high now, imagine what would happen if these gentlemen spend our tax dollars to make our community look like these two communities. They also have the same traffic problems that Oakland has. Try driving down the center of Ridgewood on a Saturday afternoon and see how long it takes you.
What innovative ways could the candidates increase revenues to offset the cost of services?
This is one of the questions I am asked most often by residents. From a purely technical standpoint, there are no “creative” ways or magic bullet for increasing miscellaneous revenues. Under the current budget rules, a municipality cannot budget more revenues in any one year than they have realized in actual cash collections the prior year unless you have concrete evidence to support the increase such as the passage of an ordinance to increase some type of fee like parking fines. Even then, you must prove that the increase will be supported and the DLGS has the right to deny your increase.
That having been said, our Borough has done a fairly good job in maximizing our miscellaneous revenue stream. Each year we look at our general fee ordinances to make sure they are updated to reflect the latest market conditions. We also collect rents from various sources and we make sure those rates are competitive with the market. For example, we collect rents under our franchise agreement with Cablevision and from the Radio Station that rents property on the top of Skyline drive. Recycling is another area where the Borough earns money to help offset the taxes residents pay. In 2008, we expect to have in increase in Recycling revenues of approximately $100,000 dollars in this area alone due to the hard work of our Recycling Coordinator. The more Oakland residents recycle in terms of paper, bottles and cans, the more money the Town will earn and those funds go directly towards the offset of taxes the residents pay.
Grants are another way we go out for funds that help offset taxes. This year alone the Council has applied for over $6.0 million in grants and we have had a very good track record the last few years of getting substantial awards. However, Grants are not always the answer as most of the larger ones are of the matching type so we need to expend money to get money. We do get a good portion of Grant funding, approximately $165,000 annually, that are not matching Grants and that does help with the expenditures within the budget and directly reduces taxes our residents would otherwise pay.
If we continue to purchase Oakland’s open space will there be a need to reconcile the loss of ratables?
There is not much more open space available in Oakland or even Bergen County for that matter, but there are still a few parcels left that we need to explore – Pinnacle being one of them. What we have to wrestle with is how we allow controlled development in the community to attract ratables but not at the expense of having to increase services for those ratables. A perfect example of this is the Eden Properties development (Walgreens, Starbucks, Columbia Bank, Office Building) on the corner of Route 202 and West Oakland Ave. This development is perfect for our community because those businesses will contribute to the tax base without requiring the types of services that residential development would call for.
What we will have to decide is how much to invest in future Open Space purchases in relation to the impact on taxes if we no longer have an Open Space Trust Fund in Oakland. Having that fund as a separate dedicated line item on our tax bills provides us with access to money we would not otherwise be eligible for as a community. Most Open Space funding sources come through grants and those grants come from groups that will invest in communities where communities are investing in themselves by way of an Open Space Fund like Oakland has. Oakland’s Open Space Fund is about to expire and if the community chooses not to renew it for another five years, we will lose the 50% match contribution on future purchases. If the community continues to want to support the purchase of Open Spaces in Oakland like they have the past five years, we would have to consider funding any future Open Space purchases through the regular budget process and that could be a very heavy load to bear for our community.
The topic of “going green” has been raised at council meetings and is a subject of national discourse. Would you support a study to determine the logistical and economic feasibility of a windmill to provide electricity for the Valley Middle School, Library, Recreation and Municipal Buildings area?
Absolutely and Councilman Chris Visconti has spoken about this many times at council meetings and has taken the lead on this issue. The study will look into all the possibilities that are available to us such as solar or cogeneration and we will work with the schools on the issue. The only downside to any of this type of planning is that the investment is very high and the payback is significantly long. I mention this because I would not want the community to get the impression that if we invested $2.0 or $3.0 million dollars into a conservation plan that the payback would be in the short-term. However, this does not mean we will not and should not look into any type of energy savings because it is the right thing to do on a long-term basis.
We have started doing this with our Police vehicles in that we are buying cars with smaller engines that are more gas efficient than the old V8 engines. We have looked into hybrid cars but out topography and location to the highways does not make them a good fit for us at this time.
The Township of Wyckoff recently instituted “single stream recycling”. This allows residents to put all recyclables to the curb at once, and one truck is dispatched to pick up the items. Is this an option that should be considered for the residents of Oakland?
This is something we can look into, and the most important message here is that the more we recycle as a community the better off it is not only for the environment but also for our community because we make money on what we recycle. If the Oakland residents can increase their volume of recyclables we will earn more revenues and those revenues go directly towards reducing the taxes we all pay in our community.
This would also directly contribute to lowering the fees we pay to remove regular trash as the largest component is based on weight (tonnage) and the more we recycle the less we throw away and our tipping fees get reduced.
In these tough economic times when the budget is such a big issue, many people are interested in knowing where candidates stand with regards to the estimated million dollar budget for the tennis court project. Where do you stand on this subject?
I have been fairly vocal on this issue and I am not in favor of spending $935,000 dollars on this project. Even when you deduct the grants that we have received thus far ($125,000) and the one we expect to receive ($144,000) it still adds up to close to $700,000 that would have to be funded by the taxpayers. I definitely support doing work on the courts – and not just a resurfacing job – because there are safety issues that need to be addressed, but this is an expensive undertaking and I am not convinced that the current project as designed is the best we can do. I was asked by the Recreation Commissioner for ideas as to how they could help offset the costs for the project and I have provided him with options I believe he is pursuing. One of which is holding fundraisers and another is to get court sponsorship where names of businesses could be placed on the courts for a fee. I am happy to see that they are looking for ways to help defray the cost of this project.
The tennis court issue filled the council chambers with more people than anyone could remember in recent history. Although Oakland does its residents a service by broadcasting the meetings on Channel 77, do you foresee any effort the governing body can take to increase communal involvement?
Yes, as liaison to the Communications Commission I have been working with them on several things. First, the Team of volunteers that work on the Commission are looking into what it would take to have the council meetings streamed on the Borough website. That would be a way to provide folks with access to the meeting even if they do not get channel 77 because they have either Verizon or satellite TV. Next, we are working with Verizon to try and get channel 77 carried on their network. Cablevision and Verizon have been in negotiations about an agreement but as of now, no agreement has been reached. We are happy to pursue this with both of them.
The recent sewer and water rate increases in Oakland, and the issues facing residents in the Ramapo Reserve, have raised concerns over water and sewer issues.
These items are actually two different issues.
First, let’s address the Water rate increase which effects all residential and commercial water users in Oakland. The Borough operates two utilities a Water utility and a sewer utility. The rate increase imposed for this year was done so to support the operations of the water utility. It is a fairly simple process in that when the budget for operating the water utility is derived, we then look to see if the rents we are collecting from all of the users of the system can support the budget. If it can’t, and this year it could not (expenses were higher than revenues), we look to either reduce the operating expenses or calculate a rate increase or a combination of both.
This year we were able to reduce some expenses but not enough to not allow for an increase. So we had to have a very nominal increase in rates and when you think about the increase less than 5.0% in relation to the expense increases we have absorbed over the past few years (salaries, insurance, additional testing of the water supply) this increase is very prudent.
For Sewer it works the same way. The budget is created and then compared to the rents we have been collecting. We were not collecting enough rents to offset the operational costs of operating the Sewer utility so rates had to be increased. When we looked at how rates were actually being calculated we found the old ordinance actually was unfavorable to the roughly 210 residential customers connected to the system and very favorable to the 20 commercial customers. Therefore, when the new rate ordinance was introduced we made the base contribution or minimal charge for all 230 users of the system equal as it is intended that the based rate should be what supports the operations of the three treatment plants. The commercial customers have an added component based on usage so that those businesses that utilize more of the system through volume would pay more of the cost to maintain the system. I believe that to be a very equitable system for everyone especially for our residential customers who had been shouldering the burden to support the treatment plants.
The Ramapo Reserve has a treatment plan as well but that plant is not part of the Borough’s sewer utility. The Reserve community voted to sell their treatment plant to American Water who services their system and the residents were just recently given notice that American Water has applied for a rate increase that will be significant for that part of our community.
What specifically would you do to assist residents in the Reserve who are facing dramatic increases?
The first time we were told about the increase was on October 14th during the Candidates Debate the Reserve sponsored. As I told the folks that night, I will contact every elected official I know to ask them to look into this rate increase, as it is significant to members of our community. I will also work with our Borough Attorney to see what options are available for the Borough to assist the residents of the Reserve.
At a recent council meeting, there was discussion that the water/sewer increases for commercial/retail users was potentially unfair with regards to “lite” and “heavy” users. Do you believe the formula in place is unfair? And if so, what would you suggest to remedy it?
No I don’t. As the old sewer rate ordinance was written, it was very unfair to the residential customers that are connected to the three treatment plants and that has been corrected with the ordinance that was introduced this year. The three treatment plants are operated as one utility so any apportionment of the base operating costs that is not split equally across the user base would be unfair to the parties that receive lower rates. There is no way to determine who puts less stress on the system and you can’t do this solely but the number of toilets a user has. For example, what if a commercial user is throwing harsh chemicals down their sink. That is a significant source of stress for the treatment plants that are in essence very large septic system with multiple hookups and there is no clear way to determine the source of the stress so the costs should be shared equally.
Why do all of Oakland’s residents subsidize those who have municipal sewer service?
I am not sure where this comes from but the only Oakland residents that pay to support the municipal sewer system are those that are connected to one of the three plants, which is about 230 users in total. If an Oakland resident is not connected to the system they do not pay to support the sewer operations.
What is your position on the water tax increase that continues that subsidy?
There is no subsidy of the water system to the sewer system. Each is treated as a separate utility, budgeted, operated and accounted for as such. There is no dollar subsidy that resident pay for water that goes to support the sewer and you cannot commingle these utilities based on the municipal finance rules that are in place.
What ways could you seek to reduce that burden on those who don’t have sewers without drastically increasing the cost to those with sewer service?
There is not much the Borough can do to help offset the cost of a homeowner in maintaining their septic system. We provide educational material on the Do’s and Don’ts of using a septic but at some point in an Oakland homeowners life we will have to pay for a new system to be installed. If we are able to get real sewers connected to the downtown area there is a possibility that homeowners who reside along Franklin Ave, Ramapo Valley Road and possible Long Hill Road could at some point pay for a connection to a sewer line. But that is a long range plan and adding lines to Franklin and Long Hill would require investment and at this moment I do not know what that cost would be.
There have been instances of senior citizens who are “lite” users and cannot justify the monthly expense of an Internet connection. As technology will permit existing vendors to permit time-limited usage to senior citizens on fixed incomes to access the internet for perhaps an hour a day, will you as a representative advocate on their behalf?
Of Course, this one is the proverbial no brainier and I would submit that this should extend not only to senior citizens but any homeowner as well. .
With health insurance costs increasing every year and Oakland providing fully funded health care to the employees and their families, how are we controlling these costs and why are we not requiring contributions from the employees to defray these costs as it is done in the private sector?
This is an area I have spent a lot of time on in my three years on the council. When I first came on the council in 2006 and began looking over the insurance plans you could quickly see many areas that were out of touch with what the current market was doing.
One of the areas I focused on as Chairman of the Insurance Committee was prescription co-payments. The original insurance prescription co-payments were $3.00 for generic drugs and $5.00 for name brand drugs. Working with our Labor Unions, we were able to negotiate an increase to $10.00 for generic drugs and $20.00 for name brand drugs for all four labor groups. These increases have been in effect for two years now and we are saving about $45,000 on an annual basis.
Another area I worked on relates to the negotiations I did with our volunteer fire department who were receiving full benefits in terms of medical and prescription coverage. Working with them was a very good experience because they are all taxpayers within the community and they understand the need to control spending to help stabilize the tax rate. Through our negotiations, we were able to remove the members of the fire department while providing a very nominal increase in clothing allowances and office stipends. The net result is that we were able to remove $100,000 annually from our budget, which is what the insurance coverage was costing us on an annual basis.
Another thing we just recently did this year we introduced and approved a chance in our hospital network that we estimate will save us another $100,000 dollars annually without changing the hospital coverage’s our employees are receiving. This is because we have gone with a bigger network that has more power in negotiating pricing with hospitals. The annual savings is based on an analysis we did comparing last year’s actual hospital usages with what the costs would have been under the new plan.
Lastly, in 2006 we introduced an Alternate Insurance Plan to compete with the Traditional Insurance Plan the Borough had in place. This plan works on the concept that most private sector employees are accustomed to in that it works on the concept of In-network and Out-of-network service providers. The more an employee utilizes an In-network provider the more savings there is for the employee and the Borough as we are self-insured. Again, by successfully negotiating with our Labor Unions, we were able to add a contractual clause to all contracts where all new employees must enroll in the Alternate Insurance Plan and they cannot enroll in the Traditional Plan.
Requiring public employees to contribute towards insurance coverage is something that must be done at the bargaining table. You cannot mandate this to take place like you can in the private sector. You cannot negotiate through forceful means and I am a firm believer, and have experience in, that if you attempt to do so all you wind up with is parties who will not trust each other and if you have no trust you cannot negotiate. I am very happy with the fact that this Council has been able to restore trust with the Labor Unions because we have never said one thing to them and then turned around and done something else.
General Statement
I have been a member of the Borough Council for three years now and while it is hard work, it is something that I do enjoy doing. It is just another way for me to give back to a community that has given so much to my family and me. I have deep roots in Oakland as my parents very first date took place at Sandy Beach and all these years later, I am very lucky to be living here and to raise my family in such a great place.
What disappoints me about this year’s election is that my opponents continue to tell people that I have raised their taxes over 50% in the last five years. They are either intentionally misleading people or flatly ignoring the facts proving to me that they will say anything to be elected.
The fact is I have only been on the council for three years, and while we have had a tax increase each year, the amount of these increases have progressively declined each year and that is a sign that we are working towards stabilizing the tax rate. Anyone can add up a tax rate and say it went up this amount or that amount. If I added up the tax rate increases, my wife and I have paid since 2000 the rate increase would be over 70% when you adjust for the impacts of the 2005 revaluation. It disappoints me that my opponents would think that the residents of Oakland would fall for such trickery. My opponents either don’t understand the business of Oakland or don’t want to understand it – either way that is an irresponsible approach to take.
I am very proud of how I have conducted myself as a member of the Borough Council and the work I have done for all the residents of this community. As I always tell folks, think of me first as an Oaklander before you think of me as a Republican because that is what I am first and foremost an Oaklander. I am happy to serve this community and hope the residents will look at my body of work, and the work of my running mate Betsy Stagg, and ask us to continuing servicing this community on November 4th.
Editor’s Note
As all candidates received the same questions at the same time, any late submissions received after the publication of this article may reflect an unfair advantage. With that qualification, we are making available late submissions via this link. Betsy Stagg; Pat Tirri;David Skoblar.
Having only one candidate subject to comments seemed unfair, so any comments offered below will be posted on the Op/Ed Page.