John Moscatelli
-
The Basics
-
John on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the article Haddonfield Budget Increases by Just More Than 1%
-
On the article 2% Budget Increase Unanimously Approved for Haddonfield Schools
John Moscatelli
10:36 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
ReplyJoe - Higher cost share. From the BoE meeting, the healthcare costs, and the pension costs are down due to the additional contributions required from the teachers in the latest contract.
-
On the article 2% Budget Increase Unanimously Approved for Haddonfield Schools
John Moscatelli
9:13 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
ReplyJust for clarification - The BoE increased their tax levy 1.98% versus last year, which is under the 2% cap that would require voter approval, that is true. However, Borough ratables dropped $19million versus last year, so the tax base to support the increased levy has fallen. the net effect is that Borough taxpayers will see a school tax increase of 2.73%, not 1.98%. [From the BoE handout, for the average home valued at $491k, last years school tax was $7113.80, and the increase this year will be $194.40 - $194.40/$7113.80=2.73%]
I'm not impugning the BoE in any way, they followed the law. I, personally, didn't realize the law capping school taxes was based on prior year levies, regardless of the tax base. It's interesting that the law is written such that, if property values are dropping, local boards of education can keep increasing their levies at 2%, regardless of the effective tax increase on the taxpayers. If we get back to rising property values, this would work in taxpayers favor be effectively capping increases (from the tax payers perspective) below 2%.
I just thing this should be put out to the public so they understand why the 2% school tax increase is actually 2.7% on their tax bills, and didn't require voter approval.
-
On the article Just When You Thought the Bancroft Issue Was Over...
John Moscatelli
7:04 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
ReplyAs an active member of Haddonfield United, and having spent many hours defeating the Bancroft bond, I fully support the Commisioners investigating a better solution to this issue. There were a number of things they could have done to make the purchase more attractive. While I respectfully disagree with Bill that the turf field issue alone could have swung the vote, getting the effective purchase price down (by getting a lower price, or finding an offset for developing part of the property, or maximizing all open space grants) would be a great start. I hope this time around the powers that be articulate a clear vision and cost; ultimately I believe a lack of this is what caused the failure of the referendum.
-
On the article Haddonfield United Mobilizes Against Bancroft Purchase
John Moscatelli
10:18 am on Thursday, January 17, 2013
ReplyI wish folks would stop using the $189/yr tax increase number, it's a 2.7% increase in your school taxes. The BoE likes the $189 number as it downplays the real cost. Remember, this is above and beyond to likely 2% increase we'll see in the next budget. Further, once this increase is worked into the budget, it's part of the base so we will pay an additional 2% per year on top of that.
This is a once in a lifetime opportunity, for Bancroft to profit from Haddonfield's taxpayers.
As for Mike's comment about Sylvan Lake, we could pay those folks double their market value (I'm sure they would sell in a heartbeat) gain the land for an expansion, and spend a lot less than $12.5M. Sounds like a much better deal.
-
On the article A Gift to the Future, and My Vote on Bancroft
John Moscatelli
10:42 am on Monday, January 14, 2013
Another way to look at the average $189 tax increase, is that it is actually an increase of 2.7% in your school taxes. Yup, 2.7% just for this bond. That will be on top of whatever increase they go for in November; so we could be looking at 4.7% this year alone (or more if they put it to a vote).
For those that want the math - average increase $189, average assessment $491,345, current school tax rate per $100 of assessed value 1.448. So $491345/100x1.448 = $7114.68 in school taxes. $189/$7114.68=2.66%
That's a number they aren't talking about. -
On the article A Gift to the Future, and My Vote on Bancroft
John Moscatelli
7:40 am on Monday, January 14, 2013
ReplyNice article, and all due respect to the author, blind faith is NEVER a virtue. Overpaying for the land by half is a bad decision. Let's fix what we have before going off half cocked and buying more land, along with historic building we need to maintain.
-
On the article PTA Packs Them in for Bancroft Q&A
John Moscatelli
3:35 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Joe, my concern is that the BoE is trumpeting the open space aspect of this, and lots of folks mistakenly think there is a large amount of open space included. This is not true; the intent is to develop.
-
On the article PTA Packs Them in for Bancroft Q&A
John Moscatelli
3:34 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
The issue is OneHaddonfield represents itself as a grassroots organization when it is funded by Bancroft. It's rather ironic that the term for this type of fake grassroots group is an Astroturf Group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing
The practice is dishonest and underhanded. If your funded by Bancroft, then say so. Let people know where the message is coming from.
-
On the article PTA Packs Them in for Bancroft Q&A
John Moscatelli
12:22 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
ReplyI can't dispute that, I thought active recreation was OK too, but what I quoted is directly off the County application. I'd copy it here, but I can't paste a picture and the application is a PDF.
However, if they can include active open space, why are they only applying for 3.68 acres? The deeper you look the more this whole thing smells. Now we find One Haddonfield is funded primarily by Bancroft; they know a gift when they see it.
John Moscatelli
11:57 am on Wednesday, March 27, 2013
For the average home, an $89 tax increase versus last years taxes of $2304 is a 3.86% increase (89/2304=0.03863). Same as the School tax levy increase that was only 2%, but is actually a 2.6% tax increase.