Special improvement budget fails to pass

[admin]

www.app.com/article/20090617/NEWS/906170371/1004/NEWS01/Special+improvement+budget+fails+to+pass

FREEHOLD — The borough special improvement district's budget will go to a second vote June 29, after several business owners' complaints led to its defeat Monday.



Borough Council members failed to pass the budget for the district, which includes downtown commercial properties. Four votes, or a majority of the council's full membership, was necessary to pass the budget, Borough Administrator Joseph Bellina said.

Councilman Marc LeVine voted against the $309,000 budget. Michael DiBenedetto, a downtown businessman, abstained. Sharon Shutzer, Jaye Sims and Kevin Kane voted in favor. Councilman George Schnurr was absent, and Mayor Michael Wilson only votes when there is a tie.

"I don't know what's going on with this budget," DiBenedetto said.

Council members expressed support for the district's operator — the Freehold Center Partnership — but also exhorted the members to work out their differences.

"I don't understand why we keep hearing this. . . . The concerns need to be resolved in the group," Shutzer said.

Commercial property owners within the district are being asked to pay $245,000 toward the budget. The tax rate would increase from 18.2 cents per $100 of assessed property value to 20 cents, Bellina said.

A handful of business owners spoke out at Monday's meeting to protest the tax increase and to question how much bang businesses off Main Street were really getting for their buck.

"It's totally unfair to the businesses that are not in the center of town," said Bill Dickinson, who owns a business on Throckmorton Street.

Perceived inequalities in the level of services for Main Street versus non-Main Street properties has been a source of tension. It was the underlying basis for a lawsuit brought last year by business owners Carl Steinberg and Paul Lussier, who accused the partnership of voting improprieties and bylaw violations.

That suit was settled last year, though Steinberg and the partnership's chief executive officer, Richard Gatto, disputed this week whether the agreement had been fulfilled.

The two also failed to see eye to eye on the tax increase and the attention paid to businesses off Main Street.

Steinberg says he was told there would be no increase. Gatto says the total amount to be paid by all the members is the same. He referred questions about individual changes to borough tax assessor Mitchell Elias, who could not be reached Wednesday.

As for services in the district, Gatto noted the partnership's involvement with Neighborhood Pride and World Changers projects off Main Street, its sponsorship of July 4th festivities at Freehold Raceway and its advocacy for the borough post office on Lafayette Street.

The partnership was also instrumental in a county-borough land swap that will bring several improvements to Throckmorton Street, and the partnership will provide landscaping and signage for a gateway into the borough on that street, Gatto said.




Kim Predham: [phone] or [e-mail]

[admin]

This doesn't look good. Too many unsolved problems. It is good to see Carl Steinberg sticking to his guns and making noise about Throckmorton.

I would love to hear a public explanation from Le Vine about why he voted as he did.

I also disagree with Shutzer who said....

"I don't understand why we keep hearing this. . . . The concerns need to be resolved in the group," Shutzer said.

Why we keep hearing this? because there are unresolved issues that need to be dealt with. Clearly the FCP has been unable to do so and governing body had better step in and see what they can do to help.
There have been a couple of not good stories coming out over the past year or so where there appears to be a real disconnect between the two entities. For the purpose of making sure our down town reaches its full potential, which is a goal we all share, it appears there is a nee for some changes so these issues can be laid to rest.

[novillero]

Jun 18, 2009 6:22:46 GMT -5 admin said:

This doesn't look good. Too many unsolved problems. It is good to see Carl Steinberg sticking to his guns and making noise about Throckmorton.

I would love to hear a public explanation from Le Vine about why he voted as he did.

I also disagree with Shutzer who said....

"I don't understand why we keep hearing this. . . . The concerns need to be resolved in the group," Shutzer said.

Why we keep hearing this? because there are unresolved issues that need to be dealt with. Clearly the FCP has been unable to do so and governing body had better step in and see what they can do to help.
There have been a couple of not good stories coming out over the past year or so where there appears to be a real disconnect between the two entities. For the purpose of making sure our down town reaches its full potential, which is a goal we all share, it appears there is a nee for some changes so these issues can be laid to rest.

Doesn't boro council act as the final arbiter over disputes arising from within this semi-autonomous district?
AND
Isn't there a council liaison that could have explained why they have to keep coming to counicl at the meeting?

It is interesting that the reporter did not take down any comments by Councilman Levine considering his vote caused the budget to fail. For the taxi-cabs, councilman Levine has avoted against giving licenses to innocent drivers just to prove a point. Was that what was going on here?

[novillero]

Jun 18, 2009 7:45:37 GMT -5 lisas84 said:

It's nice to know that the FB council is not cookie-cutter, despite each being a D. Sometimes a bit of dissent makes them all work together more energetically. If they all thought the same, what a stagnant state the town would be in.

I can tell you that Rich Gatto has accomplished a lot with the FCP. And as I say, Rome wasn't built in a day. Rich inherited a fragmented, dischordant behemoth that necessitated a structural overhaul which took months. It takes quite a while to properly address and re-engineer everything necessary to create a properly functioning, relevant entity.

The council liaison is very involved, but remember too, as a councilperson, he has a full plate of other responsibilities.

You can say all you want about Councilman Le Vine, but it is clearly evident that he has conviction and is passionate in his beliefs and his stance on issues.

Overall, I believe the lesson here with this issue is that all involved need to roll up their sleeves, put emotions aside -- and work together cohesively to get the job done. I like to have faith this will happen and I do wish all of them the very best.

My comments are not really comments at all, but questions.

First of all, council liaison may have a "full plate" but that does not mean he doesn't have to answer questions. My question is what did the liaison have to say about all of this (who is the liaison - Kane?)

Second, what did I say about Marc Levine? Nothing good nor bad; I asked what is the reasoning for his vote, and noted that he could have - as he has done in the past - voted to send a message. Perhaps knowing that his dissent would make them go back and play nice-nice with each other to resolve this on their own (but that goes to the liaison again, I would tend to think).

Anyway, you say Levine is passionate about his beliefs, etc. Well, what are they on this issue? The article in the paper failed to address the reasoning behind the lone dissent - the deciding vote. I am sure someone as passionate as Mr. Levine did not vote without comment. He may have the best reason in the world, but the paper failed to state it - a commentary more on the paper than Councilman Levine.

[admin]

Jun 18, 2009 7:45:37 GMT -5 lisas84 said:

It's nice to know that the FB council is not cookie-cutter, despite each being a D. Sometimes a bit of dissent makes them all work together more energetically. If they all thought the same, what a stagnant state the town would be in.

I can tell you that Rich Gatto has accomplished a lot with the FCP. And as I say, Rome wasn't built in a day. Rich inherited a fragmented, dischordant behemoth that necessitated a structural overhaul which took months. It takes quite a while to properly address and re-engineer everything necessary to create a properly functioning, relevant entity.

The council liaison is very involved, but remember too, as a councilperson, he has a full plate of other responsibilities.

You can say all you want about Councilman Le Vine, but it is clearly evident that he has conviction and is passionate in his beliefs and his stance on issues.

Overall, I believe the lesson here with this issue is that all involved need to roll up their sleeves, put emotions aside -- and work together cohesively to get the job done. I like to have faith this will happen and I do wish all of them the very best.

Your right, Lisa, It does take time for good change. Rich Gatto is doing just that which is all the more difficult with the stinky economy. Many more successful down towns are having a very bad time.

I think what it comes down to is why do we have to wait for these sort of articles before things are discussed? I think people need to see what progress is going on before things get into the papers like this. . What is being done to resolve these issues that have been going on for too long? Both the council and the FCP are the ones we look at here.

Like Novillero mentioned, it would have been good of the paper to quote what Le Vine had to say about his vote. Marc is definitely a very good councilman with a lot of energy and passion. But like all others, he is not always right either. To be the lone dissent should have been highlighted in this article. In a public news paper, an explanation is called for. After all, his lone vote had an effect.

After all, I think we all want the same thing which is to get these negative issues cleared up so that the town can continue moving forward the right way.

[admin]

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2009/0624/front_page/013.html

SID budget will need 2nd vote from council
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO Staff Writer


FREEHOLD — A second public hearing on the Freehold Borough Special Improvement District's $309,000 budget for 2009 will take place at a special meeting to be held in Borough Hall on June 29 at 7 p.m. The Borough Council has the responsibility to approve the budget for the SID. The district levies a tax on properties in a designated area of the borough and uses those funds to promote activities and events in the town.

During a recent council meeting, the SID budget failed to garner the four affirmative council votes it needs (out of six council members) to be adopted.

Voting to adopt the SID budget were Councilwoman Sharon Shutzer, Councilman Jaye Sims and Councilman Kevin Kane.

Council President Marc Le Vine voted no on the adoption of the budget.



Councilman Michael DiBenedetto abstained from the vote because he operates a business on South Street.

Councilman George Schnurr was absent.

Mayor Michael Wilson, who only votes on a council matter when there is a tie, said he would have voted in favor of the budget if called upon to do so.

Because the SID budget did not receive four affirmative votes, a second public hearing and council vote needs to occur, according to Borough Administrator Joseph Bellina.

During the public hearing, business owner Carl Steinberg expressed his opposition to the SID budget as he has done in previous years.

Steinberg said property owners in the SID were initially told they would not pay a higher assessment this year, and then were told the tax would go up. He said the budget was initially defeated by the SID's members, and then passed on a second attempt.

He again raised questions about the way the SID budget is voted upon and what he said are inequities between businesses that are on Main Street and those that are not on Main Street.

The SID is operated by the Freehold Center Partnership.

Steinberg said he does not believe the SID areas off Main Street, such as Throckmorton Street where his business is located, are getting the full benefit of the partnership that downtown businesses on Main Street receive.

"I maintain my own sidewalks and my own property. Maybe those (SID members) not on Main Street could pay less in taxes than those on Main Street do," he suggested.

Council members also commented on the SID budget.

Le Vine said he has heard the same issues for several years and wants to address the issues some SID members are concerned about.

"I have heard these issues before and I feel it is time to address them," the councilman said. "I want to address the concerns about the voting process. I would like to see a better mechanism for reaching out to SID members and also motivate more members to vote for the budget."

Le Vine said he also wants to address the concerns of business owners off Main Street, including the Broad Street Plaza and on Throckmorton Street.

"I am not voting against the partnership," Le Vine said. "It's a wake-up call to the partnership that we have issues that need to be addressed. We don't want to see members come back again with the same concerns that have not been addressed year after year. It should be easy to resolve. This is a small town and a house divided cannot stand."

Kane, who said he works closely with the partnership, said the partnership's new director, Richard Gatto, has done a "tremendous job" and has made many positive changes.

Shutzer said the ongoing issues are a concern to her, "when this organization has a built-in group of leaders."

"This discussion should not come to us. I've said it before. I don't understand why we keep hearing this at council meetings. These concerns need to be resolved within the group," Shutzer said.

[admin]

Le Vine said he has heard the same issues for several years and wants to address the issues some SID members are concerned about.

"I have heard these issues before and I feel it is time to address them," the councilman said. "I want to address the concerns about the voting process. I would like to see a better mechanism for reaching out to SID members and also motivate more members to vote for the budget."

Le Vine said he also wants to address the concerns of business owners off Main Street, including the Broad Street Plaza and on Throckmorton Street.

"I am not voting against the partnership," Le Vine said. "It's a wake-up call to the partnership that we have issues that need to be addressed. We don't want to see members come back again with the same concerns that have not been addressed year after year. It should be easy to resolve. This is a small town and a house divided cannot stand."


I agree with Le Vine. These issues need to be resolved and have gone on for far too long. We do need to look beyond Main Street and we have certainly discussed on this site the need for making Throckmorton better. Le Vine is right, we should not have to see people coming back next year with the same concerns.

Carl Steinberg is right to keep bringing these things up. This is for the good of the whole town.

I also agree with Kane that Gatto is making improvements. Especially in a tough economy, it will take a bit of time to really see that, but we will and are.

[novillero]

I don't get it. "These issues have gone on too long" ... wasn't there a lawsuit and a settlement on "these issues"? So wouldn't the complaint be that there was a breach of that settlement?

What will happen on this upcoming vote? If the budget passes, I wonder what has been resolved in that two week passage of time. Any? Will we go through this every year.

And either council gets involved, or they let the FCP's vote on their own budget go through. After all, there was a vote by the FCP. They seemed to have resovled it to me. As council knows, you can't make everyone happy. Not every vote will yield content amongst everyone.

I think Steinberg should try to get himself outside of the SID. If he thinks that Throckmorton deserves the same amount of attention as Main Street, IMO he is not thinking straight. Throckmorton has never been a gateway into town, and is at best a side street with day laborers hanging out on it.

[ka19]

Throckmorton is absolutely a gateway into our town. It may not be our proudest part of town, but it is one of the most important. I think improving an area like Throckmorton is the very essence of what the state intended when they authorized SID in the first place.

[novillero]

I would characterize Throckmorton as a back door, unless a "gateway" just means an "entrance."

If "gateway" is meant to be something more akin to a "main entrance," than I strongly disagree.

modification: KA19, you may be correct about what the state intend by establishing SIDs. If that is the case, then no money should go to much of Main Street... And that is a completely different thing than what I was getting at.

[ka19]

Nov, the answer doesn't have to be all or nothing. Part of our downtown is first class, and part of it is in need of some improvement. Money spent to improve that area is well spent.

Same goes for Throckmorton. Any money used to improve Throckmorton is money VERY well spent.

[novillero]

Jun 24, 2009 14:06:47 GMT -5 ka19 said:

Nov, the answer doesn't have to be all or nothing. Part of our downtown is first class, and part of it is in need of some improvement. Money spent to improve that area is well spent.

Same goes for Throckmorton. Any money used to improve Throckmorton is money VERY well spent.

I see your points.

Here are the questions I still have:

(1) what are the exact complaints being made? it seems that they just don't like the amount they have to pay?

(2) forgetting the FCP/SID/council etc. what are the improvements that you see need to be done on Throckmorton?

[ka19]

Jun 24, 2009 14:46:51 GMT -5 novillero said:

Jun 24, 2009 14:06:47 GMT -5 ka19 said:

Nov, the answer doesn't have to be all or nothing. Part of our downtown is first class, and part of it is in need of some improvement. Money spent to improve that area is well spent.

Same goes for Throckmorton. Any money used to improve Throckmorton is money VERY well spent.

I see your points.

Here are the questions I still have:

(1) what are the exact complaints being made? it seems that they just don't like the amount they have to pay?

(2) forgetting the FCP/SID/council etc. what are the improvements that you see need to be done on Throckmorton?

I really don't know. It's pretty messy.

[novillero]

Well, thinking about this further, I am afraid that things like the 4th of July Fireworks will be put on hold since there will be no money in the budet if it does not pass. I believe the FCP fiscal year starts on July 1... and no budget means no spending.

I hope that a "no" vote on this budget does not mean hurting the celebration of the nation's birth and Freehold Boro traditions.

On the other hand, we can all rest assured that at least this will be resolved in time for the latino festival that council has worked on so diligently over the past couple of years. It has really grown!!!

[admin]

Jun 29, 2009 10:44:13 GMT -5 novillero said:

Well, thinking about this further, I am afraid that things like the 4th of July Fireworks will be put on hold since there will be no money in the budget if it does not pass. I believe the FCP fiscal year starts on July 1... and no budget means no spending.

I hope that a "no" vote on this budget does not mean hurting the celebration of the nation's birth and Freehold Boro traditions.

On the other hand, we can all rest assured that at least this will be resolved in time for the latino festival that council has worked on so diligently over the past couple of years. It has really grown!!!

I have heard that same sentiment about possible lack of fire works and other FCP events. I cannot see that happening. Marc may be wrong on some things, but he is not stupid. I cannot see him casting a vote that may have that effect. Instead of the "Grinch who Stole Christmas," Freehold would have the "Councilman Who doused the Fire works."

Marc made that deciding vote. I simply cannot see him intentionally doing something that would have such a negative effect on the town. Especially if he wants to continue being a councilman. There must be somethings we are not seeing and are not aware of. Having no fire works is just not going to happen.

[novillero]

Schnurr to the rescue!

[admin]

Jun 29, 2009 16:02:14 GMT -5 novillero said:

Schnurr to the rescue!

This is too easy. I could have some fun here, but I will shut up.

[admin]

www.app.com/article/20090629/NEWS/90629090/-1/FRONTTABS01/Freehold+council+again+considers+improvement+district+budget

Freehold council again considers improvement district budget

FREEHOLD — The special improvement district's budget will come before the Borough Council tonight for a second chance at approval.



In a vote June 15, the council failed to approve the district's proposed $309,000 budget for 2009-10. Four votes were needed for passage, but only three council members voted in favor of the budget.

Commercial property owners within the district are being asked to pay $245,000 toward the budget. The district tax rate would increase by 1.8 cents, to 20 cents per $100 of assessed property value.

Several members of the district, which includes downtown businesses and commercial properties, spoke out June 15 against the tax increase and questioned how much non-Main Street businesses benefited from those tax dollars.

The council meeting begins at 7 p.m. at the municipal building, 51 W. Main Street.




-- Kim Predham

In Your Voice| Read reactions to this story
Newest first Oldest first
ReadBetweenTheLines wrote:

After throwing out all Motorcyclists (and our wallets) for the actions of a few morons from Kruise Nite, sweet vindication. As a native of the area whose family goes back over 130 years, I will NEVER spend another penny in Freehold Borough nor will dozens of other Motorcyclists I know. This is exactly the result we wanted. Maybe your "underground economy" will pick up the tax revenue slack.
6/29/2009 6:48:57 PM

[admin]

Jun 30, 2009 4:46:59 GMT -5 admin said:

www.app.com/article/20090629/NEWS/90629090/-1/FRONTTABS01/Freehold+council+again+considers+improvement+district+budget

Freehold council again considers improvement district budget

FREEHOLD — The special improvement district's budget will come before the Borough Council tonight for a second chance at approval.



In a vote June 15, the council failed to approve the district's proposed $309,000 budget for 2009-10. Four votes were needed for passage, but only three council members voted in favor of the budget.

Commercial property owners within the district are being asked to pay $245,000 toward the budget. The district tax rate would increase by 1.8 cents, to 20 cents per $100 of assessed property value.

Several members of the district, which includes downtown businesses and commercial properties, spoke out June 15 against the tax increase and questioned how much non-Main Street businesses benefited from those tax dollars.

The council meeting begins at 7 p.m. at the municipal building, 51 W. Main Street.




-- Kim Predham

In Your Voice| Read reactions to this story
Newest first Oldest first
ReadBetweenTheLines wrote:

After throwing out all Motorcyclists (and our wallets) for the actions of a few morons from Kruise Nite, sweet vindication. As a native of the area whose family goes back over 130 years, I will NEVER spend another penny in Freehold Borough nor will dozens of other Motorcyclists I know. This is exactly the result we wanted. Maybe your "underground economy" will pick up the tax revenue slack.
6/29/2009 6:48:57 PM

Another good point- the tax increases on businesses. In a bad economy, that is an exceptionally stupid idea.

[admin]

Freehold passes special improvement budget, 5-1
Passes 5-1 on second time before council
By Kim Predham • FREEHOLD BUREAU • June 29, 2009


FREEHOLD — The Borough Council voted 5-1 Monday in favor of the town's special improvement district budget, the second time the budget had come before the council.



Councilman Marc LeVine cast the lone dissenting vote. He does not oppose the district's operators, the Freehold Center Partnership, but said changes in its voting procedures are needed. Effort should also be made to ensure all members of the district receive equal value for their membership, he said.

"I vote no tonight so we can vote yes next year without any reservations," LeVine said.

The borough's special improvement district includes downtown commercial properties. The council Monday approved a 2009-10 budget totaling $309,000.

Commercial property owners in the district must pay $245,000 toward that budget, a decrease of $921 from the previous budget, according to the partnership's chief executive officer, Richard Gatto.

The district's tax rate is increasing from 18.2 cents per $100 of assessed property value to 20 cents, a jump that has upset some business owners.

Proponents and detractors of both the partnership and the budget voiced their opinions Monday before the council vote.

The partnership's efforts have enhanced both the town's reputation and its property values, said supporters.

Critics, however, complained about the tax increase and argued that Main Street businesses benefit more from those tax dollars than those on the side streets.

"What economic benefits do owners on the side streets get (from the budget)?" asked Carl Steinberg, a Throckmorton Street business owner.

Plenty, Gatto told the council Monday. The partnership has undertaken or been a catalyst for perks like the annual July Fourth celebration at Freehold Raceway, flower planting and maintenance on several side streets, and planned landscaping improvements on Throckmorton Street.

Gatto also said the partnership has been responsive to members, particularly noting changes in the voting process.

Voting has been a bone of contention for Steinberg, who said Monday that the partnership had not followed its own bylaws.

Several business owners expressed similar concerns June 15, when the budget first came before the council.

Council members Sharon Shutzer, Jaye Sims and Kevin Kane voted for the budget that night. LeVine voted against it, and Michael DiBenedetto abstained. George Schnurr was absent, and Mayor Michael Wilson only votes to break a tie.

Four yes votes, or a majority of the council's full membership, were needed for approval.





Kim Predham: [phone]; [e-mail]

[novillero]

I guess DiBennidetto thought that this was so important that he re-thought his abstention and decided to vote in favor of the budget - as approved by the FCP's internal voting process.

Councilman Levine's vote seems to be voting to send a message. He said, "I vote no tonight so we can vote yes next year without any reservations..."

[admin]

Being that it is a matter of public record, I was able to obtain a copy of Councilman Le Vine's remarks at the council meeting last night. One of the advantages of this site is that we have the room to put more out there than what a news paper can offer with limited print space. Considering that Councilman Le Vine was the lone dissent, I believe it is important for people to understand more about why he voted as he did. The councilman is an open person who I am sure will not mind having this here.

I want to be very clear about my reasons for voting NO against the SID Budget, this evening.

My vote in no way is a vote against the Partnership. In fact, I have been a supporter of the SID since its inception. I was one of only three people still seated at this table, who voted to give life to the SID back in 1994. I have also been often vocal regarding my past dissatisfaction with, what at the time, seemed to be Freehold Center Partnership’s impotency with respect to economic development and a lack of resolve and determined effort to attract and retain viable businesses to our downtown. Like any proud parent, I may love my child, but still not approve of some of the things he or she does.


In 2006, I began making public comments about the absence of the economic development piece. I also began sending emails and letters to the partnership leadership decrying their lackluster efforts to improve our business district. Eventually, they did the right thing and hired Richard Gatto to address this need. Rich has done a terrific job, so far, helping to keep our storefronts filled in the midst of a very challenging economic climate, which has decimated other model towns like Red Bank.


For me it has always has been a “tough love” situation with the Freehold Center Partnership, AS IT SHOULD BE between a governing body and a caretaker of one of any town’s most precious and valuable commodities, it’s business district -- it’s downtown. We can not just get away hoping our Main Streets do well. They must do well. And, we at this table are required to do everything in our power to ensure its success. We must always be out there promoting the Partnership’s success. And, we must be in here – at this table - to criticize their shortcomings, whenever they may reveal themselves. This may be one of those times.


On the other hand, I am not voting NO, tonight, to throw any support to those unhappy with being part of the partnership, either. I hear and understand their complaints. But, I expect them to work through their issues as active, voting members of their organization. I am not interested in any attempts by them to find possible escape roots (from the Partnership and its membership responsibilities), perhaps, for their own selfish reasons. I am more strongly in favor of them finding more and better ways to participate in and receive greater value from their membership. The more value they get, the farther the improvement reach of the Partnership will grow. And, it must grow beyond Main Street, down Throckmorton, up South Street and throughout Broad Street Plaza. There must be equal attention paid to our restaurants, our retailers and even those that own and lease office space within the district. Finding everyone equal value is a difficult challenge, but it is critical, worthwhile and possible. Everyone has some unique needs that the SID can and should address to make it an even stronger organization.


The Partnership must also look to improve its voting mechanisms. Improved communication and outreach to all of its alleged 300 taxpaying members must yield greater voter participation than its current 10-12%. No, you can’t force people to vote, but you can do a better job of motivating them to do so, by showing them that every vote counts and each vote can make a difference. More time than the 30 minutes currently allotted must be allowed to vote and voting must be arranged at convenient times for store owners, restaurateurs and those who live outside of town. 8:30 am may be difficult for many opening their doors in the morning.
I am confident that the Partnership will not only survive this evening’s vote, but will remain a viable organization in Freehold Borough for many years to come. Facing down our toughest challenges only makes an organization stronger. Call this thing growing pains or whatever you will. It’s really all good, though. We’ve heard these complaints repeatedly. We already know them very well. I must say I am a little concerned that they seem to involve many of the same people each year. There is nothing new here. Perhaps, it is high time to review and correct these deficiencies and move on. The Borough Council has a huge stake in all of this and we are here to help. Councilman Kane has been very active to that end as our liaison. But, if we are not asked to help or denied the opportunity, we must still insist that the outcome is always the right one and it benefits the entire town of Freehold. I vote NO tonight, so we can vote YES, next year WITHOUT ANY RESERVATIONS! [/color]

[novillero]

okay, I'll be the first...

In light of his preliminary comments, the councilman's vote and his ultimate conclusion make no sense to me.

I previously theorized the copuncilman's vote was to send a message. After reading this, I have no idea what message this vote sends.

[admin]

Jun 30, 2009 16:09:06 GMT -5 novillero said:

okay, I'll be the first...

In light of his preliminary comments, the councilman's vote and his ultimate conclusion make no sense to me.

I previously theorized the councilman's vote was to send a message. After reading this, I have no idea what message this vote sends.

I disagree. I think this is all about sending a message. Le Vine is actually backing up much of what we have discussed on this site over recent years. ( validating malcontents and saying we have been right) I stand by my original thought that he would never have been foolish enough to cast a no vote if it meant dousing the fireworks or silencing the amps of the Concert series.

But, in the end, this is just words. What will count is actions. If there is no follow through, then the words have no meaning. And we have seen that before throughout our town. The reality is that these are issues and problems that should have been dealt with years ago. Stating the obvious alone will not get the job done, but at least someone is speaking up a bit more.

On the other hand, we have seen a councilman dissent that played a role in getting results. Last year during the Kruise Nite fiasco, Sims was a dissent.We wound up with Kruise nite still going on and the safety aspects better covered. Even with all the changes and complaints from the motorcycle community, they were still steaming into town this past Kruise Nite. I have also received a lot of positive feedback about Kruize Night since the changes.

One thing I will disagree with. Marc wrote..

On the other hand, I am not voting NO, tonight, to throw any support to those unhappy with being part of the partnership, either. I hear and understand their complaints. But, I expect them to work through their issues as active, voting members of their organization. I am not interested in any attempts by them to find possible escape roots (from the Partnership and its membership responsibilities), perhaps, for their own selfish reasons.

I disagree with the above statement one hundred percent. This is where my experience with unions comes in. I know what it is like to be a part of something where voices are not heard and change is near impossible. For that reason, I am a strong believer in the empowerment of the individual. I believe that businesses should be allowed to opt out of the FCP just as I believe that union members should be allowed to opt out of their organization if they so choose. Nothing will promote change faster than a loss of dues paying members. These issues in the FPC have been going on for far too long, stagnating what should be a better down town, realizing its full potential. I do believe that Marc's comments come across too dismissive of those FCP members who are not happy. That is a mistake.

I will end this on one statement that I thought interesting and agree with...


Eventually, they did the right thing and hired Richard Gatto to address this need. Rich has done a terrific job, so far, helping to keep our storefronts filled in the midst of a very challenging economic climate, which has decimated other model towns like Red Bank.

I agree that Gatto has been good and is getting some results. The latter part of that statement says it all. I had considered putting a post up with my observations of other down towns during this Obama economy. It isn't good.

My wife and I like to frequent down town areas. We like to shop and we love to eat. We have noticed that Red Bank has more and more empty stores. They are even advertising free parking on week ends in what appears to be an effort to get people in to shop.

Asbury park is also having problems. A number of stores have closed up and are empty. That is a real shame because that town is turning around so nicely.

Allantown is also going down hard. Couple with anticipated bridge repairs, the only restaurant and several shops have closed, and not coming back.

And then there is Freehold. Back several months ago, I predicted that the Obama economy could cause problems for us and we could see many restaurants close up. It could still happen, but I was wrong. We are actually getting stronger as far as the restaurant business is concerned. When one closes, we get a better one. That is not a bad thing when we see what is happening in other towns that we looked to for inspiration in the past. That means that someone is doing something right.

[admin]

In one of the posted articles, this was written...

"What economic benefits do owners on the side streets get (from the budget)?" asked Carl Steinberg, a Throckmorton Street business owner.

Plenty, Gatto told the council Monday. The partnership has undertaken or been a catalyst for perks like the annual July Fourth celebration at Freehold Raceway, flower planting and maintenance on several side streets, and planned landscaping improvements on Throckmorton Street.

I think Steinbergs question is not only fair, but well called for. With the tax rate rising in this Obama economy, it is in the best interest of the town to find ways of cutting taxes for the businesses.

What gets me is gatto's response, at least what is in the article. Those things he mentioned are already being done. Other than the pending improvements on Throckmorton he mentions, there is no change with the tax increase. If I were a buisness owner, I would not be impressed. Gatto has ben doing well, but he blew it with that response.

[admin]

Jul 1, 2009 12:42:18 GMT -5 lisas84 said:

Brian wrote: "...my observations of other down towns during this Obama economy."

Whoa there, cowboy. When did the economy take a dump? During whose Presidency? That's right. Bush the Second.

Hee Haw! Called out! fair question, but one that would take us way off topic and deserves its own thread. There are some great facts and logic to back me up. ;D

[novillero]

I would have voted YES, and not played any word games with my vote. Like councilman Levine very aptly said, "Like any proud parent, I may love my child, but still not approve of some of the things he does."

This is an internal problem within the FCP. The FCP voted on the budget amongst its own members. Are we going to overturn the internal workings of this "democratic" body because some one is not happy? Surely anyone in public office or a private organization knows that you cannot satisfy everyone. But in this case, we had someone holding up progress to make one person content - a person who already had a legal avenue, and settled it. If that settlement was not being honored, he certainly had his legal remedies. So a NO vote was against the democratic nature of the FCP and against the agreement entered into by the squeaky wheel. Was the vote against the settled internal workings of the FCP, or against the settlement freely enterend into by Mr. Steinberg.

So, as the councilman had to admit about his former running mate and long-time friend, it's the same people making the same noise every year. Councilman Levine has developed a penchant for voting to "send messages," intseading of voting on what is the issue at hand. He voted No, despite his prior statement that council "must still insist that the outcome is always the right one and it benefits the entire town of Freehold." How does the NO vote benefit the entire town?

The health of Main Street is critical to the entire town. The focus of the FCP is around Main Street because it is the "main" street; it is the face of the town and that is where many businesses are. As Main Street goes, so goes the rest of the town. A rising tide floats all boats. And the success of Main Street overflows to the rest of the boro, even homeowners - the entire town.

I am sure that many agree that disagreeing for the sake of disagreement is not healthy. I side with the democratic council members of George Schnurr, Jaye Simms, Mike DiBenbideto, Sharon Shutzer and Kevin Kane (the "very active liaison" who is in the position to know about what is going on). Think about how important this vote was to the town by looking at the position of another councilman, who changed his abstention to a YES vote. I think that is telling about his fear that this budget would not pass.

[novillero]

Jul 1, 2009 12:42:18 GMT -5 lisas84 said:

Brian wrote: "...my observations of other down towns during this Obama economy."

Whoa there, cowboy. When did the economy take a dump? During whose Presidency? That's right. Bush the Second.

ahh, if only blame could rest with one man. I think there is at least 535 people to blame.