UCCF 8/18/16: Roselle Mind/Body Complex – Holley’s Folly?

777-2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF UNION, STATE OF NEW JERSEY AUTHORIZING THE GUARANTY OF THE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON NOT EXCEEDING $59,000,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF COUNTY-GUARANTEED LEASE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2016 (COMMUNITY CENTER AND LIBRARY PROJECT), ISSUED BY THE UNION COUNTY IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SECURITY THEREFORE AND DETERMINING CERTAIN OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

Approved 5-1 with one abstention

For anyone in Roselle who objects to being taxed another $59 million:
.

.
Two in Roselle who did object:
.

.
Which brought out the political posse:
.

Advertisements

4 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Warren Austin on August 19, 2016 at 2:28 pm

    Are Roselle taxpayers picking up the tab or all of Union County Taxpayers paying?

    Reply

  2. Posted by bpaterson on August 19, 2016 at 3:02 pm

    roselle is indeed a high stressed boro in the criteria of property taxes versus annual percapita income. The star ledger used to do a study every year, and sadly it showed most of union county’s towns were hurting in this area. Probably why it is not being published anymore is senator lesniak the political boss of the area told the star ledger to stop telling the truth to the citizenry, ignorance is bliss….except for the real pain. Holly is pretty much just another idiot minion of greene and lesniak anyway. Just his thinking that a lower income town can be saddled with $59 million more debt. yes there are offsets like the roselle golf residential complex coming up which is a godsend if you ignore he massive population growth on the infrastructure burden.

    Could this cost be paired down, i’m in construction and it certainly sounds way outside the mormal cost curve. As a guess, save $5 mill for the school and $10 mill for the comm cntr. One immediate cost savings could come from: find out who the legal, arch, survey, engr and construction management firms that are involved…as a guess all donors to the county democrat machine, maybe they even donate to asmblymn holley which makes him a conflict of interst criminal. Savings?–a quick 2 million if you get non-UC politically connected firms involved. Watching corruption at its finest, now trickling down and hurting the more poorer of the residents. Have they no shame?

    And holley was the one they caught fabricating absentee election ballots, and they thru out the election results because of that and the opposition won…and he skipped prosecution. Embrace the dark side holley. I should have included him in my “youre all a criminal organization” rant at the freeholder meeting last night.

    Reply

  3. Posted by Roger Stryeski on August 21, 2016 at 9:52 am

    The whole issue(s) is a house of cards. The Golf Course was supposed to offset curent issues and now the “center” is being added.

    The alleged savings of having the “center” (c.$600K) that is supposed to pay off the issue are actually recurring expenses no matter where the activiites are located (salaries and upkeep).

    Then there was a phoney example of tax impact on a two income household of $60K of another $312 pa added to the average $9,531. The issue is that the average household in 2015 was $43K ($51K in 2000) and average individual is $25K (2013). NB only 74% of households have two or more adults!

    We are watching a train wreck in slow motion by folks who can’t even get a DPW straightened out after all these years.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: