<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16441" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=271540413-23052007>Great point, Nancy M. Everybody loves to hate the
property tax, but there's a good chance that it's a lot lower than your state
and local income taxes, and a lot lower than the sales taxes you pay every
year. Both of those types of taxes go to state and local government to
provide services and facilities. </SPAN></FONT></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org
[mailto:towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Nancy
Mooney<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 23, 2007 8:50 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
towntalk@riverdale-park.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [RP TownTalk]
Taxes<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Hi All -<BR><BR>I've been out of town and admit that I've not been
able to read <SPAN style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline">all </SPAN>the messages on
this topic, but want to say something anyway.... : )<BR><BR>In Oklahoma City,
where my husband comes from, they have schools of excellent reputation and good
roads. <SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic">The also pay 8.5% sales tax on
everything <SPAN style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline">INCLUDING
FOOD!</SPAN></SPAN> It would be interesting to know what other
cities/towns pay as a <SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic">total</SPAN> tax, not
just the property tax. I've heard a lot of 'talk' here about needing more
police, etc., and we know that's gotta cost. I have seen improvements in
our town already, from nicer looking common areas to more 'sightings' of our
honorable servants in blue. <BR><BR>I'm casting no vote at this
point for or against the tax increase, but after being shocked at what my family
in OK pays in taxes on their<SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic"> groceries,</SPAN>
I'm willing to hear what the mayor has to say. I want to live in a nice
town that is on the move up! <BR><BR>Hey, by the way, I've asked this
before; what is going on with the person we hired to counsel us on improving our
town commerce/town center area? I can't remember her full name. The
initial meeting was quite encouraging but I've heard nothing
since.<BR><BR>Thanks! Nancy
Mooney<BR><BR><BR><BR><B><I>towntalk-request@riverdale-park.org</I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid">Send
TownTalk mailing list submissions to<BR>towntalk@riverdale-park.org<BR><BR>To
subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
visit<BR>http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk<BR>or, via email,
send a message with subject or body 'help'
to<BR>towntalk-request@riverdale-park.org<BR><BR>You can reach the person
managing the list at<BR>towntalk-owner@riverdale-park.org<BR><BR>When
replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<BR>than "Re:
Contents of TownTalk digest..."<BR><BR><BR>Today's Topics:<BR><BR>1. Re: no
vote will be taken at the budget hearing (CHRISTINA DAVIS)<BR>2. Re: no vote
will be taken at the budget hearing<BR>(Maureen Farrington)<BR>3. re proposed
property tax increase -- an apology (and some<BR>considerable relief!) (Dwight
Holmes)<BR><BR><BR>----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR><BR>Message:
1<BR>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 08:37:29 -0400<BR>From: "CHRISTINA DAVIS"
<BOOK-SMART@VERIZON.NET><BR>Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] no vote will be taken
at the budget hearing<BR>To: "'Dwight Holmes'" <DWIGHTRHOLMES@GMAIL.COM>,
"'TownTalk'"<BR><TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG><BR>Message-ID:
<006b01c79c6d$f6813660$020aa8c0@naw.org><BR>Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"<BR><BR>The budget historically has been delivered the week
before the election (in<BR>election years), and preparation with town staff
began 1-2 months earlier.<BR>Perhaps this has changed more recently, but it
might be a good system to go<BR>back to. It is unusual in the town's history
for a proposed budget hike of<BR>this size to have not been discussed during a
campaign, either pro or con.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Also, I have been hearing much
about road improvements; streets that were<BR>repaired 5-10 years ago are
being redone again now. This is not unusual if a<BR>utility company destroys
them and pays for the complete over-hall (usually<BR>after much legal
wrangling). But, if these newly done streets did not<BR>survive their proposed
20-30 year life span, then perhaps the road repair<BR>company should be taken
to task and repair them at reduced or no cost.<BR><BR><BR><BR>A now-deceased
mayor from the 1960s touted himself as the "road-paving<BR>king," and did all
of the town streets at once. Then, in the 1980s and early<BR>1990s, they all
failed at the nearly same time (as their life expectancies<BR>all expired at
the same time), a problem which my generation of<BR>councilmembers inherited.
A more moderate approach seemed to be warranted,<BR>as it would not seem
prudent to pass this problem along to your children<BR>after the town had
learned such a valuable lesson then.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Chris
<BR><BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From:
towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org<BR>[mailto:towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org]
On Behalf Of Dwight Holmes<BR>Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 3:50 PM<BR>To:
TownTalk<BR>Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] no vote will be taken at the budget
hearing<BR><BR><BR><BR>Roland--Thank you for the information here you've given
us that I was not<BR>previously aware of, and which is good to know. The value
of this thread<BR>continues to accumulate. However, I'm puzzled a bit by your
citing of my<BR>earlier email. What I wrote was "Like some have already said,
I think it's<BR>too bad the discussion couldn't have started somewhat sooner
-- it does feel<BR>a bit rushed, for something as momentous as this is. But it
is good to know<BR>that there are at least a few meetings to go before things
are finalized."<BR>You took a piece of that out of context. I think it
misconstrued the<BR>meaning of what I wrote.<BR><BR>And whether we are
eventually talking about tax hike of 27% or 18% or even<BR>10%, I think it's
fair to say that it is momentous. I would argue at the<BR>very least that it
*should* be seen as such. I'm not advocating for or<BR>against any particular
proposal at this point. As a new homeowner in the<BR>town, I want and need
much more information. That's why I've appreciated and<BR>expressed as much
for the current thread(s) we've got going here. Without<BR>this email list I
would know nothing of any of these issues. It's really<BR>too bad more of our
residents don't join in. But mainly, I'm just saying<BR>that a tax increase of
any amount in that range (10 - 27%) is certainly not<BR>inconsequential, is
certainly significant, and may be seen by many on tight<BR>budgets as mom
entous. <BR><BR><BR><BR>On 5/21/07, Roland Walker
<WALKER@POBOX.COM>wrote:<BR><BR>[Dwight Holmes writes]<BR>> it does feel a
bit rushed, for something as momentous as this is.<BR><BR>Outside the world of
this email list, the budget process is neither so<BR>rushed, nor the taxation
decision so momentous. <BR><BR>No vote will be taken tonight -- the meeting is
only a hearing, one<BR>that is required under the laws that govern the
process.<BR><BR>The mayor's submitted budget represents, in large part,
"wishlists" <BR>put forward by town staff, gathered up together, and proposed
to the<BR>council.<BR><BR>Tonight's hearing publicizes a maximum number, which
our taxes cannot<BR>exceed. However, it is expected that the final taxation
instructions <BR>we send to the county will be lower. The law gives us the
flexibility<BR>to move down -- but not up -- from the publicized number. So we
call<BR>it first on the high end.<BR><BR>Right now, what is happening is that
your councilmembers are poring <BR>over the budget, finding items to remove or
add, generally working to<BR>bring the budget down by whittling away at staff
wishlists. One<BR>councilmember has also found a revenue item which was
missing.<BR>Citizens have also read the budget and forwarded good money-saving
<BR>suggestions, and are encouraged to do so.<BR><BR>The incoming council are
the ones that will actually pass the budget.<BR>They are on point right now to
see that the budget fits their policy<BR>priorities as described to voters.
<BR><BR>This is generally a consultative process, not an adversarial one.
Mr<BR>Oppenheim's exhortations on the subject may be charitably explained
by<BR>noting that having served only half a term, he is not very familiar
<BR>with the process.<BR><BR>The final tax rate will be lower than the
advertised rate. It will<BR>probably represent a modest rise in
rates.<BR><BR>Vernon Archer ran for mayor in '05 on a platform or building up
our <BR>town, and was unopposed in '07. Perhaps someone will run in '09 on
a<BR>platform of cutting police and public works. In the
meantime,<BR>measured, steady buildup will continue.<BR><BR>This was the
choice of the voters.
<BR><BR>R<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>TownTalk
mailing list<BR>To post to the list, send mail to
TownTalk@riverdale-park.org<BR>TownTalk-request@riverdale-park.org is for
automated subscription
processing<BR>only<BR>http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk<BR><BR>For
more information about Riverdale Park,
visit<BR>http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>--
<BR>~~<BR>Map of Riverdale Park MD Trolley Hiker-Biker Trail and Cafritz
Property<BR>http://tinyurl.com/2wsfql<BR>~~<BR>Tracking the Washington
Nationals' 2007 season (will they catch the
'62<BR>Mets?):<BR>http://tinyurl.com/2m6f43 <BR><BR>-------------- next part
--------------<BR>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<BR>URL:
http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20070522/60868111/attachment-0001.html
<BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>Message: 2<BR>Date: Tue, 22 May
2007 11:24:10 -0400<BR>From: "Maureen Farrington"
<MAUREEN.FARRINGTON@GMAIL.COM><BR>Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] no vote will be
taken at the budget hearing<BR>To: TownTalk
<TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG><BR>Message-ID:<BR><848cd36e0705220824r4d718b23o26c7b86410c9cec@mail.gmail.com><BR>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed<BR><BR>If repairing the roads
all at once saves us money, I don't see how<BR>this is a bad thing for the
future of the town.<BR><BR>On 5/22/07, CHRISTINA DAVIS
<BOOK-SMART@VERIZON.NET>wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> The
budget historically has been delivered the week before the election
(in<BR>> election years), and preparation with town staff began 1-2 months
earlier.<BR>> Perhaps this has changed more recently, but it might be a
good system to go<BR>> back to. It is unusual in the town's history for a
proposed budget hike of<BR>> this size to have not been discussed during a
campaign, either pro or con.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Also, I have been
hearing much about road improvements; streets that were<BR>> repaired 5-10
years ago are being redone again now. This is not unusual if a<BR>> utility
company destroys them and pays for the complete over-hall (usually<BR>>
after much legal wrangling). But, if these newly done streets did not<BR>>
survive their proposed 20-30 year life span, then perhaps the road
repair<BR>> company should be taken to task and repair them at reduced or
no cost.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> A now-deceased mayor from the 1960s
touted himself as the "road-paving<BR>> king," and did all of the town
streets at once. Then, in the 1980s and early<BR>> 1990s, they all failed
at the nearly same time (as their life expectancies<BR>> all expired at the
same time), a problem which my generation of<BR>> councilmembers inherited.
A more moderate approach seemed to be warranted,<BR>> as it would not seem
prudent to pass this problem along to your children<BR>> after the town had
learned such a valuable lesson then.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
Chris<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>> From: towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org<BR>>
[mailto:towntalk-bounces@riverdale-park.org] On Behalf Of<BR>> Dwight
Holmes<BR>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 3:50 PM<BR>> To: TownTalk<BR>>
Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] no vote will be taken at the budget
hearing<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Roland--Thank you for the information
here you've given us that I was not<BR>> previously aware of, and which is
good to know. The value of this thread<BR>> continues to accumulate.
However, I'm puzzled a bit by your citing of my<BR>> earlier email. What I
wrote was "Like some have already said, I think it's<BR>> too bad the
discussion couldn't have started somewhat sooner -- it does feel<BR>> a bit
rushed, for something as momentous as this is. But it is good to know<BR>>
that there are at least a few meetings to go before things are
finalized."<BR>> You took a piece of that out of context. I think it
misconstrued the<BR>> meaning of what I wrote.<BR>><BR>> And whether
we are eventually talking about tax hike of 27% or 18% or even<BR>> 10%, I
think it's fair to say that it is momentous. I would argue at the<BR>> very
least that it *should* be seen as such. I'm not advocating for or<BR>>
against any particular proposal at this point. As a new homeowner in
the<BR>> town, I want and need much more information. That's why I've
appreciated and<BR>> expressed as much for the current thread(s) we've got
going here. Without<BR>> this email list I would know nothing of any of
these issues. It's really<BR>> too bad more of our residents don't join in.
But mainly, I'm just saying<BR>> that a tax increase of any amount in that
range (10 - 27%) is certainly not<BR>> inconsequential, is certainly
significant, and may be seen by many on tight<BR>> budgets as mom
entous.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> On 5/21/07, Roland Walker
<WALKER@POBOX.COM>wrote:<BR>><BR>> [Dwight Holmes writes]<BR>> >
it does feel a bit rushed, for something as momentous as this
is.<BR>><BR>> Outside the world of this email list, the budget process
is neither so<BR>> rushed, nor the taxation decision so
momentous.<BR>><BR>> No vote will be taken tonight -- the meeting is
only a hearing, one<BR>> that is required under the laws that govern the
process.<BR>><BR>> The mayor's submitted budget represents, in large
part, "wishlists"<BR>> put forward by town staff, gathered up together, and
proposed to the<BR>> council.<BR>><BR>> Tonight's hearing publicizes
a maximum number, which our taxes cannot<BR>> exceed. However, it is
expected that the final taxation instructions<BR>> we send to the county
will be lower. The law gives us the flexibility<BR>> to move down -- but
not up -- from the publicized number. So we call<BR>> it first on the high
end.<BR>><BR>> Right now, what is happening is that your councilmembers
are poring<BR>> over the budget, finding items to remove or add, generally
working to<BR>> bring the budget down by whittling away at staff wishlists.
One<BR>> councilmember has also found a revenue item which was
missing.<BR>> Citizens have also read the budget and forwarded good
money-saving<BR>> suggestions, and are encouraged to do so.<BR>><BR>>
The incoming council are the ones that will actually pass the budget.<BR>>
They are on point right now to see that the budget fits their policy<BR>>
priorities as described to voters.<BR>><BR>> This is generally a
consultative process, not an adversarial one. Mr<BR>> Oppenheim's
exhortations on the subject may be charitably explained by<BR>> noting that
having served only half a term, he is not very familiar<BR>> with the
process.<BR>><BR>> The final tax rate will be lower than the advertised
rate. It will<BR>> probably represent a modest rise in
rates.<BR>><BR>> Vernon Archer ran for mayor in '05 on a platform or
building up our<BR>> town, and was unopposed in '07. Perhaps someone will
run in '09 on a<BR>> platform of cutting police and public works. In the
meantime,<BR>> measured, steady buildup will continue.<BR>><BR>> This
was the choice of the voters.<BR>><BR>> R<BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> TownTalk mailing
list<BR>> To post to the list, send mail to
TownTalk@riverdale-park.org<BR>> TownTalk-request@riverdale-park.org is for
automated<BR>> subscription processing only<BR>>
http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk<BR>><BR>> For more
information about Riverdale Park, visit<BR>>
http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
--<BR>> ~~<BR>> Map of Riverdale Park MD Trolley Hiker-Biker Trail and
Cafritz Property<BR>> http://tinyurl.com/2wsfql<BR>> ~~<BR>> Tracking
the Washington Nationals' 2007 season (will they catch the '62<BR>>
Mets?):<BR>> http://tinyurl.com/2m6f43<BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> TownTalk mailing
list<BR>> To post to the list, send mail to
TownTalk@riverdale-park.org<BR>> TownTalk-request@riverdale-park.org is for
automated<BR>> subscription processing only<BR>>
http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk<BR>><BR>> For more
information about Riverdale Park, visit<BR>>
http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us<BR>><BR><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>Message:
3<BR>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:02:20 -0400<BR>From: "Dwight Holmes"
<DWIGHTRHOLMES@GMAIL.COM><BR>Subject: [RP TownTalk] re proposed property tax
increase -- an apology<BR>(and some considerable relief!)<BR>To: TownTalk
<TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG><BR>Message-ID:<BR><8123da3c0705221102i6fbfbdccu8511e0900028ba9f@mail.gmail.com><BR>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed<BR><BR>i apologize for
inadvertently giving out wrong information at last<BR>night's town meeting.
having done a hasty,<BR>trying-to-get-to-the-meeting-on-time calculation, i
misinterpreted our<BR>State of Maryland Assessment Notice, and thus came up
with a number<BR>exactly triple of what it should have been: 19% rather than
57%. you<BR>can imagine that we are as relieved as anyone to know that it's
not<BR>57%!<BR><BR>one reason i was so hurried in doing that calculation was
it took me a<BR>long time to decipher the semiannual "Consolidated Tax Bill
for Tax<BR>Year Jul 1, 2006 to Jun 30, 2007" statement.<BR>the reason for that
being that some of the numbers on that statement<BR>are annual while others
are semiannual -- and they kind of leave it up<BR>to the reader to figure that
out. so it took awhile to make sense of<BR>it.<BR><BR>when i did i was able to
determine that our Town of Riverdale Park<BR>taxes make up almost exactly 33%
of our total property tax bill. (PG<BR>County's portion is 41%, and the
remaining 26% is made up of the other<BR>various taxing jurisdictions, the
largest portion of which is Park &<BR>Planning)<BR><BR>so the proposed
increase that we are now discussing will affect<BR>roughly one-third of our
bill. i have some questions about the<BR>entire, overall process, but i will
save those until i have gathered<BR>more and better information.<BR><BR>--
<BR>~~<BR>Map of Riverdale Park MD Trolley Hiker-Biker Trail and Cafritz
Property<BR>http://tinyurl.com/2wsfql<BR>~~<BR>Tracking the Washington
Nationals' 2007 season (will they catch the '62
Mets?):<BR>http://tinyurl.com/2m6f43<BR><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>TownTalk
mailing
list<BR>TownTalk@riverdale-park.org<BR>http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk<BR><BR>For
more information about Riverdale Park, visit
http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us<BR><BR>End of TownTalk Digest, Vol 10,
Issue
50<BR>****************************************<BR></TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG></DWIGHTRHOLMES@GMAIL.COM></WALKER@POBOX.COM></BOOK-SMART@VERIZON.NET></TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG></MAUREEN.FARRINGTON@GMAIL.COM></WALKER@POBOX.COM></TOWNTALK@RIVERDALE-PARK.ORG></DWIGHTRHOLMES@GMAIL.COM></BOOK-SMART@VERIZON.NET></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! <BR><A
href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48223/*http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow">Play
Monopoly Here and Now</A> (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo!
Games.</BODY></HTML>