@ Susan: With deference to you position government does not generate wealth. Business and entrepreneurs generate wealth. Government can make it easier or more difficult for wealth generation to occur. Also, as New Jersey ranks either 49th or 50th of the fifty states in terms of total state and local tax burden per person and other states mange to have public schools, fire protection, and law enforcement with lower taxes. It is a question of running government within the confines of a reasonable cost structures. Thus, I would argue we in New Jersey and locally in West Orange have a government spending problem as opposed to an issue of not generating enough money for the government in tax revenue.

@ James Joseph: The problem with letting millionaires leave is that tax revenue goes with them.

@ MP and Paul Corrigan from West Orange: First and foremost, assessing responsibility for municipal property tax increase on any one individual is so ridiculous as to be absurd.

Mr. McKeon served and managed the Township well during his 12 year tenure and brought in zero increase municipal budgets during 5 of those 12 years. Please do keep in mind that municipal government is only one small rung up the economic ladder from the citizen-taxpayer and both are subject to the same economic forces well beyond their control.

That said, Mr. McKeon did hold two elective offices (Mayor and Assemblyman) for a period of time, having been elected and re-elected to both repeatedly. The practice was not illegal nor "sleazy" and represented the majority of his constituent's will.

For MP to call the man a "crook" is nothing more than cowardly, anonymous character assassination...period.

Though his holding both offices was "grandfathered in" and he could have continued to do so, he opted not to run for re-election as mayor.

Whatever your personal feelings may be here, the simple fact of the matter reamins that Mr. McKeon serves in public office at considerable detriment to both his family and personal finances.

He'd be far better off financially if he devoted his time and energies solely to his law practice.

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange:

Hiding behind a screen name and calling another human being "a crook" is an act of cowardly, anonymous character assassination and I need not "tone it down" or apologize for identifying it for what it is.

Disagree with someone's political positions and philosphy all you'd like but, do so with some logic and common sense rather than unbridled nonsense.

@ Paul P: And your's would be more cowardly, anonymous nonsense.

@ Paul P: The opinion of, an indentifiable human being, whose resume and biases (if any) can be easily ascertained, has far more merit than those of someone clearly ill-informed who is hiding behind a psuedonym.

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange: Oh, are you and "Paul P" one in the same, or is this the latest take on the "Musical Screen Name Game?"

Sorry, $70B, not $70M.

If you are referring to the BC study that Gov. Christie has referred to as taking $70M out of the state, here it is: www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/research_sites/cwp/pdf/njreport.pdf

Page 27 (table 7) shows the percentage of wealthy people who left New Jersey for 18 different reasons; taxes are not listed as one of those reasons. "New Job or Job Transfer" is the highest percentage for both millionaires and all households.

@ Adam Kramer: If it comes down to taking your economic advice, or Warren Buffet's, I'm going with "The Oracle of Omaha."

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/billionaire_buffett_snaps_back.html

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange: Then work on your reading comprehension since my comment (re: hiding behind a screen name) wasn't directed at you.

@ Paul P: Just how have you concluded that "everyone who works at town hall" has a Blackberry?

At best, it's likely they're issued just to department directors and not even to all of them if the necessity to be out of the office isn't a regular part of their workday.

@ Democracy - Could you kindly site the source where you get your data: The data I have seen contracditcs what you are stipulating.

The number of millionaires by State for 2009, 2010 and 2011 can be found here:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pf_article_113718.html

New Jersey's number of millionaire households is the second highest in the country and it went up between 2009 and 2010, when the millionaire surcharge was in place.

@ MP: This is an old saw ("People like McKeon want to take money from taxpayers and give to public worker unions because they are his supporters.") that is just so much nonsense and at variance with documentable fact.

First, there are 30,000 registered voters in West Orange and 1,200 (500 municipal, 700 Bd of Ed) government/quasi-government employees; only about 50% of whom live and vote in the Township.

To believe that any politican panders to them to the exclusion of all others is nonsense and suggests the accusers inability to do basic math: if government employees are your only supporters, you're not winning elections.

Further, by that same logic, no self-interested politician would do anything to alienate this group and reduce this support, would he?

Please then explain why McKeon (and subsequently Parisi) have consistently reduced the size of the municipal workforce and privatized services whenever and wherever possible?

Depends on who is paying the compensation-

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange:

Well, one either believes in and understands a free market economy or one does not.

Regardless of who is paying the bill, it's simply unrealistic to expect that an individual with the prerequsites to fill the aforementioned COO slot could be had for what is being paid the typical frye cook at McDonald's.

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange: You're right on all counts as there has been a paradigm shift when comparing public sector compensation/pensions and benefits to the private sector; the current system is not sustainable.

Still, we can't pillory people for having made a career choice 20 or more years ago and it is simply fundamentally unfair to pull the rug out from under them.

New employees? New rules...period.

Sick and vacation day payouts should be eliminated, banking and use of the former allowed but, surrendered on retirement.

Larger contributions to both benefit packages and retirement funding must also occur.

Mac:

With +/- 600 school districts (of varying sizes) in the State, I am not at all surprised that the average salary is $163,000. You should also keep in mind that we are not one of the smaller systems and are located in one of the highest cost of living (COL)areas in our state.

That said, our Superintendent is nowhere near being "one of the highest paid superintendents in the entire nation," or even the New York metropolitan area, as the articles below will clearly illustrate.

What is amazing to me is just how large some of the salaries being paid are, given they are in areas where to COL is dramatically lower than ours.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Highest-Paid-School-Superintendents-New-York-School-Salaries-132960303.html

http://www.texastribune.org/library/data/texas-superintendent-contracts-annotated/

http://www.illinoisloop.org/salary.html

Paul P: No, it's not true and you clearly don't understand the nature of government and the legislative process if you can't acknowledge that compromise is an integral part of the process.

That said, look at some NJELEC reports and convince yourself just how small a part government employee union donations play in the broad scheme of things.

@ Paul P: Well then, gven that the founding Fathers created a Constitutional democracy, comprised of a government containing three distinct parts and relying on the concept of majority rule, compromise (or "ass kissing" as you prefer) goes with the territory.

Precisely what system would you prefer there, Paulie?

@ Paul P:

Why not enlighten us about the "waste that goes on in the board of education?"

I'm sure you have some great, fact based, verifiable information to impart upon the readers of this blog.

NOT!

@ Paul P: They also never envisioned radio and television, the result being a significant part of the population having their opinions reduced to, and no more profound than, parroting the nonsensical soundbites heard therein.

Pointing out problems (or your version of them) is easy; care to share some solutions?

@ Paul P:

So, you've got nothing, huh?

Why am I not surprised?

It's a public forum Paulie and anyone is free to jump in any time they'd like.

It's not a matter of my being "Mr. know it all," it's a matter of you not knowing anything at all.

@ Mary Mann: My response s best given at sidebar and I've sent you an e-mail,

Thank you Mary.

@ Nick Muson: Well said but, I also doubt any of them thought that labeling anyone (working within the established system) as a "crook, sleazy, shady or unethical," without basis in fact, would result in civil discourse, let alone accomplish much of anything.

@ Anonymous:

Laying responsibility for the inequities of property taxes on one legislator is foolish and uncalled for as true reform will require a majority of the legislature to support it.

The problem is, and always has been, that there will be as many winners as losers if reform is instituted and thus we have paralysis.

I can assure you that Assemblyman McKeon would very much like to see such reform.

His colleagues down in Salem and Cumberland counties?

Not so much!

You can "assure" me?? Are you an official spokesperson for the assemblyman? Can you point us to one piece of legislation he's introduced or sponsored that would truly lighten the tax burden for suburban taxpayers?

And of course there will be "winners and losers," as there have been for the past three decades as we've seen our Income Taxes go up and up, always with the promise that it will provide property tax relief, yet year after year the money has been shifted to the only group that ever wins, the Abbotts.

And it isn't just McKeon, but he's the one on TV pushing yet more income taxes to "fix" the property tax problem.

McKeon Freudian Slip about "Trickle Down" is correct. However, it's "Trickle Down" Property Tax Relief doesn't work.

That is absolutely WRONG!

First, we don't have Abbott anymore. As of 2008, our schools are funded via a formula that allocates resources based on the needs of the children and not on where they live.

School districts with children who are more expensive to educate because they are low-income, special needs or limited English proficient, are supposed to receive more funding under the formula. If a district doesn't have a tax base to draw on, the State has to provide more of that funding. You can pay to educate those children now or pay to keep them in prison later.

To say that all of the income tax goes to the 31 former Abbott districts is ludicrous and completely untrue. For example, South Orange-Maplewood is supposed to receive $7 million from the State and West Orange is supposed to receive $9 million. I say supposed to because Governor Christie has underfunded those districts for the last two years and has proposed doing so again this year.

If his budgets funded the schools rather than giving $1.2 billion in tax breaks to corporations, less of the burden would fall on local property taxes. If the 10% income tax goes into effect, it will come directly from school funding and you can guarantee that either your property taxes and fees will rise or the quality of your schools will go down, lowering your property values.

@ Anonymous:

Yes, I can "assure you" that Assemblyman McKeon would very much like to see property tax and education funding reform.

I know the man well, and his feelings in this regard, and while I am not his "official spokesman," I am one of his Legislative Aides.

It's pointless to introduce legislation for the sake of introducing legislation, or simply being able to point to having done so, if it has no chance of being passed into law.

A great deal is played out behind the scenes and gaining consensus and the support of the majority required to make that happen. With the makeup of the legislature changing every two years, it's often a "two steps forward, one step back" situation.

Look what happened with gay marriage; two years ago, the legislation couldn't make it out of either the assembly or the senate.

This month, the bill made it to the Governor's Office, only to be vetoed.

If you won't even propose legislation, how do you expect to make any changes? People need to be rallied around something tangible, not just the throw-away line, "I can "assure you" that Assemblyman McKeon would very much like to see property tax and education funding reform."

It's time to get serious, or get out of the way. Taking up a seat in the legislature and voting as the party and the unions direct is in conflict with the needs of your constituents, and there's nothing moral about that.

@ Paul Corrigan from West Orange:

We are substantially in agreement on most everything, with the possible exception of health benefits for public safety personnel.

As putting one's life and limb at considerably more risk than the typical wage earner goes with the territory, I'd be more inclined to see them bear less of the burden of the cost of their coverage than non-uniform types.

Heath Care insurance for Public Sector employees has been growing at 15 - 20% per year for the past decade. With taxpayers picking up 100% of the cost, employees have had zero incentive for looking at more economical plans, or to try to find ways to utilize health care providers in a way that would save their employers any money.

Until employees pay a reasonable share (20 - 35%), costs will continue to grow at rates that will cripple local, county and state governments' ability to deliver needed services as they cut programs and staff to cover the benefits for remaining employees.

@ Paul P: And if that be true, it appears to be an eclectic mix of organizations with often competing interested who will get exactly what anyone who hasn't made a donation to Assemblyman McKeon will get: a fair and impartial hearing of their concerns and appropriate action when and if it is in the public good.

You can't legislate ethics and morality and a man with both isn't about to be swayed by a campaign donation.

@ Mary Mann: Thank you!

@ Paul P:

Yup, that's exactly what I'm saying.

It may have escaped your notice but, we are all better served with intelligent, principled people in public office and Assemblyman McKeon has the support of many who believe just that.

Most on this list appear to be trade organizations, not unions and certainly not public employee unions.

@ MP: While the profit motive is clearly missing, one can certainly compare a public and private entity in terms of size and complexity.

I stand firm in my resolve that, in most cases, you'd be hard pressed to find someone running a private company the size of the West Orange Public Schools who was not being paid substantially more than $225,000 per year.

@ Paul P:

And where is the lack of "Integrity" in representing and assisting a municipality in the legislative district you represent?

None that I see.

While I would dispute how you characterize the organizations you previously listed, what is the point you think you've proven?

If it is that the man has compromised his ethic by accepting a donation from anyone, you've submitted nothing in evidence to support such a claim.

Why was Codey's hometown the only one getting a million bucks? Weren't there enough ornaments on the Christmas tree for everyone in the 27th District?

"His" home? The one he sold in January 2010? The one he still pays the property taxes on? The new owners must be so grateful!

Or is there another "home" on Beverly Road that Richie owns?

@ Alex Sohn: The salient point of the exercise was that Governor Codey did not move to Roseland because he was "fed up" with the "high taxes" in West Orange; he purchased a home there some time ago, did extensive renovations to it and ultimately moved in.

He continued to own the home he owned and lived in (on Beverly Road) for some time thereafter and I recall he was renting it.

If he sold it, it's news to me but, I'm not quite as obsessed with other people's private business as some.

I do know that buying, renovating and re-selling homes is not something foreign to the Governor who owned at least one other (on Beverly Road) in addition to the own he and his family occupied.

The salient point is that you spew whatever nonsense enters your head. You claim to be close to people who move and leave you no forwarding address. :-)

Pathetic.

@ Alan Sohn:

Hardly, Governor Codey moved to Roseland, I had/have his new address and was aware he retained ownership of his former residence on Beverly Road and was renting the property.

He had no need to tell me he subsequently sold it and I had no need to ask and if any of this is germane to anything of substance, I fail to see where.

@ wohopeful:

Anyone not understanding that Governor Codey has a sense of humor, and that he was teasing John McKeon when he made these remarks, simply fails to acknowledge that the two men are long-time friends and colleagues.

An alternate explanation, and a much more plausible one is - Sometimes the real truth just slips out. In politics, it's what's known as a Kinsley gaffe.

@ wohopeful: Taken in context, the remarks were entirely appropriate,,,and humorous...despite any subsequent editorializing and spin.

If the worst you can say about someone is that you didn't appreciate an intentionally humorous remark they made three years ago, I'd say they don't have too much to worry about.

@ wohopeful: I don't believe Governor Codey needs to come out and state that his clearly humorous comment was a clearlyhumorous comment, meant to be good natured teasing, nor has anyone (publicly or privately) ask that he do so.

The editorializing and spin are all yours, wohopeful, as anyone viewing an unedited version of the clip can certainly make their own evaluation of its meaning and intent without your help.

Gary - Is your full time, taxpayer funded job to sit on Patch and rebut every remark made about the useless District 27 representatives?

@ Michael: I rather doubt you're "my buddy" as my friends aren't of the type to hide behind screen names spewing venomous nonsense.

Neither John McKeon, nor any other single individual (Republican of Democrat), is directly and solely responsible for whatever pain you're feeling as a result of your local property tax bill and to suggest such a thing is nonsense.

"Libs are stupid?"

Well, it appears that Warren Buffet is among them since his ideas on taxes and economic policy pretty much mirror John McKeon's.

I don't know about you, Mikey but, I'd love to be as stupid (and rich) as Warren Buffet for just an hour!

Mentioning Kevin Keogh and John McKeon in the same breath is to say you know neither of them very well at all, as more polar opposites never existed.

Do politicians stumble and fall?

Sure...and so do people in every other profession and vocation walking the face of the earth...and such folly isn't the sole province of one political party over another.

Please do keep in mind that only one President and one Vice-President of the United States (in the last 50 years) resigned their respective offices ahead of the filing of criminal charges and/or probable impeachment and both were conservative Republicans.

Ah, so droll, yet you didn't answer the question.

And your lame defense of a bunch of limousine liberals who vacuum up hundreds of millions in taxes, yet return a fraction in tax relief (whoop-di-freakin-do, they got a whole $1M for Dick Codey's hometown of Roseland) is just pathetic.

Everyone knows they are the protectors of the status quo when it comes to tax reform, tenure reform, or any other type of reform that would really benefit THEIR constituents.

@ wohopeful: Well then, I guess you'll believe whatever you'd like and it's all inconsequential anyway.

Thank you Mr. Englert as I knew I had it correct. Any doubts we could just go to the video archives.

Too bad about cousin Ray though huh?

wohopeful: No, you don't have it right but, it's all inconsequential, as I said.

There's a scene in "The Godfather" where Hyman Roth is discussing his protege Moe Green's death with Michael Corleone (who had him killed), where Roth, after telling Michael that though Moe was a visonary whom he loved like a son, he had his flaws and didn't complain when he was killed because, "Michael, this is the business that we've chosen."

That phrase is one of my personal mantras.

Well, Ray Codey took a job in the political arena and shifting sands are a part of it that I'm sure he understood,

Freud would have a field day with someone who admits he lives his life based on a quote from a fictional organized crime boss.

Maybe you shoulda went with, "leave the gun, take the cannolis."

Don't worry, McKeon, Jasey and Codey are down in Trenton fighting every day for the hard working taxpayers in District 27, and in a few minutes GaryE will put up another post telling us that.