3 years later, Charter still being reviewed. BOT to vote to change their titles. The saga continues....

For me, the current titles are a small part of the history of the village and one of the things that makes it a little bit unique. Not a big deal, but something I like. And something I don't like to see come up over and over again as formal business. I'm fine with the stipends. (Think I've shifted my stance on this over the years.)

This is my opinion as well There is something about the unique titles I love and want to retain The stipend ? The closer I get to many on the Board the more I understand the necessity it would make but a small dent in the costs they bear for all of the above plus the contant requests for donations and support of various most worthy causes Vote to have it start after the current board is out of office to avoid any conflicts of interest

I don't really care much about the titles (although I disliked Torpey's willingness to ignore the official titles).

However, I absolutely think there should be a small stipend, capped below the level that gives pension credit. Making it a purely volunteer job raises economic barriers to service, as kthnry says, and thus skews our representation at Village Hall.

At one point I was asked whether I might be interested in joining a slate, and thought through the likely unreimbursed costs of service (child care, takeout family meals, meetings over coffee, pressure to attend more local charity events, etc), in addition to the time commitment for both myself and my family.

I actually had a decent basis for this analysis, having spent a few years as President of a charitable board. At the end of the day, my decision was that I would make the time and financial sacrifices to serve the needs of homeless families, but was far less likely to do so to serve the needs of my fellow middle and upper-class citizens who expect to get my time and knowledge for free (while I pay the various unreimbursed costs). I honor those who serve, but no longer consider joining them.

kthnry said:

I voted in favor of the stipend. I'm sorry it wasn't implemented. It's not a lot of money but it could make a difference to someone on the fence about running. The minor expenses incurred by office-holders (child care, meals out because of meetings, etc.) do add up and could make the commitment impractical for some excellent candidates.

susan1014 said:

However, I absolutely think there should be a small stipend, capped below the level that gives pension credit.

Excellent point.

susan1014 said:

I don't really care much about the titles (although I disliked Torpey's willingness to ignore the official titles).

However, I absolutely think there should be a small stipend, capped below the level that gives pension credit. Making it a purely volunteer job raises economic barriers to service, as kthnry says, and thus skews our representation at Village Hall.

At one point I was asked whether I might be interested in joining a slate, and thought through the likely unreimbursed costs of service (child care, takeout family meals, meetings over coffee, pressure to attend more local charity events, etc), in addition to the time commitment for both myself and my family.

I actually had a decent basis for this analysis, having spent a few years as President of a charitable board. At the end of the day, my decision was that I would make the time and financial sacrifices to serve the needs of homeless families, but was far less likely to do so to serve the needs of my fellow middle and upper-class citizens who expect to get my time and knowledge for free (while I pay the various unreimbursed costs). I honor those who serve, but no longer consider joining them.

kthnry said:

I voted in favor of the stipend. I'm sorry it wasn't implemented. It's not a lot of money but it could make a difference to someone on the fence about running. The minor expenses incurred by office-holders (child care, meals out because of meetings, etc.) do add up and could make the commitment impractical for some excellent candidates.

Susan,

If a stipend helped you change your mind for all of the legitimate reasons above I'll vote for it. I'd love to see you on the BOT.

So, it appears that the Ordinance to Change the BOT Titles to Council and Mayor passed on first reading by a vote of 4-3. It was a 3-3 tie, with Dubowy, Levison and Rosner opposing the change and Ford, Clark and Schnall supporting it. Sheena cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the Ordinance. A Second reading and Public Hearing will likely be next month.

Sad news. Some elected officials just can't stop trying to pad their own resumes. Kudos to Dubowy, Levison and Rosner. Shame on you Sheena.

I also like unique titles and name. Keep them as is. There could even be improvement. To be really unique and noticed.

Change the M/SO village judge's title from Judge to Reeve.

Instead of Essex County, Essex Shire. Very Tolkien.

Merge with Maplweood and name the new village Valkenvania.

thechamp said:

Sad news. Some elected officials just can't stop trying to pad their own resumes. Kudos to Dubowy, Levison and Rosner. Shame on you Sheena.

Well done, Dubowy, Levison and Rosner! No comment on the rest.

My understanding is that the main reason for changing the titles is because no one outside of South Orange understands what the titles mean. Everyone knows what a mayor or council member is when it comes to governance; a village President or trustee, not so much.

Does this really matter? Does this thread need to pollute the interwebs for all eternity?

Anyone who has followed the subject knows I was virulently opposed to changing the titles But....Had a nice talk with Madam President Collum over the weekend who explained, quite clearly, the benefits of Said Change

I'd prefer to keep it the way it is but am no longer opposed to the change

librarylady said:

Anyone who has followed the subject knows I was virulently opposed to changing the titles But....Had a nice talk with Madam President Collum over the weekend who explained, quite clearly, the benefits of Said Change

I'd prefer to keep it the way it is but am no longer opposed to the change

And the explanation was...?

The vote to change BOT Titles from Trustee/Village President to Councilperson/Mayor is on the agenda for Monday night: (Nov 14)

http://southorange.no-ip.org/weblink8/0/doc/593735/Page1.aspx

michaelgoldberg said:

So, it appears that the Ordinance to Change the BOT Titles to Council and Mayor passed on first reading by a vote of 4-3. It was a 3-3 tie, with Dubowy, Levison and Rosner opposing the change and Ford, Clark and Schnall supporting it. Sheena cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the Ordinance. A Second reading and Public Hearing will likely be next month.

BTW: Today is VP Collum's birthday. Thanks for being born, Sheena, and stay the course.

-s.

Does the explanation have anything to do with pension benefits?

I know this is after the fact but just have one question. A number of years ago South Orange changed its name from South Orange Village to Township of South Orange Village. The reason was strictly monetary. Adding the word township was in some way helpful. Now its changed again. Just curious.

relx said:

My understanding is that the main reason for changing the titles is because no one outside of South Orange understands what the titles mean. Everyone knows what a mayor or council member is when it comes to governance; a village President or trustee, not so much.

I've heard this explanation time and time again. I wish the Trustees would stop seeing this as a negative, and turn it into a positive conversation starter. The titles of our elected officials are pretty unique and make a perfect segue into how unique our town is.

That said, I am interesting in hearing from librarylady more detail about Sheena's explanation of how a title change will positively impact the town.

galileo said:

I know this is after the fact but just have one question. A number of years ago South Orange changed its name from South Orange Village to Township of South Orange Village. The reason was strictly monetary. Adding the word township was in some way helpful. Now its changed again. Just curious.

Ease of convenience. "Townhship of South Orange Village" is a mouthful. "Village of South Orange" has a nice ring to it and is easier to write on a check for taxes.

Cramer , I did some research and found my answer.In 1978 the name was changed by referendum to the Township of South Orange Village. Many Essex county towns reclassified themselves at this time.The reason was to take advantage of federal revenue sharing policies that allocated townships a greater share of government aid to municipalities on a per capital basis. Just wonder if South Orange will be missing out on this revenue.

galileo said:

Cramer , I did some research and found my answer.In 1978 the name was changed by referendum to the Township of South Orange Village. Many Essex county towns reclassified themselves at this time.The reason was to take advantage of federal revenue sharing policies that allocated townships a greater share of government aid to municipalities on a per capital basis. Just wonder if South Orange will be missing out on this revenue.

I should have mentioned that. Yes, the reason that "Township" was put in the name was to take advantage of the money available only to "townships." There is no village form of government in NJ, and all "villages" are governed by the township form of government. That changed many, many years ago and such money is no longer available. The change was in name only. "Township" isn't necessary in the name any longer and my answer was intended to be what I think is the reason for going back to "Village of South Orange."