Grassroots Groundswell

Article from msnbc.com on how city governments are stepping up to help homeowners stay in their homes while the feds are failing to take strong, effective action. What are Allen & Co. doing? David Lepak asked them months ago. Still no ideas; still no answers.

Just in from Jerry Jacala:

I found the attached document [announcing the federal Hope Now program, follow-up article here.]

Federal Foreclosure Help

in the Boro website regarding a program for homeowners on the verge of defaulting on their mortgage loan.

I thought it might help some of the many owners desperately trying to sell their homes.

I know when I asked a realtor about the high inventory of “short sale” properties recently, she said it is property taxes and unemployment that are forcing people to sell.

I think this is an issue that really needs more attention.

I think most people pay their property taxes through an escrow account handled by their mortgage lender and therefore do not directly monitor how much their taxes have increased through the years or even how much they are, period.

An account of comments made about Villa Maria development during the June 9 Council meeting.

Developer Robert McNerney’s application will be on the Planning Board’s June 25 agenda, 7 p.m. at Vermeule.

During public comment, Fred Jones brought up developer Robert McNerney’s plan to apply for permits to build 55 single-family homes at the site, pointing out that the three main scenarios for the parcel in recent years have been 225 age-restricted condominiums, 55 single-family homes, and a park in the wooded portion of the parcel nearest to Stony Brook combined with a handful of large, half-acre or one-acre single family lots along Interhaven and Grove.

Mr. Jones noted that the market value of the property is now a matter of public record, since McNerney bought the property in late March for $3.93 million (far below the estimated value of tens of millions thrown around previously).

He said there’s an opportunity for the Borough to intervene by coming up with a proposal to preserve the wooded area as a public park for Borough residents (pointing out that there are many Borough residents who live in apartment complexes north of Route 22, where there are no parks) and either permit McNerney to build large-lot homes, or take the property through eminent domain and then sell large lots to individual builders.

Mr. Jones offered to work with Council members to help them network with county and state funding sources. He advocated adoption of a small municipal open space tax (to make the Borough eligible for open space funding). And he advocated the Shade Tree Commission ordinance as a means to protect the woodlands from destruction, emphasizing that the Council members’ purported concern about loss of Mayor and Council authority to Shade Tree Commission members is misplaced, since all commission decisions would be appeal-able to the Mayor.

“If you’re worried about loss of control, just read the ordinance,” Mr. Jones said. “I’m sure you [Council members] don’t want 55 houses…We have time, but it’s not on our side. I’d like to recommend that we move on this.”

Bill Campbell of Green Brook agreed with Mr. Jones, noting that former Green Brook Mayor Pat Walsh, who attended Planning Board hearings last summer to object to the ARC development plan, is now a Somerset County Freeholder with new contacts and resources she could leverage on North Plainfield’s behalf.

Mentioning the Supreme Court’s recent rulings in favor of eminent domain for public purposes, Mr. Campbell emphasized “You can do it. You have the right to do it.”

Mr. Campbell also pointed out that, if single-family homes on average house one child each, McNerney’s proposed development would add 55 children to the public school system. Estimating $10,000 per child, [it's actually $13,841for 2008-2009] he said that would add up to at least $550,000 per year [actually at least $761,255] in added school budget costs for Borough taxpayers.

Mr. Campbell contrasted that with the likely smaller annual principal and interest payments taxpayers would incur on a $4 million loan to purchase and preserve the wooded portion of the parcel and permit a handful of large-lot homes along Interhaven and Grove. [Such a loan would also eventually be paid off, unlike school costs, which are an ongoing public obligation.]

“So it does seem that the cost of money is lower than the cost of schooling those children,” Mr. Campbell said.

Barbara Habeeb (prior to her appointment to the Council, which was among the last items on the agenda) agreed with Mr. Jones and Mr. Campbell, adding that she’s done “a gazillion research” on possible ways to save Villa Maria and concluding: “I think that this is something that we can do together, as at team.”

[Ms. Habeeb later observed that the Borough currently does not need to provide additional affordable housing as per the Council on Affordable Housing's Third Round Rules, although we are obliged to rehabilitate existing low-income housing. Ms. Habeeb is currently seeking a copy of the settlement that ended the Villa Maria nuns' 2003 COAH lawsuit.]

At the June 9 Council meeting, Margaret Mary Jones (a past and perhaps current member of the Somerset County Planning Board) noted that new COAH requirements will kick in IF the Borough permits new home construction, pointing out that COAH rules require one new affordable housing unit for every five market-rate homes built. In other words, if the developer builds 55 new homes, the Borough must see that 11 new affordable homes get built somewhere in the Borough, at Villa Maria or, if the developer refuses, elsewhere in the Borough.

“The burden will be upon the town to build those houses,” Mrs. Jones said.

Council members did not comment on the issue.

“Bird Droppings” is a new occasional feature, which will be collections of small bits of information plopped by various aviary sources around the Borough.

OF PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AND PUPPET SHOWS

Got the new Borough of North Plainfield & Board of Education Newsletter. The second of its kind, the newsletter contains primarily fluff pieces about Borough departments, plus fluff pieces about the schools, plus copious PR for Borough-sponsored social activities, which are, as I’ve mentioned, the main organizing strength possessed by the current Borough leadership.

Anyway, I scanned down the Table of Contents on the cover:

Rescue Squad, page 2 (seeking new volunteers).

Recreation, page 2 (introduction to the new Director Chris Tarver, hired in a controversial backroom compromise deal to keep long-time local Rec volunteers out of the position and who, word is, likes to spend money and time on computers and paperwork, but is not so competent at things like game scheduling, event coordination and the social networking aspects of keeping volunteer coaches informed and supported in their work with the kids…

Tootling along, we find:

“Property Maintenance - page 3.”

What’s this? Is Janice Allen or Jim Rodino going to say something intelligible and responsive about the property maintenance concerns (code violations and overcrowding) that have so many local residents up in arms?

Well, no.

Turns out that the article is about puppet shows on recycling that the Property Maintenance Committee puts on at local elementary schools, because they’re an advisory committee with no authority to supervise, discipline or fire DPW employees who fail to do their jobs. But puppet shows? Yes! They are qualified and authorized to conduct puppet shows.

MIKE CASTRO AND A STEP-ONE TEACHING POSITION

Mike Castro is the substitute teacher at the high school who’s all but bankrupted himself tutoring ESL kids for free. Although several members of the School Board support him (so far intangibly, as he struggles on working full-time, but earning only the $13,000 per year substitute teacher’s income), they have apparently been told that Mike can’t be hired as a Step One salaried full-time teacher with a living wage, because he has a “certificate of eligibility” for high school teaching in Social Studies and Spanish, (plus a master’s degree in education and several years of teaching experience) but not a regular New Jersey teaching license.

However, the District hires a handful of such “certificate of eligibility” teachers every year, including last year, on a case by case basis, whenever the Board and Administration decide that the teacher has the qualifications and the district has the need. Perhaps as more Board members become aware of the bureaucratic shell-game being played, they’ll step up and go to bat for Mike.

SCHOOL BOARD v. RECREATION COMMISSION

Long-time local observers have noted that the School Board, which controls access to all the playing fields throughout the Borough, and the Recreation Commission, which needs to use those fields for recreational programs, often experience a lot of friction when trying to work together (that’s a big understatement, and perusal of Rec Commission minutes over the past few years reportedly bears this out).

But it’s more than a little strange given the familial overlap among some members of each local committee. Tom Allen was elected to the School Board and appointed to the Rec. Commission, and currently sits on both.

Sandra Dodd was reelected to the School Board last year, and her husband, Ray Dodd, is chairman of the Rec. Commission, which is a Commission entirely appointed by the Mayor with no Council approval of appointments required by law or sought in practice.

It’s another example of the closed circuit of local politics, and the practical deadlock which that groupthink engenders. You’d think that simultaneous appointments, and spousal appointments, would provide for rapid and easy tranfer of information and facilitate conflict resolution between the two groups. But it apparently doesn’t.

FIRE SAFETY AND ILLEGAL HOUSING

I recently learned that there was a house fire in a Willow Avenue home a few months ago, and when the Fire Department came to put out the first floor fire, they discovered that an entire family (presumably mother, father and several children) had been living in the basement of the home, in an illegal apartment with, among numerous other code violations, no windows for light and fresh air. Apparently no one was injured in the fire, thank goodness; I’ll try to find time to go to the Fire Department and get a copy of the incident report.

Neighbors had apparently been somewhat aware of the over-occupancy, since there were more than the usual number of cars and people going in and out. Interestingly, since the fire, the home has been a lot quieter - fewer people, fewer cars.

The neighbors probably reported their concerns, and probably nothing was done to investigate the code violations, fine the property owner, and relocate the family to safer, more appropriate housing using the part of the local code that requires the property owner to pay the relocating tenants six times the monthly rent they were paying for the illegal apartment. See Borough Code, Chapter 11-11.2

I think North Plainfield could articulate and carry out a very reasonable, moderate policy on illegal housing, simply by acknowledging and embracing our obviously multi-cultural community, while also saying “Enough already!”

As Americans, we do have a fairly decent tradition of welcoming immigrants. Granted, large waves from particular regions have in the past, and are currently, creating tensions, mostly (I think) because absorption by the host country and assimilation by the immigrant population both take time, and a huge rapid wave swamps both groups’ capacities for negotiating the transition smoothly.

That’s what’s happening in a microcosm in North Plainfield: we’re overpopulated. Not by immigrants as immigrants, but by people as people. So it’s entirely reasonable and possible for Janice Allen, or, if she continues to fail, for her successor, to monitor and control population density by enforcing housing codes that bar overcrowding by any property owner of any ethnicity. Policies and practices saying we have enough, and probably too many, people living here are not xenophobic assertions that certain types of people should leave.

They’re just a realistic admission that we have our work cut out for us already, to come together as a community and provide the necessary services to all of the residents we can handle, and that other, less-densely populated communities are better places for further population growth.  

DOUBLE-DIPPING AT THE STATE TILL

An alert reader followed up on 2007 A Great Year for Double Dippers, published in the Courier-News. Quote: “with higher salaries come higher pensions payments upon retirement.”

The reader followed the links at the article looking for North Plainfield employees, and learned that the Borough’s Chief Financial Officer Patrick DiBlasio has five New Jersey positions - North Plainfield pays him $36,912 and his income from his five state jobs combined is $203,031.

Joseph Alcino, the Borough’s Construction Official, also has five jobs. He gets $19,689 from the Borough, and his income from his five state jobs combined is $174,912.

Catherine Park, the Borough’s Tax Collector, has four state jobs. North Plainfield pays her $17,469 and her income from her four state jobs combined is $112,116.

TIMEWARPS

Many people in the Borough are concerned about crime, not only what’s happening, but how quickly residents find out about what’s happening to better protect themselves. The Borough offers security survey services and support for starting block watch associations, through the Community Oriented Policing program, as covered in the Borough newsletter cover story, which refers readers to call Detective Kuga at 908-769-2971 for more information; those sound like good programs.

I didn’t realize how peculiar the reporting system twixt police department and local media actually is until I was perusing the Police Blotter section of the April 2, 2008 Courier-News, which included crime reports from January 29, January 30, and January 31, eight weeks earlier. Hardly timely information.

TYPOS

By the way, the Borough newsletter does include information about the low-income housing rehabilitation program run by Friends of the Carpenter. But the phone number is listed wrong. The correct number, which rings at Watchung Avenue Presbyterian Church, is (90 755-2781.

I agree with Mr. Ortega that most of the violations - immigrant and non-immigrant - could probably be solved if everyone clearly knew and understood what the rules require,  knew that there’s funding available to perform the needed repairs (for low and moderate income homeowners who qualify for COAH rehabilitation program being coordinated by Friends of the Carpenter) and knew that there would be real legal consequences for non-compliance after official notification.

I also agree with critics of the Allen Administration, who see that the Allen Administration has not and is not taking any steps to inform people of the needed repairs, encourage people to use the available funding streams, and then use the prosecution tools to force compliance (if people refuse to make the repairs even after they’re aware of the problem and the funding streams).Ramshackle structures and overcrowded structures (particularly when the inhabitants are unrelated, which is the case for the rooming houses) are unsafe for the inhabitants and lower the quality of life and property values for all the residents - immigrant and non-immigrant - in the neighborhoods around them. They’re also likely to lead to costly legal penalties if and when future Borough administrators enforce the property maintenance and zoning codes more rigorously.

That current administrative failure also opens the Borough to safety and legal implications - the Borough could be sued if something bad happened to inhabitants of an unsafe structure. And any settlement for any such lawsuit would cost taxpayers the money to pay the settlement.

In other words, we need the community carrot and the community stick.

Right now we don’t have either.

Meetings start at 7:30 p.m at Vermeule Community Center. (Agendas here.)

Went to the Borough Clerk’s office today to look through the Council correspondence. The office has moved upstairs, due to renovations on the ground floor of Borough Hall, so to find it, follow the “Town Hall” signs, go down Lincoln Place, around behind the fire truck bays and up the back stairs. It was a little chaotic, so I took notes and didn’t request photocopies. The documents are there for review during normal business hours, however.

From the correspondence files:

Public Transportation - Trains: Public hearings will be held in Newark on March 31, 2008, regarding the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) on the Access to the Region’s Core project of the New Jersey Department of Transportation. More info here and here.

Summary of the project: “The ARC project extends from Frank R. Lautenberg Station in Secaucus, New Jersey to Fifth Avenue and West 34th Street in Manhattan. As currently envisioned, the project would include the construction of a new track connection between the Main/Bergen/Pascack Valley Lines and the Northeast Corridor (NEC) at Secaucus Junction, a new rail yard in Kearny, New Jersey and two new tunnels under the Palisades in New Jersey and the Hudson River that would connect to a facility under West 34th street with passenger connections to existing Penn Station and New York City Transit. The new facility would be an expansion of existing PSNY and referred to as New York Penn Station Expansion (NYPSE).”

Hearings to be held Monday, March 31, 2008 at the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, One Newark Center, 17th Floor, Raymond Boulevard, Newark, NJ 07102; 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM and 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM

Affordable Housing - Residential Development: The Council on Affordable Housing has released GIS (Geographic Information Systems) data on “Analysis of Vacant Land in New Jersey and Its Capacity to Support Future Growth.” The report is posted here, but it doesn’t go down to the municipality-specific level.  It’s part of the Third Round Rules process, with an overview, including links to lots of detailed reports, posted here.

Property Taxes/Litigation: Estate 22 Properties, LLC, owner of property at 59 Coddington and other Borough parcels, has filed a lawsuit against the Borough alleging discriminatory practices in property tax assessments. The law firm representing the plaintiffs is Lasser Hochman LLC and their letter to the Borough states that they’ll be collecting information about property taxation practices in other area municipalities to support their discrimination allegation. Several other property tax appeal letters were in the file, including one from CVS pharmacy, although the other appellants did not allege discrimination.

Water Supply - New Jersey American Water Corp. has requested permission from the state utilities board to raise water rates. If approved, the rate hike would boost the water company’s revenues by 23.35% over its current revenues of $534.1 million per year. Some analysts believe the move is designed to improve the corporation’s bottom line before its parent company, German owned RWE, divests. (Corporation owns water - part of the corporate control issue addressed by the local self-goverance ordinance put forward by North Plainfield citizens and quashed by Borough officials.) 

Public hearings on the rate hike will be held in New Jersey April 2 through 4, but I’m having trouble finding the locations and times.

More articles here and here.

Dell’Olio Development on Rockview: Langan Consultants, the environmental consultants working for Dell’Olio, have filed an application for a Freshwater Wetland General Permit and Stream Encroachment Permit. Written comments may be sent to the Department of Environmental Protection within 30 days after the application shows up in the DEP Bulletin, published semi-monthly.

Will North Plainfield’s Environmental Commission submit a letter?

Environmental Violations - The DEP also did an investigation on February 6 and discovered 10 cubic yard of fill had been dumped into the Crab Creek. DEP sent a letter to the dumper, whose name I forgot to write down, requiring corrective action to remove the fill from the brook.

Following are the proposed Third Round Rules from the NJ Council on Affordable Housing.

COAH - Cover Letter

COAH - Third Round Rules

As I noted earlier, North Plainfield is required to create zero (0) new homes; we’re required to renovate/rehabilitate a total of 282 homes between 2004 and 2018.  (See page 8 of the COAH Rules document)

In fact, the Somerset County Planning Board projects that North Plainfield will see a net loss of 55 homes by 2020, from demolitions, which, as I’ve noted before, makes sense given our status as the most densely populated municipality in the county. (See page 10 of the COAH Rules).

This means that Allen Administration claims during Planning Board hearings last summer - that condo development at Villa Maria is essential to help the Borough meet its COAH obligations - were a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Friends of the Carpenter is still on board to help the Borough plan, administer and implement a COAH-compliant housing rehab program, as evidenced by a Feb. 11 Council resolution.

Friends of the Carpenter - Resolution

Demolition might be a good way to handle the growing foreclosure/abandoned house problem in North Plainfield. And those newly vacant lots could be converted to “pocket parks” as called for in the 1974 Master Plan. (Click here and then scroll down to pages 67-68).

Posted in the comments section of the Courier-News editorial:

One correction: Mark Williams is now the co-chair of NPCCR; I sent this letter to the Courier-News before Mark’s election March 5. (I’m now focusing on editing the blog, which can be reached through www.npccr.org or www.communityrights.wordpress.com)

For CN readers in other towns confronted with predatory land developers and other corporate assaults on local self-governance, please check out www.celdf.org, the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund.

NP’s elected leaders currently lack the vision and courage to use the legal tools designed by CELDF, not without reason, because those tools are intimidating. Adopting the ordinance, whether by voter initiative or Council vote, would be an act of community civil disobedience designed to challenge and overturn unjust laws, and not every community and local governing body is ready to take on that challenge.

NP might get there in the next few years if less comprehensive local measures fail to protect the community and/or if a new crop of leaders take office, by democratically adopting a similar ordinance (over the objections of the judge this time around). The test for “failure” is not the opinion of individual municipal attorneys and judges who short-circuit the democratic process. The only truly democratic way to find out what the people of any community want is to put those measures on the agendas or on the ballots, have the public debates, and have the public votes.

Because if the source of all political power in America truly is the People, then the People have the right to challenge and change unjust laws, and adopt new laws as they see fit, even at the local level. That’s what the ordinance does. Your community might be ready now.

On the subject of senior housing in North Plainfield, equating opposition to condos at Villa Maria with opposition to elderly North Plainfielders is a false equation. I haven’t seen any homeless senior citizens roaming around. Many local retirees are busier than ever, right in the thick of local issues and community groups.

Borough elders are mostly housed in houses and apartments, and the biggest problem is that they struggle under the same high property tax burden as everyone else. There’s no shortage of available housing in NP - hundreds of houses up for sale, on the market for months on end, more and more of them foreclosed and vacant. Plus, the condos were to be sold for $325,000 to $375,000, far beyond reach for most of NP’s seniors.

Over the last 10 months, I and others have put forward many proposals to create appropriate senior housing, including incubation of local businesses that would provide affordable housekeeping, transportation, home health care and meal preparation services for seniors who want to age in their own homes; Borough support for investors who want to renovate some or all of the Villa Maria buildings into a new nursing home or assisted living facility, or into apartments, without destroying the history or the trees; and Borough support for investors who want to renovate the St. Joseph’s School building into senior housing.

On the side issues - my level of sincerity and where I should be focusing my political energy - one person wrote to object because I’ve brought ideas from a national movement to bear on a local problem, and another person wrote to object that the problem is not local, it’s national, and I should spend more time trying to oust Bush. In response, I’ve taken “think globally, act locally” to heart. North Plainfielders can’t do a whole lot about the national problems without rolling up our sleeves and digging in here, where we’re most directly affected and where we actually have the power to make a significant difference.

Another objection is that I can’t possibly be sincere about trying to better North Plainfield because I’m leaving, as though future life-changes invalidate current participation, as though perceptions matter more than actions, and as though my individual level of sincerity matters more than the issues and the information all of North Plainfield’s residents are grappling with. Wrong.

Anyone can get involved in public life, no matter how long they’ve lived in the Borough, and for as long as they want to be involved.

Actions matter more than perceptions.

And the issues and information are far more important to the well-being of the whole community than the individual situation of any one person engaged in the public conversation.

I care about North Plainfield as much as I care about anyplace - a lot. Because I think they’re all connected: we sink or swim together.

A couple of quotes, from Thomas Edison:

“I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”

“Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.”

Another document turned up in the Council correspondence files: a December 12, 2007 letter from James P. Ruggieri, Principal Community Planner with the Somerset County Planning Board, to Borough Administrator David Hollod, with copies to Mayor Allen, Borough Clerk Pflueger, Planning Board Chair Tom Fagan, and Borough Planner Marta Lefsky.

Municipal Planning Program Letter

The letter is about unspent money ($13,050) leftover from the 2003 Municipal Partnership Planning Grant the Borough received to conduct a Downtown Traffic Origin and Destination Study.

The December letter references a May 23, 2007 letter, sent by the county planners, to Dave Hollod, suggesting that the Borough reprogram the remaining money to conduct other studies on important local issues like the Council on Affordable Housing program, Office of Smart Growth endorsement of the Borough’s “Town Center” status, or “green design” and “clean energy” projects like energy audits or studies to seee if municipal buildings could be retrofitted for solar panels.

Six months later, by December, the county planner had not yet heard back from Mr. Hollod on the Borough’s plans for that money.

So the December letter set January 25 as the final deadline for reprogramming the money: no application by January 25, the money would go back into the county’s general operating expense account.

I have no idea whether the Borough acted quickly enough to keep that money, and if so, which project the money will go toward.

My guess is they failed to respond and missed the deadline, again, but I’d be glad to receive and post information to the contrary.

The second part of the letter deals with the 2004 MPP grant, which was apparently used to draft an Affordable Housing Senior Program plan.

According to the letter, Borough Planner Marta Lefsky had submitted the plan, but one remaining document was missing: a “Scope of Work” report showing specific evidence of how public outreach was “conducted to obtain local residents’ feedback concerning neighborhood vision, issues, recommendations, etc.”

It bugs me for a bunch of reasons. For one thing, county and state grant money generally goes preferentially to recipients with a demonstrated track record of using prior grant allocations well, for obvious reasons: granting agencies don’t want to see money frittered away. The Borough does not have such a positive reputation, which puts us lower down on the priority lists during future grant funding rounds.

Another irritant is the letter’s reference to two reports - a 2003 Downtown Traffic Origin and Destination Study” and a 2004 “Affordable Housing Senior Plan” - that have yet to be made public despite numerous requests from me and other local residents seeking any data- containing reports that might shed light on why Borough officials have made some of the planning decisions they’ve made in recent years. Other readers have suggested NPCCR should take a look at the results of all the planning grant money obtained and spent in the last decade, particularly on Somerset Street “revitalization.”

What did the studies find?

What did the studies suggest be done?

What was actually done?

What were the tangible results?

My third big gripe is on the sustainable communities topic. Reader views vary about how high a priority “getting off the grid” should be for North Plainfield.

Some argue, rightly, that global warming is not as much of an immediate concern for many Borough residents as how they’ll find the money to pay their next quarterly property tax bill.

My own view is that all the issues are connected, and that it’s extremely urgent for municipalities to move as quickly as possible toward clean, renewable, locally-controlled, affordable energy sources, both for public buildings and private residences. 

[For example, research compiled by the American Friends Service Committee has found that the $720 million spent to fund one day in the war in Iraq would be enough to retrofit 1,274,336 American homes for renewable energy.]

Oil, gas, coal and nuclear heating and electricity costs are only going to rise as the fossil fuel resources deplete, so communities that plan ahead, by using county planning money to do so, will be in better shape moving forward, than communities that drop the ball and miss those opportunities.

I’ve been corresponding with a reader interested in NPCCR’s position on documented and undocumented immigration. Here’s part of the correspondence that I wrote:

NPCCR doesn’t yet have a group position on immigration, but the best that I can sum up member sentiment on the subject, based on working with other people is that, so long as immigrants are living in regular homes (i.e., not overcrowded because an absentee landlord is packing them in to make a big profit) and going about their lives like everyone else, paying regular taxes, sending their kids to school (but not sending their cousins in Plainfield’s kids to NP schools), maintaining their homes in reasonably good condition, then few other people really care if the immigrants are documented or undocumented.

I’ve been rather forcefully encouraged to leave immigration out of the NPCCR platform, because it’s a federal issue anyway - local law enforcement has nothing to do with it. I have my doubts about that, since federal confusion is affecting the willingness of immigrants to particpate as witnesses in law enforcement efforts across the whole country.

But overall, I agree that as a community group, we should stick to issues the community has some control over, like building cross-cultural bridges and dealing with shared concerns.

Through the grapevine, I’ve heard that a number of immigrant families have identical concerns to the ones generally raised by non-immigrant residents. They also want good schools for their kids and decent neighborhoods to live in. So far, we haven’t had a lot of participation from immigrant families at the Town Meetings, but I hope that will change as people get more comfortable with the format.

I’ve also heard from several white people that they are actually more concerned about white, middle class, SUV-driving families overcrowding their homes to try to reduce the household property tax burden, than about immigrant laborers living in rooming houses.

Which is why my overall impression of general Borough sentiment is that it doesn’t have much to do with race, class, and immigration status.

It comes down to applying laws the same to every person, regardless of race, class and immigration status: what bothers people is not immigrants as immigrants, but the impression that local law enforcement, particularly on property maintenance, is failing to enforce laws consistently across the board, possibly to curry favor among likely Democratic voters at election time, leading to law violations across the board by everyone and generally fostering a sense of apathetic lawlessness that’s undermining quality of life, property values, etc., for everyone.