Guest Mailbag Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Read the letter below from The Observer. Again Mangin is the only one with a pair big enough to speak the truth!!! May 03, 2006 Santos always speaks in jibberish To the Publisher: It’s no secret that over the years, Mayor Alberto G. Santos and I have had our political differences — usually over some fiscal policy or the mayor’s over-use of borrowing money to solve every problem. However, we also tend to “spar” because I always refuse to accept the mayor’s double-talk when he is faced with a tough question. Sadly, the same can’t be said for The Observer. In an article entitled “Santos, Mangin Spar” in your April 19 issue, you easily accepted the mayor’s deliberately evasive answer. I never would’ve accepted anything other than an honest explanation. At issue is a line of revenue in this year’s budget that is under-stated by almost $400,000. That $400,000 was part of the biggest tax increase we’ve seen in years — and it didn’t have to be. Every budget for the past four years uses Sheet 26 of our Annual Financial Statement to determine our anticipated revenue from late tax payments. The most recently filed report shows this budgeted revenue figure should be $1.2 million. However, it’s obvious from this same financial report that the mayor used the wrong line to record this revenue. Instead, he mistakenly used the figure that appears above the correct one — $810,000 — unnecessarily increasing the tax levy by the difference, or $400,000. But, rather than admit this simple but very costly mistake, the mayor attempts to justify it with the most nonsensical explanation I’ve ever heard. Doesn’t anyone question this mayor anymore? In the article, Mayor Santos states: “ The state formula has a lag. It has not yet caught up to the Kearny property taxpayers’ on-time payment rate.” What does this mean? Does anyone understand this explanation? Call the state and ask them if they can make heads or tails of this dribble. Instead, let me offer everyone a simple, understandable explanation of why the $1.2 million figure is correct. In the last fiscal year, we know that 18.1 percent of all taxes collected were for delinquent payments. In this fiscal year, the amount of taxes outstanding is $6.6-plus million. According to the state, we can then anticipate 18.1 percent of this figure as “Receipts for Delinquent Taxes” — or $1,207,882. Using this figure to maximize our revenue keeps taxes as low as the state will permit. This is the same formula we’ve used for years. There is no “lag” or “on-time payment rate” the mayor speaks of. Can Santos offer any explanation as to how the $810,000 figure was arrived at? I can. It’s simple. It appears on the same report we’ve used every year, directly above the figure we’ve used every year. It’s a mistake. But don’t take my word for it. Go to town hall and ask for a copy of the report. Match it to the revenue portion of this year’s budget and see for yourself. Then go back and re-read Mayor Santos’ “explanation.” Unfortunately, it’s Kearny taxpayers who have to pay for this mayor’s foolishness. Jim Mangin, Kearny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Don't be fooled Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Read the letter below from The Observer. Again Mangin is the only one with a pair big enough to speak the truth!!!May 03, 2006 Santos always speaks in jibberish To the Publisher: It’s no secret that over the years, Mayor Alberto G. Santos and I have had our political differences — usually over some fiscal policy or the mayor’s over-use of borrowing money to solve every problem. However, we also tend to “spar” because I always refuse to accept the mayor’s double-talk when he is faced with a tough question. Sadly, the same can’t be said for The Observer. In an article entitled “Santos, Mangin Spar” in your April 19 issue, you easily accepted the mayor’s deliberately evasive answer. I never would’ve accepted anything other than an honest explanation. At issue is a line of revenue in this year’s budget that is under-stated by almost $400,000. That $400,000 was part of the biggest tax increase we’ve seen in years — and it didn’t have to be. Every budget for the past four years uses Sheet 26 of our Annual Financial Statement to determine our anticipated revenue from late tax payments. The most recently filed report shows this budgeted revenue figure should be $1.2 million. However, it’s obvious from this same financial report that the mayor used the wrong line to record this revenue. Instead, he mistakenly used the figure that appears above the correct one — $810,000 — unnecessarily increasing the tax levy by the difference, or $400,000. But, rather than admit this simple but very costly mistake, the mayor attempts to justify it with the most nonsensical explanation I’ve ever heard. Doesn’t anyone question this mayor anymore? In the article, Mayor Santos states: “ The state formula has a lag. It has not yet caught up to the Kearny property taxpayers’ on-time payment rate.” What does this mean? Does anyone understand this explanation? Call the state and ask them if they can make heads or tails of this dribble. Instead, let me offer everyone a simple, understandable explanation of why the $1.2 million figure is correct. In the last fiscal year, we know that 18.1 percent of all taxes collected were for delinquent payments. In this fiscal year, the amount of taxes outstanding is $6.6-plus million. According to the state, we can then anticipate 18.1 percent of this figure as “Receipts for Delinquent Taxes” — or $1,207,882. Using this figure to maximize our revenue keeps taxes as low as the state will permit. This is the same formula we’ve used for years. There is no “lag” or “on-time payment rate” the mayor speaks of. Can Santos offer any explanation as to how the $810,000 figure was arrived at? I can. It’s simple. It appears on the same report we’ve used every year, directly above the figure we’ve used every year. It’s a mistake. But don’t take my word for it. Go to town hall and ask for a copy of the report. Match it to the revenue portion of this year’s budget and see for yourself. Then go back and re-read Mayor Santos’ “explanation.” Unfortunately, it’s Kearny taxpayers who have to pay for this mayor’s foolishness. Jim Mangin, Kearny <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He knows he will never shake Santos and loses every battle, so now he is going after the observer. Jim the best thing you can do is to keep on filling up the empty shelves in Shop-Rite. You are so full of Hot Air.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GUEST Posted May 9, 2006 Report Share Posted May 9, 2006 Read the letter below from The Observer. Again Mangin is the only one with a pair big enough to speak the truth!!! May 03, 2006 Santos always speaks in jibberish To the Publisher: It’s no secret that over the years, Mayor Alberto G. Santos and I have had our political differences — usually over some fiscal policy or the mayor’s over-use of borrowing money to solve every problem. However, we also tend to “spar” because I always refuse to accept the mayor’s double-talk when he is faced with a tough question. Sadly, the same can’t be said for The Observer. In an article entitled “Santos, Mangin Spar” in your April 19 issue, you easily accepted the mayor’s deliberately evasive answer. I never would’ve accepted anything other than an honest explanation. At issue is a line of revenue in this year’s budget that is under-stated by almost $400,000. That $400,000 was part of the biggest tax increase we’ve seen in years — and it didn’t have to be. Every budget for the past four years uses Sheet 26 of our Annual Financial Statement to determine our anticipated revenue from late tax payments. The most recently filed report shows this budgeted revenue figure should be $1.2 million. However, it’s obvious from this same financial report that the mayor used the wrong line to record this revenue. Instead, he mistakenly used the figure that appears above the correct one — $810,000 — unnecessarily increasing the tax levy by the difference, or $400,000. But, rather than admit this simple but very costly mistake, the mayor attempts to justify it with the most nonsensical explanation I’ve ever heard. Doesn’t anyone question this mayor anymore? In the article, Mayor Santos states: “ The state formula has a lag. It has not yet caught up to the Kearny property taxpayers’ on-time payment rate.” What does this mean? Does anyone understand this explanation? Call the state and ask them if they can make heads or tails of this dribble. Instead, let me offer everyone a simple, understandable explanation of why the $1.2 million figure is correct. In the last fiscal year, we know that 18.1 percent of all taxes collected were for delinquent payments. In this fiscal year, the amount of taxes outstanding is $6.6-plus million. According to the state, we can then anticipate 18.1 percent of this figure as “Receipts for Delinquent Taxes” — or $1,207,882. Using this figure to maximize our revenue keeps taxes as low as the state will permit. This is the same formula we’ve used for years. There is no “lag” or “on-time payment rate” the mayor speaks of. Can Santos offer any explanation as to how the $810,000 figure was arrived at? I can. It’s simple. It appears on the same report we’ve used every year, directly above the figure we’ve used every year. It’s a mistake. But don’t take my word for it. Go to town hall and ask for a copy of the report. Match it to the revenue portion of this year’s budget and see for yourself. Then go back and re-read Mayor Santos’ “explanation.” Unfortunately, it’s Kearny taxpayers who have to pay for this mayor’s foolishness. Jim Mangin, Kearny <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/quot Mangin speaks the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Mangin Posted May 11, 2006 Report Share Posted May 11, 2006 Read the letter below from The Observer. Again Mangin is the only one with a pair big enough to speak the truth!!!May 03, 2006 Santos always speaks in jibberish To the Publisher: It’s no secret that over the years, Mayor Alberto G. Santos and I have had our political differences — usually over some fiscal policy or the mayor’s over-use of borrowing money to solve every problem. However, we also tend to “spar” because I always refuse to accept the mayor’s double-talk when he is faced with a tough question. Sadly, the same can’t be said for The Observer. In an article entitled “Santos, Mangin Spar” in your April 19 issue, you easily accepted the mayor’s deliberately evasive answer. I never would’ve accepted anything other than an honest explanation. At issue is a line of revenue in this year’s budget that is under-stated by almost $400,000. That $400,000 was part of the biggest tax increase we’ve seen in years — and it didn’t have to be. Every budget for the past four years uses Sheet 26 of our Annual Financial Statement to determine our anticipated revenue from late tax payments. The most recently filed report shows this budgeted revenue figure should be $1.2 million. However, it’s obvious from this same financial report that the mayor used the wrong line to record this revenue. Instead, he mistakenly used the figure that appears above the correct one — $810,000 — unnecessarily increasing the tax levy by the difference, or $400,000. But, rather than admit this simple but very costly mistake, the mayor attempts to justify it with the most nonsensical explanation I’ve ever heard. Doesn’t anyone question this mayor anymore? In the article, Mayor Santos states: “ The state formula has a lag. It has not yet caught up to the Kearny property taxpayers’ on-time payment rate.” What does this mean? Does anyone understand this explanation? Call the state and ask them if they can make heads or tails of this dribble. Instead, let me offer everyone a simple, understandable explanation of why the $1.2 million figure is correct. In the last fiscal year, we know that 18.1 percent of all taxes collected were for delinquent payments. In this fiscal year, the amount of taxes outstanding is $6.6-plus million. According to the state, we can then anticipate 18.1 percent of this figure as “Receipts for Delinquent Taxes” — or $1,207,882. Using this figure to maximize our revenue keeps taxes as low as the state will permit. This is the same formula we’ve used for years. There is no “lag” or “on-time payment rate” the mayor speaks of. Can Santos offer any explanation as to how the $810,000 figure was arrived at? I can. It’s simple. It appears on the same report we’ve used every year, directly above the figure we’ve used every year. It’s a mistake. But don’t take my word for it. Go to town hall and ask for a copy of the report. Match it to the revenue portion of this year’s budget and see for yourself. Then go back and re-read Mayor Santos’ “explanation.” Unfortunately, it’s Kearny taxpayers who have to pay for this mayor’s foolishness. Jim Mangin, Kearny <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You have to give The Observer credit. They printed a letter that was critical of them and they didn't even edit it. My congrats to them for the change in policy. Jim Mangin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Mangin Posted May 11, 2006 Report Share Posted May 11, 2006 He knows he will never shake Santos and loses every battle, so now he is going after the observer. Jim the best thing you can do is to keep on filling up the empty shelves in Shop-Rite. You are so full of Hot Air.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey! Say what you want about me but, my shelves are not empty. Jim Mangin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2006 Report Share Posted May 11, 2006 Read the letter below from The Observer. Again Mangin is the only one with a pair big enough to speak the truth!!! May 03, 2006 Santos always speaks in jibberish To the Publisher: It’s no secret that over the years, Mayor Alberto G. Santos and I have had our political differences — usually over some fiscal policy or the mayor’s over-use of borrowing money to solve every problem. However, we also tend to “spar” because I always refuse to accept the mayor’s double-talk when he is faced with a tough question. Sadly, the same can’t be said for The Observer. In an article entitled “Santos, Mangin Spar” in your April 19 issue, you easily accepted the mayor’s deliberately evasive answer. I never would’ve accepted anything other than an honest explanation. At issue is a line of revenue in this year’s budget that is under-stated by almost $400,000. That $400,000 was part of the biggest tax increase we’ve seen in years — and it didn’t have to be. Every budget for the past four years uses Sheet 26 of our Annual Financial Statement to determine our anticipated revenue from late tax payments. The most recently filed report shows this budgeted revenue figure should be $1.2 million. However, it’s obvious from this same financial report that the mayor used the wrong line to record this revenue. Instead, he mistakenly used the figure that appears above the correct one — $810,000 — unnecessarily increasing the tax levy by the difference, or $400,000. But, rather than admit this simple but very costly mistake, the mayor attempts to justify it with the most nonsensical explanation I’ve ever heard. Doesn’t anyone question this mayor anymore? In the article, Mayor Santos states: “ The state formula has a lag. It has not yet caught up to the Kearny property taxpayers’ on-time payment rate.” What does this mean? Does anyone understand this explanation? Call the state and ask them if they can make heads or tails of this dribble. Instead, let me offer everyone a simple, understandable explanation of why the $1.2 million figure is correct. In the last fiscal year, we know that 18.1 percent of all taxes collected were for delinquent payments. In this fiscal year, the amount of taxes outstanding is $6.6-plus million. According to the state, we can then anticipate 18.1 percent of this figure as “Receipts for Delinquent Taxes” — or $1,207,882. Using this figure to maximize our revenue keeps taxes as low as the state will permit. This is the same formula we’ve used for years. There is no “lag” or “on-time payment rate” the mayor speaks of. Can Santos offer any explanation as to how the $810,000 figure was arrived at? I can. It’s simple. It appears on the same report we’ve used every year, directly above the figure we’ve used every year. It’s a mistake. But don’t take my word for it. Go to town hall and ask for a copy of the report. Match it to the revenue portion of this year’s budget and see for yourself. Then go back and re-read Mayor Santos’ “explanation.” Unfortunately, it’s Kearny taxpayers who have to pay for this mayor’s foolishness. Jim Mangin, Kearny <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/quot Mangin speaks the truth. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The man who SPEAKS THE TRUTH MANGIN FOR MAYOR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldfart56 Posted May 11, 2006 Report Share Posted May 11, 2006 Hey!Say what you want about me but, my shelves are not empty. Jim Mangin <{POST_SNAPBACK}> JIM YOUR THE MAN! but now for the rest of town DO NOT VOTE FOR T KEAN JR!you do not need this fool in your pockets! vote with your brain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Mayor Posted May 12, 2006 Report Share Posted May 12, 2006 JIM YOUR THE MAN! but now for the rest of town DO NOT VOTE FOR T KEAN JR!you do not need this fool in your pockets! vote with your brain <{POST_SNAPBACK}> oldfart56 You're wrong on this one. Tom Kean Jr. is the man we should all be supporting. How's everything at the Happy Trails Nursing Home ?? I've heard you're the man with all those old ladies in the nursing home since you've been taking Viagra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_VOTER_* Posted May 13, 2006 Report Share Posted May 13, 2006 He knows he will never shake Santos and loses every battle, so now he is going after the observer. Jim the best thing you can do is to keep on filling up the empty shelves in Shop-Rite. You are so full of Hot Air.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The empty shelves are in the mayor and puppets brain. I love it Mangin is RIGHT AGAIN and now Santos fans can not handle it. THE HOT AIR IS SITTING IN THE TOWN HALL WITH HIS PUPPETS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldfart56 Posted May 13, 2006 Report Share Posted May 13, 2006 oldfart56 You're wrong on this one. Tom Kean Jr. is the man we should all be supporting. How's everything at the Happy Trails Nursing Home ?? I've heard you're the man with all those old ladies in the nursing home since you've been taking Viagra. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1st you was right its great here! like you said the old ladys don't scream or yell and they love it like WELL you told me ! and you gave me calis!! now as for t kean j/r you will see he is only going to make himself rich on your money! but the good thing about living here is i can see" ALL" OF THE GAMES GOING ON UP YOUNDER! and kean is a PLAYER JUST LIKE DADY!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 1st you was right its great here! like you said the old ladys don't scream or yell and they love it like WELL you told me ! and you gave me calis!! now as for t kean j/r you will see he is only going to make himself rich on your money! but the good thing about living here is i can see" ALL" OF THE GAMES GOING ON UP YOUNDER! and kean is a PLAYER JUST LIKE DADY!!!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What can you say? This guy really has it together! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 I'll take MANGIN over SANTOS anyday. My taxes cant afford another year of Santos and his pupprts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest teepee Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 I'll take MANGIN over SANTOS anyday. My taxes cant afford another year of Santos and his pupprts. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mangin, How was your letter critical of the observer. Stop kissing butt, grocery man. And clean that spill in Aisle 3! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Mangin, How was your letter critical of the observer. Stop kissing butt, grocery man. And clean that spill in Aisle 3! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wow. What a powerful argument. Real mature.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Mangin, How was your letter critical of the observer. Stop kissing butt, grocery man. And clean that spill in Aisle 3! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dave is that you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.