McSwiggan’s fire fundraiser at Shannon

1/22/2008:

Shannon Lounge sends thanks, and talks about the fundraisers:

“Thanks to everyone who participated in the various fundraisers to benefit those affected by the fire at McSwiggans. Your generous donations will help make a difference. In order to distribute the funds as quickly and fairly as possible, a committee met under the guidance of the Hoboken City Hall Administration to determine fund allocations. The committee was comprised of one representative from The Shannon, O’Donoghue’s, and The Dubliner. No one immediately affected by the fire participated in the committee proceedings.

Additional donations can be made out to The City of Hoboken Trust Fund and delivered to the Director of Health & Human Services at City Hall.”

1/15/2008:

This Thursday at Shannon Lounge, to benefit those affected by the McSwiggan’s Fire.

hoboken-shannon-lounge-mcswiggans-fundraiser-jan-17-2008.jpg

Leave a Reply

287 Comments on "McSwiggan’s fire fundraiser at Shannon"


Indiecom@aol.com
Member
8 years 7 months ago

[quote comment=”64710″]Just look at the fire department, police department, Board of Ed and rest of the agencies. Their payroll’s have grown substantially faster than population, inflation or the number of housing units in town. That is not a function of development, that is a function of the wage rates & benefits per worker rising at outrageously high rates. And lets not even mention pensions, accrued vacation days, cell phones and the like.[/quote]

I agree with you on the union contracts. Wasn’t anybody on the “management” side at the negotiating table? This is, however, an ongoing budgetary issue that needs to be brought under control. What exactly does Ruben Ramos’ mother do at city hall?

[quote comment=”64710″]Spy cams and parks are shared by all, and should be paid for by all. Public structures like the muni garages are also public goods that all must share the cost of. Same goes for IT improvements at city hall, monuments, fishing piers, playgrounds, the sprucing up of Washington St, etc…..
[/quote]

Yes, but….the “more” is the issue. Because of more development there is a need for more maintenance, more city garages, more roads, more firemen, more police. With more wear & tear because of more use, how much more often do things need to be upgraded?….oh, the sprucing up stuff….how much of this do we really need, or did we?

Indiecom@aol.com
Member
8 years 7 months ago

[quote comment=”64699″]FYI, I realize that I would probably be adversly affected by the reval, but that doesn’t stop me from seing the inequity in the system.[/quote]

Got it Ron….I see it too….I also see it as complex and believe that figuring in both the circumstances that our elected officials created through the last 2 decades, as well as, any market exuberance in the last decade or so necessitates addressing the situation as more than a simple tax inequity. I think it is possible to do this…unfortunately, it probably won’t happen that way.

matt_72
Member
8 years 7 months ago

Spy cams and parks are shared by all, and should be paid for by all. Public structures like the muni garages are also public goods that all must share the cost of. Same goes for IT improvements at city hall, monuments, fishing piers, playgrounds, the sprucing up of Washington St, etc….. As for the rest of the infrastructure expenditures, the amount of money spent on those to support development is miniscule. Just look at the budget – the city spends almost NOTHING on those items.

And my example is very representative. Just look at the fire department, police department, Board of Ed and rest of the agencies. Their payroll’s have grown substantially faster than population, inflation or the number of housing units in town. That is not a function of development, that is a function of the wage rates & benefits per worker rising at outrageously high rates. And lets not even mention pensions, accrued vacation days, cell phones and the like.

matt_72
Member
8 years 7 months ago

Indy – I decided to give you a brief lesson in cost accounting b/c the day is almost over and I won’t be around to check for your response later. Here it goes…..

If it takes 100 people to police town and there are 10,000 residents in town then that means there are 100 residents per cop in town. And if each cop makes $50,000 a year then that means it costs the city $500/resident to employ these police officers – your total cost to employ all 100 cops would be $5mm. Got me so far?

In my example, total costs go up by 50%, the number of workers go up by 10% and the number of residents also goes up by 50%. So you now have 15,000 people in town, 110 cops and the total cost of all the cops goes up to $7.5mm. That means the wage of each cop goes up to over $68K but the cost per resident stays constant at $500/resident. BUT if the police force had kept wage rates constant then they would only spend $5.5mm for all 110 cops which works out to $367.7/resident.

And you think that in my example, the new residents should pay more in taxes. So explain to me why? The above example shows why your touchy feely math makes no sense!!! The new residents actually allow the city to provide services at a lower cost – not a higher one.

Indiecom@aol.com
Member
8 years 7 months ago
Matt: So much for reasoned discourse. However, I won’t digress into insults in my response, it doesn’t forward the conversation. Anyway, I was responding to your ONE narrow example: the fire department. Suddenly you extrapolate that ONE narrow example into the entire workforce and further, into the entire municipal budget, as if this one example is representative of any and all cost increases? I’ve never presented as an expert in either finance or accounting. I do, however, try to look at a situation from more than one angle. Perhaps discussing the issue with someone who believes that something other than “market forces” should be considered is why you find me so frustrating. Regardless, now you’ve ordained that there has been no infrastructure expenditure on anything in this city in 20 years and all of the increased costs are on the labor side. I have looked at the city budget and it is true that a huge chunk is in payroll….(don’t know who has been negotiating the labor contracts, but they are off the charts and this from someone with a degree in labor studies), but there also have been costs for infrastructure upgrades, roads, spy cams, parks, a whole host of things….and these are the added costs to which I am repeatedly referring, as well as additional fire/police. The infrastructure upgrades and maintenance are a fact and therefore, an appropriate part of the discussion….and further…..this issue has more components than “basic arithmetic.” Sorry to keep harping, but the people who… Read more »
wpDiscuz