MUNICIPAL BUDGETS
In contrast with accounting records which are retrospective, a budget is generally a projection of future revenues and expenditures. At a minimum, a budget is used to control financial transactions. However, in addition to controlling financial transactions, a budget should also be used as a management and planning tool. Work load and service goal objectives are objectives are included in the budget document.
The municipal budget includes funding requirements to cover town operations, the local share contribution to Administrative District and the annual tax levy set by county to fund county operations.
The main types of municipal budgets include,
· line-item (in- put) budgets
· performance ( out-put) budgets
· Programme (goals) budgets.
The main purpose of the main types of municipal budgets is explained below:
A line- item budget is a financial document that lists how much the local municipality will spend on every item it uses. Its main purpose is that, it enables the municipal officials in controlling expenditure and to ensure accountability since it illustrates how much money is appropriated to specific cost categories.
Performance budget allocates money to various programmes with in the organisation and details the service level on which the budget is calculated. It illustrates the activities, quantities involved, unit costs and total costs of each activity.
This helps the municipal officials and stakeholders to evaluate whether or not the local government is performing adequately since the relative service levels and funds spent on different activities show municipal and community priorities. This is important in controlling costs as well as improving the internal management of the programme. It also helps to assess the productivity of the municipal budget.
Programme budget allocates the money to major programme areas, focussing on the expected results of services and activities to be carried out. This is important in the attainment of long term local community goals since it identifies the anticipated results, out puts and out comes of the corresponding investment. This allows leaders to plan a budget in a manner that allows improved decision-making regarding the organisation’s goals.
The main purpose of this form of budgeting is that, it ensures accountability, encourages efficient coordination in government administration and puts emphasis on the community priorities that are with in the financial capabilities.
Why may a combination of budgets be appropriate?
They may be appropriate because they help in planning and controlling of the receipt and expenditure of money to meet the end.
What are the main benefits of financial reporting?
The main benefits of financial reporting are explained below:
Accountability and control is one of the benefits of financial reporting. The timely reporting of the financial information permits a more rigorous control over revenue and expenditure performance there by increasing the level of public accountability of local authorities.
Another benefit of financial reporting is monitoring a balanced reporting. Accurate reporting of both the revenue and expenditures of budget helps determine whether or not expenditures and actual revenues are balanced. For instance, the municipal finance department should monitor on a daily basis whether there are enough revenue to cover monthly expenditure obligations in order to avoid cash flow deficits.
Monitoring compliance with revenue and expenditure responsibilities is another benefit of financial reporting. Local governments have specific responsibilities with respect to revenue raising and expenditure functions. Financial reporting on both revenues and expenditure allows the determination of whether or not a local authority is in compliance with its revenue and expenditure functions.
Performance evaluation is yet a benefit of financial reporting. Timely report of financial information not only facilitates the control over revenues and expenditure, but also allows for the evaluation of the financial performance of the local government. This is based on the revenue and expenditure targets and specific level of out put and out comes as compared to the actual results of a period of operations of the local government.
Another benefit of financial budgeting is assessing financial condition. A number of factors contribute to determining the financial conditions of the local governments and these include, compliance with revenue and expenditure responsibilities including compliance of the central government with the fiscal transfers, the balance between revenues and expenditures and in general, the exercise of a prudent financial management. All these can be assessed only if financial reporting is done on timely basis on each and every one of the relevant elements of a municipal financial system.
What are the benefits of the internal auditing function?
The following are the benefits of internal auditing function:
It verifies compliance with accounting and budgeting processes, enhances quality in financial administration and adds credibility to the municipal financial reports. These clear lines the relationship between the local government and the financial sector.
Explain the importance of reliability of budgetary information.
Reliable budgetary information ensures efficient budget performance and may as well lead to a fiscal surplus.
Explain the benefit of competition for budgetary resources.
It ensures efficiency and effectiveness in the use of the resources not too little nor too much. It also ensures consistence since financial needs do not just change all of a sudden and hence proper accountability and responsiveness is attained at the end of the day.
Explain the disadvantages of earmarking budgetary funds.
One of the disadvantages is that, agencies or programmes being financed may not only have little or no incentives to economise, but also their actual financial needs may change over time with out a change in funding. As such, they may end up spending not enough or too much in certain activities, making either situation inefficient. Earmarking may also impede the government’s ability to be flexible in managing its budgets or allocating resources under difficult financial situations.
Why is predictability of revenue particularly important?
It is important mainly because it ensures that risks and un-certainties are put into consideration which in the end leads to implementation of the planned activities in an efficient and effective manner.
What are the features of an adequate budgetary system?
Then features of an adequate budgetary system are explained below:
Ensuring accountability is one of the features where detailed controls should be established with a goal of ensuring that procedures and budgetary commitments are carried out by the managers, contractors and all concerned parties as mandated in the budget.
Comprehensiveness is also a feature of an adequate budget system. Revenue resources of the local government, as well as expenditures made by the government should be included in the budget.
Another feature is the explicit budget constraint to ascertain magnitude of the revenue budget and there fore, be able to plan and limit expenditures given a fixed budget.
There is also cooperation in the budget cycle where municipal budgeting should operate in harmony with other public budgetary systems, such as those of the provinces or states, and that of the central government.
Accuracy to contain un-biased revenue and expenditure projections for current capital accounts, in every one of the components is another feature of an adequately budgetary system.
Optimisation should also be encouraged to encourage participants to seek the greatest social and economic benefits at the least cost.
Legitimacy and participation mechanism is another feature that needs to be implemented to improve the allocation of usually limited capital budget for economic and social development.
There is also need to consider the mission and vision of local government where both short term and long term objectives should be considered.
There is a need to be responsive to adopt the policies that match public preferences that ideally have been agreed upon in a participatory decision-making mechanism.
Timelines is important since the budget process follows the same cycle of activities every year and out put of each activity constitutes inputs for the next. It is critical that this process completes every step of the budget on time, according to the schedule and the budget cycle.
There is need for transparency where both the revenue and expenditure budget should be a mater of public knowledge. The limit of each source should be clearly established.
Finally, a good budget should aim at providing for greater transparency, accountability, flexibility, and predictability. At the same time, accounting systems may need to be revised so that they can provide real cost information by program, and can support the accountability that is necessary for improved performance.
REFERENCES
Journal, September 29, 2000, Vol. 24 Issue 6, p16.
Anderson, J. E., and R. W. Wassmer. 1995. The decision to "bid for business:" Municipal behavior in granting property tax abatements. Regional Science and Urban Economics 25:739-57.
Auer, Tonie. Communities offer tax abatements to attract economic development. Fort Worth Business Press, April 21, 2000, Vol. 12 Issue 52, p3A.
Ball, Brian R. Drury Inn tax package nixed before council vote. Business First-Columbus, August 4, 2000, Vol. 16 Issue 50, p1.
Cheslow, Jerry. "Morristown, NJ.: Presence of the Past in a Lively Downtown—Historic area throbs with new businesses and residences," New York Times, October 31, 1999.
Clingermayer, J. C., and R. C. Feiock. 1990. The adoption of economic development policies by large cities: A test of economic interest group and institutional explanations. Policy Studies Journal 18 (3): 539-52.
Curry, Kerry. Myers and Crow set ro receive 50% abatement. Dallas Business Journal, August 20, 1999, Vol. 22 Issue 52, p10.
Delaney, John "Jay." Mayor’s Budget Message—2000 Municipal Budget, January 15, 2000.
Kostelni, Natalie. Bill seeks to woo residents. Philadelphia Business Journal, October 15, 1999, Vol. 18 Issue 36, p1.
Peoples, Judith B. Property taxes and schools: The New Jersey riddle, NJ School Board Association, 1998. [http://www.njsba.org/property_tax/ptser07.html]
Robinson, Frederick, et. al. "Government that works! New Jersey Department of the Treasury Local Government Budget Review of Morristown," State of New Jersey, September 1996.
Rodda, Kelli. New central city lines proposed. Fort Worth Business Press, May 26, 2000, Vol. 13 Issue 5, p1.
Sales, Esq., Joseph, attorney for Second-Roc Jersey Associates, owners of Headquarters Plaza. Objection to abatement application, March 28, 2000.
Tannenbaum, Esq., Paul, attorney for Morristown Green LLC. "Five Year Abatement Project Application," addressed to Mayor Jay Delaney and Town Council, February 24, 2000.
Tucci, Linda. City addicted to abatement. St. Louis Business Journal, January 12, 1998, Vol. 18 Issue 18, p1A.
Wolkoff, M. 1985. Is economic development decision making rational? Urban Affairs Quarterly 27:340-55.
——. Abatement’s price. St. Louis Business Journal, January 12, 1998, Vol. 18 Issue 18, p34A.——. Give ‘em a break. Dallas Business Journal, August 20, 1999, Vol. 22 Issue 52, p74.——. N.J.S.A. 40A:21—Five Year Exemption and Abatement Law.——. Town of Morristown, Town Council meeting, April 11, 2000.——. Town of Morristown, Town Council meeting, April 25, 2000.——. League of Municipalities web site—http://www.njslom.com——. Morristown Partnership web site—http://www.morristownnj.com——. Morristown USA—http://www.morristownusa.com——. Century 21 Department Stores—http://c21stores.com/——. Online Dictionary—http://www.dictionary.com
Chronological Newspaper ReferenceO'Reiley. Century 21 gets its house in order. Daily Record, April 23, 2002.
——. Town-by-town results: Morristown. Daily Record, June 27, 2001
——. Macy’s owners get extension for plan. Daily Record, June 7, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Morristown to weigh Macy’s replacement. Daily Record, June 4, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Macy’s developers pitch another plan. Daily Record, March 1, 2001.
——. Morristown. Star-Ledger, March 31, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Plan for old Macy’s site revisited. Daily Record, February 28, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Morristown Partnership hears Macy’s tax proposal. Daily Record, November 15, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. Macy’s owner courts votes. Daily Record, September 29, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. Mayor wants to confer with Macy’s owners. Daily Record, August 24, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Council rejects Macy’s option. Star-Ledger, August 23, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. DeLaney continues Macy’s crusade. Daily Record, July 25, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Retailers differ on denial of tax break. Star-Ledger, April 13, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Macy’s owner to try again for tax break. Daily Record, April 13, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown rejects builder’s tax request. Star-Ledger, April 12, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown votes down tax break. Daily Record, April 12, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Vail Mansion on way to becoming hotel. Star-Ledger, April 12, 2000.
Ungar, Eli. Editorial: Tax break a good deal for Morristown? Yes, town will benefit in the long run. Daily Record, April 9, 2000.
O’Reiley, Tim. Tax break for developers a novelty in Morris. Daily Record, April 9, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. New look is on the horizon for famed Morristown Green. Star-Ledger, April 2, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s site plan raises question of character. Star-Ledger, March 31, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Headquarters Plaza objects to tax abatement. Daily Record, March 30, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown puts off Macy’s tax abatement ruling. Daily Record, March 29, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown puts off action in tax abatement dispute. Star-Ledger, March 29, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Plan revised for ex-Macy’s site. Star-Ledger, March 23, 2000.
Morristown by the numbers. Daily Record, March 23, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown hears argument for easing builder’s tax levy. Daily Record, March 15, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s building developer hopes to sell tax break to Morristown. Star-Ledger, March 12, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Macy’s builders seek tax help. Daily Record, March 11, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Big tax break sought for Macy’s tract. Star-Ledger, March 10, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Two nonprofits donate $975 to Morristown in lieu of taxes. Daily Record, February 23, 2000.
Editorial: Morristown must plan its future wisely. Star-Ledger, February 15, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown Green ready for a change. Star-Ledger, February 13, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Developers offer vision for Green. Star-Ledger, February 11, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. In Morristown, builders are looking up. Star-Ledger, February 6, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown officials: New downtown building must blend in. Star-Ledger, February 2, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Builder unveils seven story vision for the Green. Daily Record, February 1, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Owners propose to replace ex-Macy’s with new building. Star-Ledger, February 1, 2000.
Gluck, Gabriel H. Apartment pickups trash local budgets. Star-Ledger, January 30, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Tax rate hike of 9.9% sought in Morristown. Star-Ledger, January 16, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown builder has big plans for Speedwell. Star-Ledger, January 12, 2000.
Hester, Tom. Towns’ special district plans pass test in Supreme Court. Star-Ledger, May 14, 1999.
Dumenigo, Argelio. Morristown one of 5 towns riding rail depot program. Star-Ledger, April 15, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. New owners reshape old Macy’s building. Star-Ledger, April 1, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. As Green tract changes hands, a shop owner tearfully bows out. Star-Ledger, January 27, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. $100 million in debt, so taxes soar again. Star-Ledger, January 16, 1999.
Saitz, Greg. With buyout, Morristown hopes to see growth along the Green. Star-Ledger, January 6, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. Parking deck gives Morristown a lift. Star-Ledger, December 16, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Redevelopment in hands of new owner. Star-Ledger, December 8, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown weighs a vacant-Macy’s sale. Star-Ledger, October 18, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Real estate feud could aid Morristown Green. Star-Ledger, September 11, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Upscale apartment complex is unveiled in Morristown. Star-Ledger, July 15, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Redevelopment zone proposed for Morristown. Star-Ledger, May 8, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Budget baton passed to Morristown mayor. Star-Ledger, December 24, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Consultant to examine Green plan. Star-Ledger, December 2, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Bloch still pushing Morristown revamp. Star-Ledger, November 18, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s owners still hoping to fill store. Star-Ledger, September 18, 1997.
Riley, Bill. Morristown clears redevelopment study. Star-Ledger, September 10, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Macy building owner rejects Morristown’s development plan. Star-Ledger, August 21, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Legal questions stall plans for a ‘new’ Morristown. Star-Ledger, August 15, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown eyes a takeover of empty stores. Star-Ledger, August 13, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Parking deck may revive Macy’s building. Star-Ledger, January
www.mrsc.org/subjects/finance/budgets/budget.aspx
The municipal budget includes funding requirements to cover town operations, the local share contribution to Administrative District and the annual tax levy set by county to fund county operations.
The main types of municipal budgets include,
· line-item (in- put) budgets
· performance ( out-put) budgets
· Programme (goals) budgets.
The main purpose of the main types of municipal budgets is explained below:
A line- item budget is a financial document that lists how much the local municipality will spend on every item it uses. Its main purpose is that, it enables the municipal officials in controlling expenditure and to ensure accountability since it illustrates how much money is appropriated to specific cost categories.
Performance budget allocates money to various programmes with in the organisation and details the service level on which the budget is calculated. It illustrates the activities, quantities involved, unit costs and total costs of each activity.
This helps the municipal officials and stakeholders to evaluate whether or not the local government is performing adequately since the relative service levels and funds spent on different activities show municipal and community priorities. This is important in controlling costs as well as improving the internal management of the programme. It also helps to assess the productivity of the municipal budget.
Programme budget allocates the money to major programme areas, focussing on the expected results of services and activities to be carried out. This is important in the attainment of long term local community goals since it identifies the anticipated results, out puts and out comes of the corresponding investment. This allows leaders to plan a budget in a manner that allows improved decision-making regarding the organisation’s goals.
The main purpose of this form of budgeting is that, it ensures accountability, encourages efficient coordination in government administration and puts emphasis on the community priorities that are with in the financial capabilities.
Why may a combination of budgets be appropriate?
They may be appropriate because they help in planning and controlling of the receipt and expenditure of money to meet the end.
What are the main benefits of financial reporting?
The main benefits of financial reporting are explained below:
Accountability and control is one of the benefits of financial reporting. The timely reporting of the financial information permits a more rigorous control over revenue and expenditure performance there by increasing the level of public accountability of local authorities.
Another benefit of financial reporting is monitoring a balanced reporting. Accurate reporting of both the revenue and expenditures of budget helps determine whether or not expenditures and actual revenues are balanced. For instance, the municipal finance department should monitor on a daily basis whether there are enough revenue to cover monthly expenditure obligations in order to avoid cash flow deficits.
Monitoring compliance with revenue and expenditure responsibilities is another benefit of financial reporting. Local governments have specific responsibilities with respect to revenue raising and expenditure functions. Financial reporting on both revenues and expenditure allows the determination of whether or not a local authority is in compliance with its revenue and expenditure functions.
Performance evaluation is yet a benefit of financial reporting. Timely report of financial information not only facilitates the control over revenues and expenditure, but also allows for the evaluation of the financial performance of the local government. This is based on the revenue and expenditure targets and specific level of out put and out comes as compared to the actual results of a period of operations of the local government.
Another benefit of financial budgeting is assessing financial condition. A number of factors contribute to determining the financial conditions of the local governments and these include, compliance with revenue and expenditure responsibilities including compliance of the central government with the fiscal transfers, the balance between revenues and expenditures and in general, the exercise of a prudent financial management. All these can be assessed only if financial reporting is done on timely basis on each and every one of the relevant elements of a municipal financial system.
What are the benefits of the internal auditing function?
The following are the benefits of internal auditing function:
It verifies compliance with accounting and budgeting processes, enhances quality in financial administration and adds credibility to the municipal financial reports. These clear lines the relationship between the local government and the financial sector.
Explain the importance of reliability of budgetary information.
Reliable budgetary information ensures efficient budget performance and may as well lead to a fiscal surplus.
Explain the benefit of competition for budgetary resources.
It ensures efficiency and effectiveness in the use of the resources not too little nor too much. It also ensures consistence since financial needs do not just change all of a sudden and hence proper accountability and responsiveness is attained at the end of the day.
Explain the disadvantages of earmarking budgetary funds.
One of the disadvantages is that, agencies or programmes being financed may not only have little or no incentives to economise, but also their actual financial needs may change over time with out a change in funding. As such, they may end up spending not enough or too much in certain activities, making either situation inefficient. Earmarking may also impede the government’s ability to be flexible in managing its budgets or allocating resources under difficult financial situations.
Why is predictability of revenue particularly important?
It is important mainly because it ensures that risks and un-certainties are put into consideration which in the end leads to implementation of the planned activities in an efficient and effective manner.
What are the features of an adequate budgetary system?
Then features of an adequate budgetary system are explained below:
Ensuring accountability is one of the features where detailed controls should be established with a goal of ensuring that procedures and budgetary commitments are carried out by the managers, contractors and all concerned parties as mandated in the budget.
Comprehensiveness is also a feature of an adequate budget system. Revenue resources of the local government, as well as expenditures made by the government should be included in the budget.
Another feature is the explicit budget constraint to ascertain magnitude of the revenue budget and there fore, be able to plan and limit expenditures given a fixed budget.
There is also cooperation in the budget cycle where municipal budgeting should operate in harmony with other public budgetary systems, such as those of the provinces or states, and that of the central government.
Accuracy to contain un-biased revenue and expenditure projections for current capital accounts, in every one of the components is another feature of an adequately budgetary system.
Optimisation should also be encouraged to encourage participants to seek the greatest social and economic benefits at the least cost.
Legitimacy and participation mechanism is another feature that needs to be implemented to improve the allocation of usually limited capital budget for economic and social development.
There is also need to consider the mission and vision of local government where both short term and long term objectives should be considered.
There is a need to be responsive to adopt the policies that match public preferences that ideally have been agreed upon in a participatory decision-making mechanism.
Timelines is important since the budget process follows the same cycle of activities every year and out put of each activity constitutes inputs for the next. It is critical that this process completes every step of the budget on time, according to the schedule and the budget cycle.
There is need for transparency where both the revenue and expenditure budget should be a mater of public knowledge. The limit of each source should be clearly established.
Finally, a good budget should aim at providing for greater transparency, accountability, flexibility, and predictability. At the same time, accounting systems may need to be revised so that they can provide real cost information by program, and can support the accountability that is necessary for improved performance.
REFERENCES
Journal, September 29, 2000, Vol. 24 Issue 6, p16.
Anderson, J. E., and R. W. Wassmer. 1995. The decision to "bid for business:" Municipal behavior in granting property tax abatements. Regional Science and Urban Economics 25:739-57.
Auer, Tonie. Communities offer tax abatements to attract economic development. Fort Worth Business Press, April 21, 2000, Vol. 12 Issue 52, p3A.
Ball, Brian R. Drury Inn tax package nixed before council vote. Business First-Columbus, August 4, 2000, Vol. 16 Issue 50, p1.
Cheslow, Jerry. "Morristown, NJ.: Presence of the Past in a Lively Downtown—Historic area throbs with new businesses and residences," New York Times, October 31, 1999.
Clingermayer, J. C., and R. C. Feiock. 1990. The adoption of economic development policies by large cities: A test of economic interest group and institutional explanations. Policy Studies Journal 18 (3): 539-52.
Curry, Kerry. Myers and Crow set ro receive 50% abatement. Dallas Business Journal, August 20, 1999, Vol. 22 Issue 52, p10.
Delaney, John "Jay." Mayor’s Budget Message—2000 Municipal Budget, January 15, 2000.
Kostelni, Natalie. Bill seeks to woo residents. Philadelphia Business Journal, October 15, 1999, Vol. 18 Issue 36, p1.
Peoples, Judith B. Property taxes and schools: The New Jersey riddle, NJ School Board Association, 1998. [http://www.njsba.org/property_tax/ptser07.html]
Robinson, Frederick, et. al. "Government that works! New Jersey Department of the Treasury Local Government Budget Review of Morristown," State of New Jersey, September 1996.
Rodda, Kelli. New central city lines proposed. Fort Worth Business Press, May 26, 2000, Vol. 13 Issue 5, p1.
Sales, Esq., Joseph, attorney for Second-Roc Jersey Associates, owners of Headquarters Plaza. Objection to abatement application, March 28, 2000.
Tannenbaum, Esq., Paul, attorney for Morristown Green LLC. "Five Year Abatement Project Application," addressed to Mayor Jay Delaney and Town Council, February 24, 2000.
Tucci, Linda. City addicted to abatement. St. Louis Business Journal, January 12, 1998, Vol. 18 Issue 18, p1A.
Wolkoff, M. 1985. Is economic development decision making rational? Urban Affairs Quarterly 27:340-55.
——. Abatement’s price. St. Louis Business Journal, January 12, 1998, Vol. 18 Issue 18, p34A.——. Give ‘em a break. Dallas Business Journal, August 20, 1999, Vol. 22 Issue 52, p74.——. N.J.S.A. 40A:21—Five Year Exemption and Abatement Law.——. Town of Morristown, Town Council meeting, April 11, 2000.——. Town of Morristown, Town Council meeting, April 25, 2000.——. League of Municipalities web site—http://www.njslom.com——. Morristown Partnership web site—http://www.morristownnj.com——. Morristown USA—http://www.morristownusa.com——. Century 21 Department Stores—http://c21stores.com/——. Online Dictionary—http://www.dictionary.com
Chronological Newspaper ReferenceO'Reiley. Century 21 gets its house in order. Daily Record, April 23, 2002.
——. Town-by-town results: Morristown. Daily Record, June 27, 2001
——. Macy’s owners get extension for plan. Daily Record, June 7, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Morristown to weigh Macy’s replacement. Daily Record, June 4, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Macy’s developers pitch another plan. Daily Record, March 1, 2001.
——. Morristown. Star-Ledger, March 31, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Plan for old Macy’s site revisited. Daily Record, February 28, 2001.
Zlock, Jon. Morristown Partnership hears Macy’s tax proposal. Daily Record, November 15, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. Macy’s owner courts votes. Daily Record, September 29, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. Mayor wants to confer with Macy’s owners. Daily Record, August 24, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Council rejects Macy’s option. Star-Ledger, August 23, 2000.
Nadilo, Joe. DeLaney continues Macy’s crusade. Daily Record, July 25, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Retailers differ on denial of tax break. Star-Ledger, April 13, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Macy’s owner to try again for tax break. Daily Record, April 13, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown rejects builder’s tax request. Star-Ledger, April 12, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown votes down tax break. Daily Record, April 12, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Vail Mansion on way to becoming hotel. Star-Ledger, April 12, 2000.
Ungar, Eli. Editorial: Tax break a good deal for Morristown? Yes, town will benefit in the long run. Daily Record, April 9, 2000.
O’Reiley, Tim. Tax break for developers a novelty in Morris. Daily Record, April 9, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. New look is on the horizon for famed Morristown Green. Star-Ledger, April 2, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s site plan raises question of character. Star-Ledger, March 31, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Headquarters Plaza objects to tax abatement. Daily Record, March 30, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown puts off Macy’s tax abatement ruling. Daily Record, March 29, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown puts off action in tax abatement dispute. Star-Ledger, March 29, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Plan revised for ex-Macy’s site. Star-Ledger, March 23, 2000.
Morristown by the numbers. Daily Record, March 23, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Morristown hears argument for easing builder’s tax levy. Daily Record, March 15, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s building developer hopes to sell tax break to Morristown. Star-Ledger, March 12, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Macy’s builders seek tax help. Daily Record, March 11, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Big tax break sought for Macy’s tract. Star-Ledger, March 10, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Two nonprofits donate $975 to Morristown in lieu of taxes. Daily Record, February 23, 2000.
Editorial: Morristown must plan its future wisely. Star-Ledger, February 15, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown Green ready for a change. Star-Ledger, February 13, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Developers offer vision for Green. Star-Ledger, February 11, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. In Morristown, builders are looking up. Star-Ledger, February 6, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown officials: New downtown building must blend in. Star-Ledger, February 2, 2000.
Bruno, Laura. Builder unveils seven story vision for the Green. Daily Record, February 1, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Owners propose to replace ex-Macy’s with new building. Star-Ledger, February 1, 2000.
Gluck, Gabriel H. Apartment pickups trash local budgets. Star-Ledger, January 30, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Tax rate hike of 9.9% sought in Morristown. Star-Ledger, January 16, 2000.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown builder has big plans for Speedwell. Star-Ledger, January 12, 2000.
Hester, Tom. Towns’ special district plans pass test in Supreme Court. Star-Ledger, May 14, 1999.
Dumenigo, Argelio. Morristown one of 5 towns riding rail depot program. Star-Ledger, April 15, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. New owners reshape old Macy’s building. Star-Ledger, April 1, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. As Green tract changes hands, a shop owner tearfully bows out. Star-Ledger, January 27, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. $100 million in debt, so taxes soar again. Star-Ledger, January 16, 1999.
Saitz, Greg. With buyout, Morristown hopes to see growth along the Green. Star-Ledger, January 6, 1999.
Swayze, Bill. Parking deck gives Morristown a lift. Star-Ledger, December 16, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Redevelopment in hands of new owner. Star-Ledger, December 8, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown weighs a vacant-Macy’s sale. Star-Ledger, October 18, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Real estate feud could aid Morristown Green. Star-Ledger, September 11, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Upscale apartment complex is unveiled in Morristown. Star-Ledger, July 15, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Redevelopment zone proposed for Morristown. Star-Ledger, May 8, 1998.
Swayze, Bill. Budget baton passed to Morristown mayor. Star-Ledger, December 24, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Consultant to examine Green plan. Star-Ledger, December 2, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Bloch still pushing Morristown revamp. Star-Ledger, November 18, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Macy’s owners still hoping to fill store. Star-Ledger, September 18, 1997.
Riley, Bill. Morristown clears redevelopment study. Star-Ledger, September 10, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Macy building owner rejects Morristown’s development plan. Star-Ledger, August 21, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Legal questions stall plans for a ‘new’ Morristown. Star-Ledger, August 15, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Morristown eyes a takeover of empty stores. Star-Ledger, August 13, 1997.
Swayze, Bill. Parking deck may revive Macy’s building. Star-Ledger, January
www.mrsc.org/subjects/finance/budgets/budget.aspx
posted by mwesigye herbert at 3:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home