Readers says frustrating and costly when the turf has to be cleaned and repaired after flooding the grass was worse
Agreed, it is frustrating and costly when the turf has to be cleaned and repaired after flooding. But, remember, when those fields were grass the “Stadium” was used a maximum of a dozen times a year. 5 or 6 home football games and a couple of lacrosse games. And of course graduation. The field was so bad that visiting teams threatened to file official complaints and refuse to play on the field. Stevens was a glorified parking lot and nothing took place on that field besides RHS football practice and adult softball. Both of those fields are now in constant use. RHS Varsity and sub varsity sports (Football, soccer, lacrosse,) are on them almost non-stop during the afternoons and youth sports utilize them in the evenings and weekends almost non-stop as well. The result has been much improved conditions on the grass fields in town as most of the pre-season and poor weather “days” events are conducted on the turf fields and the grass fields are closed. If you look at if from the angle of cost per use, it isn’t even close even with the repair costs. The fields are much more “productive” and we’re not spending money on seed, weed killer, fertilizer, and labor for cutting and maintaining those fields. I’m not saying it is a wash but the total cost difference probably isn’t as great as you think.
Schedler, Habernickel, and Citizens are all Village owned fields. Might be fun to try and get the Village Council to step up and spend some money on any of those fields. They haven’t spent squat on maintaining Maple Park and now that field is going to have to be replaced. They can’t even agree on the simplest things, how would they even consider spending money on new fields?
One question I would ask. What ever happened to the dredging program that was begun a couple of years ago? Was it completed? I don’t recall seeing any “work” done near Graydon or down by Stevens or RHS. Multiply 2 or 3 feet of dre
It’s time to pull the plug on our turf fields. The locations are not conducive to turf material. With the over $100,000 in repairs we could take that money to go back to grass. The money we have spent in fixing each if these damaged episodes could have been used for another employee or two in our maintenance dept which is short employees (our town’s landscape is falling apart and w the taxes we pay, our town should be looking well attended and it’s not!! The best landscaped areas are the ones donated by kind vendors, not our village tax dollars.). What about the Schedler property for turf, or Habernickel Farm, or Citizens park or one of the elementary schools that don’t flood?
Reader says the Ridgewood Council still considering plans for Schedler property
Its has been 2 1/2 years now that the “Dream Team Council ” of ARONSOHN ,PUCCIARELL and HAUCK have been in charge of Ridgewood via their “Block Voting” and still no decision on the Shedler Property. What are they waiting for. Are they caught up with taking care of their friends at The Chamber of Commerce and the Developers. Is the Mayor to busy with his Wellness Campaign? Is the Deputy Mayor to busy starting up his grass roots committee to help in the development of the CBD? Is Councilwoman Hauck to busy throwing luncheons for the Senior Citizens? There the house sits rotting away while the Three Amigos promote their own personal agenda. The residents or “Folks ” should be applaud by the actions or rather non action of these three. After all didn’t our Mayor when running for reelection promise action on the Schedler house and property. Didn’t he encourage “Folks” in the area of the property to also support his running mates. So now what?
6 storms in 4 short years…so much for the 100-year storm hooey.
Do you have the repairs costs as well…?
Mother Nature keeps mastering the Master Plan.
Thee field was put in during summer 2010. We’ve had floods worth remembering on:
– October 1, 2010 (there was wrinkling of the carpet then and in all the other events below) – March 8, 2011 – April 17, 2011 – Jun 23, 2011 (graduation) – August 29, 2011 (Irene) -August 1, 2014
Sandy didn’t cause a lot of flooding. It was more of a wind event
We’ve had minor flooding many other times, but not to the scale above
Ridgewood repairs artificial turf fields after costly flooding
AUGUST 8, 2014 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, AUGUST 8, 2014, 1:21 AM BY CHRIS HARRIS STAFF WRITER THE RECORD
RIDGEWOOD — Thousands of dollars are being spent this week to repair the village’s turf fields, which were damaged late last week when heavy rain caused flash flooding.
The artificial turf field at the village’s Maple Park suffered $48,000 in damage, Ridgewood officials said at a council meeting this week.
Workers began cleaning silt and dirt from the turf surface at Ridgewood High School on Thursday; some resultant wrinkles in the field will also be removed.
Flood damage will also be repaired at nearby Stevens Field, which is also owned by the school district.
Earlier this week, Ridgewood school officials allocated an emergency expenditure of $119,865 for the work.
It is expected the school fields will be usable within two weeks, when the school’s soccer and football teams are set to start practices.
Another $119,865 to repair 2 turfed fields + $48,000 for turf on Maple Field (no longer Park, so let’s admit it and change the name). Plus who-knows-what in change orders.
Deductible is $25,000! That must have been somebody’s great idea to save money on the insurance.
We are going to go broke over this fiasco. It even failed a referendum but it happened anyway. Sickening waste. Meanwhile people are literally starving all over the world.
The turf MUST GO. It’s either now or later. Now is better. But nobody can admit to making a mistake. Well, this was a huge one.
Ridgewood incurs costly damage from recent flash flooding
August 7, 2014
BY JODI WEINBERGER
STAFF WRITER
Bubbles pop up on the Ridgewood High School field after a quick but powerful rainstorm led to flash flooding throughout the village last Friday.
Last Friday’s flash flood is costing the school district and municipality hundreds of thousands of dollars in cleanup costs.
The Board of Education (BOE) received authorization from the Bergen County Department of Education this week to award a bid to LandTek for $119,865 for “emergency repair” of two district-owned artificial turf fields.
Business Administrator Michael Falkowski said there was “extensive” damage at Ridgewood High School and Stevens fields following the Aug. 1 storm and that the playing grounds are “not useable” in their current state.
The money will come out of the 2015 district budget and possibly an emergency reserve fund, he said.
“This is just for the fields,” Falkowski said. “There’s other work that needs to be done,” including general cleanup of the area.
Readers Say Turf Fields Exacerbate Village Flooding
Is seems ever time it rans now , significance damage is done to our playing fields and Village property .
We were told the turf fie;ds would drain faster , well yes they sure do but the water still needs some place to go like the Village Hall , the Ridgewood library .
Since the Village Hall Rebuilding Fiasco , and the addition of turf fields along the Ho Ho Kus brook the 50 year flood has now become an almost yearly event .
Is it time to recognize the damage to the environment all this turf is doing ?
The problem is not just the fields at Stevens ,Maple and the RHS Stadium but the many turf fields all along the banks of our rivers all over Bergen County . Again the water needs some place to go .
Maple Park flooded over into Meadowbrook on Aug. 1.
Police had to direct traffic. I was part of the directed traffic on my way home from the library. It was scary and dangerous driving through the flooded street. That’s why the police had to be called out.
I was coming home from the library where my shoes and socks and pants had gotten soaking wet as I had to wade to my car, in leg deep water. Note: Not ankle deep; leg deep, above the ankles.
Before Maple Field was turned artificial, REAC had done a report stating that artificial turf is safe for Maple field and good for the environment.
If the rains had continued the new village hall and new library would have been flooded.
Flooding was not supposed to occur there. Supposedly Ridgewood engineering experts had designed the buildings to prevent flooding.
You know what, the members of REAC should pay to have the artificial truf (grass) removed from Maple Field and real, mother nature’s grass replanted.
Trust me as they say: The kids will profit by playing on real grass.
Flash Flood Sees Ho Ho Kus Brook Breach its Banks in Ridgewood
Ridgewood NJ, The HoHoKus Brook went over its banks in Ridgewood on Friday, 08/01 causing the Village Hall/Ridgewood Public Library parking lot to flood as well as artificial turf athletic fields at Ridgewood High School, Maple Park, and Stevens Field.
Five (5) privately owned vehicles parked in the Village Hall/Ridgewood Public Library parking lot were not moved in time and heavily damaged. One vehicle reportedly belongs to a Library employee whose first day on the job was Friday.
The turf athletic fields were bubbled up and will need to be repaired.
Several streets, including Linwood Avenue, were closed due to flood waters.
No injuries were reported.
Damage to Village Hall itself was minimal; water entered at only one point, an overhead door on the north side of the building.
The letter was sent to the Ridgewood News by email on Sunday afternoon, May 4. On Monday morning the paper called to confirm that I had sent it and wanted it published. I said yes.
Late Wednesday morning, the three candidates for council received an email message from Ed Virgin, editor of the paper, stating that the volume of letters this week had been so great that the usual noon (Wed.) deadline had had to be cut off a little early. However, he added, anything received before late Wednesday morning (May 7) would be published.
Well, mine wasn’t. Gee.
Too late now.
I called Ed but his phone message said he was out until Monday and not listening to voice mail. Thanks for your objectivity, local newspaper!
Here’s the letter:
RBSA Financial Practices Questioned
Ridgewood News readers deserve to know about an important issue raised at the League of Women Voters Candidates’ Debate on April 29 but omitted from last week’s article on that event (“Race for Two Seats Heats Up,” May 2).
According to public records, the Ridgewood Baseball and Softball Association failed to file federal tax returns for at least 3 consecutive years during Village Council candidate James Albano’s long and continuing tenure as RBSA president. As a result, the group’s tax-exempt status was revoked by the Internal Revenue Service on March 15, 2011.
This suggests that appropriate papers have not been filed for at least 7 or 8 years and that contributions have not been legally tax deductible for several years.
Questions emerge:
Why did this happen? Was it deliberate, or sloppy bookkeeping?
In either case, how might RBSA’s financial practices reflect on Mr. Albano’s ability to serve on the Village Council, which oversees a vastly larger budget?
How much money does the RBSA have and where does it go?
Since RBSA activities heavily use tax-supported fields owned by the Village and Board of Education, might an audit of RBSA’s financial records by the Village be warranted?
Were corporate and individual donors to RBSA informed in a timely way in 2011 and every year since that they could no longer deduct donations from their taxes without violating federal law?
Do any individuals profit from RBSA’s summer baseball clinics conducted on taxpayer-owned property? Might an expansion of the summer clinics be one reason RBSA has pushed so hard to flatten the Schedler property in exchange for a 90-foot baseball field that its neighbors and countless other residents adamantly do not want?
At the debate, Mr. Albano denied being “the sports candidate,” a term no one but him had used that night. Interestingly, a message sent to the RBSA email list last month under the subject line “Albano for Council!” by Gary Muzio, RBSA’s “2014 Commissioner” and a leader of the summer clinics, stated: “While he [Mr. Albano] is not just the ‘sports candidate,’ the issue of the badly needed 90′ field, along with an all purpose field (read: soccer & lax) at Schedler is certainly a timely issue here.”
The assumption that RBSA had tax-exempt status and was therefore prohibited from any political activity, including endorsing candidates for local elections, led to a simple search for confirmation on the excellent IRS website, which quickly revealed the March 2011 revocation.
Might RBSA therefore use its email list for political activity, after all? Consider another factor beyond IRS regulations. The Village and Board of Education, recognizing the RBSA as a nonprofit entity (is it so registered?), have granted it the privilege of being cosponsored by the Village Parks and Recreation Department and Community School. Is it appropriate for a Village/Board of Education-cosponsored athletic organization (given priority in the use of tax-supported fields) to endorse a candidate for public office?
RBSA: How to Lose Your 501(c)(3) Tax Exempt Status (Without Really Trying)
It’s easy for a nonprofit organization to maintain its tax exempt status—and can be just as easy to lose it.
Each year, the IRS revokes the tax-exempt status of more than 100 501(c)(3) organizations. Organizations recognized as exempt from federal income tax under this section of the Internal Revenue Code include private foundations as well as churches, educational institutions, hospitals, and many other types of public charities.
But these organizations can maintain their tax-exempt status if they heed the rules in six areas:
Private benefit/inurement Lobbying Political campaign activity Unrelated business income (UBI) Annual reporting obligation Operation in accord with stated exempt purpose(s)
(Note: The following subjects are described briefly. If you want more information about each area, visit the Tax-Exempt Status Virtual Workshop on the IRS educational micro-site, www.stayexempt.irs.gov.
1. PRIVATE BENEFIT/INUREMENT
Private benefit: “A 501(c)(3) organization’s activities should be directed exclusively toward some exempt purpose,” said Richard Crom, Staff Assistant for IRS Exempt Organizations Customer Education and Outreach office. “Its activities should not serve the private interests, or private benefit, of any individual or organization (other than the 501(c)(3) organization) more than insubstantially. The intent of a 501(c) (3) organization is to ensure it serves a public interest, not a private one.”
Inurement: The concept of inurement states that no part of an organization’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of a private shareholder or individual who, because of the person’s relationship to the organization, has an opportunity to control or influence its activities.
“A 501(c)(3) organization is prohibited from allowing its income or assets to benefit insiders (people with a personal or private interest in the activities of the organization),” said Crom. “Insiders are typically board members, officers, directors, and important employees.” He added that prohibited inurement includes the payment of dividends, the payment of unreasonable compensation to insiders, and the transfer of property to insiders for less than fair market value.
If a 501(c)(3) organization engages in inurement or substantial private benefit, the organization risks losing its exemption. Additionally, insiders guilty of inurement may be subject to excise tax.
2. LOBBYING
When an organization contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or when the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation, it is lobbying. “501(c)(3) organizations are allowed to do some lobbying,” said Melaney Partner, acting director for the IRS Exempt Organizations Customer Education and Outreach office. “However, if lobbying activities are substantial an organization risks losing its tax exempt status.” She added that an organization can elect to have its lobbying activities measured by an “expenditure test” to determine whether or not the activities are substantial. This is known as a 501(h) election, so-named for the section of the Internal Revenue Code where the rules for the expenditure test are spelled out.
“By making this election, an organization agrees to not spend more than a certain percentage of its total expenses on lobbying activities,” Partner said. “The other way to measure lobbying activity is to determine whether, based on all of the pertinent facts and circumstances, an organization’s lobbying comprises a substantial part of its overall activities. This substantial part test is a more subjective method compared to the more mathematical, objective expenditure test.”
Organizations must file Form 5768, Election/Revocation of Election by an Eligible Sec. 501(c)(3) Organization to Make Expenditures to Influence Legislation, in advance to be subject to the expenditure test.
3. POLITICAL ACTIVITY
All section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate running for public office. The prohibition applies to all campaigns (federal, state and local level). “Political campaign intervention includes any and all activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office,” said Crom, who speaks to non-profit organizations on a regular basis about tax-compliance issues. “The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.”
Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization in favor of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Section 501(c)(3) organizations may engage in some activities to promote voter registration, encourage voter participation, and provide voter education, but they can’t engage in activities that favor or oppose any candidate for public office. Whether an activity is political campaign intervention depends on all the facts and circumstances.
“The political campaign intervention prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves as individuals,” said Crom. “Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions of the organization.”
4. UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME (UBI)
Another activity that can potentially jeopardize an organization’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status is having too much income generated from activities that are unrelated to the exempt function of the organization. This income comes from a regularly-carried-on trade or business that is not substantially related to the organization’s exempt purpose. “An organization that produces unrelated business income as a result of its unrelated trade or business may have to pay taxes on that income,” said Partner. “Income-producing activity must meet three conditions before the income is potentially taxable.”
First, the activity must be a trade or business. Second, the trade or business must be regularly carried on. Third, the business activity is not substantially related to an organization’s exempt purpose. In other words, the activity itself does not contribute importantly to accomplishing the exempt purpose, other than through the production of funds.
Some of the most common UBI generating activities include: the sale of advertising space in weekly bulletins, magazines, journals or on the organization’s website; the sale of merchandise and publications when those items being sold do not have a substantial relationship to the exempt purpose of the organization; provision of management or other similar services to other organizations; and, even some types of fundraising activities. Generally, organizations that generate unrelated business income should file Form 990-T, Exempt Organization Business Income Tax Return, and pay tax on the income.
“An organization must be careful generating money in activities that do not further its specific exempt purposes,” said Partner. “In addition to the taxability of income from unrelated activities, if those activities are substantial in relation to your exempt purpose activities, you may be putting your exempt status in jeopardy.”
5. ANNUAL REPORTING OBLIGATION
While 501(c)(3) public charities are exempt from Federal income tax, most of these organizations have information reporting obligations under the Internal Revenue Code to ensure they continue to be recognized as tax-exempt. In addition, they may also be liable for unrelated business income tax as described above, employment tax, excise taxes, and certain state and local taxes.
Public charities generally file either Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, Form 990- EZ, Short Form Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, or submit online Form 990-N, Electronic Notice (e-Postcard) for Tax-Exempt Organizations not Required To File Form 990 or 990-EZ.
“The type of form or notice required is generally determined by the public charity’s gross receipts and the value of its assets,” said Crom. For tax years ending on or after December 31, 2010, an organization may file Form 990-EZ if its gross receipts are normally less than $200,000, and if its total assets are less than $500,000 at the end of the year. If the organization’s gross receipts are $200,000 or greater, or if its assets at the end of the tax year are $500,000 or more, the organization generally must file Form 990. If the organization’s annual gross receipts are generally $50,000 or less, the organization may in lieu of Form 990 or 990-EZ submit online new Form 990-N, Electronic Notice (e-Postcard) for Tax-Exempt Organizations not Required to File Form 990 or 990-EZ.
There are some public charities that are not required to file Forms 990 or 990-EZ, including churches and certain church-affiliated organizations. Organizations can learn about filing and new requirements applicable to supporting organizations at the IRS Nonprofits and Charities website.
“The IRS will remove many organizations previously recognized as tax-exempt from its Master File due to provisions of the Pension Protection Act of 2006,” said Crom. “The act requires that all tax-exempt organizations—except churches and church-related organizations—must file an annual return with the IRS. And if they don’t do so for three consecutive years, they automatically lose their exempt status.”
The IRS conducted an extensive outreach effort over the past several years to remind tax-exempt organizations about this new legal requirement — and to file on time. “There were many organizations that we still did not hear from and we will post a list of those revoked organizations on the IRS website in February 2011,” said Crom.
If an organization finds that its exempt status has been automatically revoked due to non-filing and it wants its tax-exempt status reinstated, it will need to reapply and pay the appropriate user fee. For more information on that process, visit the Charities and Non- Profits pages on the IRS website.
6. OPERATION IN ACCORD WITH STATED EXEMPT PURPOSE(S)
“If you stop doing all or a significant amount of the exempt activities you told the IRS you were going to do in your original application for exemption—you could lose your exemption,” said Crom. “If your organization’s direction has changed, let us know. It could prevent future problems.” He added that organizations must adhere to the guidelines inherent in these six areas. “If they do this, they will maintain their tax-exempt status and continue enjoying the benefits associated with it,” said Crom.
To receive periodic updates on current Exempt Organization issues of interest, visit www.irs.gov and sign up to receive the EO Update by e-mail.
Reader says Turf fields looks nice , but way too much money
They only got 7 years out of Maple…not sure what the life expectancy range is for turf but I would’ve thought that it would’ve lasted longer than 7 years….
I don’t think the plan in place for the Schedler (sp?) property calls for artificial turf, but I could be wrong.
You can thank the voters in the Willard district that voted for the expanded bond that removed 2 usable baseball/softball fields at BF (specifically the second 90 foot baseball field) when they redid the track and field.
If that vote doesn’t get approved, there would be less of a push by RBSA to get a second 90 foot baseball field somewhere in town.
No doubt that the Willard parents tipped the scales and set this whole entitlement sentiment currently embraced by the sports groups.
Time to take the town back and vote for Sedon and Knudsen…or the “newbies” as one of the “townie” posters wrote last week.
Reader says I am a bit turned off by the whole astroturf the world thing
Jim is “always available”….except, we have learned, when it is time to vote in local elections….
I actually like the mayor and would want to support his choice but I just can’t pull the lever for someone who doesn’t bother to vote.
I am also a bit turned off by the whole astroturf the world thing. Enough already. So they play on grass and dirt. At least it produces oxygen and helps cool the earth instead of being just more pavement.
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_riaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 165
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_inhaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 166
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_mastodonIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 177