Applauds letter on ratables, urges logical discussion
Irecently read a very sensible letter to the editor concerning getting ratables in Old Bridge ("Give Some Potential Ratables a Chance in Old Bridge," Suburban, Nov. 15).

Sharon Mancin, the writer of the letter, reflected on the fact that Old Bridge has to come to grips with obtaining a balance between ratables and open space. Most of the letters that have preceded this letter, particularly those written during the campaign season, usually took a myopic view.

Of course, I and most other people would prefer Old Bridge the way it was when I was mayor in the early 1970s, but the realization is that all expenses for your readers and myself as well as the municipal government continue to grow. Therefore, Old Bridge needs additional ratables.

Those ratables based on single-family unrestricted housing are generally losses to the balance sheet. Each school-age child in a single family home costs at least $15,000, but very few single-family homes pay that much, and, of course, very few single-family homes only have one school-age child. Therefore, we need nonresidential ratables.

For the last 40 years, the town fathers have sought this "holy grail." Everyone always wants the clean, no-traffic, no-employees, no-utilization-of-municipal-services ratables. They do not exist, and if they did, they would probably go somewhere else because they do not want to balance the Old Bridge budget with their taxes. Hence, we have the old "chicken-and-egg" dilemma. How do we lower taxes to attract good ratables, and if not, how do we get good ratables to come here to help lower taxes?

The hue and cry against restricted senior housing in my mind did not stand the test of logic. Placing the benefits against the negatives clearly brought forth the advantage to the benefits. However, it does not appear that there is sufficient demand for restricted housing at the present time, and so that solution is not imminent.

Is the data-terminal proposal a solution? Is it a good ratable? Will it be a plus or a minus to the community? These questions and many more must be answered before the community should agree to the proposal. However, the questions and discussion should be done in a logical and orderly fashion without the usual hyperbole of campaign rhetoric.

Once again, I applaud the letter from Sharon Mancin as one of the most articulate letters I have seen on the subject of ratables.

William E. Flynn

Old Bridge