N.J. tax cap costs too much | Commentary | NewJerseyNewsroom.com -- Your State. Your News.


May 27th
  • Login
  • Create an account
  • Search
  • Local Business Deals

N.J. tax cap costs too much

titteljeff021110_optBY JEFF TITTEL

The Governor and Legislature are pushing a 2 percent tax cap as a way to deal with the state's soaring property taxes. However, a constitutional cap is not the answer to New Jersey's exorbitant taxes. Such a cap would be too absolute and inflexible and may pose a threat to our state's open space.

New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation. Instead of establishing a long term solution to this problem, Governor Christie and the legislature are merely rushing to come up with a solution. But the solution being pushed will have negative consequences for the people of New Jersey.

Instead of rushing to implement a cap, the Sierra Club supports comprehensive reform that will ease the financial burden for homeowners in New Jersey and will allow our economy to thrive.

A tax cap would have many negative side affects. In addition to compromising our open space, it will drive municipalities will seek creative ways of getting around the cap, creating additional consequences like increased debt, a reduction in services, and a potential for privatization of municipal service.

A property tax cap could have a tremendous impact on open space. Approximately half the towns in New Jersey have open space funds. Instead of this money being used to purchase open space, towns may use this funding as a permanent way to meet budget needs. If towns have to decide whether to lay off police officers or take money from open space, they are going to choose reducing open space funding.

A reduction in the purchase of open space will only lead to overdevelopment, as towns try to grow their revenues through adding ratables. In the long term, this solution will only mean higher taxes and more sprawl.

The Governor's plan has just one exemption to this cap — debt service. This exemption will also have a negative impact. Instead of buying open space on a pay-as-you-go basis, towns will now be tempted to bond and increase to make open space purchases so they can use dedicated money for the budget. This will offer short-term financial gains that lead to long-term problems.

The cap will encourage all kinds of development — residential, commercial and industrial. And with those new tax dollars that come from the development, comes an influx of new construction because towns will need new roads, sewers and schools. The debt-service exemption will allow this to be done through borrowing, which will lead to more costs down the road.

Towns will begin looking for ways to get around caps by charging separate billing for services like garbage, libraries and road departments. Towns could also set up authorities for water and sewer and use these to get around the cap as well as public scrutiny. Instead of a town buying a new water truck, it will have the water department buy a new truck. Instead of hiring new sewer staff, it will have the sewer authority hire staff. As seen with Passaic Valley Sewage Authority, authorities become a dumping ground for patronage. There is little, if any, public oversight. This cap will encourage more of these runaway authorities.

To raise revenue, the City of Trenton tried to sell its water to a private company. The City of Newark is trying to take its water department and create a new utility authority. The result is that rates will go up and services will go down and water quality will be compromised.

The cap could also lead to privatization as towns try to sell off assets to meet their budgets. Towns could attempt to privatize their police forces or fire departments. They may try to sell parks or open space for development to gain revenue. This will lead to higher costs long term and worse services for the people.

The state needs to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with property taxes by encouraging regional planning and good land use. We should be encouraging development in the right places; places with existing infrastructure and transportation. There should be better regionalization and duplication of services between communities and levels of government. We should be urging towns to merge and consolidate through incentives. It is key that the state also look at other sources of funding for schools aside from property tax revenues.

Only through comprehensive reform can we help the people of New Jersey deal with the burdensome property taxes that are crushing everyone in the state and driving businesses to go elsewhere.

Jeff Tittel is the Director of the Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter.


Protect N.J. by treating coal ash like toxic waste

Leasing N.J. parks to private companies would be a violation of the public trust

Weak oversight of site remediation helps N.J. stay polluted

Wake up, N.J.: Self-regulating leads to disaster

Together we must act to stop erosion of environmental protections in N.J.

N.J. environmentalists seeing red over Red Tape Report

Increased fuel standards a victory for environment, economy and New Jersey

New Jersey bear hunt is not the answer

New Jersey's lack of action makes flooding worse

Jeff Tittel: New Jersey's economy relies on environmental protections

Jeff Tittel: Executive Orders signed by Christie attack environmental protections

Jeff Tittel: Christmas comes early for N.J. developers

Jeff Tittel: Proposed long distance transmission lines help cheap dirty coal at the expense of renewable energy

New Jerseyans should expect more from stimulus Website

N.J. must make wind farm permitting process as quick and easy as possible

Comments (1)
1 Monday, 09 August 2010 05:21
Who cares anymore
In many NJ towns the tax base is eroding and even existing infrastructure is being hollowed out. Adding housing developments increases costs more than the taxes they bring in. A household with two kids costs the area 30K to 50K thanks to well appointed school budgets and related benefits for teachers and admins.

But the reality is starker. NJ is in systemic decline because of laws and policies that make it painful to be in business. Where I live, business are reducing the size and shuttering buildings. For corporate decision makers, why come here where they will be vilified for earning more than the average and taxed accordingly.

The fact of the matter is that towns have been mismanaged for years, and the cap will not change that. The underlying thread is that towns are small, duplicate a lot of services (e.g., how may police chiefs and mayors do we really need in NJ) and are prey to well organized and funded unions who have succeeded in getting some of the best deals in the country.

Without limits, the towns will spend more than taxpayers can afford and your hand wringing about the consequences of a cap is not a solution.

Add your comment

Your name:

Follow/join us

Twitter: njnewsroom Linked In Group: 2483509