In response to questions posed by the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, the Trenton-based lobbying arm for local government, the candidates have provided their views on such issues as property taxes, spending priorities, shared public services and government consolidation, sales taxes on out-of-state catalog purchases, and state mandates on local government.
I've met and talked with the candidates,'' said Hope Township Mayor Timothy C. McDonough, League president. "You can be certain that they have great respect for local government and for local officials and that they really do have the best interests of the people of New Jersey at heart."
Here are the questions and the candidates' responses:RELIEF FROM STATE MANDATES
In April, New York Governor David Paterson recognized how state mandates drive up local property taxes. He issued an Executive Order that directs the State bureaucracy to document the fiscal impacts of any such proposals, to conduct an honest cost-benefit analysis, to demonstrate the participation of local governments in the process and to propose sources of revenue to fund the new mandate. The Order, further, directs all state agencies to review all their existing regulations and to report back with proposals detailing changes "...which could reduce the impact of existing mandates on local governments and generate property tax relief for New York State property taxpayers." Will you make mandates relief a priority next year? How?
CORZINE: As governor, I have regularly looked at repealing mandates not related to the health, safety and welfare of New Jersey citizens, and I will continue to do so this next year. We have a long history in this state of repealing mandates not related to health, safety and welfare that are best funded locally.
The New Jersey Constitution already provides a mechanism for mandate relief through the Council on State Mandates. The council is charged with determining whether a state law, rule or regulation imposes an unconstitutional "unfunded mandate" on boards of education, counties, or municipalities. Governor Patterson's action is the first step in developing a system comparable to New Jersey's.
In the past, the Council on State Mandates has reached interpretations that are very favorable to municipalities, thereby serving its function as a bulwark against overburdening localities. This is better than what exists in New York, where no such mechanism has been firmly established, as there has been New Jersey. I look forward to reviewing the results of the mandate survey you are currently conducting with your membership and working with the League and other stakeholders to identify other areas for cost reductions.
CHRISTIE: I have been very clear in my position that New Jersey suffers from over regulation and oppressive mandates imposed from Trenton on our businesses, municipalities and our schools. In the Christie-Guadagno administration, existing mandates on municipal governments will be immediately reviewed with an eye toward eliminating them or making them less costly. In addition to honoring the constitutional prohibition against unfunded new mandates, the Christie administration will also require all new government programs and services be evaluated both before and after they are created. This means employing a cost-benefit analysis on new programs being considered, "sunsetting" all new programs, and including specific performance standards by which new programs are evaluated. I look forward to working with the League's Mandate Relief Committee to ensure that immediate relief is provided.
DAGGETT: New Jersey has adopted many state mandates, which unfortunately, have been approved without any state funding to help local governments comply with the new directives. It demonstrates the type of misguided actions which have landed state and local governments into such a fiscal mess. Clearly, it's been a factor in driving up property taxes. It also ignores a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 1995 prohibiting the executive and legislative branches from imposing unfunded mandates on local governments. Given today's economic climate, we have to take an exhaustive look at all of the state mandates to determine which are no longer necessary or too onerous and can be eliminated to provide some measure of local property tax relief. We must not, however, do so at the cost of sacrificing environmental protection, public health or workplace safety.
ENSURING STATE AID TO CITIES AND TOWNS
Over the last century, many taxes that had been collected by local governments were either abolished or became state taxes. In most cases, when these changes were made the state promised to reimburse municipalities either the amount they had been collecting or the amount that the state would collect. But that commitment has rarely been honored. These are revenue replacement programs. When the state fails to honor its commitment, municipalities are forced to raise the shortfall through other means. In most cases, the only other means available is the property tax. In the 1990's, legislators in both parties recognized the fact that increases in population, prices, wages and employee benefits – increases over which mayors and governing bodies have little, if any, control – erode the ability of local officials to keep a lid on property taxes with "level funding." Appreciating that fact, they put laws on the books that were supposed to preserve the property tax relief benefits of at least two programs, into the future. If elected, will you honor the state's statutes that require annual inflationary adjusted revenue replacement funding?
CORZINE: State aid directly supporting taxpayers, as well as boards of education, counties and municipalities accounts for more than 40 percent of the 2009-10 budget. With declining resources, I have prioritized the allocation of state dollars, while nurturing our children, honoring our seniors and protecting the most vulnerable among us.
Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook