Will a tax rate cap negatively impact municipalities?

From the Gloucester County Times:

Officials fear tax cap will cripple their towns

Gov. Jon S. Corzine called it absolutely crucial to achieving property tax reform.

But municipal officials are wondering how they will support escalating fixed costs if a plan to cap local property tax increases by 4 percent is approved.

Bill Dressel, executive director of the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, said the proposal would limit cash-strapped towns already scraping to cover state mandates.

“With the emphasis on these iron-clad caps that really aren’t dealing with the property tax drivers,” he said, “all it means is decreased services.”

In Tuesday’s State of the State address, Corzine said the cap would require local governments to prioritize spending and search for long-term cost savings.

The cap, he said, with “limited exceptions and provisions for voter override,” is key to providing relief.

Without knowing the specific exceptions that would be allowed, West Deptford Administrator Gerald White said the cap could impact the 21,000-person township on a number of levels.

White said with increased population comes the need for increased trash pickup, snow removal and police. If a cap were implemented, it could affect the services provided.

“If you’re adding population … and you have the ability to increase your levy but keep the tax rate level, what happens then?” he said.

This entry was posted in New Jersey Real Estate, Property Taxes. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Will a tax rate cap negatively impact municipalities?

  1. SG says:

    “If you’re adding population … and you have the ability to increase your levy but keep the tax rate level, what happens then?” he said.

    This will reduce township’s approval for new developments. Already, you see town’s with good schools allowing almost 0 development, this will be one more easy excuse.

    Though I know many on this board do not think there should be any more development, I have different opinion. In my opinion, development should be allowed to the extent economy requires i.e. supporting increasing population etc… The current situation in NJ has no such checks, which results in building of houses that are only McMansions or Active Adults and not Single Family Homes, which most growing families need. Also I don’t buy the argument that there is no land. Just use Google maps satellite view and you can easily find non-agricultural & non forest land.

  2. pesche22 says:

    NJ is more dense than India. That tells us
    about Development. Perhaps we could sell
    the rights to the State House to a foreign
    entity.

  3. James Bednar says:

    pesch,

    Maybe Mills can turn the Statehouse into Xanadu 2?

    jb

  4. SG says:

    pesche22: Manhatten is more dense then NJ.

    In fact since you compared to India, I will give you what is reality in India, as I lived there for 25 years. The city of Bombay (where I grew up) has population of 15 million living in less then are of any 1 county of NJ. Compare that density to NJ. The problems in India is lack of political will to develop other parts, hence large density in cities.

    I am not saying density should be increased to drastic level such as NYC or Bombay or Tokyo. But it should be increased to the extent population increases by natural growth. That is US’s growth percent is 2%, so housing stock should be allowed to grow by that amount at least.

    Also if you do better planning you can reduce traffic. At present, due to high cost of houses, a very large percentage of population is forced to live in PA border. Each of that family needs to drive at least 50 miles one way to work and back. If you want to see the result, just look at Rte 78 or 80 in morning & evening. Even if 50% of those folks could live in NJ, you will cut down traffic, sprawl, environment impact, road maintenance budgets etc…

    Don’t compare to India, I know how it is to live in a tiny 500 sq ft apartment with 6 family members.

  5. Al says:

    It is not fair to compare the whole India to NJ, it is not fair to compare the whole NJ to one city – Bombay..

    Why don’t compare it to mexico city???

    The reality is: we are talking about United states here and not one city in India or Mexico.
    You also will not find, that average two bedroom converted apartments in Bombay cost 285K USD or average rent tops 1200$/month.

    NJ is overcrowded and it is self-regulating right now. Wheither it is by highest RE taxes, highest RE prices or just quality of life….

  6. RentinginNJ says:

    White said with increased population comes the need for increased trash pickup, snow removal and police.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I though the 4% cap was applied to the annual rate of increase for which the town can hit a taxpayer with, not the total property taxes collected by the town.

    In other words, if you are adding population, you are also expanding the property tax base, so you will collect more money in tax revenue to cover these expenses.

    In fact, if you are limited to a 4% increase in the tax rate, wouldn’t development, under the right circumstances, make sense as a way to grown revenue?

    Of course, this will mean that towns will want the type of development that theoretically adds to the tax base without putting more pressure on services. This often means more McMansions and active adult communities.

  7. pesche22 says:

    whats the diff. india,mexico, korean.

    thats whats nj is all about.

    NJ is now a welfare state and its gone and
    it probably belongs in a BK court.

  8. SG says:

    Al: Agree to your point. I was pointing out same thing to pesche22 that comparing India does not make sense, similar to comparing to one city does not make sense.

    I do appreciate the fact that NJ is nothing like those denser cities around the world, and has better infrastructure. The point I am trying to make is state should at least make provisions for natural population growth. That is allowing development of 2% or so number of houses as children of existing home owners will also need roof. By adding 2% a year in planned manner is not going to make NJ as dense as Bombay or Mexico city or NYC. Of course, this development need to be tied with same amount of infrastructure developments so not as to burden over stretch resources.

    BTW: You mentioned that, You also will not find, that average two bedroom converted apartments in Bombay cost 285K USD or average rent tops 1200$/month.

    I was in Bombay 2 weeks ago, and I tell you prices decent part of Bombay are higher then the one you mentioned. I went to a builder building condos in central Bombay, and the price he gave me turned out to be $400K USD for 2 bed room condo. Also many MNCs are finding rents in South Bombay about $2500 USD per month for much shabby apartments. Don’t think everything is cheap since it is India.

  9. Lindsey says:

    I am really hoping for success in property tax reform, but it looks like I’m not going to get it.

    This is just dopey. I happen to live in a town (Ocean, Monmouth) where the municipal tax rate has actually declined significantly in real terms since about 1992. And that’s with a corrupt mayor (Terry Weldon) who has been convicted already.

    I realize my tax situation is relatively good (the school system, as it does in most every town, takes a much bigger bite and has been a more typical taxing entity), but I’d still like to see a change. Real change.

    The ability to tax must actually be removed for any real reform to be realized.

  10. Lindsey says:

    BTW,

    Almost Every town (at least the people who are elected) with developable property loves development. Residents may oppose development, but most muni officials don’t do more than pay lip service to the idea.

    In addition to graft opportunities, Building actually generates short term (extremely) financial benefits for a municipality. The long-term consequences are another matter, but politicians aren’t long-term thinkers.

    The ONLY total exception to this rule that I know of is Colts Neck. Millstone (Monmouth Cty) is kind of similar, but not as hard core as Colts Neck.

  11. curiousd says:

    “whats the diff. india,mexico, korean.”

    actually, holland would be the best comparable. they have similar size land mass, are coastal, with a thriving economy with little growth (6x slower than spain for example).

    Their population is about double NJs and still plenty of open spaces. Good planning (except for those stupid ars RINGS that Europeans like so much) has made it possible. NJ doesnt need to die or fall flat…just change.

  12. pesche22 says:

    It ,perhaps will not be long here in NJ
    where because of the dense population train
    rides will take 4 hours between stops like
    india., Maybe we will see some Ricksaws along
    route 18 in New Brunswick, and with the weather
    changes maybe some Monsoons.

  13. SG says:

    curiousd: You got me on looking at Holland (Netherland).

    While looking at Google Satellite view of Amersterdam, I came to this location. It shows truly how Residences can be well developed and land be used properly for agri purpose.

    http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=amersterdam,+netherland&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.688845,82.265625&ie=UTF8&z=16&ll=52.277283,4.870205&spn=0.009256,0.020084&t=k&om=1

    I guess its too much to expect from NJ politicians and old citizens who only think their way is right.

  14. curiousd says:

    yep, and they tax the hell out of their citizens. they are still (staticically, this is true) the tallest (not fattest) people in the EU.

    maybe we just need MORE state taxes. ;P

  15. mtnbika says:

    White said with increased population comes the need for increased trash pickup, snow removal and police. If a cap were implemented, it could affect the services provided.

    “If you’re adding population … and you have the ability to increase your levy but keep the tax rate level, what happens then?” he said.

    Do we not even consider cutting costs instead of just jumping right to the standard NJ solution of raising taxes? Paint the bull’s eye right here folks, because this is the problem. We live in a state where the people in charge aren’t even aware that another way to balance the books is to find better ways to do things and save money. But why do that when you can just get more $$$ by raising taxes. It’s a heck of a lot easier, that’s for sure.

Comments are closed.