From NorthJersey.com:
Higher business tax is dead
By Hugh R. Morley
The move to levy different property tax rates on business and residences is all but history.
Sen. Richard Codey, D-Essex, said he would not support the elimination of the so-called fairness clause in the constitution that requires the same tax rates to be levied on businesses and residences.
His office quoted him saying, “I’m a licensed funeral director, and as far as I’m concerned, the issue is in the morgue with a toe tag on it.”
The proposal for a constitutional change came up in legislative committee meetings held to study how to reduce property taxes. Business leaders feared that if the equality clause was removed, municipalities would hike taxes on business.
Codey, the Senate president, stated his opposition at a recent breakfast organized by New Jersey Business and Industry Association.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer:
A call to action on N.J. tax relief
A great opportunity for fundamental change in the New Jersey property-tax system is slipping away. Months have passed since the legislative special session on property-tax reform convened in Trenton, but no progress is discernible.
The four committees established to craft legislation have been listening to proposals, yet not one legislator has stepped forward to offer substantive change to one of the most archaic revenue systems in America.
Citizens are tired of the grandstanding of politicians who use this issue to get elected but fail to deliver the goods.
…
Regional tax-base sharing successfully operates in the Meadowlands and can be expanded to cover the entire state.
Without costing the state a penny, this plan will allow communities to share in the growth of property-tax revenues, no matter where it occurs.
By sharing in the growth of commercial and industrial properties, communities will no longer need to compete with each other to attract new ratables.
Built-out communities, such as Pennsauken and Haddonfield, would receive property-tax relief even though development happens elsewhere. No community would lose current property-tax revenues.