98 recommendations, even more questions

From the Daily Record:

Fixing N.J.’s tax mess: 98 recommendations, many questions
Lawmakers still uncertain

A sweeping set of recommendations aimed at easing New Jersey’s property taxes includes bold plans ranging from 20 percent tax credits to capping tax hikes and revamping the way the state pays for schools. But the proposals, released Wednesday, left many questions unanswered and interest groups searching for winners and losers.

The proposals, delivered in four reports that total 561 pages and 98 recommendations, include banning dual office holding and increasing state spending on education, with a focus on preschool and kindergarten programs across the state.

Many recommendations, such as cutting pension benefits for future state workers, raising their retirement age from 55 to 62 and creating a commission to recommend municipal mergers, had been widely publicized in recent days. One of many plans to check education spending, which makes up the bulk of property tax bills, would give a line-item budget veto to county school superintendents appointed by the governor.

But many key details — such as who would get the 20 percent credits and how to pay for the ambitious ideas — remain to be hammered out by the Legislature and Gov. Jon S. Corzine.

Republicans, however, questioned how the state can pay for the plans.

“Too often in the past we have had property tax proposals that have not been sustainable over time,” said Senate Minority Leader Leonard Lance, R-Hunterdon.

William Dressel Jr., executive director of the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, worried tax credits could be a “flash in the pan”like previous relief plans that ballooned at first but dwindled as budget crunches consumed state resources.

“There’s questions after questions after questions,” Dressel said.

This entry was posted in Property Taxes. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to 98 recommendations, even more questions

  1. James Bednar says:

    From the Star Ledger:

    http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/mulshine/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1163655897107360.xml&coll=1

    During the past month I have run over two dead deer. One felt like it ripped the transmission out of my Honda, but the car and I somehow sur vived.

    Captain Corzine is expected to detail his plans today in Atlantic City. But as of yesterday, his office wasn’t commenting on where the cash would come from to pay for this plan.

    It’s a lot of money, say Merkt and other Republicans. They esti mate that it would cost about $2 billion a year to fund those promised 20 percent tax cuts for “most” taxpayers. I put the word “most” in quotes because that language, which was being bandied about last week by Democrats touting the plan, didn’t make it to the ver sion released yesterday. Now we’re being told that the tax cuts would go not to the majority of taxpayers but to “as many as resources will allow.”

    The state government is too broke to pick up dead animals on the roads, Gov. Jon Corzine tells us. But if we are to believe him and his fellow Democrats, that same state government seems to be awash in dough for property tax relief.

    That was the only possible conclusion after the release of that property tax relief plan yesterday. It would require billions in new state spending. Where would the money come from? Nobody knows, or at least nobody who’s talking. But the Republicans have a lot of questions.

    “There was never any discussion of where they were going to raise the money,” said Assemblyman Richard Merkt, a Morris County Republican who served on the bipartisan committee that was supposed to consider constitutional changes. “It was never discussed in my committee. We’re like a ship that leaves port without the captain knowing where he’s going.”

  2. BC Bob says:

    “But many key details — such as who would get the 20 percent credits and how to pay for the ambitious ideas ”

    Who gets the 20%????? Political partisans??? I smell, Newark, JC, Passaic, Paterson, Camden etc… The BC towns with the 12-27 month absorption rate, fuggettabout it!!! Another tax on the so called “wealthy” to pay for this pork. It will have a opposite effect, continue to drive high wage earners out of the state

Comments are closed.