To the editor
Property tax reform may finally be on its way … maybe!
Sprawled into action by literally hundreds of letters, e-mails and phone calls by New Jersey residents (a good percentage of which came directly from Hillsborough) the New Jersey Senate finally began debate on a property tax reform bill introduced by Senator Leonard T. Connors of district 9.
The bill is essentially a New Jersey version of the "Michigan Plan." In essence the bill, known as "Concurrent Resolution #12," calls for the prohibition of property taxes for funding the public school system and diverts such funding to "other" preexisting tax sources the nature of which will be determined in future debate by the legislature.
The reallocation of the funds in this manner will make "everyone who earns a paycheck" responsible for paying for the school system and not just property owners. The bill also guarantees that all school districts will not lose any funding below what they are currently receiving in their 2001 budget if the bill passes.
The ramifications of this bill, if passed, are intriguing. First, it would obviously relieve property owners of high property taxes allowing residents to finally own a home in peace. In addition, because the state of New Jersey would now be picking up the entire cost of public education, the state of New Jersey would also be responsible in some manner for approving each of the individual school budgets thus making the controversial school budget elections obsolete.
School budgets would now be approved by New Jersey based on the "real availability of funds" instead of the emotional whining of a few loud people. The bill also allows for a state wide public referendum in any given year to reduce the amount of money allocated to the funding of the public school system if tax payers begin to feel that too much of their paycheck is being used for school budget expenses.
This last stipulation is an option that currently does not exist for property owners who currently are never given the option to reduce the magnitude of an existing school budget.
The current bill, as written, is still not perfect. Critics of the bill say that it still refuses to address the root causes of why school costs are so high to begin with. Why, for example, can the school district in Doylestown, Pa., (which has a curriculum very similar to that of Hillsborough), educate its students at a cost of only $2,500 per pupil while Hillsborough charges over $8,000 per pupil?
The bill also does not allow for vouchers to pay for charter schools that many residents so eagerly yearn for.
However, despite these shortfalls, the bill will bring tax reform.
Hillsborough

