Millstone introduces $5.9M spending plan
If adopted, municipal budget will cost average homeowner an extra
$18 per year
By linda denicola
Staff Writer
MILLSTONE — The $5.9 million municipal budget for 2002 was introduced last week despite the fact that it does not include an approved salary ordinance for the coming year.
The township’s spending plan is down a bit from last year’s budget of $6.2 million, and the total amount to be raised by property taxes is higher. The budget anticipates raising $1,257,172 in 2002 as compared to $1,171,583 in 2001.
Township Committeeman John Pfefferkorn, the finance chairman, said that the actual amount raised in 2001 was $2,883,731. He explained that the higher figures are comprised of the anticipated collection of taxes, revenue from recreation, rollback taxes from new developments, and first-year property taxes on new home construction.
That equates to a total in general revenues of $9,246,850, he said.
The new tax rate of $0.1057 per $100 of assessed valuation reflects changes in the tax rate due to a reassessment of home values completed last year. According to Pfefferkorn, based on the old assessment, the tax rate would have been $0.1582 per $100. In 2001, it was $0.1511.
Pfefferkorn explained that a house valued at $250,000 in 2001 is now valued at $375,000. That homeowner, who would have paid $378 last year, will pay $396 this year, an increase of $18 or 4.7 percent.
The budget includes $1.9 million from surplus, which is significantly less than the $3,145,000 appropriated last year.
According to Pfefferkorn, the $3.1 million appropriated last year was never used. "That total was a misstatement of fact. No surplus was ever consumed," he said, adding, it actually increased at the end of 2001.
The public hearing on the budget will be held on April 17.
Pfefferkorn complimented the committee for its endurance in going through the budget during six long meetings. But, he said, he still has concerns and voted not to introduce, "The mathematical budget works, but I have trouble with the conceptual model. We did an excellent job balancing the numbers," he said, "but I voted no because there were some critical issues that weren’t addressed."
Deputy Mayor Cory Wingerter and Mayor Evan Maltz seemed surprised when Pfefferkorn voted no during the introduction vote. Wingerter questioned why Pfefferkorn, as the finance chair, voted against the introduction after all of the time and effort that went into working on the budget. Maltz said he thought the committee "had a unanimous agreement to introduce the budget."
Pfefferkorn explained that he had voted during the last budget hearing to introduce the budget, but still disagreed with certain things behind the numbers that affect future tax rates. "You have four votes to pass it. Fundamentally I disagree with certain elements that have been put in the budget," he said.
"We could have been in 10 meetings, and nothing would have changed," he told the committee. "I would still have disagreed with some of the figures, but we have to move the budget. I thought there should have been a tax decrease because of the huge surplus that we have.
"In light of the school budget increase, the people of this town have to fork up another $600 to $800 a year," he added.
There was much discussion during the vote on the salary ordinance, which provides for a 4 percent across-the-board increase and was tabled to April 3. Pfefferkorn said that the township personnel ordinance stipulates that performance reviews should be administered and they are not.
"I think there are people, who would like to recognize employees who are doing an exceptional job. Without the reviews, I think that some people are getting short changed," he said.
Maltz said he agreed with Pfefferkorn. Committeeman Charlie Abate commented, "We discussed merit raises and no decision was made."
Pfefferkorn abstained from voting on the salary ordinance, then Wingerter abstained.
Abate asked Wingerter why he abstained. "I thought we discussed this and agreed," Abate said, then he, too, abstained.
Committeeman Bill Nurko said he missed the budget meeting the night salaries were discussed and also abstained.
Finally, Maltz abstained and tabled the issue to the next meeting.
"I don’t think we’ll have proper review done in two weeks," Wingerter said. "A lot of towns," he added, "do what we do here. I don’t see what we accomplish by not adopting the salary ordinance. The reality is we’re not going to get the salary ordinance changed in two weeks."
Since they had not voted on the 2002 budget introduction yet, Nurko asked how they could introduce a budget without a salary ordinance, which is part of the budget.
Township Attorney Duane Davison, told the committee that they could go forward with the budget introduction, pointing out, "You wouldn’t have had a salary ordinance tonight anyway because you [would have] just introduced it."