School taxes are investment that adds value

PACKET EDITORIAL, April 1

By: Packet Editorial
   Way back when we were little, and not at all inclined to finish all the Brussels sprouts on our dinner plate, our mother would implore us to eat everything she placed before us because, as she put it, "People are starving in China."
   Years later, we finally figured out the appropriate (if somewhat sassy) rejoinder to this admonition: "Name one."
   What brings this coming-of-age moment to mind is the steady stream of sky-is-falling citizens who have been seizing the microphone at school board meetings all across the region lately to complain that rising property taxes are "driving people out of their homes."
   To which the appropriate (if not entirely politically correct) rejoinder is: "Name one."
   Frankly, we’ve grown a little tired of the Chicken Little prophesying of people who rant and rave against increases in school budgets — and municipal and county and state and federal budgets — on the ground that people can’t afford to pay the taxes to support them. The fact is, most people can afford to pay these taxes; what’s more, they’d be a whole lot worse off if they didn’t.
   Take school taxes. Yes, they are high, especially in relatively affluent communities like Princeton, Montgomery, West Windsor and Plainsboro. And yes, they are apportioned on the basis of property value rather than income, which is hardly the fairest way of sharing the financial burden of supporting our system of free public education. And yes, people on fixed incomes — especially senior citizens — are surely finding it increasingly difficult to bear their share of this burden.
   But we don’t see any mass exodus arising from this state of affairs. In fact, we see quite the opposite. Montgomery, West Windsor and Plainsboro have been among the fastest-growing municipalities in New Jersey over the past two decades. Princeton Borough and Princeton Township continue to be among the most desirable places to live, not only in the region but in the country. All across central New Jersey, property values have been rising at rates that boggle the mind — far faster than the rate of inflation and, more important, faster in many cases than the rise in property taxes.
   Why are people so attracted to this region? Because the schools are so good. And why are the schools so good? Because people in this region are willing to spend the kind of money it takes to achieve excellence in education. If they weren’t, the schools would deteriorate, the region would become less desirable and property values would take a major hit.
   So the problem, as we see it, is not that property owners are being driven out of town by escalating school taxes. It’s that the commensurate gains they are enjoying in their property values exist only on paper, while the taxes have to be paid now. Most people are more than willing to accept this tradeoff. But for those who aren’t, or can’t afford to, there are any number of ways to leverage the increased value of their property to pay their current obligations — home equity loans, reverse mortgages and the like — and still come out ahead.
   The other issue, of course, is trying to retain diversity in our communities by offering a range of housing opportunities, including affordable housing. We do not want escalating property taxes to make housing in our communities affordable only to the affluent. But the solution to this problem is not to slash spending on public schools or needed municipal services; it is to find fairer ways to finance these schools and services — along with a fairer mechanism for providing affordable housing — by relying less on burdensome property taxes and more on broad-based forms of taxation.
   We understand why some people complain about paying high taxes. All we ask is that they take the time to consider what some of the consequences would be if they didn’t.