New bill will ‘give public false sense of security’
A3983/S2503 “Changes licensing requirements for home inspectors” is not in the best interest of New Jersey consumers.
This new bill would allow an 18-year-old high school graduate to obtain a full New Jersey home inspector license after less than three weeks in a classroom course and one week of field training.
This defeats the entire purpose of what the original bill was written for, to protect the home buying public. This new bill will give the public a false sense of security when hiring a state-licensed home inspector. Is this what we want? Would you personally feel comfortable hiring a New Jersey licensed inspector with these minimal requirements when you are making the largest purchase of your life?
Opponents argue there is a shortage of home inspectors — there is no shortage of home inspectors. If each of the 500, plus or minus, licensed home inspectors performs two inspections per day (500 inspectors multiplied by 250 working days per year), there is a capacity to perform 250,000 home inspections. Since there are about 140,000 home sales in New Jersey and about 80 percent get inspected, there is only a market for 120,000 home inspections per year.
Opponents argue it is difficult to become a home inspector — it is, and for good reason. Home inspectors protect the public from financial and physical harm when they are making the largest purchase of their life. Properly training home inspectors takes time. There is a nursing shortage — is anyone contemplating cutting four years of school down to one to alleviate the shortage?
The proposed bill cuts the existing 300 classroom hours down to 100. For more than three years, I have been teaching home inspection classes and have found the current 300 hours of classroom study is the bare minimum number of hours required to cover the existing curriculums. Although 300 hours of class time may seem like a lot, there is simply no way to cover all the necessary material in less time.
The proposed bill would cut the 50 learning field inspections down to only 40 hours (about 15 inspections). There are far too many combinations of plumbing, heating systems, cooling systems, electrical systems, structural systems and plumbing systems out there for a student to gain an understanding of how they function during so few training inspections. There is simply no way a student who has only gone out on 15 or so home inspections will have the knowledge or the skills necessary to properly perform their duty to the home buying public.
The proposed changes in licensing requirements for home inspectors are unfair to the members of the public they will “learn from.”
Would you or a family member wish to be the “first” client of an inspector with so little experience?
The alternate route for licensure where an inspector in training accompanies a licensed inspector on 250 home inspections will not produce fully qualified home inspectors because the inspector in training will lack the necessary classroom time and basic understanding of what is being inspected and why.
I oppose any postponement of the implementation date of the existing regulations because we feel it is unfair to the consumers of New Jersey and to those who have done the right thing and already become licensed.
I feel the existing system will work well when the licenses are required after the end of this year and we feel the law should be left as is until and unless proven otherwise.
Michael Del Greco
New Jersey home inspector
West Paterson
School funding can be changed without expense of convention
In 1968 when I was a state assemblyman, I introduced bill A330 calling for a state constitutional convention. Why? I understood the problems associated with funding education with property taxes, and I wanted the system to change.
At that time, New Jersey did not have a state income tax, and a convention was required in order for the state to adopt one. I stated at the time that property taxes should be dedicated to only municipal and county expenses. This would have reduced all our property taxes by 60 percent. At the same time, I suggested that a 5-percent state income tax be dedicated to fund only primary and secondary education.
When bill A330 was introduced, it was hailed by the Philadelphia Enquirer, at a state freeholder convention in Atlantic City, by the Division of Taxation, and again at a debate among Sen. Norman Tanzman, Sen. J. Edward Crabiel and myself.
Unfortunately, no one at the time had the guts to introduce a state income tax. In fact, no legislature wants to introduce a dedicated tax of any type that would prevent building up a pork barrel for “friendly” purposes.
There really isn’t a need to hold an expensive constitutional convention in order to introduce a new method of funding primary and secondary education. The only reason, as I see it, is for the legislators to escape the responsibility for whatever decision is made through the convention.
There shouldn’t be a delay in enacting a method of funding for next year by having some legislator introduce a bill that would fund education by a dedicated state income tax.
The total cost for primary and secondary education in the state of New Jersey is $17 billion. The total income for all workers in the state of New Jersey is $398 billion — 5 percent of that amount is $19.9 billion, which is more than enough. This is a guaranteed method of funding education with no ifs, ands or buts.
This method of funding education would not only help senior citizens but would also help many people, who due to misfortune, are living on reduced or fixed incomes. It would encourage many seniors to remain in the state and not move away.
Since 1968 I’ve campaigned and written letters to the editor asking for the dedicated tax structure, and to this date, I’ve not heard one word of criticism regarding this idea. I wish some legislator would step forward and state, clearly, how education should be funded and what is wrong with the concept I have offered.
Frank J. Coury
East Brunswick
Fed cuts offset state’s efforts on affordable housing
I am writing concerning the affordability of housing in New Jersey.Homeowners in New Jersey have benefited from the real-estate boom, as skyrocketing home values have provided them with rising home equity. However, the flipside to this equation is that more and more families cannot find affordable housing in New Jersey, which is now the third most expensive state in which to live.
The National Low-Income Housing Coalition estimates that in New Jersey the average household requires a yearly salary of $42,000 to rent a “fair-market” apartment. But the state Department of Labor reports that more than one-third of New Jersey workers earn less than $25,000 a year. Most new jobs created here in the next 10 years will pay near or under that amount.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration has not only turned a blind eye to this problem, it has actually continued to cut Section 8 funding for affordable housing on a yearly basis. The federal government’s cuts have offset New Jersey’s attempts to address the need for affordable housing.
New Jersey is one of the few states that recognizes affordable housing as a constitutional right. Unfortunately, the need for affordable housing is not being met. New Jersey must address this problem so that the less fortunate are not left behind by our state’s rising property values.
Concerned citizens can start by contacting their representatives in Congress and asking them to oppose continued cuts in Section 8 funding.
Eddie Konczal
Monroe
Hospitality, energy marked event
This is a thank you to the pastors, ministers and rabbi of South River who so graciously opened their doors to the members of the community on Sunday, June 12. Nine churches and synagogues participated in the Open Doors of Faith event, which allowed the public to tour these houses of worship.
Our family was overwhelmed by the charm and beauty in these old buildings, and we were especially impressed by the hospitality, enthusiasm and energy of the leaders of these faith communities. We learned not only about the history of these buildings and communities, but a little about their theological perspectives as well.
South River should be proud to have such vibrant congregations within its 2-square-mile boundaries.
Thank you to the members of the clergy who put this lovely day together. We look forward eagerly to other opportunities to be exposed to the hidden treasures of the borough of South River.
We also urge other communities to do something similar to this. We would love to visit some representative houses of worship from other faiths.
Mara, Ed and E.J. Zukowski
South River