On Nov. 3, all New Jersey votersw ill be asked to vote on a ballot question to provide funding for the preservation of open space. In Tinton Falls, voters will also be asked to vote on an additional question to reduce the borough’s open space tax. In these tough economic times, it is understandable that most people tend to look at everything from a dollars-and-cents perspective. Some people will argue that funding for open space is a “luxury” that we can’t afford. However, monies spent toward open space are a bargain we can’t pass up. Studies have proven that open space funding not only protects our environment while providing active and passive recreational opportunities benefiting all residents as well as future generations, it also saves us tax dollars while protecting and increasing our property values. The following arguments are geared toward the local ballot question, but the ideas and concepts certainly apply to the state ballot question as well.
The ballot question in Tinton Falls seeks to reduce the borough’s open space tax by ¼ of a cent for every $100 of assessed real property value. If passed, this will save the average Tinton Falls taxpayer about $26 per year (slightly over $2 per month), but would reduce the borough’s open space funds by nearly a quarter of a million dollars each year. The loss of this sizeable amount of money would certainly inhibit the borough’s ability to match a developer’s offer on substantial tracts of land. Tinton Falls — as well as the rest of New Jersey — is quickly running out of undeveloped parcels of land. It makes sense to use open space funding to preserve these properties now, before they are gone and while real estate values are relatively low and bargain prices are available. When the economy improves, the cost of acquiring any remaining undeveloped property will certainly rise.
The financial cost to each taxpayer due to new development is considerable. Currently, in Tinton Falls for every dollar we collect in real estate taxes from new residential development the borough pays out an estimated $1.39 in the services that need to be provided to the new residents. This figure will certainly rise substantially if we have to build a new school. New development would ensure the need for a new elementary school, which would cost an estimated $30 million to build. If a new high school were needed, that cost would be substantially higher.
Even without considering the cost of building a new school, the current educational costs in our school systems range from $16,000 to $20,000 per pupil per year, depending upon grade level. This cost alone is more than the real estate taxes that would be collected from any new development even without considering the cost of other borough services (police, streetlights, trash collection, water, roads, etc.) that would need to be provided. Whenever there is new residential development, the shortfall between the cost of services provided and revenues collected necessitates an increase in our property taxes. The $2-per-month reduction in our taxes this year is certainly not worth the additional long-term costs we will incur from increased development that includes increased taxes to subsidize services, increased costs for education, increased pollution, increased traffic, increased storm water runoff, as well as decreased quality of life and decreased property values.
Keeping the current level of open space funding is a win-win proposition for both the borough and its taxpayers. The only losers are the developers. Open space doesn’t grow on trees. Once it’s gone, it’s gone for good, and the cost of losing it will plague us forever. On Nov. 3, I urge Tinton Falls voters to vote “no” to cutting Tinton Falls open space funds and urge all voters to vote “yes” to the state ballot question to provide funding for open space preservation.
Frank DeVita
Vice Chairperson
Tinton Falls
Open Space Committee