By David Kilby, Staff Writer
CRANBURY — The township adopted its 2011 budget at its meeting Monday after a public hearing on the spending plan with the mayor the sole voice of opposition on the Township Committee.
The total proposed budget is $10,811,557 with $6,327,339 to be raised by taxation and a tax rate of 39.5 cents per $100 of assessed value, a 2-cent increase from last year.
However, the average value of a house in Cranbury has declined from $617,439 to $608,299 in the past year. So even though the tax rate will increase 2 cents, the amount to be raised by taxation is $38,021 less than last year’s levy of $6,365,360.
The owner of a house assessed at the average of $608,299 will pay $2,402 in taxes, which is $87 more than last year.
Despite being higher than last year’s budget of $10,788,106, the 2011 budget includes a handful of reductions, including a $91,132 reduction in administrative and executive costs; a $25,162 reduction in library contributions; a $50,428 reduction in police expenses; a $68,540 reduction in vehicle maintenance; and $459,615 less in grants.
These reductions help counterbalance increases of $79,748 in pensions; $27,370 in utilities; $30,005 in insurance; and $455,349 extra being put toward debt.
At the public hearing, there still were mixed opinions about the 2-cent tax rate increase.
The Township Committee adopted the budget with a 4-1 vote with Mayor Win Cody voting no.
”The spending plan I believe is a reasonable spending plan,” Mayor Cody said. “What I cannot support is a 5.3 percent (or 2-cent) tax rate increase.”
He said the entire committee did agree with the tax increase before the township was told it would receive $467,020 in state for the 2011 budget.
Even though the state has proposed $467,020, most of which comes from energy receipts, the majority of the committee believes it’s still not certain Cranbury will receive that amount of state aid.
The committee said it would be best to put that money toward the township’s $21 million debt, if the township received it.
But Mayor Cody would like to use the money to help reduce the proposed 2-cent tax increase, pointing out no one on the committee knew of a year when the township received less state aid than the state proposed at budget time.
”I would agree with you if I had it in writing that we’re absolutely receiving state funding,” Committeeman Jay Taylor said to Mayor Cody. “But we’re asking to trust politicians in Trenton.”
Mayor Cody said the township also has $2.5 million in its capital cash account.
”We’re roughly looking at $2 million of that that we’re not going to be spending money on,” he said.
But the rest of the committee and Denise Marabello, chief finance officer, said the township needs all of that money for future projects.
”If we take from that $2.5 million, essentially, it’s the classic rob Peter to pay Paul regarding the capital account,” Committeeman Dave Cook said.
”My job as CFO is to make sure we have the funds available to pay for capital fund projects,” Ms. Marabello added. “I go through these (capital fund) ordinances every year with the department heads, and I say ‘are we going to need this?’ Or ‘is there something else you need the money for.’ This isn’t money that’s extra. It’s waiting to be spent.”
Some members of the public expressed their support of the 2-cent tax increase.
Mike Dulin, of Wynnewood Drive, compared this year’s budget to the budget of 2001.
”The increase of $3.7 million (from the 2001 budget) is due to insurance, payment to other municipalities and the library, things the township has very little control over and account for about 96 percent of the budget increase over the past 10 years,” he said. “If we reduce or maintain the same tax rate, we will be cutting taxes. This is not the time to be cutting taxes. Cutting taxes brings down spending levels.”
But others said this is not a good time to raise taxes.
”The main concern in the town today is that a lot of people are hurting (financially),” said Art Hasselbach, of Route 130. “In this economy, with food prices, going up, gas prices going up, I don’t see why we can’t keep taxes flat for another year,”
He said future planned development in town could increase tax revenues in a few years.
”See what happens with the applications we already have approved in town,” he said.

