By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer
Fireworks erupted after the Princeton Joint Revaluation Study Commission presented its findings to Township Committee Monday night.
Even with the citizen’s review, some people are still not satisfied with the outcome.
Princeton Fair Tax is a group of citizens that is challenging the revaluation done in 2010, saying systematic flaws in the process resulted in skewed results that are driving people from their homes. The group is beginning a lawsuit against Appraisal Systems Inc., the company that conducted the revaluation, the township and the borough.
The raised voices between Mayor Chad Goerner and Princeton Fair Tax founder Jim Firestone began after Mr. Firestone criticized the council for only having one real estate agent on the revaluation commission saying “there’s a terrible lack of knowledge and lack of respect for your citizens.”
When Mayor Goerner defended the assessment saying the sales in the neighborhood reflect true market value, Mr. Firestone accused Mayor Goerner of not knowing the local real estate market because the mayor is in the finance field.
The particular neighborhood they were are discussing was Mayor Goerner’s and the specific home Mr. Firestone mentioned was one across the street from the mayor.
”I’ve been inside them and I’m telling you you’re wrong,” said Mr. Firestone.
Mayor Goerner said he has a problem with the Princeton Fair Tax group coming and saying they have data, but the Township Committee has never seen the data, whereas the appointed revaluation committee presented a clear concise report of their data.
”Every single time I hear the Fair Tax group get up and say there is all this data that they’ve gathered and all this information, it’s never been brought to Township Committee or presented to Township Committee,” said Mayor Goerner, who had a 20 percent increase in his taxes due to reassessment. “I have a problem with that assumption and when I look at the Revaluation Commission and the work they’ve done and how it’s detailed and spelled out and they provided that to the committee. It’s very clear and concise.”
Mr. Firestone also accused the mayor and governing body of avoiding his group and not accepting invitations to meet and that the work of the group was ignored and put aside.
Mayor Goerner fired back, saying Princeton Fair Tax is misleading the public with its claims.
”I agree with you upon the impact, especially upon the small- and modest-sized homes,” said Mayor Goerner.
Calling his initial efforts to help the community understand the appeal process “courageous and helpful,” he said the efforts of the group to get the revaluation thrown out and redone are now misleading the public.
”What you’re doing now is not a courageous and helpful act to the community,” said Mayor Goerner. “In fact, it is misleading the community to expect results that simply will not occur.”
”You talk to your attorneys about that, and we’ll talk to ours,” replied Mr. Firestone. “And we’ll see if those results will occur or not.”
Councilman Lance Liverman said he talked to several local brokers and they feel differently than Mr. Firestone. He also questioned the idea of a lawsuit, which would have to be defended with taxpayer dollars.
The group is still complaining they have not received documents they have requested.
”We will stay after these records until kingdom come. They are public records and we are entitled to have them,” said Dale Meade of the Princeton Fair Tax group.
”There was nothing that we requested that we weren’t given,” said Peter Marks, co-chair of the Revaluation Commission. “There was no hint of a conspiracy or an effort to withhold information that we found incriminating in some sense … I’ve seen everything they were given and my opinion is they were given everything they asked for.”
The findings of the commission began the committee’s work session before the argument.
”It is widely recognized that the 2010 revaluation, the first in 14 years, resulted in a disparate impact on homeowners tax burdens; in general more moderate properties suffered higher percentage increases than did higher value properties. In many cases the higher tax burdens on more moderate properties resulted in financial hardships to those homeowners,” said Michael Reilly, co-chair of the revaluation commission. “This result, while unfortunate, does not lead to a conclusion that the revaluation process was seriously flawed.”
A revaluations validity is determined when homes begin selling after a revaluation and how close the sales prices are to the assessed values.
”No two houses in Princeton are identical,” said Mr. Marks. “There’s quite a difference between arbitrary and subjective, we’re not talking about physics, we’re discussing opinions.”
The group’s claims that the values have moved, even since the assessment should come as no surprise, said Mr. Marks. Real estate moves from sale to sale and offer to offer, he said.
”The description of the highly detailed procedure set forth in New Jersey law for revaluation creates the allusion that the process is very precise,” added Mr. Reilly. “Quite the contrary, there are numerable judgment calls in all stages of the appraisal process that can lead reasonable people to different opinions of the value of a property.”
State laws regarding property taxes is the real problem, not the reassessment, said Mayor Goerner.
Mayor Goerner said there are two camps, one that believes the revaluation should be redone and will have a different outcome and a group that wants to work to change state laws regarding revaluations and mitigating the effects of a revaluation. He said he is in the latter camp.
”Lead the charge to Trenton for changes in the state law,” he said in conclusion.
The report is tentatively scheduled to be presented to the Borough Council on April 26.

