Leighton Newlin, Princeton
While sitting in the audience at the Princeton Council Meeting on Nov. 28 at the 2:30:27 mark of the meeting (video available @ princetonnj.gov) I heard and watched Councilwoman Jo Butler say the following:
“I am a little bit worried, and this doesn’t have anything to do with this project but with the university’s settlement of that lawsuit, it does seems like we have a lot of our housing in Princeton, and particular in this neighborhood that will be um, not free market, um, housing and so that there are people that will qualify for this homestead exemption, that do qualify for the homestead exemption, and through the university settlement will be able to stay in their homes perhaps longer than they would have and that’s great for them personally.
“But as the price appreciates, all of that price appreciation will go strictly to them and it may take some supply out of the market which because people won’t have to sell their houses in a way that they might have had to sell them without the university settlement and so we’ll have even less supply in the market and there will be fewer opportunities for people at that entry level who would like to move into Princeton, so there’s a lot to weigh here, I think, in this situation.”
I nearly fell out of my chair listening to such reprehensible babble from an “elected official” with an “unfettered free market trumps all” mentality, even at the expense of current residents. At best it displays a remarkable callousness toward the plight of lower income homeowners who just want to stay in their homes. At worst, since it came in the context of the Waxwood on Quarry Street discussion, it sounds like Ms. Butler would prefer that the diversity of this extraordinary neighborhood be eroded.
She states accurately that her comment had nothing to do with what was the current topic of discussion. I also noted that few people in the audience or any of her colleagues had any visible reaction to her commentary from the dais.
I must admit that I was not surprised, stunned, or shocked that Ms. Butler said what she said given her original opposition to, and later less than enthusiastic vote for the ordinance passed in April making the Witherspoon-Jackson neighborhood the 20th historic district in Princeton, but I was blindsided by her attitude.
Is it a bad thing or an undesirable thing that individuals in Princeton who qualify for the homestead rebate may be enabled by the Princeton University settlement to stay in their homes longer? Really Jo? And why focus on only the WJ neighborhood when in fact there are approximately 869 homeowners in Princeton who qualify for the rebate and most of them do not live in the WJ neighborhood, and the vast majority of those who will be beneficiaries are not people of color.
Under Ms. Butler’s assertion, if it’s unfortunate that families in the WJ neighborhood will be able to stay in their homes longer because of the allocation of dollars from the settlement, would it not also be unfortunate that families in other neighborhoods will also be able to remain in their homes longer … or is it just the WJ neighborhood because of its affordability for first-time homeowners, as she references.
It also appears the councilwoman has an issue with some folks living the “American Dream” and sharing in the appreciation gained from staying in their homes longer. You can’t make this stuff up.
WJ is virtually the only neighborhood where people of color own homes and the market is forcing people out every day.
Understanding the dynamics of the lawsuit, the impact of the university’s gigantic footprint, and its level of commercial enterprise was the basis for challenging the institution’s not-for-profit, tax-exempt status. Also keep in mind that idiots don’t run Princeton University and they employ some of the best legal minds on earth. They settled because it was in their best interest to do so.
The money was allocated toward property taxes because that was the right thing to do … and the homestead rebate benefit was a fair and equitable instrument for which to distribute it. Let us not forget that it was the WJ neighborhood that was hit hardest by the slanted and highly suspect property reevaluation in 2010 when land values increased dramatically while the value of the homes remained virtually the same, creating a windfall for developers.
Go to the video tape of the council meeting on Nov. 28 at the 2:30:27 mark. See and listen for yourself. People who are not part of the solution towards diversity and inclusiveness, and I don’t care who they are, are not just part of the problem, they are the problem.
Unless and until the comments referenced above can be explained or an apology given by Councilwoman Butler she should be taken to task and held accountable by the following:
First and foremost everyone who lives in the WJ neighborhood and those who may be less fortunate than others in Princeton wherever they may live.
Secondly, each of the 869 homeowners, households, and voters, who will be helped by the allocation of the Princeton University settlement based on their eligibility for the homestead rebate.
And lastly — but certainly not least — any and all fair-minded levelheaded citizens of Princeton who understand and appreciate that a roof over one’s head provides shelter and protects those who live inside, regardless of their status and/or income level, and they should be able to live under that roof as long as possible, by any means necessary or available to them.
It is after all their home.
Remember … your vote is more important now than ever!
Leighton Newlin
Princeton
