Cap on, cap off; who stands where on the capper

Designed to create a dynamic for school districts and local governments to prioritize spending and aggressively seek change to control long-term costs, Gov. Jon Corzine’s landmark property tax reform was ballyhooed by a Democratic legislature.
In April, Corzine signed into law what he dubbed a “remarkable combination of relief and reform.”
“I have heard from overburdened homeowners about their sizable and always-increasing property tax bills,” Corzine said. “We are taking significant steps to ease that burden.”
I wonder if Corzine’s charade of a solution is what overburdened homeowners had in mind. With a 4 percent property tax levy cap on school districts and all county and local governments, Corzine said hardworking homeowners would experience the largest level of relief in state history. The levy cap would be “instrumental in sustaining this relief over time.” Rather than assist taxpayers by streamlining costs at the state level and passing on the savings, Corzine’s effort simply puts the burden on municipalities and schools, affecting the everyday quality of life of state residents while the piggy’s in Trenton continue to feed at the through.
Trenton bureaucrats, unable to control their own spending and stop wasting taxpayer money, are coming after taxpayers. If budget caps were such a good idea why did the legislature enact a budget cap on municipalities and schools but not its own spending? The highly touted 20 percent tax rebate plan that piggybacks this legislation is a fraud, paid for by the 15 percent increase in sales tax.
New Jersey is a fiscal mess, an economic conundrum. Strapped with budgetary constraints we’re financing our own rebate by paying a higher sales tax. Every time we buy a hamburger, a bottle of shampoo or a new car we are financing our own rebate. The political gimmick has us paying higher taxes while allowing a legislature, unable to summon the political courage to control themselves, to dictate what our hometown can spend on important services, such as public safety.
The only way to get lower taxes is for the state to stop overspending and cut taxes. Instead, local governments are forced to look at spending with an eye toward the 2008 budget when the budget cap rears its ugly head. The cap has officials in many municipalities fretting. With costs soaring, keeping within the limit could mean sweeping cuts in services or relying on budget surpluses to balance budgets.
Council blamed the mystical cap in part for Ocean City’s budgetary debacle, a heated battle over public safety with the possible reduction of police and firemen. We’re not alone; this is or will be going on all over the state as municipalities begin the arduous process of meeting the needs of a post-9/11 world within state-mandated parameters. Should public safety take the hit while Trenton spends unabated?
Republican Sen. Nick Asselta said he asked himself the same question long before Democrats passed this “landmark legislation.” As we know not what tomorrow brings, Asselta said he is very concerned. He wants public safety exempted from the cap.
“The cap is wrong. Safety is the most primary function of government,” he said. “The number one goal of government is to protect its citizens and people don’t mind paying for it. This 4 percent cap becomes a problem for any municipality that believes in public safety. You should never cap a budget that would have a negative effect on public safety. This ties the hands of every municipality. We can never predict the challenges in the future. We have no idea what is going to happen; what we might need.”
Asselta has introduced amendment S-2626.
“I want fire and police protection out of the cap, period,” said Asselta. “It should never have been included. It’s pretty obvious to me that the Democrats do not have the same commitment for public safety that some of us do. There are specific, important moments in a legislators’ career when they can do the right thing and make a difference. In a legislators’ lifetime, this is one of those moments. They say yeah, I’m for police and fire, yet they stand by and watch every municipality in New Jersey struggle. Some communities, lacking residents with the guts to speak out, will have to make cuts in public safety. Some legislators just don’t have a real commitment. How could you say you are committed to public safety and vote for this? It might be over for Ocean City this year, but it’s coming back and it’s going to get worse.
“My father was a police officer and then a detective in Vineland,” Asselta said. “I watched him go to work with a gun on his hip and then a gun under his shoulder. He put his life at risk every day to protect his community. They’re trying to get ahead of the game by cutting public safety. We need more people to stand up to this and work toward fixing it. My bill is currently in committee. If the legislative leadership cared about the public safety of its residents, they’d get it out of committee.”
Sen. Richard Codey is driving the bus.
“I can’t read the mind of our majority leader,” Asselta said. “I hope he is pro-police and firemen but I don’t know. I would suggest that people who are concerned about public safety call Sen. Codey and tell him. Call him at 973-731-6770 and let him know. I want to know how my constituents feel. I know Ocean City just had quite a problem with this and residents stood up against cuts. E-mail me at SENASSELTA@NJLEG.org . With this cap in place, it is going to get harder and harder to maintain public safety.”
Asselta said he did not hear from any Ocean City council members or the mayor regarding the budget cap.
“Not one call,” he said.
Assemblyman Dr. Jeff Van Drew said the legislation is “complex.”
“It’s interesting, some constituents tell me the cap is not severe enough, others tell me the cap is too severe,” he said. “The legislature tried to find a balance. There are exemptions. I think public safety is important, as police and fire are the most basic services government can provide. Government is responsible for the health, safety and welfare of its residents. Even the most conservative believe that. I too am working on an exemption. Obviously, this is a real issue.”
The cap, said Van Drew, affects different municipalities in different ways.
“The cap on the levy means different things to each community,” he said. “Depending on the budget and how they get their revenues, it’s a problem for some. It has a profound impact on smaller communities, and oddly enough on efficient, well-run communities. The overall idea of some control on spending is absolutely necessary. We need to do more at the state level so we’re not hypocrites.”
Van Drew said they are making progress.
“I believe that we have finally turned a corner, we’re limping, crawling and bleeding toward a solution,” he said. “The legislature is finally getting it.”
Public safety, he said, is a “must.”
“If you can’t supply the police and fire protection that you need it’s a problem,” he said. “The legislature does not want people dying, structures lost or endless crime. Yes, I voted for the cap. I voted for property tax relief and I had to take the good with the bad. These things never stand alone. Overall, we were stuck with taking the good with the bad. We need to cap spending but we had to take one step at a time.”
Mayor Sal Perillo said the cap is a “mixed blessing.” While it hinders public safety in some aspects, it would assist binding arbitration.
“If public safety is taken out, it takes out the strong argument in binding arbitration, we won’t have to stay within a cap,” he said. “The cap could benefit a municipality in collective bargaining. The business administrator will be negotiating with firemen this year, policemen next year. If you take police and fire out, the argument could be made that there are no limitations. It’s a mixed situation. I can see Sen. Asselta’s point that this should not force cuts in the staffing of police and fire, but on the other hand it is a way to support the binding arbitration process.”
Councilman Jody Alessandrine warned of dire consequences.
“People don’t get it, but maybe they’ll get it when public works employees have to take the hit for public safety,” he said. “When we start to have problems with the beach and Boardwalk, when the streets aren’t clean and the grass isn’t cut and we have to cut recreation programs, maybe people will understand. Even though the budget passed I’m still uncomfortable with adding full-time employees. For every FTE we add now, we’re going to see double the cuts of people we have to let go. It’s got to come from somewhere. You can’t put eight pounds of sand in a three pound sack. This would make the budget cap completely worthless. It would allow municipalities to increase taxes unabated. It’s a complete travesty.
“It sounds good, but it would force people out,” he added. “We’re looking at a 23 percent increase in taxes with pensions and salaries increasing. All it’s going to do is make Ocean City unaffordable. The goal of the past and present mayors is to reduce the number of year round folks. With less year round folks, it’s easier to control things. That’s the MO of people, they overdeveloped and people left. When we have massive pink slips maybe they’ll understand.”
Maybe it’s time for public discourse on this cap and other issues before the budget battle gets so heated. What is important to you in your community? The cap is coming, remain silent at your own risk.
 

Ann Richardson can be e-mailed at annrichardson@catamaranmedia.com  or you can comment on this story by calling 624-8900, ext. 250, or visiting www.shorenewstoday.com  and clicking the Speak Out link.