Budget Cap Agreement Press Conference

Bramnick statement (0.00 / 0)

Assembly Republican Conference Leader Jon Bramnick:

"This is a[n] historic day for the state of New Jersey and its taxpayers. A determined Governor Christie and Assembly Republicans were able to prevail in our quest to put New Jersey taxpayers first and give them a reform plan that will finally bring government spending and property taxes under control and put that control in the hands of taxpayers who will now have the power to determine their own taxes."

"The governor and the Republican caucus understand the hardships our State's crushing property tax burden causes our citizens and that's why Governor Christie and Assembly Republicans continued to work this holiday weekend on behalf of all our residents to achieve this tough plan that will finally harness the State's escalating property taxes."

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 20:51:24 PM UTC

DeCroce statement (0.00 / 0)

Assembly Republican Leader Alex DeCroce:

"Republicans are work today tackling the most critical issues in New Jersey - curtailing government spending and controlling property taxes.  Through Governor Christi's leadership and relentless pursuit of this matter, along with Republicans in the Assembly and Senate, taxpayers in New Jersey will now decide their own fate, not politicians and bureaucrats.

          "The agreement announced by the governor finally puts New Jersey on the road that will return fiscal sanity to our state. Voters will now have a say on how their tax dollars are spent, instead of Trenton politicians.  This is a key component in our effort to cap government spending.

          "The public has waited too long to see if promises will be kept.  As we celebrate our independence this weekend, people can also be reassured that the Republicans in Trenton are working to ease their burden from the most oppressive issue they are dealing with - skyrocketing property taxes. Today is a victory for the people who pay the highest property taxes in the country."

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 20:53:13 PM UTC

Sarlo statement (0.00 / 0)

A little different approach from Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo:

"Capping property taxes is only a means to controlling property tax growth - we still need to give municipalities and schools the tools they need to actually lower property taxes," said Sarlo (D-Bergen). "The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee will still spend its summer undertaking an aggressive review of all facets of the property tax system. Unless we release the pressure state mandates and other cost drivers place on mayors and school administrators, property taxes will never actually go down."

Sarlo said the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee will still meet at 10 a.m. Thursday, July 8.

"The cap issue may have been resolved, but there's still plenty more for us to look into," said Sarlo. "We can make property tax relief permanent."

 

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 20:55:17 PM UTC

Sweeney statement (0.00 / 0)

Senate President Steve Sweeney:

"Hopefully today will go down as the day when New Jersey was finally able to declare independence from its onerous and broken property tax system," said Sweeney (D-Gloucester/Cumberland/Salem). "This debate has never been about whether or not New Jersey needs a property tax cap - it does - but how best to enact a cap that will protect both taxpayers and our quality of life. I applaud the Governor for not only pushing this issue, but for being willing to work towards a compromise."

Under the property tax cap compromise - which will come via a conditional veto by the Governor of previously passed cap legislation the Senate President sponsored (S-29) - the rate of property tax levy growth will be statutorily capped at two percent.

Local officials will be granted exceptions to the cap for health care and pension costs - which are dictated by the state - and debt service. School districts would be granted an exemption for unanticipated increases in student enrollments. Spending over the cap would be allowed for certain emergency situations, including localized severe storm damage that does not lead to a state of emergency declaration. Voters would be able to override the cap by a simple majority vote. Officials who budget beneath the 2 percent cap would be able to "bank" the difference for three years.

All other exemptions in current law would be eliminated.

"I have always maintained that given the right tools, communities would not only be able to meet the Governor's demand of stemming property tax growth at 2.5 percent, but could actually do better," said Sweeney. "This new cap law will allow us to do better. It will give taxpayers real control over their futures. It will give local officials the flexibility they need to ensure essential services do not suffer. This is a cap that will work for all of New Jersey."

Sweeney said he will post the Governor's conditional veto for a Thursday, July 8, vote in the Senate.

The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee and other committees will still meet throughout the summer to review the "tool kit" measures the Governor has put forward.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 20:57:04 PM UTC

No Democrats from the Assembly (0.00 / 0)

putting anything out on the deal yet...

---

by: Jason Springer @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:06:12 PM UTC

No Assembly Dems (0.00 / 0)

That's true.

Meanwhile, press statements from Assembly GOP members are plop-plopping into my inbox like with the sound and syncopation of hail on the top of a car in a summer storm.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:16:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let them have their cake for now (0.00 / 0)

But they won't be able to eat it  November 2011 when they get blamed for property tax increases as well as the loss of tax rebates.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 22:41:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the coverage (0.00 / 0)

You guys are doing a better job than any news outlet.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:11:15 PM UTC

Thanks, Ken. (0.00 / 0)

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:13:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And now Asm Wisniewski weighs in (0.00 / 0)

NJDSC Chair, and Assembly Transportation Chair John Wisniewski, brings up a good point:

"The agreement announced by Senate President Sweeney sounds a lot like what Democrats in New Jersey have stood for for several years and have recently passed legislation on - a statutory cap with reasonable exceptions for factors local governments can't really control.  While the amount by which taxes are allowed to increase may be different, it's a small difference - but it's significant progress and I look forward to reviewing it right after the Fourth with my colleagues.

"Once we get this done, we need to move on to solving the impending crisis with the Transportation Trust Fund."

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:55:10 PM UTC

Joe D. gives his take (0.00 / 0)

From the SL:

Essex County Executive Joseph DiVincenzo, a key supporter and close adviser to Oliver, said he had been on the phone with her, Christie and Sweeney pushing for the deal. The non-constitutional cap, along with other reforms, are a home run for local governments trying to keep property tax increases down, he said.

He said he expects all the pieces to come together quickly.

"All we need now is just to see a press conference with the three of them standing there," he said, referring to Oliver, Christie and Sweeney. "This is a great deal for New Jersey. I'm totally supportive of it. There's no question I support this deal. I've been telling them that. It's got to get done."

---

by: Jason Springer @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 21:58:27 PM UTC

Win for Sweeney (0.00 / 0)

No constitutional cap.Common sense exceptions.Take the "no cooperation" argument away from the governor.  This is a victory for the State Senate President and for common sense property tax reform.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 22:21:25 PM UTC

Somehow... (4.00 / 1)

I get the feeling it would have been a win for Sweeney no matter the outcome...

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Jul 06, 2010 at 10:53:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Video from the press conference (0.00 / 0)

Thanks to statehouse steps for putting up some video from the press conference:

---

by: Jason Springer @ Sun Jul 04, 2010 at 01:35:31 AM UTC

Definitely a win .. (0.00 / 0)

Now all the unions have to do is force the towns to make pensions payments ,and finally have them fully funded . Unions should demand the medical co pay and payment by members be rescinded ..since they are all exempt by the cap .

---

by: speedkillsu @ Sun Jul 04, 2010 at 12:32:04 PM UTC

It's a win for now (0.00 / 0)

But it could be a big loss for Democrats in 2011 if unions overplay their hand.  There is widespread bipartisan support to limit the impact of property taxes, and even private sector union workers resent the benefits given to public sector employees as evidenced by Sweeney's support for pension and benefit changes.

If public unions "push the envelope" on property tax increases they couid feel a real backlash from voters in November.  And you can be sure Christie and the GOP will do all they can to whip up an anti-union frenzy which would benefit the GOP at the polls.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 01:58:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Excellent analysis (0.00 / 0)

Public Worker unions are once again in a corner. But there is a way for them to gain new influence.

The NJEA cannot beat Chrisite but if they reorganize themselves and learn how to use the override vehicle then with 50% of the vote at a local level they can attain victories which are no longer possible through negotiation.

Can an organization like the NJEA adapt to this new way ,the override vote, in order to "win" items for their membership. I doubt they can. Adapting to new political circumstances  is not their strong suit. Their leadership seems to only know how to act one way.

The real battles now will not play out in rooms full of negotiators,it will instead play out in override general elections.

These unions wil have to change the way they have done things in the past. Instead of lobbyists they need to hire political consultants who know how to win votes.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 03:10:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not on proiperty taxes (0.00 / 0)

Unions need to get away from focusing on regressive property taxes as a source of revenue for their salaries and benefits.  Whatever muscle they have should be used for alternative funding methods, either increasing state aid or allowing for local sales and income taxes such as they have in other states, including Pennsylvania.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 04:04:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think (0.00 / 0)

UNIONS focus on using property taxes to pay for their benefits. In fact, unions are not able to specify where management gets its cash from. The problem is that municipalities and counties are largely limited to that source. The best way to break the high property tax trap is to allow other sources of revenue to be tapped.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 22:47:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lipstick on a pig (0.00 / 0)

This is better than a constitutional amendement with no exceptions and a supermajority requirement to waive.  And the banking permitted is good.  But it's still too low, and has not enough exceptions.  Without an increase in state aid to make up the difference, public education in New Jersey will suffer.  Larger class sizes, cutbacks in courses and in equipment will be the result.  User fees will become more common, and will rise, increasing the gap between rich school districts and the rest.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Sun Jul 04, 2010 at 13:32:46 PM UTC

Alternative funding (0.00 / 0)

Time to consider more progressive means of funding local education, and get away from property taxes which are highly regressive.  There are alternatives such as local income and sales taxes as they have in other states like Pennsylvania.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 04:09:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

User fees (0.00 / 0)

User fees should be acceptable provided they are means tested like school lunch programs.  They could even use the same list of students who are eligible for free, discount or full price.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 04:12:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

User fees (0.00 / 0)

Are contrary to the spirit of public education.

I don't know what "means tested" has to do with it.  Parents in middle class and poor school districts can't afford the amoung of fees that more affluent parents can afford.  There will be an inequity anyway you cut it.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 14:32:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Means testing (0.00 / 0)

User fees apply to extra-curricular and non-mandatory summer programs.  They do not apply to mandatory core requirements.

School lunches are already means-tested.  Obviously, parents in middle class and poor school districts already receive more subsidies than parents in wealthy districts.  And they should.

Besides, why should seniors and middle-class homeowners who don't have kids in public schools subsidise the cost of extra-curricular and non-mandatory programs for kids whose parents can easily afford them?

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 19:25:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Re: (0.00 / 0)

I know they're for extraciricular activity.  For now.  But you talk about subsidies, where is the money going to come for that?  Not from the municipalities with the cap.  And, except perhaps for the Abbot districts, not from the state as long as Chrisite is in charge.

Who's to say whose parents can easily afford them?  Some may be obvious, but others not so much.  Following your logic, seniors and middle-class homeowners should vote down every school budget in wealthy downs.  And since the don't have kids in public schools, maybe they should vote against every school budget in every town.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Tue Jul 06, 2010 at 12:35:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But that won't happen (0.00 / 0)

At least under Christie.  There is no chance the income tax will be raised to fund schools.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 14:29:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's a solution (0.00 / 0)

Get rid of Christie.  Or at least elect a veto-proof majority in 2011, like the GOP in 1991.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 19:28:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's the reality (0.00 / 0)

With redistricting, there will be only two chances for a veto-proof majority, slim and none.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Tue Jul 06, 2010 at 12:36:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

not so sure about that (0.00 / 0)

I believe that there is another way to deal with the funding issue, which could possibly raise or lower income and/or property taxes.

First, the tax code should be reformed so that there are more tax brackets for people earning $250K+, $500K+, $750K+, $1MM+, $5MM+, and $10MM+.

Second, before the budget process begins, each tax bracket should be assigned a percentage of the overall tax burden.

Finally, county school districts should be established, using Abbott school districts as the core of these districts, and voters should be given the opportunity to decide every November whether their local school districts should join their county school district or remain independent with schools in county school districts being funded solely with state income tax dollars and independent school districts being funded solely with property tax dollars.

Based on the results of these annual votes, both income taxes and property taxes could go up or down dramatically.  County school district budgets would be based on the total number of students served and a statewide per pupil spending allocation determined by the Department of Education and subject to approval by the legislature.  

Independent school districts would be free to spend as much or as little per student as they choose and would also be free to block the establishment of charter schools in their districts.

I think that putting the core decisions in the hands of voters enables both conservatives and liberals in Trenton to cede some ideological ground.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jul 06, 2010 at 04:07:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

How Does This Differ For Schools? (0.00 / 0)

Schools still have to pass their budgets, no matter what the levy is. How is this plan going to be any different in any practical way?

http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com

---

by: Jersey Jazzman @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 19:08:33 PM UTC

Good question (0.00 / 0)

I've been wondering about that myself.

http://christiegonewild.blogsp...

---

by: ken bank @ Mon Jul 05, 2010 at 19:30:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Real Gain (0.00 / 0)

Much of the discussion over this matter revolves around how to raise further monies and maintain or increase expenditures when the real need is to find ways to increase quality of education and services with less money. If the government "hard Cap" is enacted, localities will be pushed into overturning the cap  or using the exemptions, which just maintains the status quo of ever-increasing property tax levies. The alternatives are to accept an erosion of services, surrender to a version of the Governor's "tool Kit," or  join together in sharing and consolidation. See my diary A Pretty Band-Aid vs. Real Gain.  

"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." - Sen. Ted Kennedy

---

by: Bill Orr @ Tue Jul 06, 2010 at 12:09:17 PM UTC