|
|
Vol. LXIV, No. 30
|
|
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
|
|
|
|
Vol. LXIV, No. 30
|
|
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
|
Steven Weiss
Madison Street
(4 Letters)
Parker Block
Prospect Avenue
Co-Founder PIACS
Thomas P. McCool
President & CEO
Eden Autism Services
To the Editor:
Yeou-Shiuh Hsu’s take on the Israeli /Palestinian conflict (found in the July 7 Town Topics article and July 21 letter to the paper) is so highly tendentious and lacking in nuance as not to merit a response. The point I would like to make is that while complex national and international issues deserve extensive debate, those arguments should be aired in a forum other than a local community newspaper, which best serves its readers by encouraging lively discussions of local issues.
Steven Weiss
Madison Street
Editor’s Note
This is one of several letters we have received rightly observing that Town Topics strayed from its policy of attending primarily to local news when it printed the July 14 letter disputing statements quoted in the July 7 Topics of the Town (“Interfaith Peace Builders’ Delegate Visits Area,/Shares Thoughts on Palestinian-Israeli Strife”) and again when it printed Yeou-Shiuh Hsu’s July 21 response. In running both letters, Town Topics allowed the notion of a fair exchange to overrule our policy. We will not be printing any more letters on this issue.
To the Editor:
I wanted to respond to Mr. Nelson’s frustration in regard to the recent revaluation in Princeton Borough and Princeton Township (Mailbox July 21). I share his view that the impact of the revaluation for some of our seniors and low-to-middle-class residents threatens to dismantle the already fragile framework of diversity in our community.
I, too, received my tax bill, and due mainly to my home’s revised assessment, my taxes have risen by 21 percent. The significant increase that I and some other residents have experienced is not due to the township’s tax rate (our rate increase was 1.7 percent — our lowest in 25 years), nor is it due to the tax rate increases put forth by the Regional School Board. It is due to the percentage increase in my home’s value relative to other properties in Princeton Township as a result of the recent revaluation. Part of these dramatic percentage increases in taxes is due to the fact that the last revaluation of the Princetons occurred in 1996. In general, during that 14 year period, smaller homes increased at a higher percentage in value than larger homes. Another issue is that when a mass appraisal is performed there will always be inequities and inaccuracies. We have encouraged residents to file appeals with Mercer County if they feel that their homes are incorrectly valued.
Since both towns were mandated by Mercer County to perform a revaluation, the ability to affect the outcome is extremely limited by law. We, as a governing body, have been incredibly frustrated with the county and state to address the impact of these significant property tax increases. While our power is limited, we have been working to monitor existing sales data and compel the assessor to update neighborhood assessments immediately based on this data. We have also been working to compel the chair of the Mercer County Board of Taxation to appear in a public meeting to address issues relating to the methods and transparency of the revaluation. Furthermore, we have encouraged neighborhood groups to form and will assist in facilitating meetings with Mercer County to address any inaccuracies.
Finally, I would also recommend that any senior 65 or older who qualifies for the Senior Tax Freeze Program apply for relief. The state has extended the deadline to August 2, 2010. While the state has limited the benefits under this program it is important to apply in order to establish eligibility for benefits in future years. Here is a link for more information: www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/2009ptr_seniorfreeze.shtml.
We will continue to work with the County of Mercer and the State to express our concerns. If you have additional questions or need more information, please email me directly at cgoerner@princeton-township.nj.us.
Chad Goerner
Deputy Mayor
Princeton Township
To the Editor:
I attended the meeting Monday night to discuss the inequities in the recent revaluation process and heard discussion of neighborhood anomalies as well as the tax assessor’s smoke and mirrors explanation of the formula. It is pointless to argue house by house when there is a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. The bottom line is that the revaluation was conducted during the peak of the recession, when there were fewer properties sold and when the most expensive homes lost the most value. It is the construction of mega-homes throughout the community that has caused the property values of smaller homes to skyrocket. Now the homeowners of these McMansions have been rewarded with a reduction in taxes, leaving homeowners of the smallest properties to carry the burden with huge tax increases — the poor subsidizing the rich. How can this extreme inequity be addressed? Without an immediate freeze in taxes, the homeowners most impacted may not be able to remain in the community while resolution of the problem drags on.
Ann Summer
Cedar Lane
To the Editor:
Many concerns have been raised about the equity and fairness of the October 1, 2009 Revaluation. At least four neighborhoods have joined together to form a group called “We the People.” In my own neighborhood, the Dempsey-Cuyler-Walnut neighborhood, we have found many inconsistencies in the data. We have also found other inequities in the assessment methodology that suggest that the neighborhood is being substantially over assessed. The results of this study were presented to the Township Committee on July 19 along with presentations from the Witherspoon-Jackson neighborhood and the Oakland-Ewing neighborhood.
We have pressed Princeton Township Committee to take whatever legal steps they can to obtain a more equitable assessment. We have also asked them to seek immediate relief for taxpayers on limited incomes who will be suffering major hardships in paying property taxes due in August, and who ultimately may be forced to move out of our community. We hope that members of Princeton Borough Council will do the same.
If you have major concerns about the fairness of your revaluation and associated tax increase, please join us.
Kip Cherry
Dempsey Avenue
To the Editor:
The property tax revision enacted recently claims to raise the tax by 1.7 percent (or by 2.8 percent as given elsewhere) for the average household. This is a totally meaningless number since the revaluation, on which the new property tax is based, is biased toward higher raise for smaller houses. The value of our small ranch was increased by 2.85, while the largest house in the neighborhood was increased by 2.08. As was stated many times before, this actually burdens smaller properties disproportionately (in our case, 59 percent increase!), and in the meantime reduces the burden on larger properties. This is not tenable. Many are offended by this approach, and for a good reason: it is unfair.
Obviously a “market value” appraisal cannot be objective. On the principle of fairness to all, the following alternative method is proposed. First, we should eliminate the subjective, and, recently, quite volatile “market value” assessment from the mechanism. Simply stated, assume we must have a certain amount collected from the property taxes in the township, $PT. Since each home owner has a lot size (regardless of neighborhood), and a built square-footage, we may sum the total of all lots (A=acres) and built area (B=square ft) and then assign the tax as the fraction of the lot size and the built area for any given property. Suppose lot size is exactly as valuable as built area, then the tax of a homeowner with lot size A1 and built area B1, will be:
Property Tax = (0.5*A1/A + 0.5*B1/B)* $PT
This has the advantage of objectivity, based on physical size, not on someone’s biased “market value” which may change within weeks, and will result in endless debate.
It should be mentioned that a town where lower and higher income people blend, where older and younger people live side by side, can be a harmonious, healthy town. Places where high income predominates are, simply, lifeless. We already moved closer to the latter by allowing replacement of the Princeton hospital by a high income housing project. A tax change, which burdens the lower-valued households disproportionately, can have dire consequences to our town. It may drive out lower income homeowners, and our elders. It is not too late to change.
Dr. Moshe Ben-Reuven
Clover Lane
To the Editor:
The founders, administrators, teachers and, most especially, parents of the Princeton International Academy Charter School (PIACS) are deeply disappointed in the decision of the Department of Education but do not fault the Commissioner or any member of the hard-working DOE team. We understand that his office was legally constrained in its ability to provide an extension despite its desire to do so. In recognition of the fact that PIACS is, with the exception of one document, completely prepared for final authorization, the DOE offered PIACS a “planning year” extension in order to prepare for opening in September 2011. The founders and trustees are looking forward to spending this time constructively to ensure that the school, when it opens, is even stronger. Moreover, we will use this time to better inform the community about the school and the value it will provide. In the past six months we have learned that there is a great demand among taxpaying parents in our community for dual-language immersion programs and an International Baccalaureate curriculum framework in the public school system. We have learned that there are many forward-thinking parents who believe that we can deliver innovative programs which improve the quality of public education while also operating more cost-effectively than traditional public schools. We have learned that many parents are committed to providing their children the skills which they will need to succeed in the 21st Century. And, sadly, we have learned the ends to which our public school officials will go to deprive parents and their children of their rights under state law simply to protect their own parochial interests. Nonetheless, the politics of fear, intimidation, mis-information and manipulation will not prevail. School district officials in our community have become accustomed to being able to easily dismiss the concerns and suggestions of parents. They will soon learn, however, that the determination of the taxpaying parents, founders and trustees of PIACS to open the school is in no way diminished. We are galvanized by the injustice that the children have endured. We will work harder to ensure that PIACS opens next year in an effort to help our children, our community and our country keep pace with evolving international standards of excellence.”
Parker Block
Prospect Avenue
Co-Founder PIACS
To the Editor:
On behalf of Eden Autism Services, and the individuals with autism whom we serve, I want to extend my heartfelt thanks for the generosity of our community. On July 18, Eden’s 7th annual Eden Family 5K Race and one-mile Fun Run sponsored by Munich Reinsurance America broke this event’s fundraising record with more than $80,000 in net proceeds.
A Special thanks goes to Munich Re and its president and CEO Tony Kuczinski for its primary sponsorship of the race; Curt Emmich of Princeton Forrestal Center, who served as race director; the 14 additional companies that provided major sponsorship or in-kind support; and the many other individuals and businesses who contributed goods and services to our event.
We are deeply grateful to the dedicated Eden Family 5K steering committee that helped plan this outstanding event; the many volunteers, without whom it would not be possible; and to the walkers and runners who participated in the race and Fun Run. The funds raised will help Eden continue its mission of improving the lives of individuals with autism and their families.
Thomas P. McCool
President & CEO
Eden Autism Services