Rampulla & Leung for Raritan Township Committee
A Prescription for Change

As long-time residents of Raritan Township, we are prompted to run for seats on the Raritan Township Committee out of concern that decades of Republican administration have brought continuous erosion to this township’s quality of life. The result is sprawl and traffic congestion, degradation to our open space and environment, plus perennial increases in property tax.

Hunterdon has the dubious distinction of being the county with the highest property tax across the nation since 2006. According to the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan research organization in Washington DC, our median property tax, at $7,999, surpassed the $7,706 average paid by second-placed Nassau County of Long Island, and was $6,500 over the national average of $1,500 in that year.1 Last year, Raritan Township registered the second highest average property tax increase in the County, rising $553 (6.7%) over 2006 to $8,806, just behind the $812 (16.5%) average increase (to $5,722) in Lebanon Borough.2

It is true that from 70 to 80% of local property tax goes to support public schools, over which municipalities have little control under the existing system. There are, however, reasons that the Republican administration in Raritan Township might have compounded the problem of escalating tax through its pro-developer stance. A contrast with neighboring Readington proves instructive. Both townships are quite similar in demographics, and face similar pressure from county and local school appropriations. Indeed, because of its smaller population base, Readington spends more per student than Raritan, averaging $13,061 versus $ 12,736 in the 2006-7 school year. 3

A major difference between these two largest municipalities in Hunterdon lies in their development strategies, as suggested in a succinct editorial of the Hunterdon County Democrat last year 4, Readington is 26% larger, 47.69 sq. mls versus Raritan’s 37.84 in size. It used to have a larger population than Raritan, 6147 compared to 4,545 in 1960, 7,688 to 6,934 in 1970, and 10,855 to 8,292 in 1980 respectively according to US Census. Beginning in the 1970s, Readington adopted a strategy of using preservation and buying up land to forestall development. Since then, it has been aggressively saving farms and open space, and boosting minimum lot sizes. In contrast, Raritan has to a much greater degree zoned to attract and accommodate business, retail and housing development. The result is that the population in Readington began to slide below Raritan’s by 1990 (13,400 to 15,616), and this trend continued in 2000 (15,803 to 19,809) and 2006 (16,295 to 22,720). Thus, over 46 years, the population in Readington grew by 165% and Raritan’s exploded by 400%.

Readington has done better in preserving its open space and rural character, while Raritan has been plagued by sprawl and congestion. New traffic lights and stops spawn like rabbits on the Raritan section of Rte 202, and the township struggles to keep traffic flowing on Rte 31 during rush hours despite spending tens of millions in upgrades. As residents caught in traffic jams at local roadways choke on exhaust fumes, large parts of the township have been turned into strip malls and parking lots resembling those in municipalities in the densely populated northern counties of New Jersey.

Most important, Republicans in Raritan like to argue that growth increases the ratable and tax base, and hence will lower the tax long-term. The following graph comparing general tax rates per $100 of assessed property value, the standard measure of local taxes, in Readington and Raritan from 1976-2006 showed otherwise:

Graph 1: Comparing Local Tax Growth Rates in Readington & Raritan (1975-2006)

Sources: For 1976-2001, figures on tax rates in five year intervals are from Dinah Rowbothan, ed., Hunterdon County Databook 2003, Flemington, NJ: Hunterdon County Planning Board, 2003; pp. 51-52. For 2005-6, figures are from ICMA (International City/County Management Association, The New Jersey Municipal Data Book, Woodside, CA: Information Publications, 2008: pp. 417-18.

Not only did the relatively higher property tax rates in Raritan persist, but there has been an increasing, divergent gap since 2000. While the rates in Readington have dropped and flattened, those in Raritan have shot up alarmingly. This illustrates that rather than bringing tax savings, rapid growth will drive up taxes through increasing demand on public service and amenities. In taxpayer-funded pension obligations for township police and public employees alone, as noted in the above editorial, Raritan will incur over $1 million in 2008 while Readington’s will be less than half that at $500,000.

Moreover, excessive development will prove even more expensive to Raritan taxpayers under the new, 3rd Round COAH (Council on Affordable Housing) rules. These rules raise municipal growth share ratios from 1 affordable housing unit per every 9 market rate, new houses built to 1 per 6; and 1 affordable housing unit per every 25 new jobs created to 1 per 16 for non-residential development. As these new ratios are retroactive to 2004-8, according to the Raritan Township Planner, the township already accumulated 245 affordable housing units in obligation. These will cost local taxpayers over $35.5 million, as the Township cannot recapture or renegotiate with developers to offset these costs.6 The new, affordable housing fees charged on developers also do not cover the full cost of COAH obligations. The construction of a new single family home valued at $600,000 and offered as affordable housing will have to be subsidized by taxpayer by approximately $24,000, and up to $145,903 per unit for affordable units generated by non-residential development. 7 In the words of the Township Planner, these new “regulations create significant incentives for municipalities to stop and limit growth to every extent possible.” 8

These new rules make the Republicans’ pro-developer stance even more unviable, and a smart growth strategy limiting development by promoting open space preservation will actually help mitigate the pressure on local taxes. If elected to the Township Committee, we will work to implement an integrated approach that will:

• Balance growth with open space & environmental preservation by restoring full funding for the voter approved open space tax. This will not only allow us to capitalize on the softening real estate market to preserve open space and the environment for future generations, but also reap immediate benefit in exempting such conserved parklands and open space from calculating the developable acreage used in determining COAH obligations.9

• Promote & expand innovative, environmentally compatible use of preserved open space to realize its full recreational and economic benefits for residents.

• Ensure the Township Planning Board strictly enforces the Master Plan & existing ordinances to curb excessive growth , protect public interest, treat all parties fairly and stop “bending over backward for developers.”10 The zoning rules and Master Plan should be adjusted to attract inclusionary development, independent living communities for seniors and individuals with special needs to help earn credits for fulfilling COAH obligations.
  • Continue cutting the costs of municipal operations by rationalizing budgeting, deepening the sharing of purchase and services with surrounding municipalities, and the introduction of a modernized service model as well as green, renewable energies.

• Lobby for reforms to rein in public school expenditures, such as accelerating school district consolidation through the K-12 School Board initiative, and possibly by putting a temporary cap on school budget hikes (equivalent to the current 4% cap on municipal spending increases).

• Educate the State on the onerous financial burdens the new COAH rules impose on suburban communities through dialogue and persuasion, rather than relying, as Republicans tend to, solely on adversarial and legal confrontations.

Raritan Township can no longer afford the business-as-usual, one-sided, pro-developer policies. By electing both Rampulla and Leung to create a Democratic majority in the Township Committee this November 4th, Raritan residents can start the process to reverse the downward spiral to fiscal disaster and environmental degradation, and preserve the quality of life and future for our children.

Notes:

1. Reuters News, September 13, 2007; Forbes.com, July 10, 2008.
2. Hunterdon County Democrats, August 2, 2007: pp. A1-2.
3. State and Municipal Profiles Series, The New Jersey Municipal Data Book, Woodside, CA: Information publications, 2008: pp. 416 & 418.
4. Hunterdon County Democrats, August 2, 2007: p. C6.
5. Ibid.
6. Item 11 of James Humphrey’s comment on COAH, in Document 9b of The Information Packet for the February 25, 2008 session of the Raritan Township Committee.
7. Items 11b & C in ibid.
8. Item 16 in ibid.
9. See our comment, “Money Well Spent,” in Hunterdon County Democrats, May 15, 2008: p. C7.
10. See John Hyman’s comment, “Business-Friendly Board,” in ibid., July 17, 2008: p. C7.