This could be wrong, but I would say that most residents of New Jersey's 566 municipalities would agree that there are several instances where it would make cultural, financial, and geographical sense for two adjacent towns to consolidate governments, police departments, fire departments, public works, and so on. I would also say that just slightly more than half of those residents would say that their town should NOT consolidate with the adjacent town. This is just my sense -- also, it's a sense based more on a pre-Great Recession and BC (Before Christie) mindset and less on new economic realities.
As governor, Jon Corzine recognized that certain towns needed to consolidate, but he never really made an aggressive case. He formed the Local Unit Alignment, Reorganization, and Consolidation Commission (yawn) that was charged to:
"Study and report on the structure and functions of county and municipal government. This effort includes the study of local taxing districts and their statutory basis. It also includes the fiscal relationship between local governments, and the appropriate allocation of service delivery responsibilities from the standpoint of efficiency"
This Byzantine mission statement is more that most of us can swallow, and resulted in kind of pushing for consolidating "the two Berlins" (not sure if that was more for symbolic purposes) and encouraged shared services between municipalities. LUARCC still exists, but while the state's Department of Community Affairs (the department that oversees LUARCC) remains in transition under the new Christie administration, it's unclear how the consolidation commission will proceed.
In the meantime, Governor Christie's tax caps, budget slashing, and overall disregard for tactful legislating will more likely than not result in towns making those tough decisions, including consolidation, that were once considered a luxury; pragmatic, but luxurious nonetheless. A quick aside: the governor's braggadocio and blind ideals do him no favors and will likely keep him from being at the helm of any real progress.
Brian Donohue from The Star-Ledger validates many of the pro-consolidation ideas documented in the late, great Alan Karcher's Multiple Municipal Madness in this NJ.com video clip. In it, you'll see some clips of Gov. Christie making some pretty good arguments in favor of municipal consolidation, using his native Mendham Township and Borough as an example of two municipalities that suffer from duplication of services, including two libraries and two school boards, not to mention two separate governments, police departments, etc.
Gov. Christie hopes Cap 2.5 will force town consolidation |
When I covered the Princetons as a reporter for the local paper there, I came to understand several important things about consolidation. First, the idea that so-called doughnut towns -- both the hole and doughnut as is the case with Princeton Township (doughnut) and Princeton Borough (hole) -- share a community is kind of bogus. I mean, the Princetons share far more than other doughnut towns like Metuchen Borough and Edison Township, and Highland Park and Edison Township, and any other town swallowed by the mammoth, sprawling, Edison Township (once part of the even mammoth-er Raritan Township). But for the most part, the people living in Princeton Township and Princeton Borough are different. They do, however, share schools and a library, which, culturally speaking, is very important.
Second, as Donohue points out in his video, most arguments against consolidation are sentimental. Some very vocal groups would create specious arguments against consolidation, but those were fundamentally based on a desire to remain as two towns, just because. There are no good arguments against consolidating smaller towns like the Princetons.
Third, I will always remember something the current mayor of Princeton Borough, Mayor Mildred Trotman, said when she came into office: that consolidation would probably not be explicit, but that the towns would eventually "backdoor into consolidation." While the state does need to be more aggressive in getting towns to merge, especially towns that don't have as much in common as the Princetons do, her approach makes sense here.
Sadly, it appears that Gov. Christie's setting a 2.5 percent tax cap, while resonating well with make-believe penny-pinchers, exploits the genuine beliefs of mayors like Trotman. The tax cap is mostly propaganda, because towns have mandated expenses and contractural pay increases that exceed 2.5 percent are not addressed by the 2.5 percent cap and that those increases continue to mount, regardless who crafts the municipal budget.
Anyway, Governor Christie is speaking out against a "top-down" mandate to consolidation, but it's exactly what he's doing. That's not to say consolidation is not a fantastic, cost-cutting idea that increases efficiency and potentially improves public safety and schools, but starving towns of funds to force them to make potentially unsustainable, and life-changing decisions, is beyond reckless.
No comments:
Post a Comment