Appeal to get discussion on right basis

Following is an appeal I made to a Gannett reporter. I requested that the property tax discussion be given some balance as to its fundamental context. The idea is that individuals pay taxes regardless of who or how rich their neighbor is.

________________________________________

Read your article in today's Press about lawmakers wanting to cap spending in so-called rich districts.

Let me suggest that you and Gannett expose this misleading idea that there are "rich" and "poor" districts. The characterization would be true if there were only rich or only poor people living in those districts. The reality is there are an entire range of incomes represented in each. Individuals pay taxes by themselves. Their rich neighbor has nothing to do with that ability.

I live in Middletown where we receive state aid toward education in the upper teens as a percent of the total budget. Middletown has one of the better per pupil costs. Nothing near the Abbotts or other high-spending districts. We receive so little aid because we have a lot of wealthy residents. But I have yet to receive anything from them to help me pay my property taxes.

As you know, Middletown borders Keansburg, an Abbott district. I am not sure how much they receive from Trenton as a percent of their total education budget, but it certainly must exceed 60%. They are a "poor" district.

My suggestion for your reporting is that you could choose a street or block that acts as a border between the two towns. They will have similar sized and valued homes. The people who live in them will likely be in similar income brackets. BUT because one lives in Middletown and the other in Keansburg, they are each imputed with a different ability to shoulder the cost of local education spending. Obviously, they do not have differing abilities. But the state designates each district's ability to afford based on an average of the aggregate income, regardless of the range of incomes. Just because Keansburg does not have a Navesink River Road or a Locust (among other) areas, it has a lower average income, a lower "wealth" factor.

You can see how this is unfair and totally misses the point. If the aid from Trenton was credited directly to individual tax payers property tax obligation based on personal income then it might be fair. Of course, that would mean the property tax would then be a quasi income tax and/or ability to pay based tax. But this is not what exists. Just because one lives on the wrong side of the street, they are imputed with greater ability to pay than the guy they see out their front window. Ridiculous.

The above is why the context of the discussion about property taxes is so off-center. Fairness is the issue. No matter where one lives, they should be expected to contribute based on their own ability to pay, not an imputed ability simple because they have a rich neighbor.

I hope you can convince your editors that this is an important topic to be raised during this time of heightened attention to property taxes. Currently, it is being ignored as irrelevant or unimportant when it comes to the multitude of proposed solutions to the problem of high property taxes. It is forgotten that the burden of the Property Tax is individually borne and not supplemented for by one's rich neighbor. [Which raises the concomitant issue of the short shrift the disproportionate share lower income and fixed income taxpayers bear based on total income].