REPUBLICAN BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS SAY PLAN TO CHARGE MUNICIPALITIES FOR STATE POLICE COVERAGE WILL DRIVE UP PROPERTY TAXES

CONCERN OVER USING STATE POLICE IN RURAL AREAS -- BUT NOT IN PLACES LIKE CAMDEN AND IRVINGTON -- IS A DOUBLE-STANDARD
May 11, 2006
Assemblyman Joseph Malone/609-298-6250
Assemblyman Frank Blee/609-407-0407
Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose/973-726-0954

REPUBLICAN BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS SAY PLAN TO CHARGE MUNICIPALITIES FOR STATE POLICE COVERAGE WILL DRIVE UP PROPERTY TAXES

CONCERN OVER USING STATE POLICE IN RURAL AREAS -- BUT NOT IN PLACES LIKE CAMDEN AND IRVINGTON -- IS A DOUBLE-STANDARD

Three members of the Assembly Budget Committee, whose districts would be impacted by the proposal, say a Corzine administration plan to force rural municipalities to reimburse the state for State Police patrols will drive up property taxes and represents a double-standard that puts urban needs ahead of those in rural communities.

"It costs the taxpayers far less to have State Police patrols in many of these towns with low-crime rates than it would to create and staff a full-time municipal police patrol in those towns," said Assembly Republican Budget Officer Joe Malone, R-Burlington, Ocean, Monmouth and Mercer. "This proposal will drive up property taxes in these towns while doing little to help the state’s bleak budget picture."

The comments came at today’s Assembly Budget Committee hearing on the Department of Law and Public Safety's budget, where Attorney General Zulima Farber was questioned about the decision in light of the fact that in recent years the state has utilized State Police personnel to patrol the streets of Camden and Irvington.

While making no proposal to control the cost of deploying State Police to urban areas like Camden and Irvington -- and in fact expanding that proposal to 8 urban centers -- the Corzine administration is targeting the 74 rural communities that currently receive State Police coverage, by proposing a reimbursement formula that will cost those towns approximately $24 million.

"The basic right to be safe in your community may be a worthy justification for using state funds to protect city residents, but why then is it too much of an expense for the state to fund State Police protection for rural towns?" said Assemblyman Frank Blee, R-Atlantic. "This plan will naturally drive up property taxes in rural communities and sends a message to these taxpayers that their safety isn’t as highly valued as that of their urban neighbors."

Under the Governor’s budget proposal, $24 million of the $74.2 million expended on these rural police patrols would be covered by the municipality while the state continues to fund a State Police presence for Camden and Irvington.

"Apparently the Governor will send the State Police free-of-charge into Camden and Irvington, but he feels it’s necessary to charge rural and suburban taxpayers for that assistance," said Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose, R-Sussex, Morris and Hunterdon. "This is a continuing double-standard where rural and suburban taxpayers are asked to pay more, while nobody is addressing the waste and abuse of tax dollars in cities like Irvington and Camden."

#####