In the News - Public Safety

Posted by M Paradis

August 12, 2008

Parts of rural N.J. to pay for State Police service

By LISA GRZYBOSKI
Courier-Post Staff

After escaping similar plans in 2002 and 2006 that were ultimately scrapped from the final state budget, rural towns that rely on the New Jersey State Police for all or part of their police protection will have to start paying something for that service in January.

It costs an estimated $80 million a year for state troopers to cover the 92 municipalities involved, said Tom Vincz, a spokesman for the state Department of the Treasury. The amount includes such things as officer salaries and overhead expenses to run the police barracks.

Gov. Jon S. Corzine, who plans to sign the budget today, originally proposed having the affected towns contribute $20.5 million, around 25 percent, toward the cost of the State Police coverage. That amount was reduced to $12 million during the Legislature’s budget review, Vincz said.

The formula used to determine how much each rural town will pay won’t be completed until after the budget is adopted, Vincz said. Language in the budget guarantees that the share towns pay won’t result in more than a $100 increase over 2007 average residential property taxes.

The 77 municipalities that have full-time State Police protection would likely contribute more than the 15 towns that use the troopers for part-time service. The costs wouldn’t be imposed until January, when many municipalities begin their calendar year budgets, Vincz said.

“The only thing we can do is sit and wait for the figures,” said Shrewsbury Township Mayor Albert Klose, whose town uses the State Police full-time. “We’ve survived all these years with the State Police, and we hope to continue that relationship because it’s been a good one.”

But the township has begun exploring the option of entering into an agreement with a nearby municipality for police protection should State Police services become too expensive, Klose said.

“It’s going to have an impact on us one way or the other,” Klose said.

Municipalities that share police services with neighboring towns wouldn’t be charged for the State Police, said Corzine spokesman Jim Gardner. He said the initiative is meant to make sure towns are equitably sharing costs for services provided.

“Right now, many taxpayers are paying for their own towns’ police departments and subsidizing the State Police costs for other towns,” Vincz said.

If Corzine’s administration wants to talk about how it’s unfair for taxpayers around the state to help pay for trooper patrols in other towns, then Camden and Irvington should be included in the conversation, said Senate Minority Leader Thomas H. Kean Jr., R-Union.

In the original proposal, Camden would have contributed $800,000 for its State Police service and Irvington roughly the same amount, Vincz said. Corzine and the Legislature decided jointly to remove the two cities from the list because the services provided in those urban areas are different than those provided in rural communities, he said.

“If they’re talking about equality, let’s talk about it across the board,” Kean countered.

Coupled with decreases in state aid to municipalities and reductions in the property tax rebate program, the State Police cost-sharing plan will inevitably lead to higher local property taxes for many people, Kean said.

“This has been a reoccurring topic in the last few years,” said Mayor Chuck Chiarello of Buena Vista Township in Atlantic County.

In 2006, the last time Corzine proposed State Police cost sharing, Buena Vista was scheduled to pay nearly $800,000 annually for full-time trooper coverage, which would have increased municipal property taxes by one-third, Chiarello said.

Under that earlier proposal, the state would have charged $330 per housing unit for full-time patrols and $230 per home for part-time patrol. Buena Vista was overjoyed when that plan failed to make it into the state budget, Chiarello said.

This year, towns have yet to hear anything about the formula, even though they’re supposed to start paying by January, he said.

“Nobody even knows how the formula was done,” said Assemblywoman Marcia A. Karrow, R-Hunterdon.

Rural vs. urban

Of the 46 municipalities in Karrow’s district, about half rely on the State Police for all or part of their police service. She believes it’s wrong to require rural New Jersey to pay for State Police coverage when the force was created in the 1920s to patrol those very communities.

“These are municipalities that have very small populations, small budgets and little to no ratables,” Karrow said.

She noted many of the towns also can’t expand their tax base to pick up the cost of State Police service because either preserved farmland or conservation areas such as the one in the Highlands block development. Money can be found to help New Jersey’s urban areas, but when it comes to rural communities, the well is dry, Karrow complained.

Assemblyman John J. Burzichelli, D-Gloucester, said he, too, isn’t satisfied with the program as it’s described in the budget. More attention must be paid to what constitutes “rural,” he said.

“If you’re rural, you should get the service free, and if you’ve outgrown your rural status, you should pay something for it,” Burzichelli said.

Singled out

Many of these country communities can’t share police services with neighboring towns because nobody around them has a police department either, Burzichelli said. He also wondered aloud why rural towns were being singled out when the state police also does patrols in those municipalities with major highways running through them.

As far as Chiarello is concerned, rural towns pay for the State Police service through the court fines they collect.

For example, Buena Vista collected about $200,000 in 2007 in fines generated by State Police, he said. The township didn’t get to keep any of that money.

MParadis NOTE: This is an interesting point and we will be researching what contributions we make to the court system from the use of the State Police

“So, we see it as we’re already contributing,” Chiarello said.

Legislation was introduced this month by Sen. Jeff Van Drew, D-Cape May, and Assemblyman Nelson Albano, D-Cumberland, to assess a $40 surcharge on all motor vehicle violations in the state to pay for police services. It would generate an estimated $160 million in surcharges; half would help pay for State Police rural patrols, and towns and cities with police departments would receive up to $1 million each to pay for police.

Reach Lisa Grzyboski at (856) 486-2931 or lgrzyboski@courierpostonline.com