DETERMINANTS OF PROPERTY TAX BURDEN IN NEW JERSEY 2008

Ernest C. Reock, Jr. Professor Emeritus

Center for Government Services Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

September, 2013

DETERMINANTS OF PROPERTY TAX BURDEN IN NEW JERSEY 2008

Ernest C. Reock, Jr. Professor Emeritus Center for Government Services Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

September, 2013

Center for Government Services Division of Continuing Studies Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 303 George Street, Ste. 604 New Brunswick, NJ 08901

ccgs.rutgers.edu

Why is this paper important for public officials? Property taxes, the mere mention of which causes blood to boil in New Jersey, are difficult to dissect for the average citizen. Why are they higher in some towns and lower in others? Is there a way to control their growth? How do we know if they are too high?

Municipal officials struggle to define and predict the variation between towns. In many forums, the issues of controlling the rise of property taxes and alternative government funding models are debated time and again. Property Tax Burden Index and Determinants

This paper proposes a model for a Property Tax Burden Index a tool measuring the determinants of the variation. Property Tax Burden here is defined as the level of the tax in relation to the financial resources from which it must be paid.

Dr. Ernest Reock Jr. first introduced the concept for the Property Tax Burden Index in 2004. This paper updates those findings and defines the significant changes from the original model. The Index can be used to inform policy decisions perhaps challenging the current thinking that municipal cost cutting alone will result in reduced property tax burdens in the most burdened places. 1. Low level of property tax base 2. Low level of personal income 3. High level of residential property 4. Low level of other municipal revenue 5. Low level of other school revenue 6. High level of municipal budget Property tax burden may have multiple causes; the model proposes twelve primary determinants 7. High level of school costs 8. High level of county taxes 9. High level of school enrollment 10. Low level of State municipal aid 11. Low level of State school aid 12. Low level of State tax rebates

As the list of determinates in the model suggests, no one item can be used to predict the tax burden.

The heaviest property tax burdens are found in small, older suburbs that have low property tax bases and limited personal incomes among their residents; excessive spending is rarely found in such places, and the only feasible relief must come from outside the community. State school aid is of considerable help in many places, especially in urban communities. However, State municipal aid is insufficient and poorly distributed, having been dramatically reduced or eliminated from many towns. State tax rebates do not redress the balance. The Great Recession of 2008 also contributed to the property tax burden as the value of homes decreased.

Using data to understand This paper is an example of how the use of data available to everyone can inform our understanding of property tax burdens in New Jersey. The model relies on data reported by state agencies and attempts an unbiased analysis.

Building a model of the determinants of property tax burdens which vary by municipality can help the public understand the variation in property taxes. The data used in the model is drawn largely from research for the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book, a comprehensive data source published annually by the Center for Government Services at Rutgers. There is evidence from this model to predict the future, even though this paper relies on the last year that personal income and other tax data was available (2008). As more current data becomes available, it can be used in the model. Local officials can prepare a Property Tax Burden Profile for their own municipality by using the model embedded in this paper. We encourage the use.

Alan Zalkind Director

Angie McGuire, Ph.D. Editor, NJLDDB

Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey 2008

Ernest C. Reock, Jr.

Executive Summary This is an up-date of a paper on the same subject for the year 2004. New data have been gathered and reported, and significant changes have been made in the approach followed. The purposes of the paper are: (1) to suggest a method for measuring the property tax burden in New Jersey municipalities, (2) to identify statewide changes in the property tax that took place between 2004 and 2008, (3) to apply the suggested method to New Jersey municipalities in order to determine those with the greatest and least tax burden, and (4) to continue an exploration of the reasons why variation in burden exists. The tax burden in any municipality can be measured in two ways: by the equalized net tax rate, which applies to all kinds of property, and by the percentage that the tax takes of the personal income of the residents of the community. A property tax burden index is calculated for each municipality, defined as the square root of the product of these two measures. This gives equal weight to each measure in an index that varies proportionately with changes in both measures and permits use of the measure for longitudinal comparisons. While property taxes are high in New Jersey and were growing annually in the mid-2000s, their burden was declining as a booming economy brought rapidly rising property values and personal incomes. In 2007, both the equalized net tax rate and the property tax as a percentage of personal income hit their lowest point in New Jersey for many years. However, in the years after 2005, the state, and the nation, began to enter a severe recession. The growth in property values and personal income slowed and then began to reverse. By 2008, both the equalized net tax rate and the percentage that property taxes took from personal income were on the rise, although by that date they had not yet reached the level of earlier years. The relative property tax burden indexes for New Jerseys municipalities show wide variations in 2008, as they did in 2004. While a few of the major North Jersey suburbs are among the most heavily burdened, the most frequently impacted places are small, older suburbs, especially in Camden County. Urban areas are less often among the places with the highest property tax burdens. In fact, property taxes in urban communities declined rapidly between 1997 and 2005 as additional State school aid ordered under the Abbott court decision enabled urban school districts to avoid increases in local school tax levies. By 2007, Newark and Jersey City had total equalized net property tax rates county + municipal + school- rebates below

2 the statewide average rate, and in 2008 they ranked #476 and #524, respectively in Property Tax Burden Index. Other urban places made similar, though less spectacular, gains. Twelve primary determinants of property tax burden have been analyzed in four major categories: Local Financial Resources: Amount of taxable property per capita Amount of personal income per capita Percentage of residential property Amount of municipal non-property tax revenue per capita Amount of school non-property tax revenue per resident pupil Expenditures: Municipal budget per capita School costs per pupil County taxes per capita Demographics Percentage of population in public school State aid: State municipal aid per capita State school aid per resident pupil State tax rebates per capita With only one exception, the 30 most heavily burdened communities in 2008 have very limited financial resources taxable property and personal income per capita. Also common among these places are a high percentage of residential property and limited non-property tax revenues. Excessive public expenditures do not explain the high property taxes in the most burdened communities.. Most of these places spend well below the state average for municipal services. While half of them have above-average school costs, this has been mandated by the Abbott decisions in three of their school systems, and is balanced by high State school aid. The property tax burden from county costs is below the state average in 24 of the 30 most heavily burdened places The percentage of the population in the public schools is a factor only sporadically, depending upon the nature of the population and the private school facilities available. State aid for schools and property tax rebates provide some needed support to many of the most burdened places, but State municipal aid is of little help for all but a handful of places.

3 Procedures and data are presented in the paper to permit any municipality in the state to prepare a Property Tax Burden Profile, indicating the relative impact of each property tax determinant in that community. Profiles are shown for 12 selected places. The heaviest property tax burdens are found in small, older suburbs that have low property tax bases and limited personal incomes among their residents; excessive spending is rarely found in such places, and the only feasible assistance must come from outside the community. State school aid is of considerable help in many places, especially in urban communities, but State municipal aid is insufficient and poorly distributed, and State tax rebates do not redress the imbalance.

4 Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey 2008 Table of Contents Executive Summary. Table of Contents. Tables and Charts The Property Tax in New Jersey. A Method for Measuring Property Tax Burden.. The Equalized Net Tax Rate The Property Tax as a Percentage of Personal Income An Index of Property Tax Burden... Statewide Trends: 2004 to 2008. Application to New Jersey Municipalities.. Determinants of Property Tax Burden Special Data Treatment.. Expanded Population Data School Data. Income Data Comparison to State Averages. The 30 Most Heavily-Burdened Municipalities. Local Financial Resources.. Determinant #1 Low Level of Property Tax Base............... Determinant #2 Low Level of Personal Income... Determinant #3 High Level of Residential Property....... Determinant #4 Low Level of Other Miscellaneous Revenue... Determinants #5 - Low Level of School Surplus...` Summary of Financial Resource Determinants.. Expenditures Determinant #6 High Level of Municipal Budget Determinant #7 High Level of School Costs Determinant #8 High Level of County Taxes.. 1 4 6 7 7 7 8 9 10 12 14 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 18 18 19 19 20 20 20 20 21

5 Summary of Expenditure Determinants.. Demographics.. Determinant #9 High Level of Public School Enrollment,,,, State Aid Determinant #10 Low Level of State Aid to Municipalities.. Determinant #11 Low Level of State Aid to Schools. Determinant #12 Low Level of State Tax Rebates. Summary of State Aid Determinants. Summary of Property Tax Burden Determinants Property Taxes in the Urban Municipalities The Relative Importance of Determinants Property Tax Burden Profiles Property Tax Burden Profiles Calculation of Property Tax Burden Profiles Patterns of Determinants in the Most Burdened Places Woodlynne West Orange.. Haledon. Salem City. Hillside.. Pohatcong.. Patterns of Determinants in the Urban Communities Vineland. New Brunswick.. East Orange Newark... Bridgeton Elizabeth Conclusion. Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008 Appendix Table 2 Determinants of Property Tax Burden; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008 22 22 22 23 23 23 24 25 25 25 29 29 29 32 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

6 Tables and Charts Table 1. Changes in New Jersey Statewide Equalized Net Property Tax Rate, 2003 to 2008. Table 2. Changes in New Jersey Net Property Tax as a Percentage of the Personal Income of Residents, 2003 to 2008........ Table 3. Changes in the New Jersey Property Tax Burden Index, 2003 to 2008.. Table 4. Property Tax Burden Index 30 Most Heavily Burdened New Jersey Municipalities, 2008 Table 5. Determinants of Property Tax Burden. Table 6. Determinants of Property Tax Burden; Percentages of State Averages, 2008; 30 Most Heavily Burdened Municipalities Table 7. Property Tax Burden Index Urban Municipalities, 2008. Table 8. Spread Sheet Layout for Evaluation of the Impact of Each Property Tax Burden Determinant in a Municipality, 2008.. Table 9. Leading Property Tax Burden Determinants: 30 Most Heavily Burdened New Jersey Municipalities, 2008 Table 10. Leading Property Tax Burden Determinants: 31 New Jersey Urban Municipalities, 2008. 10 11 12 13 14

17 26 30 33 41

Chart 1. New Jersey Equalized Net Property Tax Rates: 1989-2012, Newark, Jersey City, and State Average.

27

Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey 2008

Ernest C. Reock, Jr. This is an up-date of a paper on the same subject for the year 2004, which was completed and distributed in late 2009. New data have been gathered and reported and some substantial changes have been made in the approach followed; these will be identified in the appropriate locations. The year 2008 may seem ancient history at this point. However, the availability of personal income information at the municipal level always lags at least two years behind tax information. Here, a decision has been made to use the latest 1 tax and income data for the same period -- 2008 -- , rather than trying to appear more current by combining data for two different years The Property Tax in New Jersey New Jersey is recognized as having one of the highest property tax levels in the country. In 2008-09 the state ranked second in property taxes per capita and third in property taxes as a percentage of personal income 2. Within the state the tax is administered through 566 3 separate municipal taxing jurisdictions, and its burden varies widely from place to place. Some communities are heavily burdened by their property taxes; others may be only lightly impacted. The purposes of this paper are: (1) to suggest a method for measuring the property tax burden in New Jersey municipalities, (2) to identify statewide changes in the property tax that took place between 2004 and 2008, (3) to apply the suggested method to New Jersey municipalities in order to determine those with the greatest tax burden, and (4) to explore the reasons why substantial variations in tax burden exist. A Method for Measuring Property Tax Burden The Equalized Net Tax Rate
1 2

As of the date this paper was started. New Jersey ranked 16th and 34th on personal income taxes, 30th and 43rd on sales and gross receipts taxes, and 5th and 15Th on total state and local taxes, respectively. Tax and population data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census; personal income data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 3 Now (in 2013) 565 with the consolidation of the two Princetons.

8 Two different ways usually are suggested for calculating the burden of the property tax. The most common approach is to use the property tax rate as an indicator of burden. General property tax rates, under New Jersey constitutional provisions, must be applied uniformly to all taxable properties within a municipal taxing district 4. Thus, they become a burden on the property in the municipality, usually without regard to its ownership or use 5. In order to make comparisons among municipalities, corrections must be made wherever possible for variations in tax assessment practices, so that the true value of their taxable property can be gauged by some common measure. The equalized valuation calculated annually by the State Division of Taxation makes such an adjustment and will be used to provide a common basis for measuring a municipalitys tax base. The equalized net tax rate used in this paper is the total amount of property taxes levied within the taxing district (municipality) for county, municipal, and school purposes, minus all tax rebates made to residents of the municipality by the State government, divided by the equalized valuation of the taxing district, and multiplied by 100. The Property Tax as a Percentage of Personal Income The equalized property tax rate often is assumed to indicate the burden on the resident taxpayers, and it is in most cases. However, if the taxpayers have very large or very small personal fiscal resources, a high or low equalized property tax rate may not accurately reflect the tax burden borne by the residents of the community. A second method used for measuring property tax burden in a community is the percentage that the property tax levy paid by the residents of a municipality takes from the personal income of the residents. Property taxes paid by commercial, industrial and non-homestead farm property relieve the tax burden of a communitys residents. In order to find the portion of the total tax levy paid by the residents of a municipality, either directly or through their rent, the total levy first has been multiplied by the percentage of the total assessed valuation of the taxing district that is classified as residential, apartment, or farm residence property. This gives the amount of the total tax levy paid on residential property. A second adjustment then is made to eliminate taxes paid on residential property used only on a seasonal basis by non-residents. This is particularly important in New Jerseys seashore resort communities. In order to calculate the portion of the tax levy paid by residents, the tax levy paid on residential property has been multiplied by the percentage of dwelling units found by the Bureau of the Census to be occupied on April 1, 2010, a date well prior to summer rentals. Next, the tax levy paid by residents has been reduced by subtracting the amount of State tax rebates paid to residents of the community. The net result then has been divided by the total amount of personal income reported by the Division of Taxation for income tax-paying residents (including their dependents) of the community to find an estimated percentage that the net property tax forms of the personal income of the residents.
4 5

Constitution of New Jersey, Article VIII, Section 1, paragraph 1. Other provisions of the Constitution authorize exemptions from taxation for certain specified uses of property, but differential valuations or tax rates are not permitted.

An Index of Property Tax Burden The analysis must face the problem of reconciling in a single index number two different measures of property tax burden the tax rate and the tax as a percentage of personal income --, which may be considered equally important, but are quite different in magnitude, Tax rates in recent years in New Jersey have averaged from about 1.5 to 2.5% of equalized value property. During the same period, property taxes have averaged from about 7.5 to about 9.0% of resident personal income. Simply adding or averaging the two percentages to obtain an index number would give much greater weight to the personal income factor. Three goals have been sought in developing the property tax burden index: (1) in the absence of any rationale for preferring one measure over the other, the two measures should be given equal weight in the index. In the earlier paper, this was done by considering each measure the equalized property tax rate and the property tax as a percentage of personal income -- as a percentage of the comparable state average figure for the tax year in question. The two percentages of the state average then were averaged to present a single figure that gave them equal weight in an Index of relative property tax burden. While this produced a balanced measure of relative property tax burden for a particular community in a particular year, it did not lend itself to any meaningful measurement of changing tax burdens over a period of time. (2) the index should lend itself to measuring tax burden over a period of time. An approach to these two criteria might be sought by multiplying the tax rate by the taxes as a percentage of income. This approach gives equal weight to each measure and lends itself to calculations of burden both in a given year and over time. However, multiplication leads to non-linear results; for example, a 10% increase in the tax rate and in the percentage of income leads to a 21% increase in the index (3) the index should give linear results. Therefore the index that has been used is: The square root of the product of the tax rate and the tax as a percentage of personal income. This calculation of the index meets all three of the goals stated.

10 Statewide Trends: 2004 to 2008 In 2004, New Jersey was in the midst of a boom in property valuations. Equalized valuations rose over 14% in that year, while the total property tax levy increased only 6.5% and homestead tax rebates were increased by almost a billion dollars (See Table 1). The result was a significant decline in the state average equalized net property tax rate. The growth of valuations continued for two more years, with rebates remaining relatively constant. By 2007, the real estate bubble had begun to deflate. Equalized valuations grew only 6.8% in that year. However, the annual increase in property taxes also slackened, an increased homestead tax rebate program helped provide cover for the weakening economy, and the statewide equalized tax rate continued to decline, reaching its lowest point since equalized valuation was invented in the 1950s. Table 1. Changes in New Jersey Statewide Equalized Net Property Tax Rate, 2003 to 2008. Total Property Tax Levy (Billions) Annual Percent Change in Total Tax Levy + 6.5 + 6.5 + 6.9 + 5.8 + 4.9 Net Property Tax Levy (Billions) Annual Percent Change in Equalized Valuation

Homestead Tax Rebates (Billions)

Equalized Valuation (Billions)

Equalized Net Tax Rate

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Sources:

17.3 18.4 19.6 20.9 22.1 23.2

- 0.8 - 1.6 - 1.2 - 1.1 - 2.2 - 1.8

16.5 16.8 18.4 19.8 19.9 21.4

824 940 1,084 1,240 1,324 1,360

+ 14.1 + 15.3 + 14.4 + 6.8 + 1.9

2.00 1.79 1.70 1.60 1.51 1.57

website..

All tax levy data in this paper are from county abstracts of ratables reported on the New Jersey Division of Local Government Services (DLGS) website. Homestead Rebate data provided by the New Jersey Department of Treasury for use in the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book. All equalized valuation data in this paper are annual calendar year figures from the DLGS

By 2008, New Jersey and the entire nation were moving rapidly into recession. Although growth in the total property tax levy continued to slow down, property values increased only marginally and, at the same time, homestead tax rebates were cut back. The result was that the trend of the equalized net property tax rate reversed in 2008, and New Jersey began to enter a period of increasing net property tax rates.

11 Personal income also was on the rise in 2004 (See Table 2), an 8.4% annual growth combining with the 6.5% increase in the property tax levy and the expansion of the homestead tax rebate program to produce a decline in property taxes as a percentage of income from 5.19% a year earlier to 4.86%. New Jersey personal income continued to grow through the 2007 income tax year, in fact at an accelerating pace. In that year, property taxes took only 4.54% of New Jersey taxpayers personal income. In 2008, however, the bottom dropped out of the economy and the personal income of New Jersey income taxpayers changed from a 10.3% annual increase in 2007 to a 2.9% decrease in the next year. With homestead tax rebates also being reduced, property taxes as a percentage of personal income rose to 4.95%. Table 2. Changes in the New Jersey Net Property Tax as a Percentage of the Personal Income of Residents, 2003 to 2008 Annual Percent HomeNet Change Stead Property in tax Tax Total Rebates Levy Tax (Billions) Levy (Billions) Billions) Total Property Tax Levy 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 17.3 18.4 19.6 20.9 22.1 23.2 + 6.5 + 6.5 + 6.9 + 5.8 + 4.9 - 0.8 - 1.6 - 1.2 - 1.1 - 2.2 - 1.8 16.5 16.8 18.4 19.8 19.9 21.4 Net Annual Percent Net Property Total Percent of Net Property Tax as Personal Change Property Tax Percent Income In Tax Levy Paid by of Personal Paid by Residents Personal (Millions) Income Residents (Billions) Income 220.8 239.4 260.5 279.3 308.2 299.1 + 8.4 + 8.8 + 7.2 + 10.3 - 2.9 66.4 63.3 66.2 67.4 63.3 63.9 11.5 11.6 13.0 14.1 14.0 14.8 5.19% 4.86 4.98 5.04 4.54 4.95

Sources: As in Table 1, plus All Personal Income data in this paper are from New Jersey Department of Treasury for use in the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book.

When the equalized tax rate data from Table 1 are combined with the information on property taxes as a percentage of personal income in Table 2, a Property Tax Burden Index for the entire state can be constructed, as shown in Table 3. New Jerseys state Property Tax Burden Index declined steadily from 2003 through 2007 and then, as the recession gathered strength, it began to rise in 2008.

12 Table 3. Changes in the New Jersey Property Tax Burden Index, 2003 to 2008 State Average Equalized Net Property Tax Rate 2.00 1.79 1.70 1.60 1.51 1.57 Net Property Tax As Percent of Personal Income 5.19% 4.86 4.98 5.04 4.54 4.95 State Property Tax Burden Index 3.22 2.95 2.91 2.84 2.62 2.79

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Application to New Jersey Municipalities The procedures described above have been applied to all New Jersey municipalities with the exception of a few that are so small, or their ownership patterns so specialized, that the data may be unreliable 6. Table 4 shows the Relative Property Tax Burden Index for the 30 most heavily burdened municipalities using 2008 data, with communities listed in descending order of burden 7. The two components of the Property Tax Burden Index -- equalized net property tax rate and net taxes as a percentage of personal income generally work in tandem; when one measure is high the other usually is high also. However, there are exceptions. Many seashore resorts Cape May, Harvey Cedars, Surf City, Bay Head, --have very low property tax rates, but those property taxes impose well above the state average burden on the personal incomes of their yearround residents. In contrast. some of the poorer communities of the state Bridgeton, Hi-Nella, Trenton, Camden -- show the reverse pattern: a low burden on personal income, but very high tax rates. Seventeen of the most heavily tax-burdened municipalities in 2008 also were among the 30 most heavily burdened in 2004, including eight of the top ten. New Jerseys large cities are conspicuously absent from this list. Only East Orange, Irvington, West Orange, and the City of Orange Township among New Jerseys 100 largest municipalities, appear on the list of the 30 most heavily burdened by the property tax. Instead, the typical high tax-burden place is a small

Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack and Winfield. Audubon Park was included in the 2004 analysis, but more recent reports appear unreliable. 7 The Property Tax Burden Index for all municipalities, in alphabetical order by county, is shown in Appendix Table 1.

13

most heavily burdened by the property tax. Instead, the typical high tax-burden place is a small suburban community. Thirteen counties have at least one community among the most heavily burdened, with Camden the leader at nine. . Table 4. Property Tax Burden Index 30 Most Heavily Burdened New Jersey Municipalities, 2008.
Equalized Net Tax as % of Net Personal Tax Rate Income 3.11 2.66 2.85 2.85 2.37 2.52 2.48 2.66 2.39 2.77 2.41 2.17 2.49 2.15 2.76 2.23 2.61 2.62 2.52 2.54 2.18 2.10 2.25 2.50 2.30 2.28 2.07 2.54 2.33 2.52 7.93 8.65 6.80 6.48 7.50 7.02 7.13 6.58 7.32 6.17 7.07 7.73 6.73 7.73 5.91 7.20 6.04 5.99 6.20 6.09 7.07 7.33 6.80 6.11 6.55 6.59 7.24 5.86 6.38 5.87 Property Tax Burden Index 4.97 4.80 4.40 4.30 4.21 4.21 4.21 4.19 4.18 4.13 4.13 4.10 4.09 4.08 4.04 4.01 3.97 3.96 3.95 3.94 3.93 3.92 3.91 3.90 3.88 3.87 3.87 3.86 3.85 3.85

Index Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Municipality WOODLYNNE ROSELLE SALEM CITY WOODBURY HILLSIDE LAWNSIDE WEST ORANGE LAUREL SPRINGS ORANGE LINDENWOLD HIGH BRIDGE HALEDON EAST ORANGE PROSPECT PARK PENNS GROVE NORTH PLAINFIELD STRATFORD SOMERDALE BARRINGTON GLASSBORO RIDGEFIELD PARK BLOOMINGDALE NEWTON IRVINGTON WILLINGBORO POHATCONG POMPTON LAKES MOUNT EPHRAIM WASHINGTON BOR. MAGNOLIA

County Camden Union Salem Gloucester Union Camden Essex Camden Essex Camden Hunterdon Passaic Essex Passaic Salem Somerset Camden Camden Camden Gloucester Bergen Passaic Sussex Essex Burlington Warren Passaic Camden Warren Camden

14

Determinants of Property Tax Burden Property tax burden may have multiple causes, including limited local resources, high levels of expenditures, below-average assistance from State government, and even some elements of local demographics. Table 5 shows a classification of the primary determinants that have been examined, together with commonly used scales for measuring the level of each determinant. Table 5. Determinants of Property Tax Burden. Nature of Determinant Primary Determinant Low level of property tax base Low level of personal income High level of residential property. Low level of other municipal revenue. Low level of other school revenue High level of municipal budget. High level of school costs High level of county taxes High level of school enrollment Low level of State municipal aid Low level of State school aid Low level of State tax rebates Measurement Scale Equalized valuation per capita Personal income per taxpayer plus dependents. Percentage of residential property Local municipal miscellaneous revenue per capita Budgeted school surplus per resident pupil. Municipal budget per capita School costs per resident pupil County tax levy per capita Resident school enrollment as percentage of total population State municipal aid per capita State aid to schools per resident pupil State tax rebates per capita

1 2 3 4 5 6

Local Financial Resources

Expenditures

7 8

Demographics

9 10

State Aid

11 12

Only primary determinants have been considered here; that is, the determinants having a direct impact on the property tax. For example, a high municipal budget per capita is considered a

15 primary determinant of property tax burden. However, a low tax collection rate, which would trigger a high reserve for uncollected taxes, causing a larger municipal budget per capita, would be considered a secondary determinant of property tax distress. Secondary determinants are not within the scope of this paper. Special Data Treatment Expanded Population Data Many of the determinants are measured on a per-capita basis equalized valuation, municipal non-property tax revenue, municipal budgets, county taxes, state municipal aid, and tax rebates 8. In order to compensate particularly for the special conditions in the seashore resorts large non-resident summer populations and low year-round occupancy the estimated resident population of every municipality has been divided by the percentage (expressed as a decimal) of dwelling units found by the Bureau of the Census to be occupied on April 1, 2010. The result is called the expanded population figure, which may more reasonably represent the total number of persons for whom services must be provided. Thus, for example, Sea Isle City, with an estimated 2008 resident population of 2,909, and with only 15.1% of its dwelling units occupied on April 1, 2010, is treated as though it had a year-round population of 19,265 persons. The same calculation has been made for every municipality in the state, although the impact is on a much smaller scale in non-resort places. The resulting expanded state population is +10.3% higher than the official 2008 state population estimates. School Data Two problems are encountered in combining the financial data of school districts and municipalities. One is that the geographic jurisdictions of the units do not always coincide. Where there is a school district that offers a full K-12 curriculum or where the school district operates only a K-6 or K-8 system and sends its high school students to another district on a tuition basis, there is no special problem because all resident students will be counted in the home district coinciding with the municipality, and all of their costs will be in the local school budget. However, where there are regional or consolidated school districts that cover more than one municipality, special steps are necessary. Public school enrollment data have been aggregated by municipality, using information supplied by the New Jersey Department of Education on the municipal origin of students enrolled in regional and consolidated school districts. However, the financial data of the regional school districts -- budgets, budgeted school surplus, and state aid have been apportioned among the constituent municipalities in each case on whatever basis has been used by the school boards and the county boards of taxation in apportioning the tax levies of the regional districts. These bases vary sometimes in proportion to tax ratables, sometimes to resident enrollment, and sometimes a combination of the two. School financial data budgets, budgeted school surplus, State aid have been presented on a per pupil basis, primarily because this is the most commonly used and understood terminology. Part of the school data State aid and school surplus -- are for the 2008-09 school year, resulting in some disconnect when combined with tax and other data presented on a 2008 calendar or tax year basis.
8

Presentation of data on a household basis, rather than per capita, has been considered but rejected in favor of the more common per capita measure.

16

The second problem is that the fiscal years of the school districts and the municipalities do not coincide. Whereas the property tax is levied on a calendar year basis, school data, including state aid, is available only on a hyphenated school year basis. No neat solution is apparent. Therefore, school district financial data for 2008-09 has been combined with municipal data for 2008, and the term school costs, rather than school budgets, has been used. Income Data Personal income data have been presented on the basis of the total number of individual State income tax taxpayers and their dependents, as reported by the Division of Taxation, thus approximating a per capita basis 9. This obviously results in an undercount of population and income where there are persons below the tax-paying threshold. In 2008 the total number of income taxpayers and their dependents comprised 91% of the total estimated population and 82% of the expanded population described above. Comparison to State Averages Each primary determinant has been measured by the scale indicated in Table 5. The data for a municipality then have been expressed in Table 6 as percentages of the state average for each determinant. For example, the equalized valuation for Woodlynne (#1)-- $35,924 per capita is only 25.3% of the state average of $141,968. Shading in Table 6 highlights percentages above or below the state average, indicating that these particular determinants contribute unusually to the communitys property tax burden. Percentages of a determinant that reduce, rather than increase, the property tax burden are shown unshaded. For example, the equalized valuation per capita of West Orange (#7) is above the state average, so it is shown unshaded. The 30 Most Heavily-Burdened Municipalities Local Financial Resources Five primary financial resource determinants have a significant effect on the level of property tax burden and are considered here the property tax base, the personal income of the residents, the proportion of taxable residential property, the amount of non-property tax revenue received by the municipality, and the amount of surplus used to balance the school district budget. Determinant #1 - Low Level of Property Tax Base Probably the most obvious financial resource determinant of property tax burden is a low level of taxable property. For any given tax levy, the smaller the amount of taxable property, the higher the tax rate. The level of the tax base has been measured by the equalized valuation per capita, using expanded population figures.. .
9

Personal income data provided by the State Department of Treasury for use in the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book,

Table 6. Determinants of Property Tax Burden: Percentages of State Averages, 2008; 30 Most Heavily Burdened Municipalities. 17
STATE AID LOCAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES 2 3 4 5 Low Level High Level Low Level Low Level of of of Other of Personal Residential Municipal School Income Property Revenue Surplus 6 7 High Level High Level of of Municipal School Budget Costs 8 High Level of County Txes EXPENDITURES

1 Low Level of Property Tax Base

DEMOGRAPHICS 9 High Level of School Enrollment

10 11 12 Low Level Low Level Low Level of State of State of State Municipal School Tax Aid Aid Rebates

Property Tax Burden Equalized Valuation per Capita Capita 1,247 73.4 134.5 91.4 85.8 150.5 114.5 124.5 98.6 126.3 51.8 120.9 108.9 142.1 94.6 93.6 131.0 17.0 44.8 181.1 30.8 77.9 60.8 56.9 79.7 57.6 86.5 110.6 108.2 101.2 107.1 124.7 53.9 79.5 63.0 76.9 105.2 6.9 90.0 120.6 135.0 81.7 135.9 162.7 18.2 70.7 66.0 76.1 64.2 76.7 115.6 88.5 87.5 107.4 76.3 124.5 83.7 81.6 72.6 71.3 105.2 116.0 79.4 111.5 101.6 104.1 85.5 134.2 83.4 39.4 109.6 71.6 92.6 97.2 97.1 91.4 100.7 96.2 131.1 102.8 93.8 95.2 91.5 83.4 89.5 84.1 104.9 123.6 101.4 95.4 47.0 60.8 75.1 75.3 78.9 114.2 133.0 103.8 44.7 61.7 84.1 89.3 35.9 80.4 66.5 64.4 87.3 87.6 104.2 70.9 50.5 144.5 78.2 38.1 44.0 181.6 147.6 92.8 97.7 87.6 15,776 458 14.0 155.7 93.6 113.8 98.4 97.4 114.3 104.5 123.5 96.6 83.6 103.4 107.3 97.3 136.6 155.2 101.7 116.5 93.9 85.3 75.6 100.0 86.5 89.8 79.9 82.8 102.0 105.1 99.2 103.9 102.3 Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita 141,968 25.3 59.1 27.3 45.6 71.3 59.8 111.7 55.4 38.2 29.2 79.9 57.0 32.2 51.0 24.4 61.0 48.7 44.5 55.6 40.1 83.2 91.0 64.9 33.1 39.7 89.8 96.3 49.1 56.7 44.2 79.6 91.3 68.3 68.3 63.3 75.0 90.9 71.4 47.2 60.4 93.5 112.3 88.7 98.2 117.5 63.2 67.8 62.9 78.6 71.4 107.9 103.3 101.3 108.0 100.7 43.5 60.0 80.3 36.5 75.7 96.8 55.2 46.7 46.3 36.8 116.9 105.1 102.7 111.6 101.6 149.8 171.3 151.5 153.5 124.9 71.9 89.4 63.6 131.1 46.4 58.9 120.0 72.8 46.6 50.7 82.8 103.6 112.0 99.1 113.0 170.5 71.6 86.7 92.2 35.9 38.5 10.0 42.1 22.7 35.7 60.5 41.0 68.1 65.0 115.7 106.9 87.3 94.2 97.8 86.0 88.2 90.8 54.6 112.2 92.7 137.5 247.6 240.8 1.8 38,024 79.4 412 458 and Residential Dependents Property per Capita Resident Pupil Municipal Misc.Rev Municipal Budget

Property Tax

Personal Income per Taxpayer

Percentage of Tax Base

School Surplus per

Index Rank

Municipality

Burden Index

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Resident School Pupils

as %

State Municipal Aid per Capita 168 44.0 81.0 142.9 89.3 141.1 135.1 76.8 115.5 172.0 75.6 61.9 57.1 203.0 40.5 166.1 50.6 73.2 68.5 73.2 85.7 67.9 55.4 85.1 124.4 68.5 76.2 70.8 63.7 59.5 69.0

State School Aid per Resident Pupil 6,047 167.3 131.8 266.7 123.0 114.1 131.0 24.1 83.7 255.1 167.6 53.5 107.4 313.8 131.4 67.9 132.1 59.1 105.9 64.8 125.2 44.9 39.9 92.4 292.8 154.0 61.2 42.8 96.9 80.9 113.4

State Tax Rebates per Capita 191 93.9 140.1 64.0 115.0 134.1 127.5 136.8 167.3 56.1 96.4 158.2 104.7 47.2 90.4 70.2 115.2 154.7 156.5 146.6 96.1 122.7 178.0 107.7 47.7 127.0 176.2 171.6 176.0 112.9 158.6

State Average

1 2 3 4 5

WOODLYNNE ROSELLE SALEM CITY WOODBURY HILLSIDE

4.97 4.80 4.40 4.30 4.21

6 7 8 9 10

LAWNSIDE WEST ORANGE LAUREL SPRINGS ORANGE LINDENWOLD

4.21 4.21 4.19 4.18 4.13

11 12 13 14 15

HIGH BRIDGE HALEDON EAST ORANGE PROSPECT PARK PENNS GROVE

4.13 4.10 4.10 4.07 4.04

16 17 18 19 20

NORTH PLAINFIELD STRATFORD SOMERDALE BARRINGTON GLASSBORO

4.01 3.97 3.96 3.95 3.94

21 22 23 24 25

RIDGEFIELD PARK BLOOMINGDALE NEWTON IRVINGTON WILLINGBORO

3.92 3.92 3.91 3.91 3.88

26 27 28 29 30

POHATCONG POMPTON LAKES MOUNT EPHRAIM WASHINGTON BOR. MAGNOLIA

3.87 3.87 3.86 3.85 3.85

18 Table 6 shows the relative 2008 level of the tax base in the 30 most property taxburdened municipalities, when measured as a percentage of the state average equalized valuation per capita $141,968. Low tax bases clearly are a major factor in the most burdened communities. Every one of these places except West Orange (#7) has a property tax base per capita below the state average and, except for Bloomingdale (#22) and Pompton Lakes (#27), more than 10% below. Determinant #2 - Low Level of Personal Income The amount of personal income of the communitys residents has a direct impact on the second component of the Property Tax Burden Index the percentage that property taxes take of their personal income. The personal income used here is the total personal income reported by New Jersey income taxpayers. This amount has been divided by the number of taxpayers plus their dependents, with the state average in 2008 being $38,024 per capita. Two factors in the 2004 report made the municipal figure artificially low in some cases. First, in that year the data did not include social security payments, so figures for senior citizen communities and other concentrations of the elderly were artificially low. This omission was corrected by 2008, and the data for these communities should be more accurate for this year. The second factor still is reflected in the data; this is that communities having large numbers of very low income persons, who are below the taxpaying threshold for the New Jersey income tax, will show less total personal income than actually exists in such places. However, the income missed by this approach probably is relatively small on a per capita basis. All data are from the State Department of the Treasury. Among the 30 most distressed municipalities, 26 have levels of personal income per taxpayer considerably below the state average, with three, High Bridge (#11) and Bloomingdale (#22), and Pompton Lakes (#27) being below, but nearer to, the average. Again, West Orange (#7) is the only high-burden place having an average personal income per taxpayer greater than the state average. Determinant #3 High Level of Residential Property The property tax burden on the residents of a municipality can be ameliorated by the presence of large amounts of commercial or industrial property that will carry a portion of the tax levy. Conversely, where a community is almost entirely residential, nearly the full load of property taxation must be borne by the residents. Determinant #3 measures the proportion of residential property 10 in the municipality, using the classifications of property applied by the local tax assessor each year when participating in the sales ratio program administered and reported by the State Division of Taxation. Data come from the website of the State Division of Local Government Services in the Department of Community Affairs. Statewide, the percentage of residential property for 2008 is 79.4%
10

Residential property used here includes properties classified as residential, apartment and farm residential, in contrast to commercial, industrial, and farm property (other than farm homesteads).

19

Of the 30 places with the highest Property Tax Burden Indexes, 21 have above-average proportions of residential property. In contrast, some municipalities that have relatively small property tax bases per capita and low average personal incomes, may be saved from even heavier property tax burdens by substantial amounts of non-residential property. Determinant #4 - Low Level of Other Miscellaneous Revenue The fourth financial resource determinant of property tax burden is the relative absence of non-property tax revenues at the local municipal level. Large amounts of non-property tax revenue can relieve local officials of the necessity for levying substantial property taxes. Examples include payments in lieu of taxes (pilots), license fees, municipal court fines, parking meter revenues, special tax revenues in some places, surplus, delinquent taxes, and a multitude of other sources of local government revenue. Determinant #4 has been measured by the level of municipal miscellaneous revenue shown in Column 14d of the county abstract of ratables, with State aid revenues being deducted. The resulting local miscellaneous revenue has been divided by the expanded population to obtain a per capita figure. The state average in 2008 is $412 dollars per capita 11. Below-average levels of local municipal miscellaneous revenue are common among the high property tax burden communities. Twenty-two of the 30 highest burden municipalities, including all four of the highest burden places, have less than the average amount of nonproperty-tax local revenue. Communities with large concentrations of residential property Woodlynne (#1), Laurel Springs (#8), Lindenwold (#10), Bloomingdale (#22), Willingboro (#25), and Pompton Lakes (#27) often have low levels of local municipal miscellaneous revenue, although this combination is not universal. Determinant #5 - Low Level of School Surplus 12 The final fiscal resource determinant examined here is the amount of the school districts general fund balance that was used in 2008-09 to help balance the school budget. In past years, many school districts were able to build up substantial surpluses that could be drawn upon to help stabilize the property tax rate from year to year. These surpluses have dwindled in recent years under pressure both from taxpayers and from the State Department of Education. Nevertheless, they still constitute an important resource that helps reduce the tax burden in some school districts. On average, across that state, such funds amount to $458 per resident pupil in 2008-09. However, they vary widely from municipality to municipality, reflecting sporadic use, Among the 30 most burdened municipalities, budgeted school surplus is below the state average in 19 places, with no discernible pattern among the communities.
11 12

Expanded population. In 2004, this Determinant also included school district miscellaneous revenue, amounting to about $67 per resident pupil statewide. Data on this item were not readily available for 2008, and it has been omitted from this report.

20 Data for budgeted school surplus have been derived from Indicator 20 in the 2010 Comparative Spending Guide issued by the New Jersey Department of Education. Summary of Financial Resource Determinants While the distribution of the five financial resource determinants varies from place to place, the lack of such resources remains a predominant reason for high property tax burden in most of the worst-off communities. Although only nine of the 30 most burdened municipalities are below average on every financial resource determinant, thirteen are below average on four resource determinants, and all of them except Pohatcong (#26) fall short on at least three of the five measures. Expenditures Three primary expenditure determinants of property tax burden have been evaluated in each municipality. These are the municipal budget per capita, the school costs per resident pupil, and the level of county taxes apportioned to the municipality. The results are shown in Table 6 as percentages of the statewide average figure. Determinant #6 - High Level of Municipal Budget The level of the municipal budget has an obvious impact on both the tax rate and the property tax as a percentage of personal income. Municipal budget data have been taken from the county abstracts of ratables, and consist of the tax levies for local municipal purposes (Col. 12CII(a)) and for municipal open space (Col. 12CII(b)), plus the total miscellaneous revenue anticipated (Col. 14(d)), minus all State municipal aid 13. The resulting budget figures have been divided by the estimated expanded 2008 resident population of each municipality to find Determinant #6. The state average municipal budget per capita in 2008 is $1,247 14. Eleven of the 30 most burdened municipalities have per capita municipal budgets above the state average. In several cases, they are the more urban places Orange (#9), East Orange (#13), and Irvington (#24), but some of the older suburbs also are included, such as Roselle (#2), West Orange (#7), Hillside (#5), Haledon (#12), and Ridgefield Park (#21). Less easily explainable are the high municipal budgets in Lawnside (#6), High Bridge (#11), and Pohatcong (#26). Determinant #7 - High Level of School Costs School expenditures also impact both the tax rate and the property tax as a percentage of local income. School costs used here are the sum of: (1) all State formula aid to school districts; (2) the budgeted general fund balance, or school surplus,
13 14

See below, p. 10 for a description of State municipal aid. Expanded population.

21

with both items as supplied for 2008-09 for the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book by the State Department of Education and consolidated on a municipal basis; and (3) the local district school tax levy (Col.12CI(a)); (4) the regional and consolidated school district tax levy (Col.12CI(b)); and (5) the school tax levy in the municipal budget (Col.12CI(c)); with all three from the 2008 county abstract of ratables. The term school costs is the equivalent of a school budget per pupil in school districts with K-12 fiscal responsibilities. In the constituent municipalities of a K-12 regional or a regional high school district, the per pupil cost is influenced by the apportionment of the regional tax levy among the municipalities. Finally, the total school cost figure has been divided by the total number of public school pupils from the municipality in all school districts involved. County vocational district expenditures and pupils have been ignored, since costs not included in the budgets of the individual school districts that send pupils to the vocational schools will be included in the county tax levy. The state average school cost per pupil in 2008-09 is $15,776. Thirteen municipalities out of the 30 most burdened have school costs per pupil above the state average on Determinant #7. Several of these places Salem City (#3), Orange (#9), East Orange (#13), and Irvington (#24) are Abbott school districts, where a high school budget per pupil has been mandated in recent years with compensating State aid to reduce the property tax. Non-Abbott municipalities in the top 30 tax-burden places with above average per-pupil school costs include Roselle (#2), Woodbury (#4), West Orange (#7), Lawnside (#6), Lindenwold (#10), High Bridge (#11), North Plainfield (#16), Bloomingdale (#22), and Willingboro (#25), although many of these places are barely above the state average. Determinant #8 - High Level of County Taxes Taxes for county purposes apportioned to the municipalities are identified as Determinant #8. Here the source of information again is the county abstract of ratables, and the data include the net county taxes less municipal state aid (Col. 12AV) 15, county library taxes (Col. 12B(a)), county health taxes (Col. 12B(b)), and county open space taxes (Col.12B(c)). Expanded population figures are used to calculate the per capita data. The average county tax levy in 2008 is $458 per capita 16. Only seven of the 30 most burdened places appear to have above-average county taxes. These include West Orange (#7) a municipality that is reasonably well-to-do in a county with a number of poorer communities, where the more affluent communities often carry much of the county tax load, three smaller
15

This particular state aid to municipalities is almost extinct. Only Walpack received such aid in 2008, for a total of $1,523. 16 Expanded population.

22 places in Camden County, where county taxes, in general, are high Lawnside (#6), Laurel Springs (#8), Barrington (#19), and three places Bloomingdale (#22) and Pohatcong (#26), and Pompton Lakes (#27) for which there is no ready explanation. Summary of Expenditure Determinants High expenditure levels occur much less frequently than low resource levels among the most burdened communities. Some aspect of high expenditures can be blamed, at least partially, for the property tax burden in most of the 30 highest-burden communities. However, in ten places Woodlynne (#1), Prospect Park (#14), Penns Grove (#15), Stratford (#17), Somerdale (#18), Glassboro (#20), Newton (#23), Mount Ephraim (#28),Washington Borough (#29), and Magnolia (#30) the property tax burden is substantial even though every expenditure determinant is below the state average. All of these places have such low levels of resources that they are particularly burdened. Demographics Determinant #9 High Level of Public School Enrollment One demographic determinant of relative property tax burden has been examined the percentage of a municipalitys population that is enrolled in the public schools. More children in school mean more expenditures. The percentage of a community enrolled in the public schools is affected by at least four factors: the age make-up of the community, the reputation of the public schools, the availability of non-public schools, either religious or secular, and an income level of the population that would facilitate private school enrollment. Data on resident enrollment was supplied by the New Jersey Department of Education. Some communities are relatively young, with large numbers of school-age children in proportion to adults. Woodlynne (#1), Prospect Park (#14), and Penns Grove (#15), are the three places with the highest percentages of their population enrolled in public schools. All three have experienced large in-migrations of Hispanic residents with young children. Haledon (#12) also comes close to fitting this pattern, although the overall population growth has been minimal. Municipalities that have large public school enrollments probably due of the reputation of their schools Montgomery (#293), Mountain Lakes (#374), and Millburn (#486), for example are not included in Table 6 because their high property tax resources often permit them to sponsor such schools with moderate property tax burdens. Areas having a strong parochial school system and tradition, as in Hudson County, have low public school enrollments as a proportion of total population, and also do not appear in Table 6.

23 Finally, a low personal income of the residents may prevent them from participating in private school education. This is probably a factor in the most burdened communities, such as Woodlynne (#1), Salem City (#3), Prospect Park (#14), and Penns Grove (#15). State Aid State aid is provided to local communities in two ways by grants to municipalities and school districts, and by direct tax rebate payments to qualified taxpayers. Determinant #10 Low Level of State Aid to Municipalities In 2008-09, State aid to municipalities amounts to $1.611 billion, broken down as follows: 2008 Adjusted CMPTRA...$ 631,110,087 Total Energy Receipts Tax Distribution 08. 906,247,396 Garden State Trust CY/08SFY 09... 9,827,687 Watershed Moratorium Offset. 2,217,648 Pinelands Property Tax Stabilization.... 1,800,000 Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act_____108,679 Total Adjusted Formula Aid $1,611,333,497

Aid is apportioned to municipalities by a variety of formulas. When aggregated, in 200809 it comes to an average of $168 per capita 17. Data on State aid to municipalities comes from the website of the Division of Local Government Services in the Department of Community Affairs. Low per capita levels of State municipal aid are common among the 30 most heavilyburdened municipalities in 2008. Twenty-two of the 30 places shown in Table 5 receive belowaverage amounts of such assistance per capita. The more urban places Orange (#9), East Orange (#13), and Irvington (#24) do reasonably well, as do some smaller urban places. Salem City (#3) and Hillside (#5) receive more aid than the average, as do a handful of other places Lawnside (#6), Laurel Springs (#8), and Penns Grove (#15) -- but most heavily-burdened places receive much less. Determinant #11 Low Level of State Aid to Schools The earlier report on property tax determinants in 2004 focused on a year in the midst of a freeze of State aid for schools that lasted from 2002-03 to 2007-08 for most school districts. State aid to schools totaling $6.348 billion, was distributed in 2004-05 through a multitude of formulas, most of them included in the Comprehensive Education Improvement and Financing
17

Expanded population.

24 Act of 1996 (CEIFA). In addition, special aid for some of the poorest districts was provided in the State budget and grew from year to year to meet the requirements of the Abbott v. Burke court decision. In January, 2008, the Governor signed into law the School Funding Reform Act of 2008 , which substantially changed the distribution of State aid to local school districts. All districts were brought within a single package of state aid formulas, although some provisions of the law were designed to hold the Abbott districts harmless for the immediate future. Total State aid for schools in 2008-09 rose to $8.289 billion, or $6,047 per resident pupil. Data for 2008-09 were provided by the New Jersey Department of Education.
18

In contrast to the municipal aid formulas, which give little weight to the financial resources of a community, major portions of the State school aid formulas in 2008-09 do recognize the level of both the property tax base of the school district and the personal income of community residents. The result is that only thirteen of the 30 most burdened municipalities receive below-average amounts of State school aid per pupil. The four Abbott communities among the 30 most burdened Salem City (#3), Orange (#9), East Orange (#13) and Irvington (#24) receive far above the average State aid per pupil in 2008-09. While State school aid plays a significant role in relieving the property tax burden in many low-wealth communities, its effect fades quickly for those places that have more substantial local financial resources. Comparatively well-to-do places like West Orange (#7), receive relatively limited property tax relief from State aid to their schools. The impact of aid to the Abbott districts on the state average is so great that a large number of other municipalities fall below the average level. Even more modest places, such as Laurel Springs (#8), High Bridge (#11), Stratford (#17), Barrington (#19), Ridgefield Park (#21), Bloomingdale (#22), Newton (#23), Pohatcong (#26), Pompton Lakes (#27), Mount Ephraim (#28), and Washington Borough (#29) receive less than the State average of $6,047 per pupil. Determinant #12 Low Level of State Tax Rebates Tax rebates, paid by the State to individual local taxpayers, have been a staple of New Jersey government since 1977 19. While relatively stable for many years, during the early 2000s tax rebates fluctuated considerably. In 2008, a total of $1.826 billion - $191 per capita - was distributed under the tax rebate program. The total rebates received in each municipality have been divided by the expanded population of each municipality to find a per capita figure. Data on tax rebates are from the New Jersey Department of Treasury for use in the New Jersey Legislative District Data Book. Most of the heavily burdened municipalities receive some significant benefit from the tax rebates in 2008. Exceptions are Salem City (#3), Orange (#9), East Orange (#13), Penns Grove (#15), and Irvington (#24) and, to a lesser extent, Woodlynne (#1), Lindenwold (#10), Prospect
18 19

C.260, L.2007. Tax rebates paid directly to taxpayers were replaced in 2011 by tax credits applied to the quarterly tax bill of each qualified taxpayer.

25 Park (#14) and Glassboro (#20). Most of the places that have below-average tax rebates also have less than the state average percentage of owner-occupied housing 20, probably reflecting some bias in the tax rebate laws favoring home ownership over tenancy. Summary of State Aid Determinants None of the 30 most property tax-burdened municipalities in the state receive belowaverage assistance on every form of State aid. In this sense, the State aid programs tend to supplement each other. State aid for schools, of course, dwarfs the other aid programs, distributing more than twice as much money as municipal aid and tax rebates combined. Moreover, school aid is distributed through a dynamic 21 formula that recognizes both current property values and personal income. Without such a school aid formula, the situation of the most property-tax-burdened communities of the state would be far more desperate. Summary of Property Tax Burden Determinants An examination of the distribution of significant determinants among the 30 mostburdened municipalities in Table 6 reveals a heavy concentration of deficiencies in the financial resources area. Many fewer of these most-burdened places appear in the table because of high expenditures. State aid --municipal, school, and rebate -- fails to compensate adequately for the lack of local financial resources in the most heavily-burdened municipalities of the state, resulting in wide variations in burden. Property Taxes in the Urban Municipalities The low 2008 Property Tax Burden Index rankings for many urban municipalities, especially Newark (#476) and Jersey City (#524) may come as some surprise, given the common understanding that property taxes are excessive in New Jerseys urban areas (See Table 7). Property tax rates really were high in these places until the late 1990s. Since that time, however, tax rates in the states two largest cities and in some of the other urban communities have dropped sharply. By 2005, the equalized net property tax rate in Jersey City was below the state average, and in 2007 the same thing happened in Newark (See Chart 1) 22. Both cities remained below the state average net property tax rate through 2009. Since that time, property tax rates have rebounded in the two cities, but they are still far below their peaks in 1997-98 and only minimally above the state average 23. Property taxes as a percentage of personal income in

20 21

New Jersey Legislative District Data Book, 2009, Table A. A dynamic formula is recalculated every year with current enrollment, equalized valuation and personal income data. 22 New Jersey Legislative District Data Book, years 1989 through 2013. 23From this point on this paper will use the Supreme Courts identification of 28 urban school districts to define urban municipalities. Originally, the Court identified only 28 places. However, subsequent judicial and legislative action soon resulted in the addition of Plainfield and Neptune Township to the 28, and Salem City joined to group in more recent years, for the total of 31 urban municipalities.

26 Table 7. Property Tax Burden Index Urban Municipalities, 2008 Equalized Net Tax Rate 2.55 2.39 2.49 2.50 1.88 2.02 2.41 2.86 1.84 1.73 1.77 1.93 1.80 2.10 1.57 1.69 1.75 1.25 1.82 1.96 1.51 1.79 1.43 2.40 1.37 1.81 1.70 1.46 1.40 1.33 1.23 Net Tax as % of Personal Income 6.80 7.32 6.73 6.11 6.37 5.83 4.78 4.25 5.89 6.26 5.77 5.10 5.34 4.50 5.87 5.40 5.18 7.14 4.90 4.46 5.66 4.76 5.83 3.06 5.20 3.63 3.72 4.22 3.79 2.83 3.07

Index Rank 3 9 13 24 90 101 111 120 145 151 189 213 227 245 259 268 271 274 279 287 299 301 315 377 391 421 435 446 476 524 525

Municipality Salem City Orange East Orange Irvington Plainfield Passaic City Trenton Bridgeton Perth Amboy New Brunswick Paterson Union City Pleasantville Gloucester City Keansburg Elizabeth Harrison Town Long Branch Burlington City Millville Garfield Phillipsburg Asbury Park Camden Neptune Twp. West New York Vineland Pemberton Twp. Newark Jersey City Hoboken

County Salem Essex Essex Essex Union Passaic Mercer Cumberland Middlesex Middlesex Passaic Hudson Atlantic Camden Monmouth Union Hudson Monmouth Burlington Cumberland Bergen Warren Monmouth Camden Monmouth Hudson Cumberland Burlington Essex Hudson Hudson

Tax Burden Index 4.40 4.18 4.10 3.90 3.47 3.43 3.40 3.35 3.29 3.29 3.20 3.13 3.10 3.07 3.04 3.02 3.01 3.00 2.98 2.96 2.93 2.92 2.89 2.71 2.67 2.56 2.52 2.48 2.30 1.94 1.94

27

Chart 1: New Jersey Equalized Net Property Tax Rates: 1989-2012; Newark, Jersey City and State Average 4.50

4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 20 11

State Average

Newark

Jersey City

28 Newark and Jersey City, first calculated for 2003 24, have consistently since that time been below the state average. Why the change? The major reason is the Abbott v . Burke school funding case. While the first substantive decision in the case occurred in 1990, the remedies ordered immediately required only increased expenditures in the urban districts, with some recognition by the Court that this could cause fiscal burdens for both the State and for local communities and that a phasein might be appropriate. In fact, the state did increase funding for the schools modestly in 1990 with the Quality Education Act (QEA) 25 and then with the Comprehensive Education Improvement and Financing Act in 1996 26. Urban property tax rates for county, municipal and school purposes remained high or even increased during the early 1990s. In 1997, however, the Supreme Court in its Abbott IV decision ordered that the State provide increased funding to the twenty-eight districts identifiedas Abbott districts that will assure that each of those districts has the ability to spend an amount per pupil in the school year 1997-98 that is equivalent to the average per-pupil expenditure in the DFG I & J districts 27 The Supreme Court order was interpreted initially to require that all additional expenditures must be provided by the State. This interpretation opened up a new era in New Jersey urban property taxation. In 1997-98, all but three of the 31 Abbott school districts 28 were able to adopt budgets with substantially the same or smaller school general fund tax levies as in the prior year, while the State provided additional state aid to make up the difference. This practice was continued for a number of years, with most Abbott school districts approving budgets each year having little or no annual increase in tax levy. Newark, for example, levied a school property tax of $80,000,000 every year from 1996-97 through 2005-06, while its property tax base (equalized valuation) grew by 150%. With even a small annual increase in the amount of taxable property, a fixed tax levy can only result in a lower tax rate. Substantially the same thing happened in Jersey City, and the impact on taxes was accentuated by a building boom; from 1998 through 2008, Jersey City issued building permits for 15,545 new residential housing. While Newark and Jersey City show a drastic change in property tax burden, similar, though usually less dramatic, impacts can be seen in all of the Abbott communities 29. During the years from 1998-99 through 2005-06 most Abbott school districts were able to keep their school general fund tax levies no higher than in 1997-98, while their State aid and equalized valuations increased. Only in 2006-07 did the State begin to require a majority of the districts to raise more local taxes. School taxes in the urban districts bottomed-out about that time, and total tax rates

24 25

New Jersey Legislative District Data Book, 2006. L.1990, c. 52. 26 L.1996,c.138. 27 Abbott v. Burke, IV, 149 N.J. 145. 28 Salem City did not gain designation as an Abbott school district until 2004-05, but is included here as an urban community. 29 Although the number of municipalities considered urban and, therefore, eligible for Abbott funding has fluctuated at times, all 31 that were ever considered in the category are included here as Abbott municipalities.

29 in these places are again on the rise but still, in most places, below their peaks in the early 1990s. The Relative Importance of Determinants Preceding sections describe the determinants of relative property tax burden among the 30 most heavily burdened places on a frequency basis. However, the relative importance of each determinant in the final Property Tax Burden Index of individual municipalities is not always apparent. Property Tax Burden Profiles The data base compiled to identify the significant determinants of property tax burden can be used to prepare an analysis of the determinants in any municipality. Table 8 shows the entries on an Excel spreadsheet that uses all 12 determinants to calculate a Property Tax Burden Index for any individual community. By changing each determinant for that municipality to the state average figure, one by one, while holding all other determinants constant, a municipalitys Property Tax Burden Index can be recalculated to identify how much of a change can be attributed to that determinant. The accompanying flow chart reflects Table 8, and shows the way in which each determinant affects the calculation of the equalized net tax rate and the property tax as a percent of personal income. Calculation of Property Tax Burden Profiles Appendix 2 to this paper shows the value of each property tax burden determinant in 2008 for every municipality in the state 30. These can be inserted, one-by-one, in the Excel program outlined in Table 8, while holding all others constant, to prepare a Property Tax Burden Profile evaluating the effect of each determinant on that municipality.

30

Except six; see FN5.

30

Table 8. Spread Sheet Layout for Evaluation of the Impact of Each Property Tax Burden Determinant in a Municipality for 2008 A Name of Municipality B County C Estimated 2008 Total Population D 2010 Census Proportion of Occupied Units E Expanded 2008 Total Population F Determinant 1 Equalized Valuation per Capita (Expanded) G Equalized Valuation H Determinant 2 Personal Income per Taxpayer and Dependents I Number of Taxpayers and Dependents J Total Personal Income of Taxpayers and Dependents K Determinant 6 Municipal Budget per Capita (Expanded) L Municipal Budget M Determinant 4 Local Municipal Miscellaneous Revenue Per Capita (Expanded) N Local Municipal Miscellaneous Revenue O Determinant 10 State Municipal Aid per Capita (Expanded) P State Municipal Aid Q Municipal Tax Levy R Determinant 9 Resident Pupils as % of Expanded Population S Determinant 7 School Costs per Resident Pupil Input Input (C/D) Input (F * E) Input Input (H * I) Input (E * K) Input (E * M) Input (E * O) (L N P) Input Input

31 T Total School Costs U Determinant 5 Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil V Total Budgeted School Surplus W - Determinant 11 State School Aid per Resident Pupil X Total State School Aid Y School Tax Levy Z Determinant 8 County Tax Levy per Capita (Expanded) AA County Tax Levy AB Determinant 12 State Tax Rebates per Capita (Expanded) AC Total State Tax Rebates AD Net Tax Levy AE Equalized Net Tax Rate AF Determinant 3 Percentage of Tax Base Residential AG Total Tax Levy AH Estimated Tax Paid by Residential Property AI Estimated Tax Paid by Municipal Residents AJ Estimated Net Tax Paid by Municipal Residents AK Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income AL Property Tax Burden Index (E * R *S)/100 Input (E * R * U)/100 Input (E * R * W)/100 (T V X) Input (E * Z) Input (E * AB) (Q + Y + AA AC) (AD/G) * 100 Input (Q + Y + AA) (AF * AG)/100 (AH * D) (AI AC) (AJ/J)* 100 SQRT(AE*AK)

32
Census Population % Occupied Housing Units Resident Pupils as % of Expanded Pop.

Expanded Population

Resident Pupils

Mun. Budget per Capita

Mun. Misc. Revenue per Capita

State Mun. Aid per Capita

County Tax per Capita

School Costs Per Pupil

School Surplus Per Pupil

State Aid per Pupil

Municipal Budget

Municipal Misc. Revenue

State Municipal Aid

Total School Costs

Total School Surplus

Total State Aid

Municipal Tax Levy

County Tax Levy

School Tax Levy

Total Tax Levy

Equalized Valuation Per Capita

Tax Rebates Per Capita

Tax Rebates

% Tax Base Res.

Tax Paid on Res. Prop.

Equalized Valuation

Net Tax Levy

% Occupied Housing Units

Tax Paid by Residents

Equalized Net Tax Rate

Net Tax Paid by Residents

Personal Income Per Capita of Residents

Personal Income of Residents

Prop.Tax % of Income

33

Patterns of Determinants in the Most Burdened Places No single determinant explains the variation in property taxes within the state. Property Tax Burden Profiles have been calculated for the 30 most heavily burdened municipalities. Six different property tax burden determinants show up as the leading factor in the tax burden for at least one of these places (See Table 9), and an example is shown for each pattern. For most of these communities, the principal cause of tax burden is the lack of an adequate tax base. Seventeen of the 30 municipalities, including the six most impacted places, have a low equalized valuation per capita as the single most important cause of their tax burden. Woodlynne (#1), with the highest 2008 Property Tax Burden Index in the state, is used as an example. Five of the 30 most burdened communities have a relatively low level of State school aid as their leading cause of property tax burden. Here, West Orange (#7) is shown as an example. Three municipalities in the group indicate low personal income as the principal reason for their high property tax burden. Haledon (#12) is an example of this group. Three other places, all with Abbott school districts, have high school costs per pupil as the leading cause of their property tax burden. However, they also receive substantial amounts of State school aid that reduces their tax burden. Salem City (#3) is offered as an example. A single municipality among the top 30 has a high municipal budget per capita as the most important determinant. The example shown is Hillside (#5) Finally, one of the most burdened places has high county taxes per capita as its most important property tax determinant. This is the Township of Pohatcong (#26) in Warren County.

34

Table 9. Leading Property Tax Burden Determinants: 30 Most Heavily Burdened New Jersey Municipalities, 2008 Number Municipalities Woodlynne Roselle Woodbury Laurel Springs Orange Lindenwold Penns Grove North Plainfield Stratford Somerdale Barrington Glassboro Newton Willingboro Mt.Ephraim Washinghton Bor. Magnolia West Orange High Bridge Ridgefield Park Bloomingdale Pompton Lakes Lawnside Haledon Prospect Park Salem City East Orange Irvington Hillside Pohatcong Property Tax Burden Profile Shown

Low Equalized Valuation Per Capita

17

Woodlynne

Low State School Aid per Pupil Low Personal Income Per Taxpayer and Dependents High School Costs Per Pupil High Municipal Budget Per Capita High County Tax levy Per Capita

West Orange

Haledon

3 1 1

Salem City Hillside Pohatcong

35

Property Tax Burden Profile Woodlynne (Property Tax Burden Rank #1) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index Determinants Changed To State Average

4.97 Revised Property Tax Burden Index Percentage Change in Index

Determinants Causing High Tax Burden Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 2.50 - 49.7% Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 2.97 - 28.8 High School Enrollment % 4.01 - 19.3 Low State Municipal Aid per Capita 4.54 - 8.6 High % Residential Property 4.54 - 7.4 Low Other Municipal Revenue per Capita 4.71 - 5.3 Low State Tax Rebates per Capita 4.91 - 1.2 Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil 4.93 - 0.7 ___________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden Low County Taxes per Capita Low Municipal Budget per Capita Low School Costs per Pupil High State School Aid per Pupil Woodlynne Woodlynne is a tiny residential borough (0.2 sq.mi.) on the border of the City of Camden. It was incorporated in 1901 from a portion of Haddon Township. The Borough has very limited financial resources, both of taxable property and of personal income. A changing population in recent decades from white to African-American to Hispanic has brought with it a very high public school enrollment as a percentage of the population, placing a special burden on community financial resources. Relatively little non-property-tax revenue is raised in this heavily residential community. State municipal aid helps only slightly to alleviate the tax burden Both school costs per pupil and municipal budgets per capita are well below the state average, and the schools receive substantial amounts of State aid per pupil. The apportionment of county taxes based on equalized tax ratables is of considerable assistance to the Boroughs taxpayers. 6.06 6.47 7.44 8.98 + 22.1% + 30.2 + 50.0 + 80.8

36

Property Tax Burden Profile West Orange (Property Tax Burden Rank #7) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index: Determinants Changed to State Average 4.21 Revised Property Tax Burden Index Percentage Change in Index

Determinants Causing High Tax Burden Low State School Aid per Pupil 3.48 17.3% High School Costs per Pupil 3.81 9.5 High Municipal Budget per Capita 3.88 7.8 High County Taxes per Capita 4.04 4.0 Low Other Municipal.Revenue per Capita 4.08 3.1 High School Enrollment % 4.09 2.9 High % Residential Property 4.13 1.9 Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil 4.14 1.7 Low State Municipal Aid per Capita 4.17 1.0 ______________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High State Tax Rebates per Capita High Equalized Valuation per Capita High Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit West Orange West Orange is a large suburban community in Essex County, combining older sections and newer developments. School factors play the largest role in the West Orange property tax burden, combining a below-average level of State school aid with above-average school costs per pupil. A high municipal budget per capita contributes to the tax burden. County taxes per capita, based on the substantial property tax base, are substantial. There is relatively little local municipal miscellaneous revenue. The high percentage of residential property, the below-average State municipal aid per capita, and low amounts of budgeted school surplus also contribute to the burden, though to a smaller degree. Tax rebates per capita are slightly above average, but the main factors that moderate the tax burden in West Orange are the substantial property tax base and a considerable personal income per taxpayer unit. 4.29 4.45 4.61 + + + 1.9 % 5.7 8.7

37

Property Tax Burden Profile Haledon (Property Tax Burden Rank #12) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index: Determinants Changed to State Average 4.10 Revised Property Tax Burden Index Percentage Change in Index

Determinants Causing High Tax Burden Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 3.04 - 25.9% Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 3.09 - 24.6 High Municipal Budget per Capita 3.83 - 6.6 Low State Municipal Aid per Capita 3.93 - 4.1 High School Enrollment % 3.94 - 3.9 High % Residential Property 3.98 - 2.9 Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil 4.03 - 1.7 ______________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High State Tax Rebates per Capita Low County Taxes per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low School Costs per Pupil 4.12 4.21 4.26 4.79 4.91 + 0.5 + 2.7 + 3.9 + 16.8 + 19.8

Haledon Haledon is a small suburban community on the border of Paterson in Passaic County. Its financial resources are well below the state average, with low personal income per taxpayer unit being the most important tax burden determinant. Equalized valuation per capita is almost as low. Several other determinants contribute to the burden of the property tax, with a municipal budget per capita somewhat higher than average being the most important. The two determinants that help to keep the property taxes from being more excessive are particularly low school costs per pupil and a substantial amount of local municipal miscellaneous revenue.

38

Salem City (Property Tax Burden Index Rank # 3) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index

4.40

______________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage To State Average Property Tax Change Burden Index in Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High School Costs per Pupil Low Equalized Valuation per Capita Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit Low State Tax Rebates per Capita High School Enrollment % Low Other Municipal Revenue per Capita High % Residential Property 1.97 2.30 2.82 4.00 4.22 4.25 4.27 - 55.2% - 47.7 - 35.9 - 9.1 - 4.1 - 3.4 - 3.0

___________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High State Municipal Aid per Capita Low Municipal Budget per Capita High Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil Low County Taxes per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil Salem City Salem City, the urban center of rural Salem County was not one of the original Abbott communities, but was added to that list in 2004-05. As would be expected, Salems leading property tax burden determinant is the high school costs per pupil mandated by the Abbott decision, but this is balanced by very substantial State school aid. Beyond this, Salem is a very poor community, and the low taxable property value and low personal income per capita and per taxpayer dominate its Property Tax Burden Index. A low level of State tax rebates per capita contributes to the tax burden. Aside from high Abbott-based State school aid, other factors alleviating Salems property tax burden are a low municipal budget, a substantial use of surplus in the school budget, and a relatively low levy for county services. 4.70 4.85 4.85 4.88 11.10 + 6.8 + 10.2 + 10.2 + 10.9 +152.3

39

Hillside (Property Tax Burden Rank #5) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index Determinants Changed to State Average Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High Municipal Budget per Capita Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit Low Equalized Valuation per Capita Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil 4.21 Revised Property Tax Burden Index 3.08 3.40 3.56 4.10 Percentage Change in Index - 26.8 % - 19.2 - 15.4 - 2.6

______________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High % Residential Property High School Enrollment % High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita High State Municipal Aid per Capita High State Tax Rebates per Capita Low County Taxes per Capita Low School Costs per Pupil High State School Aid per Pupil Hillside Hillside is a medium-sized suburb in Union County, bordering the cities of Newark and Elizabeth. It is the only community among the 30 most heavily property-taxed municipalities where the leading cause of the burden is the high municipal budget. Contributing significantly to the tax burden are low levels of personal income and equalized valuation per capita. A surprising number of different determinants have a favorable impact on Hillsides tax burden, but they are not substantial enough to offset the effect of the high municipal budget and the low financial resources of the community.

4.26 4.27 4.30 4.33 4.35 4.39 4.39 4.42

+ + + + + + + +

1.2 1.4 2.1 2.9 3.3 4.3 4.3 5.0

40

Property Tax Burden Profile Pohatcong (Property Tax Burden Rank #26) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index Determinants Changed to State Average 3.87 Revised Property Tax Burden Index Percentage Change in Index

Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High County Taxes per Capita 3.36 - 13.3 % Low State School Aid per Pupil 3.41 - 11.9 High Municipal Budget per Capita 3.45 - 10.9 Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 3.46 - 10.6 Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 3.67 - 5.2 Low State Municipal Aid per Capita 3.82 - 1.3 High School Enrollment % 3.87 ______________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low School Costs per Pupil High State Tax Rebates per Capita Low % Residential Property 3.90 4.01 4.07 4.13 4.22 + + + + + 0.8 3.6 5.2 6.7 9.0

Pohatcong Pohatcong is a rural township in Warren County. No single determinant stands out as a dominant factor in the townships Property Tax Burden Profile. High county costs per capita have the largest impact, with low State school aid, a relatively high municipal budget per capita, and fairly low personal income as contributing factors. Several determinants provide some property tax relief, including a low percentage of residential property, high State tax rebates per capita, and comparatively low school costs per pupil.

41

Patterns of Determinants in the Urban Communities In the 31 urban municipalities there also is no single determinant that dominates the analysis of property tax burden. As would be expected, since the Abbott classification has been used to define the urban municipalities, high school costs per pupil stand out as the most important determinant in 16 places. Since these costs are balanced through court order with high levels of State school aid, it is useful to break this group of communities down by their second most important determinants. When this is done (See Table 10), ten of the 16 places have a low tax base equalized valuation per capita as the second most important property tax determinant. Vineland (#435) is shown as an example. Five places where high school costs are the leading determinant have low personal income as the secondary determinant; New Brunswick (#151) is an example. Finally, East Orange (#13) is the single example among the urban communities where high school costs are followed by a high municipal budget per capita as the second most important property tax burden determinant. After high school costs, the most important determinant of property tax burden among the urban municipalities is a high municipal budget per capita. Seven of the 31 places follow this pattern, with Newark (#476) offered as the example. Next in frequency among the urban places is a low equalized valuation per capita, which is found in four places; Bridgeton (#120) demonstrates this pattern. Last, in four other communities, illustrated by Elizabeth (#268), low personal income per taxpayer and dependents is the most important determinant of property tax burden.

42 Table 10: Leading Property Tax Burden Determinants: 31 New Jersey Urban Municipalities; 2008 Leading Property Tax Burden Determinant Secondary Property Tax Burden Determinant Property Tax Burden Profile Shown

Number

Number

Municipalities Burlington City Pemberton Twp. Gloucester City Vineland Irvington Union City Keansburg Salem City Plainfield Phillipsburg Pleasantville New Brunswick Perth Amboy Long Branch Paterson East Orange Camden Newark Harrison Hoboken Jersey City Trenton Asbury Park Bridgeton Millville Orange West New York Garfield Neptune Twp. Passaic City Elizabeth

Low Equalized Valuation Per Capita High School Costs 16 Low Personal Income Per Capita High Municipal Budget Per Capita High Municipal Budget Per Capita

10

Vineland

New Brunswick

East Orange

Newark

Low Equalized Valuation Per Capita Low Personal Income Per Capita

4 4

Bridgeton

Elizabeth

43 Property Tax Burden Profile Vineland (Property Tax Burden Rank #435) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index 2.52

____________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage to State Average Property Tax Change in Index Burden Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High School Costs per Pupil 1.44 - 42.6% Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 1.73 - 31.1 Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 1.92 - 23.5 High County Taxes per Capita 2.15 - 14.3 Low State Municipal Aid per Capita 2.42 - 3.6 High School Enrollment % 2.45 - 2.4 Low State Tax Rebates per Capita 2.49 - 0.8 ____________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil Low % Residential Property High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low Municipal Budget per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil Vineland One of the largest municipalities in South Jersey, Vineland shows the typical Abbott pattern, with high school costs per pupil leading the determinants causing high property tax burden, and high State aid for schools alleviating that burden. Beyond these extremes, Vinelands tax burden can be attributed primarily to a low level of resources a low equalized valuation per capita and limited personal income per taxpayer unit. County taxes also are a significant factor in Vinelands tax burden. Aside from State school aid, a relatively low municipal budget per capita is significant in limiting Vinelands property tax burden. 2.55 2.62 2.70 3.12 6.03 + 1.6 + 4.4 + 7.6 + 24.3 +140.2

44 Property Tax Burden Profile New Brunswick (Property Tax Burden Rank #151) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index 3.29

____________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage to State Average Property Tax Change Burden Index in Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High School Costs per Pupil 1.43 - 56.5% Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 2.13 - 35.3 Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 2.21 - 32.8 Low State Tax Rebates per Capita 2.71 - 17.6 High Municipal Budget per Capita 3.12 - 5.2 Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil 3.25 - 1.2 _________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden Low School Enrollment % High State Municipal Aid per Capita High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low % Residential Property Low County Taxes per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil 3.38 3.66 3.69 3.84 4.10 7.34 + 2.7 + 11.2 + 12.2 + 16.7 + 24.6 +123.1

New Brunswick New Brunswicks Property Tax Burden Profile is typical of most urban districts which, by the convention used here, include all of the Abbott school districts. Heavy school costs per pupil constitute the largest property tax generator while, conversely, State school aid is the most important factor that reduces the tax burden. When these two determinants are set aside, deficiencies in resources low personal income and limited equalized valuation per capita are the two leading causes of property tax burden in the city. A fairly low level of State tax rebates per capita adds to the tax burden of the citys residents. The citys tax burden is lightened by a relatively low county tax per capita, a below-average proportion of residential property, and relatively substantial amounts of municipal revenue from non-property tax sources. State municipal aid is of some assistance, but the remaining determinants have only minor impacts.

45

Property Tax Burden Profile East Orange (Property Tax Burden Rank #13) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index Determinants Changed to State Average Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High School Costs per Pupil High Municipal Budget per Capita Low Equalized Valuation per Capita Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit Low State Tax Rebates per Capita Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil High % Residential Property Determinants Reducing Tax Burden Low School Enrollment % High State Municipal Aid per Capita High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low County Taxes per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil East Orange As an Abbott community, the large Essex County suburb of East Orange demonstrates the typical tax burden pattern of high school costs and high State school aid. Beyond this, the citys tax burden is most affected by its high municipal budget per capita and its lack of local financial resourcesequalized valuation and personal income. A low level of State tax rebates per capita contributes to the citys tax burden. On the other hand, the low county tax levy, due to the citys limited tax base, is of considerable assistance to East Orange, and above-average local non-property-tax municipal revenues and substantial State municipal aid also help the city. 4.09 Revised Property Tax Burden Index 1.41 2.18 2.32 2.80 3.65 4.01 4.03 4.12 4.73 4.87 5.17 10.53 Percentage Change in Index 65.6% 46.8 43.4 31.8 11.0 2.2 1.7

+ 0.5 + 15.4 + 18.8 + 26.1 +156.8

46 Property Tax Burden Profile Newark (Property Tax Burden Rank #476) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index 2.30

______________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage To State Average Property Tax Change Burden Index in Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden High Municipal Budget per Capita 0.00 - 100.0% High School Costs per Pupil 0.53 - 77.1 Low Equalized Valuation per Capita 1.47 - 36.4 Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 1.47 - 36.4 State Tax Rebates per Capita 1.67 - 27.8 ______________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden Low School Enrollment % High Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil High State Municipal Aid per Capita Low % Residential Property LowCounty Taxes per Capita High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil Newark Newark, the states largest city, has high per capita budgets for municipal purposes. If the city budgeted at the statewide average level and all other factors remained the same, there would be virtually no local property tax. Other determinants that increase the tax burden are the high costs of the schools, the low level of equalized valuation and personal income and limited State tax rebates per capita. On the other hand, if Newarks state aid for schools were reduced to the state average amount per pupil, and all other determinants were kept constant, the city would have, by far, the highest property tax burden in the state. In actual fact, the availability of large amounts of State school aid in 2008 permitted the city to have both a high expenditure level per pupil and a high per capita municipal budget, while maintaining a relatively low property tax burden. Other factors that help to keep Newarks property taxes low include substantial amounts of non-property tax municipal revenue, the payment of a favorable share of county costs, a relatively low percentage of residential property, and significant amounts of State municipal aid. 2.31 2.34 2.00 2.86 3.04 5.05 6.95 0 + 1.3 + 21.2 + 23.8 + 31.6 + 118.6 + 200.5

47 Property Tax Burden Profile Bridgeton (Property Tax Burden Rank #120) Actual 2008 Property Tax Burden Index 3.36

____________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage To State Average Property Tax Change Burden Index in Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden Equalized Valuation per Capita 1.30 - 61.3% Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit 1.86 - 44.6 School Costs per Pupil 2.31 - 31.3 State Tax Rebates per Capita 2.56 - 23.8 Other Municipal Revenue per Capita 2.68 - 20.2 School Enrollment % 3.23 - 3.9 ____________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil State Municipal Aid % Residential Property County Taxes per Capita Municipal Budget per Capita State School Aid per Pupil Bridgeton Bridgeton is a very poor city, with much of its property tax burden attributable to the low equalized valuation per capita and limited personal income per taxpayer. High school costs per student also increase the citys property tax burden, but this is balanced by large amounts of State school aid per pupil. An unusually low receipt of State tax rebates contributes to the citys property tax burden, as does a lack of non-property tax municipal revenue. Bridgetons tax burden is alleviated by substantial amounts of State aid to the schools. A limited municipal budget per capita helps keep the tax burden down, as does a low level of county taxes per capita. 3.37 3.52 3.55 4.94 6.07 13.24 + 0.3 + 4.8 + 5.7 + 47.0 + 80.7 + 294.0

48 Property Tax Burden Profile Elizabeth (Property Tax Burden Rank #268) Actual 2008 property Tax Burden Index 3.02

___________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Changed Revised Percentage to State Average Property Tax Change Burden Index in Index Determinants Causing High Tax Burden Low Personal Income per Taxpayer Unit Low Equalized Valuation per Capita High School Costs per Pupil High Municipal Budget per Capita Low Tax Rebates per Capita Low Budgeted School Surplus per Pupil High School Enrollment % 2.00 2.09 2.26 2.34 2.68 2.87 2.99 33.8% 30.8 25.2 22.5 11.3 5.0 1.0

___________________________________________________________________________ Determinants Reducing Tax Burden High State Municipal Aid per Capita Low Percentage Residential Property High Other Municipal Revenue per Capita Low County Taxes per Capita High State School Aid per Pupil Elizabeth Elizabeth, the county seat and largest city in Union County, is an example of a municipality where low personal income and low property values are the two leading determinants of property tax burden, even out-ranking high Abbott school costs per pupil in importance. The city also has a high municipal budget per capita and receives a relatively modest amount of State tax rebates per capita. More favorable determinants are the high per pupil amount of State school aid, the low county taxes per capita, a substantial amount of non-property-tax municipal revenue, and the comparatively low proportion of residential property. 3.24 3.34 3.35 3.63 6.75 + 7.3 + 10.6 + 10.9 + 20.2 +123.5

49

Conclusion While property taxes may be high throughout New Jersey, they are most burdensome in many of New Jerseys small suburban municipalities, which often have low levels of taxable property, and whose residents have limited personal incomes. Only rarely is the property tax burden in such places due to high levels of municipal or school spending. Public officials in these communities must choose between providing only minimal services or imposing a high property tax. There is little that they can do within the context of their own municipalities and school districts; the solution must come from outside, through assistance from other sources. In recent years, court-directed increases in State aid to schools in the states more urban communities have helped significantly to lower the property tax burden in those places. This also has happened to a lesser extent in non-urban communities. State municipal aid, however, has been much less important and has been distributed with less consideration of a communitys own resources. State tax rebates have been of some help to individuals, but are not targeted to less affluent communities, and they have been distributed spasmodically. One of the less-recognized determinants of property tax burden that is critical for many of the most-burdened places is the apportionment of county taxes on the basis of tax ratables. Without this policy, the property tax burden in the highest-tax communities would be far worse. A shift in responsibilities from municipalities to the county level would help the most burdened places provided that the present method of apportioning county costs is continued. The property tax in New Jersey is far from the monolithic monster often portrayed. It is complicated and diverse, having different impacts for different reasons throughout the states many municipalities. In the aggregate, the property tax may be a huge mechanism for financing the states local governments, but in its application to individual communities the property tax varies tremendously. A factor that causes high taxes in one place may be the salvation of another municipality. Too often, attempts to solve the property tax problem try to apply sweeping restrictions without identifying the different components of the problem,

50

APPENDIX

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 5.11 7.76 6.89 5.15 3.83 5.79 5.44 4.92 3.50 3.46 5.04 4.31 4.42 5.24 5.72 5.18 4.63 5.57 5.34 4.75 5.93 7.87 2.87 4.55 0.90 6.99 6.91 4.04 6.05 6.15 4.89 4.67 7.22 3.15 4.30 6.56 6.60 4.57 2.95 6.30 7.69 4.69 3.15 5.66 5.77 6.37 6.04 6.11 6.30 6.34 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 292 71 420 237 473 191 126 346 523 519 356 399 403 205 539 493 423 248 227 447 252 161 534 362 560 47 80 487 335 233 428 359 70 520 495 153 139 341 547 119 129 372 531 299 142 95 251 164 128 178 Municipality ABSECON ATLANTIC CITY BRIGANTINE BUENA BUENA VISTA CORBIN CITY EGG HARBOR CITY EGG HARBOR TWP. ESTELL MANOR FOLSOM GALLOWAY HAMILTON HAMMONTON LINWOOD LONGPORT MARGATE MULLICA NORTHFIELD PLEASANTVILLE PORT REPUBLIC SOMERS POINT VENTNOR WEYMOUTH ALLENDALE ALPINE BERGENFIELD BOGOTA CARLSTADT CLIFFSIDE PARK CLOSTER CRESSKILL DEMAREST DUMONT EAST RUTHERFORD EDGEWATER ELMWOOD PARK EMERSON ENGLEWOOD ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS FAIR LAWN FAIRVIEW FORT LEE FRANKLIN LAKES GARFIELD GLEN ROCK HACKENSACK HARRINGTON PARK HASBROUCK HTS. HAWORTH HILLSDALE County Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Tax Rate 1.70 1.66 0.96 1.85 1.39 1.75 2.06 1.61 1.09 1.17 1.53 1.62 1.57 1.91 0.55 0.95 1.41 1.68 1.80 1.29 1.57 1.36 1.21 1.68 0.48 1.97 1.81 1.26 1.33 1.55 1.32 1.64 1.79 1.28 1.14 1.64 1.66 1.74 0.71 1.80 1.44 1.59 1.14 1.51 1.88 1.87 1.55 1.75 1.77 1.65

Property Tax Burden Index 2.95 3.58 2.57 3.09 2.31 3.19 3.34 2.82 1.95 2.01 2.77 2.64 2.64 3.16 1.77 2.22 2.55 3.06 3.10 2.47 3.05 3.27 1.86 2.77 0.66 3.72 3.53 2.26 2.84 3.09 2.54 2.77 3.59 2.01 2.21 3.28 3.31 2.82 1.45 3.37 3.33 2.73 1.89 2.93 3.30 3.45 3.06 3.26 3.34 3.23

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 3.70 6.58 6.52 7.08 5.02 3.99 6.16 6.04 3.82 4.47 6.36 5.72 7.22 5.51 6.40 4.09 5.31 7.74 4.85 4.68 5.21 5.99 7.07 4.42 6.73 5.59 5.65 2.72 6.21 5.63 1.89 5.60 6.01 4.52 4.03 7.04 5.19 6.08 5.87 3.87 5.57 3.87 4.76 5.87 5.39 5.01 4.90 5.29 4.66 5.26 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 497 152 100 41 350 505 170 181 461 419 148 203 125 352 155 477 249 218 455 398 306 404 21 385 92 253 400 550 144 286 557 267 102 347 479 91 360 275 266 458 282 489 450 45 107 262 279 256 364 238 Municipality HO-HO-KUS LEONIA LITTLE FERRY LODI LYNDHURST MAHWAH MAYWOOD MIDLAND PARK MONTVALE MOONACHIE NEW MILFORD NORTH ARLINGTON NORTHVALE NORWOOD OAKLAND OLD TAPPAN ORADELL PALISADES PARK PARAMUS PARK RIDGE RAMSEY RIDGEFIELD RIDGEFIELD PARK RIDGEWOOD RIVER EDGE RIVERVALE ROCHELLE PARK ROCKLEIGH RUTHERFORD SADDLE BROOK SADDLE RIVER SOUTH HACKENSACK TEANECK TENAFLY UPPER SADDLE RIVER WALDWICK WALLINGTON WASHINGTON TWP. WESTWOOD WOODCLIFF LAKE WOOD-RIDGE WYCKOFF BASS RIVER BEVERLY CITY BORDENTOWN CITY BORDENTOWN TWP. BURLINGTON CITY BURLINGTON TWP. CHESTERFIELD CINNAMINSON County Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Bergen Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Tax Rate 1.32 1.64 1.81 1.97 1.55 1.08 1.71 1.71 1.50 1.49 1.70 1.75 1.56 1.40 1.68 1.30 1.76 1.26 1.22 1.50 1.63 1.16 2.18 1.63 1.78 1.67 1.23 0.74 1.75 1.55 0.69 1.63 1.95 1.75 1.30 1.70 1.47 1.48 1.56 1.49 1.59 1.31 1.26 2.36 2.15 1.83 1.82 1.75 1.63 1.81

Property Tax Burden Index 2.21 3.28 3.43 3.73 2.79 2.08 3.25 3.22 2.39 2.58 3.29 3.17 3.35 2.78 3.28 2.30 3.06 3.12 2.43 2.65 2.91 2.63 3.93 2.69 3.46 3.05 2.64 1.42 3.29 2.96 1.14 3.02 3.43 2.81 2.29 3.46 2.77 3.00 3.02 2.40 2.98 2.25 2.45 3.72 3.40 3.03 2.98 3.05 2.76 3.09

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 5.10 5.61 5.54 4.85 5.15 5.13 4.50 4.32 4.94 5.62 5.18 6.18 4.98 3.86 4.85 4.30 4.23 3.18 5.29 3.18 4.22 5.46 5.28 4.74 5.17 5.69 5.38 4.16 4.06 6.55 5.95 1.49 5.32 6.20 5.69 5.36 5.32 3.87 3.06 5.05 4.68 5.55 5.03 5.87 4.50 5.27 5.60 5.88 5.31 4.35 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 257 133 157 336 206 118 367 439 318 288 230 53 197 395 243 384 457 532 169 521 446 174 94 323 353 198 254 512 432 25 303 556 122 19 61 193 79 382 377 138 132 54 154 43 245 113 62 72 98 123 Municipality DELANCO DELRAN EASTAMPTON EDGEWATER PARK EVESHAM FIELDSBORO FLORENCE HAINESPORT LUMBERTON MANSFIELD MAPLE SHADE MEDFORD LAKES MEDFORD TWP. MOORESTOWN MOUNT HOLLY MOUNT LAUREL NEW HANOVER NORTH HANOVER PALMYRA PEMBERTON BOR. PEMBERTON TWP. RIVERSIDE RIVERTON SHAMONG SOUTHAMPTON SPRINGFIELD TABERNACLE WASHINGTON TWP. WESTAMPTON WILLINGBORO WOODLAND WRIGHTSTOWN AUDUBON BARRINGTON BELLMAWR BERLIN BOR. BERLIN TWP. BROOKLAWN CAMDEN CITY CHERRY HILL CHESILHURST CLEMENTON COLLINGSWOOD GIBBSBORO GLOUCESTER CITY GLOUCESTER TWP. HADDON HEIGHTS HADDON TWP. HADDONFIELD HI-NELLA County Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Burlington Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Tax Rate 1.82 1.97 1.94 1.66 1.94 2.22 1.68 1.44 1.68 1.56 1.85 2.20 2.03 1.82 1.95 1.69 1.37 1.12 1.99 1.26 1.46 1.92 2.26 1.73 1.49 1.77 1.73 1.01 1.57 2.30 1.43 0.95 2.12 2.52 2.33 1.89 2.35 1.89 2.40 2.17 2.36 2.43 2.14 2.37 2.10 2.18 2.36 2.18 2.23 2.59

Property Tax Burden Index 3.04 3.32 3.28 2.84 3.16 3.37 2.75 2.50 2.88 2.96 3.10 3.69 3.18 2.65 3.07 2.69 2.41 1.89 3.25 2.00 2.48 3.24 3.45 2.87 2.78 3.18 3.05 2.05 2.52 3.88 2.92 1.19 3.36 3.95 3.64 3.18 3.54 2.70 2.71 3.31 3.33 3.67 3.28 3.73 3.07 3.39 3.64 3.58 3.44 3.35

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 6.58 7.02 6.17 5.87 5.31 5.86 5.78 4.89 5.68 5.75 5.99 6.04 4.83 5.77 5.49 7.93 3.46 6.57 4.21 3.92 5.20 4.36 4.45 4.94 4.18 4.99 3.40 6.13 6.59 9.95 4.28 2.35 4.25 3.85 4.96 3.90 3.99 5.57 5.30 4.61 4.37 4.46 3.30 4.19 5.27 3.72 6.72 6.64 5.62 4.86 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 8 6 10 30 60 28 59 176 34 55 18 17 140 89 130 1 558 508 554 526 488 501 530 540 548 551 533 467 445 32 528 546 120 430 121 492 444 51 136 331 406 287 491 443 185 435 48 40 192 411 Municipality LAUREL SPRINGS LAWNSIDE LINDENWOLD MAGNOLIA MERCHANTVILLE MOUNT EPHRAIM OAKLYN PENNSAUKEN PINE HILL RUNNEMEDE SOMERDALE STRATFORD VOORHEES WATERFORD WINSLOW WOODLYNNE AVALON CAPE MAY CITY CAPE MAY POINT DENNIS LOWER TOWNSHIP MIDDLE TOWNSHIP NORTH WILDWOOD OCEAN CITY SEA ISLE CITY STONE HARBOR UPPER TOWNSHIP WEST CAPE MAY WEST WILDWOOD WILDWOOD WILDWOOD CREST WOODBINE BRIDGETON COMMERCIAL DEERFIELD DOWNE FAIRFIELD TWP. GREENWICH HOPEWELL LAWRENCE MAURICE RIVER MILLVILLE SHILOH STOW CREEK UPPER DEERFIELD VINELAND BELLEVILLE BLOOMFIELD CALDWELL CEDAR GROVE County Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cape May Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Essex Essex Essex Essex Tax Rate 2.66 2.52 2.77 2.52 2.50 2.54 2.30 2.14 2.55 2.33 2.62 2.61 2.26 2.09 2.02 3.11 0.36 0.65 0.38 0.95 0.98 1.07 0.81 0.63 0.50 0.39 1.05 0.90 0.93 1.46 0.85 0.95 2.66 1.66 2.28 1.26 1.55 2.45 2.07 1.76 1.57 1.96 1.49 1.48 1.94 1.70 2.04 2.11 1.80 1.41

Property Tax Burden Index 4.19 4.21 4.13 3.85 3.64 3.86 3.64 3.24 3.80 3.66 3.96 3.97 3.30 3.47 3.33 4.97 1.11 2.06 1.27 1.93 2.25 2.16 1.90 1.77 1.44 1.39 1.89 2.35 2.48 3.81 1.90 1.50 3.36 2.53 3.36 2.22 2.49 3.69 3.32 2.84 2.62 2.96 2.22 2.49 3.20 2.52 3.71 3.74 3.18 2.62

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 6.73 2.85 4.33 5.53 6.11 4.06 6.10 3.45 5.27 3.79 4.10 6.37 7.32 3.55 5.65 5.73 5.07 7.13 5.25 4.59 4.99 5.45 4.91 6.09 4.51 4.79 3.64 5.03 5.69 5.98 5.14 5.69 5.55 5.06 4.94 5.39 6.21 4.35 5.82 6.48 5.78 5.81 5.61 5.74 6.55 5.18 3.07 2.83 6.56 5.16 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 13 510 456 66 24 413 50 486 106 476 429 76 9 498 57 204 337 7 112 313 219 158 289 20 328 264 440 199 103 35 194 56 82 209 109 131 42 317 31 4 52 81 114 234 83 271 525 524 39 290 Municipality EAST ORANGE ESSEX FELLS FAIRFIELD TWP. GLEN RIDGE IRVINGTON LIVINGSTON MAPLEWOOD MILLBURN MONTCLAIR NEWARK NORTH CALDWELL NUTLEY ORANGE ROSELAND SOUTH ORANGE VERONA WEST CALDWELL WEST ORANGE CLAYTON DEPTFORD EAST GREENWICH ELK FRANKLIN TWP. GLASSBORO GREENWICH HARRISON TWP. LOGAN MANTUA MONROE NATIONAL PARK NEWFIELD PAULSBORO PITMAN SOUTH HARRISON SWEDESBORO WASHINGTON TWP. WENONAH WEST DEPTFORD WESTVILLE WOODBURY WOODBURY HTS. WOOLWICH BAYONNE EAST NEWARK GUTTENBERG HARRISON TOWN HOBOKEN JERSEY CITY KEARNY NORTH BERGEN County Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Essex Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Gloucester Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Tax Rate 2.49 1.48 1.35 2.35 2.50 1.68 2.24 1.48 2.20 1.40 1.57 1.99 2.39 1.36 2.36 1.75 1.58 2.48 2.19 1.82 1.95 1.97 1.78 2.54 1.80 1.91 1.71 2.01 2.06 2.38 1.97 2.35 2.24 1.95 2.34 2.06 2.24 1.91 2.53 2.85 2.35 2.14 2.05 1.66 1.89 1.75 1.23 1.33 2.14 1.69

Property Tax Burden Index 4.09 2.06 2.42 3.60 3.90 2.61 3.69 2.26 3.41 2.30 2.53 3.56 4.18 2.20 3.65 3.16 2.83 4.21 3.39 2.89 3.12 3.27 2.96 3.94 2.85 3.03 2.49 3.18 3.42 3.78 3.18 3.65 3.53 3.14 3.40 3.33 3.73 2.88 3.84 4.30 3.69 3.53 3.39 3.09 3.52 3.01 1.94 1.94 3.75 2.96

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 3.72 5.10 4.47 3.63 5.58 6.26 5.08 6.56 6.19 5.05 5.23 5.06 5.63 5.38 5.79 5.07 6.74 7.07 5.45 5.30 4.49 4.72 5.75 6.53 5.25 5.68 5.36 4.36 5.42 5.95 5.35 5.41 4.94 6.00 6.09 4.95 4.23 5.25 5.31 3.84 5.17 4.78 4.70 5.68 3.62 6.59 5.67 4.65 5.60 5.73 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 482 213 371 421 247 67 281 37 64 261 294 355 97 220 167 277 44 11 343 348 452 401 224 69 221 216 316 424 242 272 110 159 295 33 84 232 366 186 302 433 179 111 225 217 469 75 163 349 258 96 Municipality SECAUCUS UNION CITY WEEHAWKEN WEST NEW YORK ALEXANDRIA BETHLEHEM BLOOMSBURY CALIFON CLINTON TOWN CLINTON TOWNSHIP DELAWARE EAST AMWELL FLEMINGTON FRANKLIN FRENCHTOWN GLEN GARDNER HAMPTON BOROUGH HIGH BRIDGE HOLLAND KINGWOOD LAMBERTVILLE LEBANON BOROUGH LEBANON TOWNSHIP MILFORD RARITAN TWP. READINGTON STOCKTON TEWKSBURY UNION TWP. WEST AMWELL EAST WINDSOR EWING HAMILTON HIGHTSTOWN HOPEWELL BOR. HOPEWELL TWP. LAWRENCE PENNINGTON PRINCETON BOR. PRINCETON TWP ROBBINSVILLE TRENTON WEST WINDSOR CARTERET CRANBURY DUNELLEN EAST BRUNSWICK EDISON HELMETTA HIGHLAND PARK County Hudson Hudson Hudson Hudson Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Hunterdon Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Tax Rate 1.39 1.93 1.67 1.81 1.68 2.07 1.75 2.15 2.12 1.82 1.66 1.52 2.11 1.81 1.83 1.76 2.06 2.41 1.46 1.48 1.33 1.47 1.68 1.98 1.85 1.72 1.55 1.49 1.74 1.52 2.16 1.98 1.75 2.42 2.03 1.93 1.79 1.95 1.61 1.66 2.02 2.41 2.05 1.72 1.50 1.93 1.88 1.69 1.65 2.08

Property Tax Burden Index 2.27 3.13 2.73 2.56 3.06 3.60 2.98 3.76 3.62 3.03 2.94 2.78 3.44 3.12 3.26 2.99 3.73 4.13 2.82 2.80 2.44 2.64 3.11 3.59 3.12 3.13 2.89 2.55 3.07 3.01 3.40 3.27 2.94 3.81 3.52 3.09 2.75 3.20 2.92 2.52 3.23 3.40 3.11 3.13 2.33 3.56 3.27 2.80 3.04 3.45

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 6.01 5.16 5.96 5.50 4.75 6.26 5.22 4.79 5.89 4.91 4.11 4.95 4.47 4.75 4.95 5.17 6.02 4.76 5.59 5.32 5.80 5.83 5.35 5.19 5.35 6.02 4.76 3.24 4.43 4.82 4.61 4.28 4.04 6.27 4.94 5.04 6.50 4.07 5.47 4.21 5.87 5.60 6.16 4.44 5.20 7.14 4.94 5.08 4.64 5.43 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 146 276 162 300 441 151 190 381 145 327 361 380 449 319 358 389 147 386 200 538 143 315 354 513 484 431 468 514 549 402 414 434 462 187 383 304 160 451 263 522 259 210 388 418 527 274 368 494 375 141 Municipality JAMESBURG METUCHEN MIDDLESEX BOR. MILLTOWN MONROE NEW BRUNSWICK NORTH BRUNSWICK OLD BRIDGE PERTH AMBOY PISCATAWAY PLAINSBORO SAYREVILLE SOUTH AMBOY SOUTH BRUNSWICK SOUTH PLAINFIELD SOUTH RIVER SPOTSWOOD WOODBRIDGE ABERDEEN ALLENHURST ALLENTOWN ASBURY PARK ATL. HIGHLANDS AVON-BY-THE-SEA BELMAR BRADLEY BEACH BRIELLE COLTS NECK DEAL EATONTOWN ENGLISHTOWN FAIR HAVEN FARMINGDALE FREEHOLD BOR. FREEHOLD TWP. HAZLET HIGHLANDS HOLMDEL HOWELL INTERLAKEN KEANSBURG KEYPORT LAKE COMO LITTLE SILVER LOCH ARBOUR LONG BRANCH MANALAPAN MANASQUAN MARLBORO MATAWAN County Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Middlesex Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Tax Rate 1.80 1.73 1.79 1.55 1.31 1.73 1.95 1.53 1.84 1.66 1.86 1.48 1.35 1.74 1.55 1.38 1.80 1.52 1.80 0.59 1.88 1.43 1.44 0.81 0.96 1.06 1.16 1.29 0.45 1.44 1.48 1.48 1.40 1.63 1.48 1.69 1.65 1.47 1.68 0.93 1.57 1.76 1.17 1.51 0.71 1.26 1.53 0.96 1.59 2.01

Property Tax Burden Index 3.29 2.99 3.27 2.92 2.49 3.29 3.19 2.71 3.29 2.86 2.77 2.71 2.46 2.88 2.77 2.67 3.29 2.69 3.17 1.78 3.30 2.89 2.78 2.05 2.27 2.52 2.35 2.04 1.42 2.64 2.61 2.52 2.38 3.20 2.70 2.92 3.27 2.45 3.03 1.98 3.04 3.14 2.68 2.59 1.92 3.00 2.75 2.21 2.71 3.30

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 4.48 5.02 3.60 4.67 5.20 5.00 4.45 5.08 6.68 2.84 4.78 4.11 5.29 5.17 3.20 4.91 4.62 5.76 5.26 4.93 6.03 6.22 4.94 5.56 3.66 3.20 4.69 4.50 4.93 5.54 4.32 3.73 3.95 2.03 5.50 4.72 6.01 5.28 3.55 4.08 3.52 6.52 4.60 4.63 3.76 4.61 5.37 5.53 4.29 6.21 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 442 338 535 396 391 412 454 379 78 541 496 544 333 278 552 481 422 231 324 426 270 150 410 235 499 507 325 376 363 312 485 515 503 555 283 332 212 296 500 460 483 172 407 416 480 378 310 127 374 115 Municipality MIDDLETOWN MILLSTONE TWP. MONMOUTH BEACH NEPTUNE CITY NEPTUNE TOWNSHIP OCEAN TOWNSHIP OCEANPORT RED BANK ROOSEVELT RUMSON SEA BRIGHT SEA GIRT SHREWSBURY BOR. SHREWSBURY TWP. SPRING LAKE SPRING LAKE HTS TINTON FALLS UNION BEACH UPPER FREEHOLD WALL WEST LONG BRANCH BOONTON TOWN BOONTON TOWNSHIP BUTLER CHATHAM BOR. CHATHAM TWI.A441P CHESTER BOR. CHESTER TWP. DENVILLE DOVER TOWN EAST HANOVER FLORHAM PARK HANOVER HARDING JEFFERSON KINNELON LINCOLN PARK LONG HILL MADISON MENDHAM BOROUGH MENDHAM TOWNSHIP MINE HILL MONTVILLE MORRIS PLAINS MORRIS TOWNSHIP MORRISTOWN MOUNT ARLINGTON MOUNT OLIVE MOUNTAIN LAKES NETCONG County Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Monmouth Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Morris Tax Rate 1.39 1.60 0.95 1.50 1.37 1.37 1.33 1.45 1.88 1.09 1.02 0.66 1.53 1.72 0.58 1.06 1.41 1.66 1.56 1.32 1.51 1.74 1.39 1.72 1.29 1.33 1.74 1.64 1.55 1.51 1.19 1.12 1.17 0.74 1.61 1.71 1.64 1.63 1.32 1.41 1.47 1.62 1.49 1.46 1.39 1.60 1.56 2.02 1.72 1.85

Property Tax Burden Index 2.49 2.83 1.85 2.65 2.67 2.62 2.44 2.71 3.55 1.76 2.21 1.65 2.84 2.99 1.37 2.28 2.56 3.09 2.86 2.55 3.02 3.29 2.62 3.09 2.18 2.06 2.86 2.71 2.76 2.89 2.27 2.04 2.15 1.22 2.98 2.84 3.14 2.93 2.17 2.40 2.27 3.24 2.62 2.60 2.29 2.71 2.89 3.34 2.72 3.39

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 4.67 5.50 4.62 4.47 5.40 6.28 5.76 4.78 5.45 5.92 5.10 5.85 6.02 5.50 4.18 5.38 5.18 4.09 6.20 6.27 4.98 4.66 4.42 7.24 4.85 5.50 4.84 4.04 5.13 8.20 4.99 4.66 4.37 5.66 5.79 7.65 6.42 5.78 4.97 5.74 6.07 4.24 5.98 7.33 6.16 7.73 6.49 6.16 5.99 5.83 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 373 339 345 463 255 88 201 393 223 175 536 284 529 517 490 464 437 466 509 405 408 471 438 168 542 392 537 511 545 74 459 470 465 409 478 273 427 518 417 365 506 502 305 22 117 12 116 183 260 101 Municipality County Tax Rate 1.59 1.45 1.72 1.27 1.72 1.92 1.75 1.48 1.78 1.77 0.65 1.50 0.60 0.75 1.21 1.04 1.21 1.35 0.68 1.10 1.38 1.15 1.41 1.46 0.60 1.29 0.67 1.04 0.45 1.56 1.16 1.15 1.28 1.21 0.91 1.18 1.01 0.71 1.36 1.32 0.71 1.09 1.43 2.10 1.85 2.17 1.77 1.67 1.54 2.02

Property Tax Burden Index 2.72 2.83 2.82 2.38 3.05 3.48 3.17 2.65 3.11 3.24 1.82 2.96 1.90 2.04 2.25 2.37 2.51 2.35 2.06 2.63 2.62 2.32 2.50 3.25 1.71 2.66 1.81 2.05 1.53 3.57 2.40 2.32 2.36 2.62 2.30 3.00 2.54 2.03 2.60 2.76 2.07 2.15 2.92 3.92 3.37 4.10 3.39 3.21 3.03 3.43

PAR.-TROY HILLS Morris PEQUANNOCK Morris RANDOLPH Morris RIVERDALE Morris ROCKAWAY BOR. Morris ROCKAWAY TWP. Morris ROXBURY Morris VICTORY GARDENS Morris WASHINGTON TWP. Morris WHARTON Morris BARNEGAT LIGHT Ocean BARNEGAT TWP. Ocean BAY HEAD Ocean BEACH HAVEN Ocean BEACHWOOD Ocean BERKELEY TWP. Ocean BRICK Ocean EAGLESWOOD Ocean HARVEY CEDARS Ocean ISLAND HEIGHTS Ocean JACKSON Ocean LACEY Ocean LAKEHURST Ocean LAKEWOOD Ocean LAVALLETTE Ocean LITTLE EGG HARBOR Ocean LONG BEACH Ocean MANCHESTER Ocean MANTOLOKING Ocean OCEAN GATE Ocean OCEAN TWP. Ocean PINE BEACH Ocean PLUMSTED Ocean POINT PLEASANT Ocean POINT PLEASANT BCH Ocean SEASIDE HEIGHTS Ocean SEASIDE PARK Ocean SHIP BOTTOM Ocean SOUTH TOMS RIVER Ocean STAFFORD Ocean SURF CITY Ocean TOMS RIVER TWP. Ocean TUCKERTON Ocean BLOOMINGDALE Passaic CLIFTON Passaic HALEDON Passaic HAWTHORNE Passaic LITTLE FALLS Passaic NORTH HALEDON Passaic PASSAIC CITY Passaic

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 5.77 7.24 7.73 6.64 5.29 6.71 5.87 6.85 6.01 4.94 4.70 4.85 4.98 1.42 3.69 4.62 5.91 5.20 4.13 4.73 4.41 6.80 4.90 5.26 2.79 3.64 3.34 6.92 4.77 4.57 1.85 5.08 5.51 5.03 6.86 5.71 4.88 7.20 4.02 5.13 5.21 5.75 5.93 3.60 3.81 5.12 5.64 5.06 5.83 5.37 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 188 27 14 58 334 36 171 49 195 236 208 207 280 559 357 182 15 99 344 211 226 3 321 135 543 474 504 65 330 394 553 322 215 311 87 240 293 16 448 307 370 86 68 472 453 329 149 340 104 326 Municipality County Tax Rate 1.77 2.07 2.15 2.00 1.52 2.11 1.79 2.00 1.68 1.93 2.11 2.05 1.79 0.62 2.08 2.23 2.76 2.27 1.92 2.08 2.18 2.85 1.68 2.09 1.01 1.46 1.35 1.88 1.70 1.54 0.90 1.62 1.78 1.66 1.77 1.66 1.78 2.23 1.51 1.64 1.43 2.12 2.17 1.49 1.56 1.59 1.91 1.58 2.01 1.52

Property Tax Burden Index 3.20 3.87 4.08 3.65 2.84 3.77 3.24 3.71 3.18 3.09 3.15 3.15 2.98 0.93 2.77 3.21 4.04 3.44 2.82 3.14 3.10 4.40 2.87 3.32 1.67 2.31 2.13 3.61 2.85 2.65 1.29 2.87 3.13 2.89 3.48 3.08 2.95 4.01 2.47 2.90 2.73 3.49 3.59 2.32 2.44 2.85 3.29 2.83 3.42 2.86

PATERSON Passaic POMPTON LAKES Passaic PROSPECT PARK Passaic RINGWOOD Passaic TOTOWA Passaic WANAQUE Passaic WAYNE Passaic WEST MILFORD Passaic WOODLAND PARK Passaic ALLOWAY Salem CARNEYS POINT Salem ELMER Salem ELSINBORO Salem LWR. ALLOWAYS CRk. Salem MANNINGTON Salem OLDMANS Salem PENNS GROVE Salem PENNSVILLE Salem PILESGROVE Salem PITTSGROVE Salem QUINTON Salem SALEM CITY Salem UPPER PITTSGROVE Salem WOODSTOWN Salem BEDMINSTER Somerset BERNARDS TWP. Somerset BERNARDSVILLE Somerset BOUND BROOK Somerset BRANCHBURG Somerset BRIDGEWATER Somerset FAR HILLS Somerset FRANKLIN TWP. Somerset GREEN BROOK Somerset HILLSBOROUGH Somerset MANVILLE Somerset MILLSTONE BOR. Somerset MONTGOMERY Somerset NORTH PLAINFIELD Somerset PEAPACK-GLAD. Somerset RARITAN BOROUGH Somerset ROCKY HILL Somerset SOMERVILLE Somerset SOUTH BOUND BROOK Somerset WARREN TOWNSHIP Somerset WATCHUNG Somerset ANDOVER BOROUGH Sussex ANDOVER TOWNSHIP Sussex BRANCHVILLE Sussex BYRAM Sussex FRANKFORD Sussex

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 5.27 5.62 5.46 5.80 4.93 5.43 5.48 6.26 5.00 6.80 5.82 4.95 5.59 6.43 5.12 5.10 5.43 5.88 4.45 5.88 5.21 5.40 6.18 5.95 7.50 5.53 6.39 4.36 5.00 6.37 5.77 8.65 6.73 5.18 5.36 3.20 5.75 4.04 4.76 5.70 5.41 5.76 6.55 5.07 4.98 6.01 5.60 4.84 7.25 5.55 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 180 228 173 177 342 309 265 202 387 23 105 415 184 63 320 222 229 246 397 250 298 268 124 156 5 351 93 475 291 90 189 2 46 239 214 516 165 436 390 85 166 308 38 297 314 73 241 369 77 269 Municipality FRANKLIN BOROUGH FREDON GREEN HAMBURG HAMPTON TOWNSHIP HARDYSTON HOPATCONG LAFAYETTE MONTAGUE NEWTON OGDENSBURG SANDYSTON SPARTA STANHOPE STILLWATER SUSSEX BOROUGH VERNON WANTAGE BERKELEY HEIGHTS CLARK CRANFORD ELIZABETH FANWOOD GARWOOD HILLSIDE KENILWORTH LINDEN MOUNTAINSIDE NEW PROVIDENCE PLAINFIELD RAHWAY ROSELLE ROSELLE PARK SCOTCH PLAINS SPRINGFIELD SUMMIT UNION TOWNSHIP WESTFIELD ALLAMUCHY ALPHA BELVIDERE BLAIRSTOWN FRANKLIN FRELINGHUYSEN GREENWICH HACKETTSTOWN HARDWICK HARMONY HOPE INDEPENDENCE County Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Sussex Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Tax Rate 1.97 1.71 1.93 1.81 1.61 1.54 1.67 1.60 1.44 2.25 2.00 1.37 1.83 2.05 1.62 1.90 1.77 1.59 1.57 1.59 1.65 1.69 1.82 1.81 2.37 1.40 1.87 1.22 1.74 1.88 1.76 2.66 2.06 1.83 1.83 1.30 1.85 1.56 1.50 2.16 1.96 1.46 2.15 1.69 1.67 2.12 1.69 1.55 1.74 1.64

Property Tax Burden Index 3.22 3.10 3.24 3.24 2.82 2.90 3.02 3.17 2.68 3.91 3.41 2.61 3.20 3.63 2.87 3.11 3.10 3.06 2.65 3.06 2.93 3.02 3.35 3.28 4.21 2.78 3.46 2.31 2.95 3.47 3.19 4.80 3.72 3.08 3.13 2.04 3.26 2.51 2.67 3.51 3.26 2.90 3.75 2.93 2.89 3.57 3.08 2.74 3.55 3.02

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix Table 1. Property Tax Burden Index; All New Jersey Municipalities, 2008*
2008 2008 Estimated Net Tax as % of Resident Personal Income 5.42 6.20 5.00 5.67 5.72 4.76 6.59 6.38 5.77 4.94 2008

Equalized Net Index Rank 244 108 285 196 134 301 26 29 137 425 Municipality KNOWLTON LIBERTY LOPATCONG MANSFIELD OXFORD PHILLIPSBURG POHATCONG WASHINGTON BOR. WASHINGTON TWP. WHITE County Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Tax Rate 1.74 1.87 1.76 1.78 1.92 1.79 2.28 2.33 1.90 1.31

Property Tax Burden Index 3.07 3.40 2.96 3.18 3.32 2.92 3.87 3.85 3.32 2.55

*Except Teterboro, Audubon Park, Pine Valley, Tavistock, Walpack, Winfield.

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.95 287 1,046 483 218 213 337 199 356 332 275 15,413 13,769 16,745 1,418 1,814 1,266 409 273 707 442 224 220 190 86.8 88.2 90.1 28,149 32,250 36,874 59,946 77,903 268,589 135,690 185,453 0.897 0.952 7,353 29,112 5,804 30,521 3.33 2.73 13,540 36,275 0.972 0.940 0.948 0.973 0.942 0.919 260,880 131,088 184,112 176,336 550,682 170,304 109,222 165,271 91,674 32,111 30,035 60,171 25,573 41,045 65,701 100,211 39,351 20,169 54,520 88.7 25.7 93.9 88.8 90.9 95.0 94.9 34.9 76.6 78.8 86.5 77.1 69.4 85.2 74.0 82.3 330 792 168 168 637 350 290 316 387 136 1,013 456 380 283 338 440 315 211 195 586 361 405 864 743 529 128 448 224 272 897 396 1,195 73 147 1,071 105 143 77 316 809 1,577 1,247 991 919 1,114 599 1,719 2,012 1,179 909 3,120 1,244 1,539 1,661 1,427 1,033 1,771 2,002 1,228 1,349 1,859 2,152 1,420 1,031 1,610 14,033 16,983 22,653 14,569 11,955 20,730 18,036 14,792 15,940 13,377 15,692 24,168 15,347 14,477 21,648 13,772 14,910 14,072 17,634 13,753 19,146 18,976 12,939 14,002 21,101 22,488 15,043 12,944 13,777 288 302 305 424 1,396 544 266 387 170 344 335 399 166 485 1,413 230 206 685 271 467 519 493 242 333 493 242 333 319 998 316 169 299 3.7 19.6 16.6 15.4 14.7 18.6 16.8 24.6 14.4 17.0 16.4 19.7 1.7 3.2 15.2 20.1 19.4 10.4 12.1 6.2 13.9 20.9 8.0 13.5 14.9 12.0 8.7 20.0 18.9 20.0 16.2 8.9 6.8 12.2 15.7 9.2 7.0 15.4 10.0 9.0 12.6 10.3 3.58 2.57 3.09 2.31 3.19 3.34 80.7 76.5 86.4 75.7 86.0 71.0 76.8 86.8 95.8 95.9 87.9 75.6 70.2 93.8 73.4 94.4 84.1 401 616 255 221 2,057 489 410 500 301 865 274 297 915 183 706 601 319 610 697 455 78 794 13,321 14,158 333 457 802 13,588 471 769 1,296 15,604 2.82 1.95 2.01 2.77 2.64 2.64 3.16 1.77 2.22 2.55 3.06 3.10 2.47 3.05 3.27 1.86 2.77 0.66 3.72 3.53 2.26 2.84 3.09 2.54 2.77 3.59 2.01 2.21 3.28 3.31 2.82 1.45 3.37 18,634 9,635 10,074 16,968 0.973 0.944 5,130 0.963 8,615 0.964 8,659 0.960 22,863 0.933 145,430 261,360 301,298 6,019 0.953 410,601 7,917 0.960 115,732 25,611 0.962 123,462 2,480 0.912 872,408 584,484 31,404 6,599 0.936 267,247 84,837 2,239 0.945 79,159 25,437 12,187 0.587 143,542 27,384 11,343 0.838 116,208 25,039 1,215 0.935 123,267 33,258 18,853 0.923 63,303 14,239 7,885 0.967 152,866 31,554 6,020 0.913 99,287 26,290 8,501 0.444 215,744 53,477 1,088 0.284 521,994 66,046 7,216 0.948 165,807 50,245 13,424 0.946 109,181 26,137 24,397 0.931 102,509 25,853 36,450 0.925 99,523 27,480 1,907 0.960 100,629 26,104 1,716 0.920 120,096 30,820 39,863 0.933 122,654 27,184 4,379 0.918 67,563 21,327 520 0.873 90,096 25,103 86.1 503 906 16,552 7,324 0.926 85,989 27,096 83.0 232 380 603 15,850 3,710 0.929 79,048 21,338 83.7 321 335 970 13,954 12,647 0.466 167,576 31,312 95.9 171 1,045 874 19,375 39,408 0.775 401,370 14,855 15.4 540 1,291 4,245 21,437 8,389 0.945 111,514 29,247 78.4 300 55 1,147 12,659 110 149 32 135 118 261 116 163 254 122 88 144 116 97 35 46 99 100 122 170 92 38 155 182 165 92 106 216 59 205 121 104 100 180 94 96 108 112 154 154 89 56 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1,676 3,377 3,205 8,471 9,622 8,003 9,901 4,882 6,594 10,160 7,072 7,190 9,428 2,851 1,649 1,522 8,242 3,583 18,057 7,518 5,299 2,122 7,744 512 962 3,177 4,446 961 2,148 621 718 717 3,135 1,111 1,306 1,238 705 3,892 999 1,050 4,762 719 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 259 69 102 280 240 221 243 220 232 181 199 205 237 270 81 109 220 305 138 227 186 135 193 194 71 280 226 190 185 264 239 222 341 117 107 262 298 138 147 332 138 180

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

ABSECON

Atlantic

ATLANTIC CITY

Atlantic

BRIGANTINE

Atlantic

BUENA

Atlantic

BUENA VISTA

Atlantic

CORBIN CITY

Atlantic

EGG HARBOR CITY

Atlantic

EGG HARBOR TWP.

Atlantic

ESTELL MANOR

Atlantic

FOLSOM

Atlantic

GALLOWAY

Atlantic

HAMILTON

Atlantic

HAMMONTON

Atlantic

LINWOOD

Atlantic

LONGPORT

Atlantic

MARGATE

Atlantic

MULLICA

Atlantic

NORTHFIELD

Atlantic

PLEASANTVILLE

Atlantic

PORT REPUBLIC

Atlantic

SOMERS POINT

Atlantic

VENTNOR

Atlantic

WEYMOUTH

Atlantic

ALLENDALE

Bergen

ALPINE

Bergen

BERGENFIELD

Bergen

BOGOTA

Bergen

CARLSTADT

Bergen

CLIFFSIDE PARK

Bergen

CLOSTER

Bergen

CRESSKILL

Bergen

DEMAREST

Bergen

DUMONT

Bergen

EAST RUTHERFORD

Bergen

EDGEWATER

Bergen

ELMWOOD PARK

Bergen

EMERSON

Bergen

ENGLEWOOD

Bergen

ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS

Bergen

FAIR LAWN

Bergen

FAIRVIEW

Bergen

FORT LEE

Bergen

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 1.89 2.93 3.30 3.45 3.06 3.26 3.34 3.23 2.21 3.28 3.43 3.73 79.3 61.4 80.7 83.2 81.2 71.3 29.1 95.0 86.4 70.0 87.0 84.5 92.5 88.4 83.4 42,799 61,755 60,175 27,871 28,536 273,520 173,871 225,086 0.962 0.872 0.955 13,929 3,793 2,261 3.43 2.81 38,662 14,662 0.964 0.907 0.961 0.960 0.957 213,100 522,753 167,659 168,562 641,340 310,363 157,864 280,465 88,779 40,529 60,135 32,940 158,498 40,291 32,112 270,218 25,995 47,985 105,803 51.0 87.7 78.6 71.0 74.2 90.5 91.9 93.8 64.3 54.7 83.0 68.1 94.2 31.0 89.3 92.9 139 371 489 313 222 595 436 246 393 353 294 395 321 394 415 261 404 1,234 263 209 561 1,005 295 264 760 577 325 108 587 436 157 348 273 273 229 1,452 246 246 147 429 518 537 483 459 310 334 248 77 16 2,185 320 904 161 341 681 390 380 297 1,542 1,378 1,521 1,316 1,952 2,810 1,046 1,283 1,568 1,333 1,285 1,500 1,637 918 1,970 1,240 1,384 1,645 1,442 1,615 1,351 1,186 1,686 3,625 1,413 1,269 2,509 3,517 1,545 1,627 194 355 984 2.79 2.08 3.25 3.22 2.39 2.58 3.29 3.17 3.35 2.78 3.28 2.30 3.06 3.12 2.43 2.65 2.91 2.63 3.93 2.69 3.46 3.05 2.64 1.42 3.29 2.96 1.14 3.02 388 17,454 6,079 9,620 10,674 0.970 0.972 24,163 0.967 12,370 0.939 10,851 0.942 14,595 0.966 250,074 190,081 118,123 8,917 0.958 213,631 26,128 0.968 339,200 19,375 0.942 129,675 7,780 0.971 225,993 62,475 25,580 6,029 0.968 313,353 92,759 13,312 0.970 201,294 45,252 6,211 0.960 244,394 61,281 4,719 0.957 214,603 32,993 14,701 0.958 117,619 31,127 15,947 0.965 129,673 34,144 2,725 0.954 292,987 25,787 7,566 0.967 286,408 74,623 6,763 0.963 187,945 41,254 9,145 0.968 149,230 34,716 24,172 0.963 280,938 64,456 19,295 0.949 168,034 31,495 23,776 0.935 97,999 23,675 10,477 0.955 121,752 26,998 74.4 318 372 1,248 8,597 0.958 179,828 43,871 92.1 210 1,381 4,002 0.958 329,868 105,636 94.5 407 348 1,844 13,648 13,706 13,661 14,686 13,396 15,539 14,284 14,843 16,354 19,900 12,340 14,132 13,870 15,920 14,210 17,415 16,320 14,499 16,053 16,299 15,710 11,282 14,420 14,136 13,147 14,790 15,910 18,455 14,627 14,503 18,997 21,657 19,955 15,059 9,848 0.979 203,779 46,879 93.1 294 189 1,228 13,164 3,413 0.977 282,848 68,134 87.6 289 512 1,990 16,686 11,410 0.958 161,953 37,195 81.7 263 30 1,458 13,632 294 522 365 608 315 222 177 310 499 276 352 507 532 238 220 384 440 359 574 423 232 618 402 472 333 231 507 318 440 332 920 301 316 1,139 528 283 507 4,869 0.980 233,773 56,583 94.7 352 57 1,299 13,062 419 42,804 0.936 144,329 30,197 61.5 296 695 1,740 16,821 238 11,131 0.975 232,957 63,266 91.1 286 219 1,388 15,308 421 22.5 9.9 21.4 13.8 20.8 20.5 20.6 16.4 11.6 13.0 11.2 14.1 12.3 16.4 19.0 12.4 13.1 10.4 18.0 15.5 17.7 20.0 17.9 7.0 15.8 14.5 19.9 14.8 14.0 22.9 18.7 19.8 9.6 5.2 13.9 12.2 9.7 12.6 10.6 23.0 28,971 0.939 89,430 19,856 79.6 196 933 17,237 167 14.0 11,619 0.955 395,135 135,562 89.8 360 579 1,236 20,888 705 16.7 168 106 118 116 121 117 214 151 95 148 110 97 89 230 138 100 205 209 126 89 147 118 123 269 132 59 199 55 132 514 114 102 126 102 143 275 98 129 118 259 103 99 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1,034 12,209 681 3,153 692 966 758 759 788 2,588 1,407 4,442 1,098 993 1,229 891 841 1,685 1,026 1,321 615 790 632 719 714 1,501 834 606 729 1,786 2,714 522 593 558 976 788 1,272 940 799 1,325 1,279 551 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 133 152 258 151 257 284 223 291 184 216 222 223 243 205 284 301 217 228 273 275 309 215 282 191 262 109 241 252 229 200 234 167 319 262 261 73 265 278 76 249 236 164

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

FRANKLIN LAKES

Bergen

GARFIELD

Bergen

GLEN ROCK

Bergen

HACKENSACK

Bergen

HARRINGTON PARK

Bergen

HASBROUCK HTS.

Bergen

HAWORTH

Bergen

HILLSDALE

Bergen

HO-HO-KUS

Bergen

LEONIA

Bergen

LITTLE FERRY

Bergen

LODI

Bergen

LYNDHURST

Bergen

MAHWAH

Bergen

MAYWOOD

Bergen

MIDLAND PARK

Bergen

MONTVALE

Bergen

MOONACHIE

Bergen

NEW MILFORD

Bergen

NORTH ARLINGTON

Bergen

NORTHVALE

Bergen

NORWOOD

Bergen

OAKLAND

Bergen

OLD TAPPAN

Bergen

ORADELL

Bergen

PALISADES PARK

Bergen

PARAMUS

Bergen

PARK RIDGE

Bergen

RAMSEY

Bergen

RIDGEFIELD

Bergen

RIDGEFIELD PARK

Bergen

RIDGEWOOD

Bergen

RIVER EDGE

Bergen

RIVERVALE

Bergen

ROCHELLE PARK

Bergen

ROCKLEIGH

Bergen

RUTHERFORD

Bergen

SADDLE BROOK

Bergen

SADDLE RIVER

Bergen

SOUTH HACKENSACK

Bergen

TEANECK

Bergen

TENAFLY

Bergen

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.29 3.46 2.77 3.00 3.02 2.40 2.98 2.25 2.45 3.72 3.40 3.03 74.9 73.9 72.9 86.1 81.9 82.1 81.8 91.8 86.3 82.8 65.5 85.8 81.9 86.6 89.2 26,098 38,556 51,643 75,891 60,518 170,684 8,685 62,806 0.930 0.905 0.930 7,693 2,627 6,713 2.78 3.18 10,844 3,466 0.940 0.951 0.974 0.945 0.955 76,806 70,133 57,697 68,078 99,960 118,954 119,465 137,539 24,041 42,450 25,049 29,590 28,972 27,948 21,864 22,788 40,927 40,601 33,694 37,860 76.4 97.9 89.8 76.8 82.2 69.0 74.8 84.4 90.6 85.1 90.6 86.5 92.3 96.1 90.0 85.5 199 220 174 460 445 262 358 490 127 318 457 404 394 402 122 204 377 456 245 248 309 249 254 340 216 595 230 649 734 1,393 711 763 633 602 364 1,252 1,077 799 294 343 750 740 972 572 1,824 754 594 469 537 171 363 211 825 616 819 516 580 413 408 1,498 1,123 746 809 1,255 869 725 703 700 1,162 907 689 845 858 622 1,027 959 1,192 861 952 218 420 1,040 733 772 782 1,064 414 641 937 380 769 902 2.98 3.05 2.76 3.09 3.04 3.32 3.28 2.84 3.16 3.37 2.75 2.50 2.88 2.96 3.10 3.69 3.18 2.65 3.07 2.69 2.41 1.89 3.25 2.00 2.48 3.24 3.45 2.87 1,540 27,975 7,350 7,332 9,474 0.899 0.826 39,182 0.961 10,245 0.895 19,509 0.948 22,815 0.957 146,436 223,848 4,104 0.961 115,248 19,154 0.928 80,498 7,984 0.964 163,005 12,000 0.962 124,014 36,127 36,941 5,962 0.971 151,277 39,370 11,387 0.945 100,988 31,713 562 0.932 96,250 25,949 45,306 0.963 126,250 38,938 7,692 0.938 82,017 24,701 6,545 0.958 78,012 28,900 16,791 0.954 105,786 30,471 4,654 0.947 93,991 30,451 15,360 0.961 124,958 34,165 7,423 0.961 86,909 41,834 21,312 0.962 127,919 30,448 9,396 0.914 78,211 22,330 10,110 0.957 135,009 33,594 3,817 0.923 93,009 32,011 80.0 320 640 1,126 2,563 0.923 55,808 21,857 91.1 540 1,094 1,541 0.889 109,268 26,608 77.2 626 272 867 14,456 21,234 12,293 14,769 18,823 13,706 16,759 15,309 14,722 13,529 12,816 15,137 15,099 11,567 14,941 16,279 14,344 18,531 14,835 12,641 15,205 14,855 16,244 16,641 22,815 11,349 15,106 15,910 22,411 14,827 15,149 13,085 17,686 17,418 16,898 0.969 268,337 82,498 93.8 364 572 956 14,706 7,453 0.963 173,561 36,286 76.7 260 109 1,544 11,931 5,941 0.968 357,931 94,882 73.8 469 680 1,797 19,808 668 322 491 440 211 350 508 288 516 324 458 355 410 299 304 486 431 387 563 469 616 303 439 553 778 241 593 33 202 287 260 218 251 387 452 450 524 10,699 0.957 178,906 39,459 81.7 284 235 1,377 14,271 325 9,548 0.976 202,949 48,623 96.7 231 274 1,192 16,621 377 11,296 0.938 101,421 24,555 82.3 246 549 861 13,247 186 9.5 13.4 13.2 19.9 14.6 19.5 14.1 10.9 13.5 17.2 14.7 18.3 9.5 15.6 11.1 16.8 16.4 12.0 15.9 17.7 13.9 14.4 19.1 15.8 10.0 18.2 18.6 21.2 12.9 15.5 1.3 18.5 10.6 10.2 15.2 15.3 11.4 20.3 10.7 16.4 9,522 0.967 180,269 38,762 89.5 230 505 1,325 15,536 322 16.3 8,454 0.951 356,751 105,115 89.9 368 455 1,338 16,489 653 21.6 131 304 72 94 118 113 131 228 125 117 110 581 247 90 155 106 94 81 106 88 190 145 84 133 81 107 88 111 119 167 91 96 114 87 74 120 121 108 118 141 152 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 684 873 2,666 863 741 884 912 667 6,325 12,621 2,793 3,356 12,690 4,447 3,593 3,895 4,550 3,851 6,171 6,879 3,325 2,628 5,551 4,583 5,722 5,070 4,288 2,471 2,403 947 8,934 2,525 13,222 7,946 5,946 10,140 19,433 8,473 1,989 4,007 3,794 6,054 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 148 350 190 316 268 167 307 199 188 260 236 274 211 224 113 297 249 277 205 223 249 290 257 236 185 373 224 310 221 172 178 273 16 86 239 169 166 248 258 204 380 257

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

UPPER SADDLE RIVER

Bergen

WALDWICK

Bergen

WALLINGTON

Bergen

WASHINGTON TWP.

Bergen

WESTWOOD

Bergen

WOODCLIFF LAKE

Bergen

WOOD-RIDGE

Bergen

WYCKOFF

Bergen

BASS RIVER

Burlington

BEVERLY CITY

Burlington

BORDENTOWN CITY

Burlington

BORDENTOWN TWP.

Burlington

BURLINGTON CITY

Burlington

BURLINGTON TWP.

Burlington

CHESTERFIELD

Burlington

CINNAMINSON

Burlington

DELANCO

Burlington

DELRAN

Burlington

EASTAMPTON

Burlington

EDGEWATER PARK

Burlington

EVESHAM

Burlington

FIELDSBORO

Burlington

FLORENCE

Burlington

HAINESPORT

Burlington

LUMBERTON

Burlington

MANSFIELD

Burlington

MAPLE SHADE

Burlington

MEDFORD LAKES

Burlington

MEDFORD TWP.

Burlington

MOORESTOWN

Burlington

MOUNT HOLLY

Burlington

MOUNT LAUREL

Burlington

NEW HANOVER

Burlington

NORTH HANOVER

Burlington

PALMYRA

Burlington

PEMBERTON BOR.

Burlington

PEMBERTON TWP.

Burlington

RIVERSIDE

Burlington

RIVERTON

Burlington

SHAMONG

Burlington

SOUTHAMPTON

Burlington

SPRINGFIELD

Burlington

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 3.05 2.05 2.52 3.88 2.92 1.19 3.36 3.95 3.64 3.18 3.54 2.70 68.3 72.8 74.3 85.3 83.1 87.7 72.3 75.2 91.4 89.6 87.5 89.6 78.9 88.9 65.8 19,276 24,060 33,417 25,966 72,996 80,579 46,170 69,203 0.939 0.957 0.936 10,655 39,399 2,687 1.11 2.06 2,093 3,686 0.962 0.943 0.903 0.127 0.351 63,143 69,163 117,807 84,083 74,584 35,924 534,075 260,616 28,844 21,569 22,781 24,389 23,912 25,787 49,485 27,670 27,250 13,583 72,608 36,940 89.7 85.1 89.4 85.9 89.1 62.9 94.0 81.8 80.4 82.1 78.8 89.1 90.0 91.9 94.5 82.2 360 160 141 221 335 230 357 702 148 317 425 327 221 257 218 211 331 247 187 210 234 354 318 654 193 176 104 83 356 623 357 1,360 156 645 206 78 861 932 40 425 477 2,345 395 688 295 512 786 629 951 462 358 372 47 543 2,307 207 647 1,130 495 1,940 833 1,266 904 1,265 1,115 1,293 656 883 831 1,167 624 1,230 1,428 645 889 1,093 1,017 936 951 609 809 948 823 731 879 705 916 1,249 1,344 460 228 1,085 2.71 3.31 3.33 3.67 3.28 3.73 3.07 3.39 3.64 3.58 3.44 3.35 4.19 4.21 4.13 3.85 3.64 3.86 3.64 3.24 3.80 3.66 3.96 3.97 3.30 3.47 3.33 4.97 7,049 31,317 5,085 8,410 11,308 0.938 0.950 34,983 0.952 4,030 0.934 4,392 0.950 3,764 0.932 72,498 69,769 4,328 0.924 62,789 17,485 0.900 41,450 2,842 0.940 84,841 1,903 0.943 78,588 27,697 22,387 998 0.898 36,366 20,041 11,442 0.957 185,219 65,290 14,326 0.961 96,691 33,838 7,589 0.949 100,830 39,707 64,756 0.954 71,097 28,188 11,503 0.902 51,402 20,106 2,434 0.972 112,183 33,189 13,817 0.923 73,753 31,676 4,886 0.923 54,783 21,912 1,909 0.937 34,022 21,138 70,846 0.945 134,667 43,234 79,383 0.863 14,528 10,566 2,262 0.942 63,099 20,372 5,414 0.955 105,792 24,514 51.9 354 583 1,348 7,922 0.952 101,325 31,514 81.6 297 248 804 11,176 0.956 72,115 23,618 75.9 234 159 950 13,129 12,499 17,343 13,531 20,816 14,765 20,529 14,950 15,326 16,943 20,732 13,072 15,429 13,891 13,745 15,303 12,534 16,600 16,035 14,119 15,217 14,429 13,829 16,475 16,359 14,444 14,607 11,291 14,821 14,401 15,921 13,264 32,692 48,695 6,939 0.946 78,998 29,890 85.8 150 830 800 15,330 8,883 0.953 82,150 29,384 85.5 366 73 944 13,471 736 0.888 59,231 19,454 60.5 920 892 1,510 11,154 168 476 477 470 614 659 371 102 792 256 343 435 730 303 452 595 579 1,087 244 475 523 282 401 463 425 446 458 289 397 401 399 752 475 459 215 854 488 1,352 0.964 124,048 29,692 84.7 643 336 1,625 15,827 478 36,530 0.951 56,324 22,951 93.3 237 553 952 16,218 201 8,626 0.971 140,496 35,716 67.8 367 1,148 946 15,747 540 16.0 11.6 15.3 13.9 13.0 11.9 13.2 14.3 14.0 15.9 16.5 15.2 9.3 13.3 11.0 15.5 14.4 16.3 11.2 14.3 19.6 8.3 17.3 16.0 11.7 14.3 10.3 13.9 11.1 15.0 13.5 13.7 13.1 16.3 14.8 16.1 13.6 21.8 0.6 2.0 646 0.901 174,021 29,363 80.9 594 2,362 16,734 729 13.8 7,157 0.971 116,010 35,538 95.4 143 665 498 14,853 444 18.1 118 1,768 95 115 982 590 115 123 124 108 274 99 588 151 395 97 103 146 250 95 122 109 109 89 194 227 127 116 177 107 96 193 92 122 115 123 86 156 188 74 28 43 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 5,471 7,471 5,917 9,310 5,568 6,465 5,053 3,919 5,930 4,197 6,822 10,220 19,842 1,447 14,084 8,928 6,601 5,645 17,926 6,777 1,970 4,174 618 8,694 5,062 7,919 10,137 6,857 4,558 5,857 5,256 8,487 10,261 6,307 6,405 3,577 2,876 6,992 8,621 10,116 1,044 16,121 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 257 254 212 242 222 133 278 280 310 250 277 196 54 270 165 258 211 292 177 250 296 310 237 156 319 243 184 302 203 336 303 224 217 290 298 295 187 274 221 179 31 60

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

TABERNACLE

Burlington

WASHINGTON TWP.

Burlington

WESTAMPTON

Burlington

WILLINGBORO

Burlington

WOODLAND

Burlington

WRIGHTSTOWN

Burlington

AUDUBON

Camden

BARRINGTON

Camden

BELLMAWR

Camden

BERLIN BOR.

Camden

BERLIN TWP.

Camden

BROOKLAWN

Camden

CAMDEN CITY

Camden

CHERRY HILL

Camden

CHESILHURST

Camden

CLEMENTON

Camden

COLLINGSWOOD

Camden

GIBBSBORO

Camden

GLOUCESTER CITY

Camden

GLOUCESTER TWP.

Camden

HADDON HEIGHTS

Camden

HADDON TWP.

Camden

HADDONFIELD

Camden

HI-NELLA

Camden

LAUREL SPRINGS

Camden

LAWNSIDE

Camden

LINDENWOLD

Camden

MAGNOLIA

Camden

MERCHANTVILLE

Camden

MOUNT EPHRAIM

Camden

OAKLYN

Camden

PENNSAUKEN

Camden

PINE HILL

Camden

RUNNEMEDE

Camden

SOMERDALE

Camden

STRATFORD

Camden

VOORHEES

Camden

WATERFORD

Camden

WINSLOW

Camden

WOODLYNNE

Camden

AVALON

Cape May

CAPE MAY CITY

Cape May

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 1.27 1.93 2.25 2.16 1.90 1.77 1.44 1.39 1.89 2.35 2.48 3.81 70.4 84.7 79.2 72.7 83.2 80.9 82.8 84.8 83.8 89.0 87.7 82.0 74.1 91.8 90.0 26,456 22,117 25,687 30,290 45,234 190,224 45,714 396,927 0.971 0.974 0.866 27,691 21,992 18,546 3.41 2.30 36,966 278,980 0.971 0.957 0.959 0.948 0.863 403,915 231,383 46,955 282,555 169,672 474,891 189,551 58,072 49,779 17,763 183,109 48,544 83,041 17,965 84,351 53,931 147,048 77,810 15,553 77.0 74.3 83.2 84.2 87.4 84.6 81.6 96.2 42.7 95.3 77.9 81.8 90.2 81.7 90.1 54.4 206 259 235 301 210 436 166 294 357 493 227 223 633 348 624 755 718 467 328 395 416 422 409 1,339 142 455 364 697 267 915 91 846 202 987 1,251 369 161 183 543 553 22 141 276 292 224 379 300 413 91 266 709 366 531 302 469 544 513 1,263 773 812 660 577 472 406 646 405 645 397 1,130 366 504 561 982 1,483 1,363 1,672 984 1,772 2,174 2,289 1,788 1,339 1,478 1,585 2,392 1,617 2,029 564 800 1,708 1.90 1.50 3.36 2.53 3.36 2.22 2.49 3.69 3.32 2.84 2.62 2.96 2.22 2.49 3.20 2.52 3.71 3.74 3.18 2.62 4.09 2.06 2.42 3.60 3.90 2.61 3.69 2.26 6,662 56,299 7,483 2,107 65,390 0.866 0.960 12,645 0.970 7,133 0.957 43,885 0.944 33,831 0.935 101,774 113,181 154,398 58,780 0.947 67,128 8,282 0.947 84,110 1,523 0.956 79,078 663 0.925 53,074 26,528 28,416 28,930 0.931 62,499 22,088 8,147 0.906 34,883 24,226 2,989 0.903 68,625 22,663 4,803 0.955 72,956 28,368 883 0.911 75,948 34,568 6,742 0.914 43,482 19,951 1,674 0.649 71,633 22,976 3,262 0.953 65,794 28,013 5,410 0.889 40,514 17,697 24,742 0.924 21,139 11,565 2,463 0.702 50,742 20,005 3,985 0.275 163,695 32,666 5,259 0.329 126,738 14,954 400 0.309 247,678 21,746 85.5 536 1,755 980 0.473 241,318 31,879 85.6 286 662 1,031 10,941 0.720 147,322 33,018 85.5 330 270 775 14,581 44,620 21,303 21,838 21,000 17,641 16,783 14,519 15,017 17,568 13,339 20,280 14,476 13,598 14,006 17,099 16,150 13,650 18,044 18,834 12,376 13,101 11,368 14,291 21,169 18,960 17,256 14,307 20,687 15,502 15,578 16,278 15,987 20,083 1,012 0.136 649,159 53,546 94.5 440 106 1,531 32,390 2,909 0.151 250,821 36,450 94.7 258 3,234 904 31,072 14,756 0.282 252,706 41,268 93.7 295 1,821 1,149 21,504 418 486 1,229 275 452 455 247 337 92 205 371 692 589 375 718 695 611 313 565 423 525 792 618 391 443 599 730 164 1,632 1,526 892 174 1,075 648 1,720 712 208 4,800 0.232 157,577 29,059 88.0 353 1,099 1,118 26,475 288 16,278 0.781 154,452 26,314 73.3 333 679 1,030 15,215 281 20,328 0.660 145,218 23,436 90.5 156 321 753 12,958 273 10.8 12.2 1.4 2.3 0.6 0.9 15.1 3.9 4.1 4.6 2.1 7.4 16.7 14.5 15.1 7.4 11.6 10.9 14.8 18.6 6.1 16.6 8.2 12.8 13.5 15.4 12.5 12.7 14.0 12.5 13.6 17.3 17.5 26.5 11.2 20.2 16.1 24.4 17.4 13.9 5,725 0.887 163,864 27,402 80.0 269 178 773 15,931 308 14.8 223 0.265 665,321 52,229 93.5 362 1,819 28,503 1,236 0.2 39 300 67 200 28 46 16 30 446 57 41 77 35 108 193 116 116 331 80 141 81 120 132 164 58 122 204 126 219 169 119 104 341 111 205 79 209 141 103 165 101 335 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 14,693 7,264 5,163 5,854 3,833 1,761 1,853 1,017 4,749 13,580 1,364 8,235 2,618 12,958 15,533 11,935 7,945 10,141 10,394 8,908 7,592 9,431 8,100 14,790 10,773 7,324 9,505 16,065 5,359 3,437 491 785 18,976 845 916 670 17,705 748 1,018 634 1,224 17,328 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 125 215 193 186 59 48 33 41 174 147 148 49 58 77 89 151 229 167 151 256 261 222 105 191 201 233 237 181 225 249 239 237 90 152 245 232 91 225 215 131 154 59

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

CAPE MAY POINT

Cape May

DENNIS

Cape May

LOWER TOWNSHIP

Cape May

MIDDLE TOWNSHIP

Cape May

NORTH WILDWOOD

Cape May

OCEAN CITY

Cape May

SEA ISLE CITY

Cape May

STONE HARBOR

Cape May

UPPER TOWNSHIP

Cape May

WEST CAPE MAY

Cape May

WEST WILDWOOD

Cape May

WILDWOOD

Cape May

WILDWOOD CREST

Cape May

WOODBINE

Cape May

BRIDGETON

Cumberland

COMMERCIAL

Cumberland

DEERFIELD

Cumberland

DOWNE

Cumberland

FAIRFIELD TWP.

Cumberland

GREENWICH

Cumberland

HOPEWELL

Cumberland

LAWRENCE

Cumberland

MAURICE RIVER

Cumberland

MILLVILLE

Cumberland

SHILOH

Cumberland

STOW CREEK

Cumberland

UPPER DEERFIELD

Cumberland

VINELAND

Cumberland

BELLEVILLE

Essex

BLOOMFIELD

Essex

CALDWELL

Essex

CEDAR GROVE

Essex

EAST ORANGE

Essex

ESSEX FELLS

Essex

FAIRFIELD TWP.

Essex

GLEN RIDGE

Essex

IRVINGTON

Essex

LIVINGSTON

Essex

MAPLEWOOD

Essex

MILLBURN

Essex

MONTCLAIR

Essex

NEWARK

Essex

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.53 3.56 4.18 2.20 3.65 3.16 2.83 4.21 3.39 2.89 3.12 3.27 85.7 88.5 80.0 34.3 91.1 35.7 86.6 85.5 94.0 85.7 59.6 87.4 92.1 76.6 83.1 41,725 31,405 23,198 25,901 96,755 126,092 103,356 79,482 0.924 0.931 0.932 241,114 36,746 55,270 2.27 3.13 15,372 62,183 0.891 0.949 0.923 0.920 0.915 99,903 84,575 230,901 85,809 104,739 100,101 339,990 56,214 31,385 38,936 26,369 16,105 31,620 21,695 84,204 29,010 23,570 22,526 39,666 16,510 97.3 58.3 79.2 74.8 79.1 87.7 67.8 67.5 87.0 60.9 79.7 61.2 65.9 62.0 31.9 66.3 281 273 223 377 193 469 335 155 382 470 320 225 257 411 814 658 321 863 1,001 834 342 315 620 467 321 900 342 336 626 205 317 570 910 466 1,172 491 417 933 571 924 1,104 1,019 1,095 58 1,006 679 989 473 637 516 50 552 2,911 578 1,351 312 141 185 298 627 957 2,208 637 1,333 841 958 781 691 1,166 749 646 946 687 1,137 1,318 929 1,070 1,033 881 1,853 1,553 1,249 2,179 2,558 1,686 1,773 1,274 2,573 1,449 460 602 1,039 2.96 3.94 2.85 3.03 2.49 3.18 3.42 3.78 3.18 3.65 3.53 3.14 3.40 3.33 3.73 2.88 3.84 4.30 3.69 3.53 3.39 3.09 3.52 3.01 1.94 1.94 3.75 2.96 15,201 40,577 10,528 2,138 57,448 0.908 0.956 9,174 0.959 3,052 0.961 10,450 0.917 4,467 0.918 59,254 64,755 22,013 0.935 120,598 2,355 0.964 116,604 52,037 0.971 99,137 2,250 0.934 70,401 23,667 33,250 3,134 0.966 114,501 39,090 9,206 0.942 77,535 28,949 6,075 0.902 67,363 17,928 1,669 0.925 74,783 26,358 3,227 0.947 55,350 22,671 32,949 0.957 89,180 26,841 15,177 0.956 97,069 33,661 6,245 0.961 178,949 28,942 12,436 0.964 116,382 41,806 4,984 0.950 220,957 28,416 19,751 0.934 56,932 27,137 17,287 0.958 83,522 28,091 3,949 0.935 90,428 28,321 7,788 0.958 125,432 38,014 87.0 349 830 837 30,632 0.946 96,146 27,641 69.1 307 408 864 7,553 0.932 64,792 23,941 87.7 334 579 854 13,591 14,111 13,945 14,917 12,928 15,325 17,440 11,905 15,340 12,464 11,901 13,465 12,751 14,841 14,072 13,858 5,943 14,164 16,094 12,867 16,022 15,995 16,656 14,242 13,661 13,247 11,431 19,427 23,000 19,366 13,966 13,471 16,302 21,416 42,617 0.953 158,561 45,637 82.3 295 46 1,553 18,304 10,441 0.976 238,766 46,622 69.0 501 184 1,685 14,818 12,493 0.962 197,457 51,090 89.2 390 70 1,446 13,312 777 873 609 368 496 749 516 460 324 1,108 692 1,021 554 465 318 434 368 415 682 400 527 619 614 324 345 543 737 383 342 384 325 872 324 412 349 1,269 211 15,882 0.949 169,903 75,648 92.1 723 278 2,021 16,292 662 5,352 0.964 364,883 71,604 57.7 798 685 2,387 17,815 1,303 31,058 0.917 54,261 17,726 78.7 380 1,574 17,597 205 13.5 15.6 15.7 16.1 15.4 14.6 15.6 13.0 18.7 15.8 16.1 10.6 12.3 21.6 18.9 17.3 18.0 15.1 13.3 17.9 15.7 18.6 26.5 16.6 16.2 13.7 12.6 13.8 15.5 19.6 13.7 15.9 11.0 10.8 5.1 11.0 14.2 11.9 12.0 14.7 26,171 0.960 159,337 39,864 83.7 297 284 1,635 13,090 634 15.0 7,051 0.980 249,391 95,931 94.7 334 198 1,105 16,314 960 15.5 87 119 289 204 115 115 162 129 87 88 255 111 104 144 181 57 104 99 157 155 93 99 84 55 134 77 84 110 99 150 117 56 172 315 82 602 347 293 558 148 144 266 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 564 1,838 15,423 967 1,065 685 640 1,456 7,521 5,801 3,858 7,846 6,831 7,568 2,343 4,688 4,816 4,990 5,328 6,737 5,762 10,020 6,582 3,848 1,791 5,969 5,101 3,873 7,811 7,436 6,548 4,279 6,107 9,009 3,762 13,403 6,518 15,652 5,400 7,919 765 16,885 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 149 324 107 248 174 283 270 261 236 244 260 228 247 183 258 190 158 282 278 281 265 179 249 214 199 232 302 207 252 219 330 186 162 113 107 102 64 78 185 118 159 83

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

NORTH CALDWELL

Essex

NUTLEY

Essex

ORANGE

Essex

ROSELAND

Essex

SOUTH ORANGE

Essex

VERONA

Essex

WEST CALDWELL

Essex

WEST ORANGE

Essex

CLAYTON

Gloucester

DEPTFORD

Gloucester

EAST GREENWICH

Gloucester

ELK

Gloucester

FRANKLIN TWP.

Gloucester

GLASSBORO

Gloucester

GREENWICH

Gloucester

HARRISON TWP.

Gloucester

LOGAN

Gloucester

MANTUA

Gloucester

MONROE

Gloucester

NATIONAL PARK

Gloucester

NEWFIELD

Gloucester

PAULSBORO

Gloucester

PITMAN

Gloucester

SOUTH HARRISON

Gloucester

SWEDESBORO

Gloucester

WASHINGTON TWP.

Gloucester

WENONAH

Gloucester

WEST DEPTFORD

Gloucester

WESTVILLE

Gloucester

WOODBURY

Gloucester

WOODBURY HTS.

Gloucester

WOOLWICH

Gloucester

BAYONNE

Hudson

EAST NEWARK

Hudson

GUTTENBERG

Hudson

HARRISON TOWN

Hudson

HOBOKEN

Hudson

JERSEY CITY

Hudson

KEARNY

Hudson

NORTH BERGEN

Hudson

SECAUCUS

Hudson

UNION CITY

Hudson

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.73 2.56 3.06 3.60 2.98 3.76 3.62 3.03 2.94 2.78 3.44 3.12 90.6 77.0 95.2 92.4 92.8 93.4 88.4 82.3 56.0 93.1 81.9 83.0 80.9 81.9 94.0 52,259 47,342 35,977 32,695 30,992 93,300 160,192 235,896 0.946 0.952 0.906 17,438 12,095 82,883 3.11 3.13 26,507 23,367 0.933 0.964 0.865 0.963 0.932 169,553 185,310 172,304 272,534 203,277 33,446 225,616 106,061 32,294 48,265 71,203 50,932 61,106 93,833 123,637 50,523 15,756 68,053 21,829 81.5 90.3 78.4 75.4 77.5 82.0 84.5 76.8 65.5 87.7 77.3 90.7 71.9 69.7 72.5 63.6 507 420 207 458 194 324 372 850 272 425 285 518 108 342 486 277 466 325 919 622 471 1,006 469 598 253 499 617 330 188 151 226 1,081 661 72 613 556 398 1,111 477 202 104 791 305 86 468 588 640 459 1,537 952 111 50 480 110 336 263 179 325 373 63 1,000 552 675 1,508 1,033 659 1,060 757 738 1,364 772 1,125 946 1,725 549 1,240 727 1,274 1,018 1,069 1,263 1,110 1,215 1,214 1,716 1,873 1,466 2,055 1,355 1,479 400 894 1,005 3.26 2.99 3.73 4.13 2.82 2.80 2.44 2.64 3.11 3.59 3.12 3.13 2.89 2.55 3.07 3.01 3.40 3.27 2.94 3.81 3.52 3.09 2.75 3.20 2.92 2.52 3.23 3.40 2,656 13,391 31,645 17,754 1,988 0.952 0.959 5,295 0.937 90,402 0.955 36,062 0.946 26,767 0.942 110,036 97,495 110,041 2,907 0.952 195,212 6,255 0.957 151,502 6,034 0.942 300,715 546 0.915 153,210 40,807 100,894 16,033 0.964 234,317 56,799 22,353 0.972 189,399 52,450 1,186 0.942 126,242 34,645 6,171 0.941 166,075 44,999 1,955 0.907 151,337 41,301 3,741 0.944 200,011 50,589 4,028 0.922 163,022 45,353 5,217 0.955 157,231 38,328 3,674 0.957 113,436 36,810 1,628 0.931 85,190 30,975 1,945 0.931 94,134 36,708 1,454 0.909 118,258 34,312 3,228 0.944 186,789 58,556 4,277 0.942 114,683 28,514 56.8 416 614 1,101 4,450 0.961 180,489 50,142 84.4 547 451 949 4,671 0.928 204,901 62,963 94.7 214 879 833 21,700 16,450 15,377 18,513 16,666 13,580 15,254 16,431 15,013 16,042 26,373 26,728 16,402 17,399 15,624 17,049 21,970 20,628 17,326 16,273 15,913 15,967 13,105 13,213 14,468 18,181 17,012 14,191 30,768 19,053 13,078 19,511 15,160 13,411 13,822 0.964 185,787 57,659 84.0 373 628 830 16,465 2,544 0.963 165,115 42,433 77.7 587 358 1,369 14,358 1,029 0.940 146,946 40,429 88.0 206 313 924 14,287 501 559 616 692 608 383 645 397 327 292 385 522 537 603 496 574 391 651 761 505 1,007 529 677 564 483 498 472 783 1,213 862 845 791 1,279 980 159 1,145 299 857 0.941 127,554 32,092 79.7 305 746 14,187 437 3,917 0.970 166,175 48,780 92.8 226 445 755 14,834 587 5,109 0.943 169,444 49,021 93.1 290 89 688 15,742 564 18.0 22.3 20.2 20.1 19.3 18.0 13.6 14.7 12.8 15.7 12.4 14.0 13.4 14.5 18.1 14.8 7.8 6.9 18.3 13.2 20.1 18.9 8.0 16.1 13.8 14.6 14.6 9.9 14.0 14.3 15.6 17.3 11.7 16.8 4.8 12.9 21.1 14.5 21.0 15.1 46,472 0.942 56,314 23,907 66.9 599 506 1,362 17,155 213 12.6 12,370 0.919 172,661 49,595 61.2 1,151 437 2,540 16,984 669 8.5 218 165 81 86 83 136 78 96 95 95 104 106 117 74 72 104 534 102 143 58 445 285 122 114 117 111 83 431 160 330 261 115 105 121 153 89 89 107 134 538 106 131 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3,027 14,411 3,464 2,467 5,778 1,861 1,126 1,380 2,776 1,901 1,938 1,562 4,568 4,406 4,353 3,235 3,259 3,650 1,948 2,158 2,648 3,379 1,976 1,424 985 1,732 1,710 1,338 4,047 2,635 5,501 3,361 811 1,019 1,294 795 1,525 945 1,048 17,873 1,132 6,851 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 102 77 223 245 266 358 253 199 279 239 187 275 233 209 231 302 317 233 240 167 259 356 214 264 235 154 164 244 188 219 244 222 256 226 184 203 65 112 263 92 136 196

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

WEEHAWKEN

Hudson

WEST NEW YORK

Hudson

ALEXANDRIA

Hunterdon

BETHLEHEM

Hunterdon

BLOOMSBURY

Hunterdon

CALIFON

Hunterdon

CLINTON TOWN

Hunterdon

CLINTON TOWNSHIP

Hunterdon

DELAWARE

Hunterdon

EAST AMWELL

Hunterdon

FLEMINGTON

Hunterdon

FRANKLIN

Hunterdon

FRENCHTOWN

Hunterdon

GLEN GARDNER

Hunterdon

HAMPTON BOROUGH

Hunterdon

HIGH BRIDGE

Hunterdon

HOLLAND

Hunterdon

KINGWOOD

Hunterdon

LAMBERTVILLE

Hunterdon

LEBANON BOROUGH

Hunterdon

LEBANON TOWNSHIP

Hunterdon

MILFORD

Hunterdon

RARITAN TWP.

Hunterdon

READINGTON

Hunterdon

STOCKTON

Hunterdon

TEWKSBURY

Hunterdon

UNION TWP.

Hunterdon

WEST AMWELL

Hunterdon

EAST WINDSOR

Mercer

EWING

Mercer

HAMILTON

Mercer

HIGHTSTOWN

Mercer

HOPEWELL BOR.

Mercer

HOPEWELL TWP.

Mercer

LAWRENCE

Mercer

PENNINGTON

Mercer

PRINCETON BOR.

Mercer

PRINCETON TWP

Mercer

ROBBINSVILLE

Mercer

TRENTON

Mercer

WEST WINDSOR

Mercer

CARTERET

Middlesex

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.33 3.56 3.27 2.80 3.04 3.45 3.29 2.99 3.27 2.92 2.49 3.29 59.5 68.9 86.5 66.5 69.2 65.5 82.2 85.3 61.8 62.4 88.6 86.4 67.8 86.6 92.6 34,727 16,986 48,834 58,338 39,673 158,849 289,327 300,489 0.360 0.929 1,917 5,910 1,569 11,425 2.70 2.92 34,730 20,947 0.960 0.954 0.946 0.943 0.957 0.963 968,569 175,370 123,418 257,888 95,640 105,395 186,655 119,375 31,939 62,318 105,661 145,615 33,652 30,461 79,802 31,480 23,420 41,120 31,910 91.5 75.2 89.0 94.5 87.7 93.0 90.3 92.7 94.5 52.6 78.1 95.7 83.5 73.5 75.0 79.3 609 432 306 320 382 210 296 1,485 374 983 602 399 654 232 298 316 1,137 431 471 358 214 391 446 199 356 309 212 282 431 271 70 310 235 364 747 374 352 124 531 1,165 43 314 3,281 446 7,064 2,242 151 250 478 54 511 401 441 1,300 315 248 368 653 1,127 839 1,568 872 933 1,139 1,759 1,191 1,098 887 1,151 993 806 3,329 1,056 1,987 1,469 1,457 1,494 1,015 1,270 967 2,828 1,379 989 1,341 486 1,164 1,128 844 546 360 1,301 3.19 2.71 3.29 2.86 2.77 2.71 2.46 2.88 2.77 2.67 3.29 2.69 3.17 1.78 3.30 2.89 2.78 2.05 2.27 2.52 2.35 2.04 1.42 2.64 2.61 2.52 2.38 3.20 14,195 1,045 10,062 4,882 0.887 0.877 4,845 0.660 5,908 0.686 2,201 0.682 4,602 0.934 181,578 323,394 206,682 16,546 0.833 68,363 1,845 0.958 111,120 699 0.595 468,145 18,390 0.968 115,841 34,327 70,665 97,963 0.958 136,006 29,681 8,145 0.965 112,371 30,521 15,682 0.949 101,404 25,140 22,623 0.973 169,453 30,792 41,089 0.959 193,763 40,403 7,777 0.943 126,710 32,691 42,208 0.954 123,714 30,539 21,148 0.932 165,700 48,595 52,408 0.959 127,610 32,052 48,742 0.931 74,458 15,968 65,859 0.965 116,783 33,389 39,586 0.967 127,617 33,362 51,149 0.938 64,242 16,008 37,122 0.916 198,451 41,940 82.5 370 1,184 1,020 6,965 0.963 149,680 35,929 85.3 478 77 1,105 13,644 0.968 122,702 29,907 79.5 280 104 1,162 14,013 13,910 16,174 20,405 14,726 13,897 18,651 13,630 12,601 12,583 13,711 14,277 13,764 11,444 14,358 13,164 16,435 27,143 9,580 27,767 18,761 20,246 17,269 22,010 12,587 20,295 72,055 19,593 9,903 11,759 16,334 12,710 14,638 13,918 13,098 0.964 175,395 48,035 83.6 337 171 1,129 15,110 6,367 0.958 85,353 28,034 84.5 247 88 803 13,901 14,245 0.947 99,905 39,459 89.3 212 495 852 18,071 283 240 484 343 409 548 189 366 334 210 356 483 355 365 561 474 298 317 373 288 1,213 289 177 464 795 506 381 717 767 2,321 391 308 655 247 248 445 318 2,010 0.968 123,234 33,875 95.1 315 935 13,980 351 99,706 0.963 155,419 36,946 65.5 197 1,140 13,078 427 47,279 0.968 169,062 41,099 77.4 577 570 1,315 15,706 471 18.2 13.7 14.1 9.6 12.6 15.2 14.9 13.3 12.8 13.2 14.1 14.3 16.8 13.0 18.1 13.4 13.1 21.1 16.0 13.8 14.3 13.1 13.0 0.3 19.7 13.1 10.0 5.2 5.8 4.7 16.4 17.1 1.0 10.9 19.6 22.8 10.9 15.1 18.0 15.2 6,993 0.956 97,404 26,413 87.8 251 946 12,775 284 15.2 3,927 0.963 453,309 75,759 43.9 1,166 473 3,117 19,258 1,290 21.7 156 106 110 193 88 84 80 137 163 69 72 290 141 119 211 138 93 268 539 151 151 64 109 293 98 181 88 442 85 60 65 64 73 199 165 124 92 100 113 133 278 112 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 871 4,607 2,304 1,174 3,504 3,053 5,675 829 4,348 1,436 898 16,175 2,085 4,836 15,133 2,319 1,017 3,446 6,340 2,662 2,600 5,211 4,296 1,885 3,535 19,121 2,032 24,931 1,497 1,105 2,581 3,535 695 3,464 4,370 3,728 2,931 600 5,342 5,984 2,337 4,070 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 154 235 250 188 327 150 200 249 290 289 343 57 186 209 130 185 125 223 215 179 237 209 288 226 251 116 264 65 236 169 132 127 218 145 68 166 244 203 211 177 217 268

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

CRANBURY

Middlesex

DUNELLEN

Middlesex

EAST BRUNSWICK

Middlesex

EDISON

Middlesex

HELMETTA

Middlesex

HIGHLAND PARK

Middlesex

JAMESBURG

Middlesex

METUCHEN

Middlesex

MIDDLESEX BOR.

Middlesex

MILLTOWN

Middlesex

MONROE

Middlesex

NEW BRUNSWICK

Middlesex

NORTH BRUNSWICK

Middlesex

OLD BRIDGE

Middlesex

PERTH AMBOY

Middlesex

PISCATAWAY

Middlesex

PLAINSBORO

Middlesex

SAYREVILLE

Middlesex

SOUTH AMBOY

Middlesex

SOUTH BRUNSWICK

Middlesex

SOUTH PLAINFIELD

Middlesex

SOUTH RIVER

Middlesex

SPOTSWOOD

Middlesex

WOODBRIDGE

Middlesex

ABERDEEN

Monmouth

ALLENHURST

Monmouth

ALLENTOWN

Monmouth

ASBURY PARK

Monmouth

ATL. HIGHLANDS

Monmouth

AVON-BY-THE-SEA

Monmouth

BELMAR

Monmouth

BRADLEY BEACH

Monmouth

BRIELLE

Monmouth

COLTS NECK

Monmouth

DEAL

Monmouth

EATONTOWN

Monmouth

ENGLISHTOWN

Monmouth

FAIR HAVEN

Monmouth

FARMINGDALE

Monmouth

FREEHOLD BOR.

Monmouth

FREEHOLD TWP.

Monmouth

HAZLET

Monmouth

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 3.27 2.45 3.03 1.98 3.04 3.14 2.68 2.59 1.92 3.00 2.75 2.21 89.8 91.6 85.4 86.8 93.0 96.3 78.7 82.5 83.6 86.1 66.4 96.1 94.9 81.2 94.7 55,896 24,288 123,511 39,259 43,996 98,205 186,493 233,643 0.943 0.952 4,486 8,118 8,212 10,159 2.86 2.71 1,678 7,761 0.956 0.956 0.957 0.948 0.951 0.961 161,848 147,741 234,513 122,908 282,912 298,805 269,637 273,892 26,308 49,823 47,638 40,308 35,386 67,380 34,846 78,077 113,696 59,191 92,938 64.0 100.0 93.5 88.9 79.6 85.4 92.4 77.1 80.1 79.2 94.5 82.1 87.7 93.6 54.9 96.1 281 341 205 500 400 603 427 322 485 117 525 209 421 243 561 255 282 300 335 392 748 344 802 597 251 495 427 739 1,458 4 673 45 1,352 2,190 408 299 723 760 3,516 77 2,229 561 221 453 684 168 532 606 88 113 615 643 240 210 179 3,524 312 263 827 1,035 911 738 1,360 1,051 1,113 983 1,104 1,480 1,054 1,806 1,737 1,855 2,180 729 1,756 821 1,056 1,076 989 1,183 1,017 1,194 1,070 1,198 1,670 1,274 2,621 1,734 261 258 885 2.71 3.30 2.49 2.83 1.85 2.65 2.67 2.62 2.44 2.71 3.55 1.76 2.21 1.65 2.84 2.99 1.37 2.28 2.56 3.09 2.86 2.55 3.02 3.29 2.62 3.09 2.18 2.06 8,469 8,339 26,168 6,874 0.961 0.924 6,620 0.944 19,703 0.953 5,134 0.779 3,520 0.612 621,428 175,772 151,881 1,068 0.900 66,810 3,778 0.963 319,167 2,070 0.637 610,952 1,804 0.654 299,114 78,645 98,652 7,264 0.907 461,796 162,909 907 0.960 104,079 34,630 11,866 0.916 181,746 43,072 5,733 0.932 212,359 55,238 28,224 0.919 183,106 43,075 28,410 0.862 125,103 29,035 5,114 0.923 105,205 27,699 3,570 0.754 304,252 87,303 10,201 0.961 198,514 55,413 66,687 0.960 180,253 48,186 8,754 0.931 114,910 37,301 40,532 0.968 183,981 54,715 6,251 0.678 242,528 44,787 38,956 0.966 160,713 43,828 90.0 216 210 817 32,622 0.829 136,654 29,424 86.0 261 542 1,145 274 0.516 324,778 55,354 93.7 898 411 1,924 9,312 19,596 13,654 13,879 13,586 18,840 14,014 14,633 18,646 13,175 17,316 15,271 13,054 19,956 18,726 16,671 36,464 19,108 17,432 6,371 24,289 14,366 19,801 13,315 17,102 14,009 15,952 17,260 14,584 16,140 11,927 15,242 15,042 16,254 6,119 0.942 260,287 78,679 92.1 489 900 1,580 16,809 1,773 0.704 150,358 30,262 91.6 552 1,282 15,078 7,476 0.937 100,350 28,499 77.5 327 140 1,104 15,573 235 393 651 902 304 407 610 473 283 436 527 779 275 307 487 548 432 246 1,154 802 1,514 751 171 1,475 468 399 254 468 625 421 353 544 292 637 714 616 641 10,550 0.881 68,960 20,741 90.6 287 1,740 1,166 23,107 168 877 0.919 304,926 69,575 99.2 318 2,232 46,156 784 51,335 0.960 132,234 33,071 84.8 290 146 844 13,921 342 19.0 1.3 14.0 11.6 8.1 16.8 7.5 10.6 18.9 10.5 20.9 13.3 14.6 21.4 8.9 10.2 12.2 13.8 14.4 10.3 13.7 18.7 3.3 6.7 17.8 13.7 5.6 7.9 9.8 16.9 17.6 15.2 11.1 10.8 17.1 10.8 21.0 18.2 19.2 21.4 16,885 0.964 265,094 81,586 88.2 441 149 1,202 15,589 664 19.2 5,272 0.834 128,782 39,878 90.3 393 1,378 1,301 24,740 325 5.9 72 155 187 129 182 115 172 123 93 140 124 59 73 199 112 103 83 111 195 106 114 200 113 108 79 84 131 87 61 78 93 117 99 155 116 132 70 146 91 105 113 142 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3,648 874 4,525 4,153 18,707 6,199 3,233 910 1,401 11,603 4,026 925 2,787 3,366 2,015 2,377 1,003 3,489 9,333 2,298 836 3,315 6,293 805 2,629 657 1,038 954 799 816 2,958 7,455 3,627 1,153 739 1,648 895 2,644 617 789 1,134 1,451 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 197 165 253 261 154 201 158 210 104 113 212 175 194 230 221 191 179 225 202 205 247 168 225 122 103 165 224 182 145 207 226 232 224 215 209 222 194 238 166 162 178 182

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

HIGHLANDS

Monmouth

HOLMDEL

Monmouth

HOWELL

Monmouth

INTERLAKEN

Monmouth

KEANSBURG

Monmouth

KEYPORT

Monmouth

LAKE COMO

Monmouth

LITTLE SILVER

Monmouth

LOCH ARBOUR

Monmouth

LONG BRANCH

Monmouth

MANALAPAN

Monmouth

MANASQUAN

Monmouth

MARLBORO

Monmouth

MATAWAN

Monmouth

MIDDLETOWN

Monmouth

MILLSTONE TWP.

Monmouth

MONMOUTH BEACH

Monmouth

NEPTUNE CITY

Monmouth

NEPTUNE TOWNSHIP

Monmouth

OCEAN TOWNSHIP

Monmouth

OCEANPORT

Monmouth

RED BANK

Monmouth

ROOSEVELT

Monmouth

RUMSON

Monmouth

SEA BRIGHT

Monmouth

SEA GIRT

Monmouth

SHREWSBURY BOR.

Monmouth

SHREWSBURY TWP.

Monmouth

SPRING LAKE

Monmouth

SPRING LAKE HTS

Monmouth

TINTON FALLS

Monmouth

UNION BEACH

Monmouth

UPPER FREEHOLD

Monmouth

WALL

Monmouth

WEST LONG BRANCH

Monmouth

BOONTON TOWN

Morris

BOONTON TOWNSHIP

Morris

BUTLER

Morris

CHATHAM BOR.

Morris

CHATHAM TWI.A441P

Morris

CHESTER BOR.

Morris

CHESTER TWP.

Morris

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.76 2.89 2.27 2.04 2.15 1.22 2.98 2.84 3.14 2.93 2.17 2.40 91.6 97.3 87.0 84.3 60.3 80.8 60.8 87.5 72.0 92.4 79.0 63.1 89.5 86.6 64.1 33,536 40,759 37,902 18,309 51,134 134,066 299,549 107,789 0.449 0.199 0.962 42,754 78,419 1,675 2.06 2.63 393 1,871 0.854 0.886 0.817 0.139 0.822 598,034 308,505 93,606 127,424 146,153 150,011 494,583 193,579 26,637 49,885 25,898 71,923 42,272 25,837 26,278 31,917 34,911 53,041 39,881 76.0 76.5 80.2 87.3 93.2 70.8 92.6 86.8 93.3 90.4 94.7 93.2 88.3 72.3 97.0 89.1 612 266 520 262 309 237 604 683 207 301 191 486 230 550 343 229 475 458 202 163 273 434 389 394 589 384 381 312 1,248 878 484 285 84 133 335 337 8 183 20 471 471 519 17 5,866 330 1,762 4,780 112 250 283 518 12,997 1,415 329 329 305 138 445 419 1,658 1,158 1,304 1,888 1,524 1,782 1,288 1,011 1,673 1,051 1,149 919 1,354 2,218 967 1,213 1,097 897 870 1,106 738 763 1,479 1,265 760 765 887 957 1,360 1,090 244 391 1,316 2.27 3.24 2.62 2.60 2.29 2.71 2.89 3.34 2.72 3.39 2.72 2.83 2.82 2.38 3.05 3.48 3.17 2.65 3.11 3.24 1.82 2.96 1.90 2.04 2.25 2.37 2.51 2.35 1,391 10,835 1,265 22,255 838 0.214 0.895 6,083 0.950 18,387 0.961 1,486 0.942 23,302 0.966 161,723 61,805 174,953 25,545 0.937 168,426 6,263 0.969 142,277 2,858 0.934 287,880 25,196 0.965 188,698 56,451 40,685 16,658 0.952 162,968 40,276 50,431 0.953 186,868 38,474 3,222 0.953 100,885 27,736 4,274 0.963 333,445 117,752 25,810 0.951 142,841 37,281 5,827 0.897 131,774 39,860 19,268 0.908 149,331 41,593 21,242 0.956 263,132 78,454 6,005 0.970 254,512 51,353 21,057 0.957 253,590 64,946 3,587 0.963 143,605 32,177 5,503 0.947 384,687 141,734 5,053 0.958 298,071 95,817 16,009 0.950 225,449 81,139 82.9 726 328 1,518 8,611 0.962 210,391 55,159 89.1 468 107 1,665 10,635 0.965 153,844 39,002 87.3 456 445 1,545 15,328 13,798 15,740 16,963 18,724 14,772 14,468 15,639 22,820 15,157 16,929 15,047 16,267 14,575 15,972 13,595 13,178 15,736 12,768 17,616 14,730 14,925 13,515 14,477 61,818 14,656 25,024 49,313 5,100 13,850 12,803 18,083 139,455 17,957 9,582 0.964 247,676 73,806 93.8 286 290 1,190 14,929 21,679 0.911 134,933 36,807 91.4 200 92 943 14,263 3,316 0.916 759,487 229,642 92.6 881 178 2,651 21,185 1,765 314 575 361 491 505 663 888 334 574 570 574 319 307 328 738 229 425 386 444 677 343 382 387 148 410 319 937 331 1,855 807 286 395 450 461 1,478 568 13,648 0.961 290,940 47,185 57.6 460 960 1,592 15,188 681 12,389 0.953 256,495 61,602 64.9 308 686 1,266 17,132 536 11,396 0.979 319,735 46,876 56.5 318 668 1,724 16,659 747 14.5 10.6 15.3 11.6 15.4 22.6 10.9 16.9 12.9 18.2 22.5 14.6 19.4 14.0 11.9 9.1 8.9 18.3 26.7 12.3 13.8 14.0 21.3 13.1 14.9 14.8 17.7 14.5 22.3 17.3 1.4 13.3 4.0 1.9 18.4 7.2 11.7 12.9 0.9 7.7 17,860 0.962 87,504 18,465 73.9 363 703 1,019 14,099 213 13.4 16,483 0.955 204,599 50,902 81.8 360 23 1,150 15,543 475 16.1 136 86 290 108 214 143 111 112 109 190 64 129 107 98 133 131 201 174 67 100 128 153 111 89 93 190 109 82 115 57 96 111 26 55 78 33 76 111 78 131 40 68 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1,413 8,227 864 877 862 870 4,564 967 1,585 841 731 1,243 1,522 3,909 755 963 2,040 1,350 1,261 3,328 750 4,410 1,005 1,198 2,426 825 1,346 1,785 3,466 11,323 2,517 3,807 3,719 6,371 641 2,697 1,910 1,563 3,712 6,758 8,468 1,836 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 239 159 256 171 229 125 249 211 265 249 139 181 138 337 224 230 174 130 212 180 135 238 206 300 153 305 241 251 262 112 186 229 84 245 100 60 201 423 244 220 52 200

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

DENVILLE

Morris

DOVER TOWN

Morris

EAST HANOVER

Morris

FLORHAM PARK

Morris

HANOVER

Morris

HARDING

Morris

JEFFERSON

Morris

KINNELON

Morris

LINCOLN PARK

Morris

LONG HILL

Morris

MADISON

Morris

MENDHAM BOROUGH

Morris

MENDHAM TOWNSHIP

Morris

MINE HILL

Morris

MONTVILLE

Morris

MORRIS PLAINS

Morris

MORRIS TOWNSHIP

Morris

MORRISTOWN

Morris

MOUNT ARLINGTON

Morris

MOUNT OLIVE

Morris

MOUNTAIN LAKES

Morris

NETCONG

Morris

PAR.-TROY HILLS

Morris

PEQUANNOCK

Morris

RANDOLPH

Morris

RIVERDALE

Morris

ROCKAWAY BOR.

Morris

ROCKAWAY TWP.

Morris

ROXBURY

Morris

VICTORY GARDENS

Morris

WASHINGTON TWP.

Morris

WHARTON

Morris

BARNEGAT LIGHT

Ocean

BARNEGAT TWP.

Ocean

BAY HEAD

Ocean

BEACH HAVEN

Ocean

BEACHWOOD

Ocean

BERKELEY TWP.

Ocean

BRICK

Ocean

EAGLESWOOD

Ocean

HARVEY CEDARS

Ocean

ISLAND HEIGHTS

Ocean

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.62 2.32 2.50 3.25 1.71 2.66 1.81 2.05 1.53 3.57 2.40 2.32 95.6 90.1 90.4 76.5 64.3 92.2 86.8 84.0 86.6 93.7 83.2 85.2 89.2 73.0 83.5 34,042 39,332 44,401 13,513 56,440 136,701 72,459 149,129 0.966 0.960 0.968 27,739 11,908 3,072 3.15 3.15 7,967 1,345 0.924 0.958 0.941 0.932 0.929 228,558 110,118 208,917 128,425 152,001 91,337 77,918 75,178 14,044 34,713 17,599 41,520 36,889 35,137 47,328 36,344 32,950 31,563 23,735 26,806 82.6 80.4 94.9 71.0 72.8 87.8 88.6 90.9 56.3 86.8 73.7 90.0 74.8 89.4 64.9 77.2 216 187 320 264 216 250 307 706 224 238 234 220 498 222 632 262 363 192 312 262 284 280 656 315 419 469 999 1,761 6,441 3,354 74 287 5,024 274 607 32 136 410 141 579 550 742 375 601 118 763 235 414 205 229 494 813 733 1,851 430 182 315 245 825 456 744 2,549 1,455 1,146 1,064 856 1,026 888 796 726 1,103 1,199 1,358 960 1,159 1,158 1,134 1,333 1,044 1,180 1,105 1,434 896 1,321 1,064 1,072 550 1,054 739 295 207 1,010 2.36 2.62 2.30 3.00 2.54 2.03 2.60 2.76 2.07 2.15 2.92 3.92 3.37 4.10 3.39 3.21 3.03 3.43 3.20 3.87 4.08 3.65 2.84 3.77 3.24 3.71 3.18 3.09 12,195 53,918 10,621 12,681 5,594 0.931 0.966 11,031 0.965 145,643 0.925 66,884 0.950 8,904 0.972 172,424 53,972 11,643 0.962 163,227 17,997 0.961 151,505 8,517 0.947 80,918 78,219 0.960 137,497 28,045 20,986 7,454 0.950 129,252 34,575 3,876 0.734 101,784 23,874 95,933 0.802 145,272 32,704 1,558 0.242 278,385 38,839 26,520 0.742 142,873 27,999 3,709 0.947 74,186 17,821 1,449 0.269 258,059 34,093 2,311 0.308 178,170 38,920 3,342 0.458 119,549 19,951 5,418 0.588 262,413 38,308 20,139 0.873 163,998 34,566 8,215 0.957 115,805 30,183 2,078 0.906 142,087 33,074 8,993 0.812 129,233 29,947 89.7 355 1,229 891 2,136 0.692 92,617 26,274 96.9 279 683 849 452 0.303 1,120,319 157,812 96.0 656 2,538 24,248 13,408 18,323 9,460 12,592 11,418 16,474 19,287 60,940 35,501 3,367 9,659 52,634 12,507 16,962 15,886 12,870 13,492 13,121 14,609 17,706 17,993 19,602 15,024 13,159 15,205 15,185 15,683 14,407 15,259 12,772 12,702 23,758 14,052 41,629 0.882 100,445 25,118 89.2 193 96 651 13,660 3,546 0.167 409,109 56,313 95.1 302 10,445 1,037 107,011 20,699 0.781 117,031 26,401 89.8 151 733 751 15,958 358 1,222 313 3,312 282 400 432 345 503 783 360 565 745 228 440 831 445 314 661 703 409 741 819 869 269 271 676 368 763 1,061 566 1,012 638 737 804 681 676 2,754 0.295 258,770 41,790 95.4 193 714 16,899 798 70,983 0.922 107,159 15,477 76.6 360 960 17,869 323 2,707 0.934 66,377 20,114 82.4 578 915 1,245 13,645 200 19.8 7.0 2.2 10.9 1.0 6.6 0.3 9.5 8.9 14.8 21.4 13.5 7.5 4.9 1.4 1.9 21.3 13.1 1.5 11.7 9.1 12.1 13.3 15.0 13.2 10.7 8.6 16.9 15.8 14.7 19.1 15.3 13.2 11.7 15.7 13.8 12.0 18.7 12.4 14.1 26,381 0.880 146,766 29,644 86.4 246 219 861 12,881 454 16.1 52,587 0.955 135,727 31,865 87.9 244 705 770 12,915 417 17.8 80 409 122 84 21 70 34 89 105 60 72 116 72 69 85 28 33 50 101 95 28 92 79 93 159 96 101 137 85 208 245 119 68 164 157 92 101 129 86 141 122 113 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 5,184 4,690 10,922 5,253 1,189 7,520 6,444 2,095 2,175 4,197 7,651 3,544 6,100 2,179 1,155 3,952 7,667 2,141 1,261 2,267 3,157 4,685 6,668 2,415 2,442 6,492 1,035 878 2,786 16,771 17,367 2,591 7,948 3,185 837 3,398 753 3,909 904 6,335 15,703 7,757 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 242 253 164 167 81 221 59 390 54 164 205 240 213 215 120 43 77 72 194 227 85 182 174 339 267 200 278 284 303 92 98 327 172 277 284 255 258 277 275 265 210 231

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

JACKSON

Ocean

LACEY

Ocean

LAKEHURST

Ocean

LAKEWOOD

Ocean

LAVALLETTE

Ocean

LITTLE EGG HARBOR

Ocean

LONG BEACH

Ocean

MANCHESTER

Ocean

MANTOLOKING

Ocean

OCEAN GATE

Ocean

OCEAN TWP.

Ocean

PINE BEACH

Ocean

PLUMSTED

Ocean

POINT PLEASANT

Ocean

POINT PLEASANT BCH.

Ocean

SEASIDE HEIGHTS

Ocean

SEASIDE PARK

Ocean

SHIP BOTTOM

Ocean

SOUTH TOMS RIVER

Ocean

STAFFORD

Ocean

SURF CITY

Ocean

TOMS RIVER TWP.

Ocean

TUCKERTON

Ocean

BLOOMINGDALE

Passaic

CLIFTON

Passaic

HALEDON

Passaic

HAWTHORNE

Passaic

LITTLE FALLS

Passaic

NORTH HALEDON

Passaic

PASSAIC CITY

Passaic

PATERSON

Passaic

POMPTON LAKES

Passaic

PROSPECT PARK

Passaic

RINGWOOD

Passaic

TOTOWA

Passaic

WANAQUE

Passaic

WAYNE

Passaic

WEST MILFORD

Passaic

WOODLAND PARK

Passaic

ALLOWAY

Salem

CARNEYS POINT

Salem

ELMER

Salem

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.98 0.93 2.77 3.21 4.04 3.44 2.82 3.14 3.10 4.40 2.87 3.32 85.4 76.6 87.1 90.7 84.6 73.4 74.8 91.4 79.8 83.2 87.3 86.4 93.2 90.5 85.7 76.2 31,725 53,651 29,891 67,766 297,970 274,686 114,897 0.949 0.943 8,465 5,594 5,077 3,316 3.24 3.24 3,599 3,466 0.912 0.812 0.906 0.936 0.944 0.924 130,832 183,686 126,763 140,926 91,191 156,773 149,413 102,149 26,952 96,175 95,301 30,247 41,924 27,651 37,898 35,652 25,347 42,574 47,701 30,601 53.1 88.4 67.0 91.4 79.9 79.0 68.2 82.8 53.9 89.2 87.1 71.1 92.6 92.9 86.3 536 403 259 211 277 258 622 179 868 253 972 404 395 288 668 330 279 478 221 165 322 182 231 227 243 335 330 389 88 584 1,441 658 451 331 433 404 601 1,442 526 1,165 121 229 820 34 56 63 145 315 560 276 301 323 422 1,347 662 626 323 55 1,203 1,438 1,545 1,018 1,135 909 2,221 1,032 1,133 732 1,172 1,260 1,239 882 2,405 1,221 1,746 1,211 955 996 1,922 857 1,073 1,454 1,032 531 1,047 683 947 736 433 453 904 1.67 2.31 2.13 3.61 2.85 2.65 1.29 2.87 3.13 2.89 3.48 3.08 2.95 4.01 2.47 2.90 2.73 3.49 3.59 2.32 2.44 2.85 3.29 2.83 3.42 2.86 3.22 3.10 814 6,531 633 6,502 0.946 0.916 15,944 0.962 5,110 0.929 12,637 0.927 675 0.959 197,654 106,313 7,289 0.939 172,086 2,556 0.935 313,153 21,143 0.949 86,580 22,958 0.966 215,674 71,413 24,027 124,069 410 0.970 130,600 35,848 10,800 0.939 101,055 24,781 38,968 0.967 153,541 44,197 6,891 0.970 221,739 55,556 59,417 0.954 152,298 38,702 898 0.900 506,899 275,226 44,339 0.967 206,952 50,096 15,025 0.973 207,161 53,798 10,365 0.940 91,899 23,159 7,750 0.935 320,972 123,299 26,542 0.968 266,127 89,224 8,344 0.943 315,301 94,918 3,360 0.944 84,938 29,938 3,584 0.952 94,907 30,505 86.6 238 8 476 5,661 0.819 38,732 15,601 69.3 374 1,135 1,140 2,841 0.943 49,412 26,182 85.1 255 916 511 14,903 19,505 12,450 9,441 18,821 14,003 16,970 14,501 15,809 14,446 18,155 17,020 15,652 13,403 13,562 9,652 13,746 17,286 18,166 13,014 13,902 17,508 16,582 16,740 19,028 9,554 15,670 22,540 12,643 16,550 14,409 14,027 13,736 16,961 9,434 0.960 73,246 29,918 87.7 156 321 413 13,976 4,548 0.934 98,536 44,583 85.9 332 811 556 16,896 13,345 0.928 89,100 27,302 67.2 271 373 1,009 13,823 799 911 704 460 344 808 727 935 795 971 291 707 723 1,503 439 731 514 307 442 694 295 1,130 497 657 316 225 1,012 964 431 507 738 499 511 361 606 579 394 4,688 0.899 34,633 13,977 80.6 515 213 1,167 6,212 304 1,803 0.933 102,015 28,232 56.8 428 74 725 16,679 941 1,559 0.912 127,023 39,461 51.5 212 648 749 16,831 1,150 11.1 14.3 21.7 13.8 12.8 16.3 13.2 15.9 14.6 18.3 9.4 20.6 16.8 12.7 16.9 17.5 10.0 12.2 19.1 18.7 11.5 15.6 22.2 14.2 14.7 14.8 13.6 11.7 9.8 19.2 13.8 17.2 12.0 12.7 18.0 12.8 13.6 17.7 18.5 12.0 1,884 0.934 154,473 27,665 41.5 1,114 690 4,959 5,005 1,063 13.0 1,050 0.868 98,507 31,507 91.4 235 746 571 15,007 801 10.7 135 3,845 208 163 279 475 124 92 142 240 161 90 123 88 109 131 226 179 88 96 102 105 179 201 80 85 116 110 143 133 96 101 139 238 90 975 88 94 142 99 71 78 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4,395 4,315 3,923 6,525 4,106 4,601 7,362 8,152 8,366 16,130 5,988 4,113 1,113 799 701 5,367 1,096 1,266 750 2,166 1,021 3,313 3,888 1,549 961 7,988 750 1,141 983 3,914 6,365 918 1,053 1,868 3,063 3,472 3,725 3,949 5,986 3,041 3,103 5,869 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 291 113 204 241 134 257 234 239 238 122 231 220 181 177 152 227 221 233 119 231 260 205 298 338 146 220 160 203 218 185 201 167 158 214 210 249 258 215 220 221 255 276

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

ELSINBORO

Salem

LWR. ALLOWAYS CRk.

Salem

MANNINGTON

Salem

OLDMANS

Salem

PENNS GROVE

Salem

PENNSVILLE

Salem

PILESGROVE

Salem

PITTSGROVE

Salem

QUINTON

Salem

SALEM CITY

Salem

UPPER PITTSGROVE

Salem

WOODSTOWN

Salem

BEDMINSTER

Somerset

BERNARDS TWP.

Somerset

BERNARDSVILLE

Somerset

BOUND BROOK

Somerset

BRANCHBURG

Somerset

BRIDGEWATER

Somerset

FAR HILLS

Somerset

FRANKLIN TWP.

Somerset

GREEN BROOK

Somerset

HILLSBOROUGH

Somerset

MANVILLE

Somerset

MILLSTONE BOR.

Somerset

MONTGOMERY

Somerset

NORTH PLAINFIELD

Somerset

PEAPACK-GLAD.

Somerset

RARITAN BOROUGH

Somerset

ROCKY HILL

Somerset

SOMERVILLE

Somerset

SOUTH BOUND BROOK

Somerset

WARREN TOWNSHIP

Somerset

WATCHUNG

Somerset

ANDOVER BOROUGH

Sussex

ANDOVER TOWNSHIP

Sussex

BRANCHVILLE

Sussex

BYRAM

Sussex

FRANKFORD

Sussex

FRANKLIN BOROUGH

Sussex

FREDON

Sussex

GREEN

Sussex

HAMBURG

Sussex

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008 2008 2010 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008 2008-09 2008

Property Tax County 1 2.82 2.90 3.02 3.17 2.68 3.91 3.41 2.61 3.20 3.63 2.87 3.11 76.9 89.0 87.4 73.0 81.7 82.2 66.4 92.7 72.5 77.7 49.9 52.6 80.7 83.0 86.6 26,937 22,993 28,425 57,055 49,343 370,835 139,556 253,069 0.932 0.934 2,635 5,941 3,123 2,233 2.89 3.57 5,114 9,511 0.925 0.935 0.920 0.920 0.967 0.952 151,672 92,832 103,256 149,052 137,971 128,199 157,179 107,387 124,543 31,180 84,868 48,623 25,396 26,239 34,880 38,614 43,919 37,868 29,860 66.1 84.9 89.0 92.3 75.1 82.1 71.8 89.9 94.3 71.7 72.7 86.4 81.9 93.5 82.0 69.2 293 303 462 316 696 414 339 347 438 363 188 278 337 539 283 381 337 225 254 268 313 310 265 259 748 654 429 539 630 26 158 188 885 175 575 239 489 332 270 810 1,254 533 259 259 749 103 79 142 1,170 8 318 595 202 130 140 416 671 519 1,193 1,277 1,319 1,498 1,160 1,475 1,877 1,690 2,217 1,534 1,352 1,429 1,471 1,678 1,011 1,048 1,695 1,914 1,461 1,241 689 1,026 1,027 822 669 584 808 871 414 89 766 3.10 3.06 2.65 3.06 2.93 3.02 3.35 3.28 4.21 2.78 3.46 2.31 2.95 3.47 3.19 4.80 3.72 3.08 3.13 2.04 3.26 2.51 2.67 3.51 3.26 2.90 3.75 2.93 2,386 4,385 29,450 53,673 0.966 0.965 20,557 0.941 14,829 0.967 22,891 0.966 12,802 0.956 102,308 180,608 197,939 20,599 0.933 83,834 28,624 0.932 121,176 46,126 0.913 71,837 11,905 0.972 215,127 59,830 20,996 6,551 0.965 287,661 63,929 39,162 0.939 157,826 23,894 7,619 0.972 262,278 30,448 21,171 0.944 101,228 24,711 4,408 0.951 147,676 35,116 7,088 0.978 168,967 44,257 124,755 0.914 68,117 16,691 21,895 0.974 191,356 48,067 14,357 0.967 188,876 39,672 13,344 0.973 250,188 62,739 11,557 0.937 124,355 30,243 24,854 0.787 105,023 31,003 2,124 0.895 62,485 21,714 4,292 0.805 111,519 33,122 93.4 284 232 734 3,562 0.948 116,592 34,676 92.5 238 879 1,102 19,206 0.925 179,756 50,295 89.0 383 895 1,154 13,907 14,175 14,054 10,238 15,102 15,033 14,876 13,926 12,395 17,710 12,665 14,420 15,052 14,908 16,317 13,459 14,292 18,539 14,138 16,545 13,935 14,168 16,406 15,624 14,598 13,111 15,570 13,303 12,971 12,767 16,454 14,049 11,038 15,862 1,882 0.798 128,891 31,329 85.9 306 1,556 658 17,464 2,545 0.955 92,220 28,177 89.9 370 260 1,146 12,234 8,096 0.911 92,081 27,131 70.4 234 1,091 15,175 358 354 471 637 444 418 247 389 441 875 656 643 230 562 492 361 845 505 991 700 238 401 278 346 624 676 1,137 481 861 925 543 567 917 864 786 953 601 3,906 0.852 104,491 27,575 82.3 185 500 15,859 402 2,466 0.952 187,145 38,509 77.8 464 118 812 17,116 703 15,491 0.898 112,145 32,774 93.1 202 230 835 14,198 402 13.5 16.4 10.7 12.6 17.4 13.8 19.3 16.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 17.1 18.9 14.8 16.6 14.5 17.7 11.5 13.6 16.0 14.6 14.8 18.1 14.6 12.4 13.1 14.8 17.4 13.0 17.4 13.8 20.7 10.3 13.8 17.9 17.2 17.9 15.1 24.3 13.4 8,295 0.860 142,612 36,944 86.5 278 399 939 16,488 556 11.1 5,099 0.919 142,147 36,184 79.8 226 190 694 14,993 545 15.4 104 92 71 101 117 143 93 160 80 74 84 99 90 87 152 155 166 250 134 135 237 168 562 154 140 184 161 136 100 124 147 179 136 137 114 109 218 504 105 112 77 94 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4,140 4,429 5,492 2,865 5,550 5,589 5,701 6,429 1,809 4,258 4,797 3,909 6,138 5,740 772 782 855 15,565 773 1,142 6,899 2,842 3,794 738 668 15,490 5,392 7,970 5,125 864 738 665 4,002 680 1,461 5,518 6,193 3,776 4,382 4,141 4,331 4,123 Burden Index Capita Resident Pupil of Pop. per Capita Res. Pupil per Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per

County Tax levy

Res. School Pupils

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 12 258 218 240 268 201 205 282 208 191 318 218 184 197 250 218 344 280 96 307 257 256 305 229 235 222 149 220 267 266 246 283 130 281 172 280 308 267 255 251 230 222 241

State School Aid per

State Tax Rebates

Determinant

HAMPTON TOWNSHIP

Sussex

HARDYSTON

Sussex

HOPATCONG

Sussex

LAFAYETTE

Sussex

MONTAGUE

Sussex

NEWTON

Sussex

OGDENSBURG

Sussex

SANDYSTON

Sussex

SPARTA

Sussex

STANHOPE

Sussex

STILLWATER

Sussex

SUSSEX BOROUGH

Sussex

VERNON

Sussex

WANTAGE

Sussex

BERKELEY HEIGHTS

Union

CLARK

Union

CRANFORD

Union

ELIZABETH

Union

FANWOOD

Union

GARWOOD

Union

HILLSIDE

Union

KENILWORTH

Union

LINDEN

Union

MOUNTAINSIDE

Union

NEW PROVIDENCE

Union

PLAINFIELD

Union

RAHWAY

Union

ROSELLE

Union

ROSELLE PARK

Union

SCOTCH PLAINS

Union

SPRINGFIELD

Union

SUMMIT

Union

UNION TOWNSHIP

Union

WESTFIELD

Union

ALLAMUCHY

Warren

ALPHA

Warren

BELVIDERE

Warren

BLAIRSTOWN

Warren

FRANKLIN

Warren

FRELINGHUYSEN

Warren

GREENWICH

Warren

HACKETTSTOWN

Warren

Appendix 2 - Determinants of Property Tax Burden in New Jersey, 2008

2008

2008

2010

2008

2008-09

2008

2008-09

2008

2008-09

2008

2008-09

2008

Property Tax County 1 3.08 2.74 3.55 3.02 3.07 3.40 2.96 3.18 3.32 2.92 3.87 3.85 3.32 2.55 5,905 0.918 122,430 6,864 0.955 128,147 6,693 0.905 80,492 3,330 0.923 127,548 30,274 25,973 36,421 30,954 14,528 0.897 66,428 20,582 2,575 0.920 86,269 28,021 8,119 0.896 107,253 29,644 80.5 91.2 75.8 68.7 80.3 87.1 73.0 8,404 0.917 112,922 34,080 79.3 2,918 0.910 114,067 32,425 94.6 3,128 0.905 121,295 37,271 88.0 321 292 315 230 604 256 514 259 287 336 5,696 0.961 125,510 35,615 92.9 391 1,955 0.916 140,279 34,068 89.5 365 2,813 0.917 217,221 30,346 45.4 320 533 34 328 352 323 119 322 71 619 746 380 208 1,620 0.926 138,655 39,607 93.9 296 289 2 3 4 5 6 592 855 749 741 639 669 702 642 851 972 1,552 906 805 480 Burden Index Capita Est. Pop. pied Units per Capita plus Dependents Farm Hmstd. per Capita Resident Pupil

Census % OccuEqualized Valuation

2008 Personal Income per Taxpayer Gen.Fund Balance Municipal per Budget

2008 % of Tax Base Res.+ Apt. +

2008 Local Mun. Misc. Rev.

Municipality

per

School Cost per Resident Pupil 7 13,472 15,184 15,138 13,186 13,157 13,000 12,392 14,874 14,739 19,932 14,800 13,156 14,406 14,356

County Tax levy per Capita 8 884 1,411 854 781 730 716 674 637 520 366 831 447 775 747

Res. School Pupils of Pop. 9 17.2 13.8 13.8 14.9 17.4 17.1 13.6 13.4 14.8 15.3 14.3 14.5 17.0 9.3

as %

State Mun. Aid per Capita 10 115 200 127 69 116 97 136 126 88 148 128 100 97 66

State School Aid per Res. Pupil 11 4,144 1,206 3,634 4,498 4,626 4,434 2,715 5,715 6,135 17,057 3,700 4,893 5,124 3,390

State Tax Rebates per Capita 12 279 235 247 248 242 275 243 191 278 182 336 215 267 220

Determinant

HARDWICK

Warren

HARMONY

Warren

HOPE

Warren

INDEPENDENCE

Warren

KNOWLTON

Warren

LIBERTY

Warren

LOPATCONG

Warren

MANSFIELD

Warren

OXFORD

Warren

PHILLIPSBURG

Warren

POHATCONG

Warren

WASHINGTON BOR.

Warren

WASHINGTON TWP.

Warren

WHITE

Warren