Date: 2009/12/24

Homeowners in Princetons see new property values

By Krystal Knapp

Special to The Times

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP -Early next year, residential property owners in the two
Princetons will receive letters informing them of the new assessed values of their
properties.

Borough residents will receive letters the week of Jan. 4, and township residents will
receive letters a few weeks later.

At a recent joint borough council and township committee meeting, the head of the firm
handling the assessments and the Princeton tax assessor updated officials on the status of
the assessments.

The last time a revaluation was done was in 1996.The two Princetons were ordered by
the County Board of Taxation to conduct the revaluation of properties. The new assessed
values as of Oct. 1, 2009 will be used to calculate property taxes in 2010.

"A revaluation is no more than an effort to make sure everyone is paying their fair share,"
Appraisal Systems CEO Ernest Del Guercio told officials, citing a New Jersey statute
that calls for all properties be assessed at 100 percent of their true market value.

"The constitution also demands that all properties be assessed by the same standard of
value," he said. "That is the key to the revaluation effort. Revaluation does not raise taxes.
It can not. All it does is insure everyone is paying their fair share, no more and no less."

The company reported last year that borough homes were assessed at about 40 percent of
their value, while township homes were assessed at about 47 percent of their value. Del
Guercio said residential properties generally have not gone up in value since 2005, and in
some cases have seen a decrease in value. "They've been dropping at a rate greater than
commercial and industrial properties," he said. "In the recent past there has been a shift --
sometimes significant, sometimes minor -- from residential to commercial."

Appraisers have visited as many properties as possible, Del Guercio said, but some
property owners "for whatever reason" have not given the company access to their
homes. They can still schedule a visit with the company. "In order to do the job properly,
we must see every property not only from the outside, but inside as well," he said.

The letters being sent out will state the true market value of the property. All of the
assessments and the factors that determined them will be posted on the company's web
site at asinj.com shortly after the letters are mailed.

Also included in the letters will be information on how property owners can schedule an
appointment with a member of the appraisal company to discuss the assessment amount
before it is finalized.

"We encourage people to avail themselves of this opportunity so that everyone will be
confident that the right information was used to determine the value and insure the
assessment is fair and equitable," Del Guercio said. "We will continue to meet with
people until we have met with every interested citizen of the borough and township."

At those one-on-one meetings, which will be offered during business hours, evenings, and
Saturdays, a representative of Appraisal Systems will review the information used to
determine a particular property's value. Property owners can share information they feel
affects the property value at that meeting.

On or before Feb. 1, a postcard will be sent to property owners stating the official value
of the property and what the taxes were the previous year. Property owners will have
until May 1 to appeal. After that date, property owners who dispute their assessments
would have to file an appeal with the County Board of Taxation. If property owners
disagree with the county findings, they have 45 days to file an appeal with the state.

Del Guercio warned that property owners should not apply the new assessment to the
old tax rate. The tax rate will be readjusted after the revaluation.

Township Committeeman Lance Liverman worried that residents who do not have
computer access, such as seniors, would be out of the loop in terms of information about
the assessments. Officials said the same information that is on the Web would be available
at the municipal buildings.

Borough Councilman David Goldfarb was concerned that people who disagree with the
conclusions of the assessment know that they have further recourse, adding: "The
message should be that when people are still unhappy after the informal meeting with
your firm, there is a chance to sit down with the assessor."
Date: 2010/01/29

A tale of two tax bills

Princeton Borough revaluation hikes burden on modest homes

By Krystal Knapp


 SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - Figures on the boroughwide property revaluation show that

homeowners with the lowest property values, on average, would see the highest average
percentage tax increase while those with the highest property values would see their taxes
decrease, according to a Times analysis.

The revaluation numbers have aroused concern among some residents who have set about
analyzing the data on their own. A look at two homes on opposite ends of the spectrum
illustrates the potential effects of the reassessment.

Take for instance 12 Lytle St. Previously assessed at $95,600, the property is now
assessed at $402,700. Taxes under the old assessment would have been about $4,200 for
2009. Under the new assessment they would be about $8,200, a difference of $4,000
more, or 95 percent.

Then there is 117 Library place, formerly ranked one of the residential properties with
the highest values in the borough at $1.99 million. It is now assessed at $3.46 million.
Taxes under the old assessment would have been almost $87,300 for 2009. Under the new
assessment they would be more than $70,500, a decrease of about $16,700, or more than
19 percent.

The last time a borough revaluation was conducted was back in 1996. The new assessed
values will be used to calculate property taxes for 2010.

Representatives from Appraisal Systems, the firm conducting the reassessments,

reported last year that borough homes on average were only assessed at about 40 percent
of their value, while township homes were assessed at about 47 percent of their value.

It appears that the reassessment will wallop those residents the most who own homes
formerly assessed at $167,000 or less, which includes about 20 percent of residential
property owners in the borough. A number of those properties are located in the John
Witherspoon neighborhood, while others are condominiums.

According to the data, the average borough residential property value increased from
$342,471 to $738,168, an increase of 115.5 percent.
Some homeowners will see very little change in their bills because their change in value
was about average. Some residents with lower valued homes will actually see decreases in
their tax bills, and some of the pricier properties will see increases.

On average, homeowners with properties formerly ranked in the bottom 20 percent in

terms of assessed value would see their tax payments increase an average of 28 percent, or
an average of $1,225. This data is based on preliminary assessment figures and assumes
that the tax base stays the same.

Meanwhile, homeowners with properties formerly ranked in the top 20 percent in terms
of assessed value will see their tax payments decrease an average of 8.4 percent, or an
average of $2,839.

"More of the burden is being placed on those least able to deal with it in these difficult
economic times," said resident Chris Baldwin, who believes the revaluation methodology
may be flawed.

Councilman David Goldfarb urged residents who dispute their new assessments to appeal
with the Mercer County Board of Taxation. Goldfarb agreed higher-value properties have
been hit hardest in the recent property slump.

Councilman Roger Martindell said the council should look into the issue further. Council
President Andrew Koontz suggested that the reassessment issue be placed on a future
agenda and that the borough tax assessor and representatives from Appraisal Systems
attend the meeting.

Brett Trout, the vice president of Appraisal Systems, said in a phone interview yesterday
that every property in town is assessed at a fair market rate based on what houses are
actually selling for.

"Some properties go up, some go down, some stay the same," he said. "The redistribution
is based on value, with all homes assessed at the same standard. A formula is not used."
Date: 2010/02/05

Princetonians say land values are all over the map

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - After examining a boroughwide revaluation that has aroused

much angst in the community, resident Don Cox wants to know why assigned land values
in his neighborhood appear to vary enormously, even for lots that are nearly identical in
size.

Comparing three similarly sized properties, Cox said the land value rates vary from
$11.50 to $23.52 to $83.40 per square foot, based on his analysis.

"It appears that no uniform measurement of land value was determined in accordance with
Section 502.4 of the New Jersey Assessor's Handbook," he wrote in a letter to the
company that did the revaluation, Appraisal Systems.

Questions like that -- including a concern that the revaluation may result in taxes that go
up more in percentage terms for owners of some of the cheaper properties in town than
for others -- have townspeople calling for a public discussion of the revaluation, which
goes into effect this year.

Based on a Times analysis of the new revaluation, the average borough residential
property has increased in value by 2.15 times its 1996 assessment, but properties in the
bottom 20 percent have increased an average of 2.71 times, while properties in the top 20
percent have only increased 1.98 times.

This means some of the residential property tax burden will be shifted to more
moderately valued homes. The exact impact on residential property taxes in 2010 will
depend on changes in commercial property tax values and the borough budget. Residents
do have the opportunity to appeal the new values.

Chris Baldwin is one of several residents who have raised questions about the
methodology used to determine property values during the revaluation. He wants more
transparency about how it was done.

The shift in the residential tax burden has such important consequences for residents that
Baldwin says it is important borough officials review the process to ensure accuracy,
consistency and fairness before assessments are finalized.

"Perhaps the new assessments are very accurate to current market conditions, but
perhaps not," he wrote in an e-mail. "The questions on the table are, how will we know
and who will decide?"

In addition to the methodology used to determine a home's value, residents are wondering
how the appraiser defined neighborhoods, how land values and house values were
weighed, and how much the condition of a home mattered.

Cox, who expressed surprise about the widely varying values assigned to seemingly
similar properties, doesn't think correct procedure was followed.

According to state law, the true value of a property is defined as the price at which, in the
assessor's judgment, each parcel of real property would sell for on Oct. 1, 2009.

Officials say Appraisal Systems is following state guidelines and basing assessments on
the true market value of homes, i.e., what they can sell for in the market. Appraisal
Systems outlines the assessment process in general on its website, www.asinj.com.

For the borough assessments, the company looked at market data from 2007, 2008 and
2009 and has posted sales data and neighborhood assessments on the website. The
company is expected to post information on the website about commercial property
reassessments within days, as well as a tax impact statement, broken down by property
type. Princeton Township assessments will be mailed out and posted in the next few
weeks.

Council President Andrew Koontz said a public forum is a good idea, but also stressed
that people who have concerns about their individual assessments should meet with
Appraisal Systems and appeal if they feel the assessments are incorrect.

Councilman Roger Martindell agreed a public forum would be productive, "so that the
community can have confidence that what was done was done fairly. I expect that my
colleagues will convene a meeting with Appraisal Systems and perhaps the township as
well in order to discuss the methodology so everyone is comfortable."

Martindell also said individuals should appeal if they disagree with their individual
assessments. While he has no reason so far to believe the methodology is flawed, he said
it is important to understand the effects on taxpayers.

"If it is true that certain parts of town have gone up proportionally greater than other
parts of town. There will be market forces that will affect the future of those parts of
town. And if those parts of town include taxpayers who are the least well off in our
community, it will tend to force those taxpayers out of town."

Martindell characterized significant assessment increases in more moderate homes as a

negative and a positive. The tax burden will be greater, but the property is also more
valuable and sellers can earn more. Martindell expressed concern about the gentrification
of neighborhoods and the loss of moderately priced housing in town, which he said would
be "to (the) detriment of the entire community, making us even more of golden ghetto
than we are today."
2010/03/24

Martindell gets 'official' endorsement from Democrats

By Krystal Knapp

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - Incumbent Councilman Roger Martindell is the lone

candidate to receive the official endorsement of the local Democratic organization for this
year's borough council race.

Council President Andrew Koontz withdrew from the race because he received the nod
from county Democrats last weekend to run for freeholder this year.

Candidate Nick Karp also withdrew and says he will focus his efforts on the newly
formed Citizen Finance Advocacy Taskforce, an independent group formed late last year
to review the Borough budget and look for cost savings.

Martindell, a lawyer who has served on the council since 1989, was the top vote-getter at
the Princeton Community Democratic Organization endorsement meeting Sunday night,
receiving 73 percent of the votes cast by borough and township Democrats who attended
the meeting. He received 77 percent of the votes cast by borough delegates, pushing him
well beyond the 60 percent threshold needed for the PCDO's official endorsement.

Candidate Anne Neumann came in second with 55 percent of the total vote, while
candidate Jo Butler came in last place with 41 percent of the votes. Neuman and Butler
fell short of receiving the official endorsement because they did not surpass the needed
60 percent threshhold. Each delegate could vote for two candidates; 49 percent voted for
Neumann, while 42 percent voted for Butler. Both candidates will appear in the same
column as Martinell for the Democratic primary because they received a majority of the
borough and township votes combined, but they will not carry the official PCDO slogan
next to their names.

Martindell stressed his experience on the council and touted a record of fiscal prudence
and social activism. He said he voted against budget increases more than any other
council member over the past 20 years. He also said he worked this past year to make
sure the borough police department now has civilian oversight in the form of an effective
public safety committee.

Neumann, a former member of the Princeton Environmental Commission, a member of

the regional site plan review committee, and a member of the PCDO local issues
committee, has a bachelor's degree in math and a doctorate in English literature. She says
her work on the environmental commission has strengthened her belief that Princeton can
and should strive to balance environmental, economic and social sustainability. She also
has reviewed the issue of the amount Princeton University pays to the borough in lieu of
taxes and believes increased revenue from the university should go only toward property
tax relief.

Butler, who has an master's degree in business administratioin from Northwestern

University and works for Wickenden Associates, is the chairwoman of the Citizen
Finance Advocacy Taskforce.

She is stressing fiscal responsibility and transparency and says she wants to make the
budget process more open and accessible to residents. She would like the borough to
improve communication with residents through the use of e-mail and the internet.

All three candidates support exploring consolidation. While Martindell and Neumann
said they believe it would be more efficient and cost-effective in the long run, Butler said
she would need to see more data to come to a final conclusion.

Asked about the problem of so-called McMansions cropping up in town, Neumann and
Martindell said they would support changing zoning regulations, while Butler said larger
houses are not necessarily bad and that they help the town's fiscal situation.

Asked for her thoughts on how the property reassessment will affect owners of more
modest homes, Butler said the results of the revaluation should not be a surprise because
of how tear-downs have driven the market. She said the borough should control taxes to
address the situation.

Martindell and Neumann called for the borough to provide some form of property-tax
relief for lower income residents affected by the revaluation with money from the
borough's affordable housing fund. Neumann suggested the relief could be in the form of
a rebate, while Martindell said it could be in the form of loans he compared to a reverse
mortgage that would be paid back when the property owner sells the home or dies.
Date: 2010/03/28

Concerns voiced about property revaluations in the Princetons

Residents to get opportunity to question assessment process during upcoming
public forum

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - The borough and township will host a public forum
Wednesday night to address residents' concerns about the recent property revaluation.

The joint public meeting will begin at 7 p.m. in the main room of the township municipal
building.

Representatives from the private firm that conducted the revaluation, Appraisal Systems,
will explain the assessment process. The tax assessor and a county representative may
also be there.

Some residents from both municipalities have questioned the methodologies used in the
reassessments and feel there are inconsistencies and some inaccurate information in
individual assessments. Some say an inspector never entered their homes.

A few residents have expressed concerns about the tax burden shifting in the borough and
the township -- people with more modest homes will be paying more because
assessments on modest homes increased at a higher rate than did assessments on more
expensive homes. Representatives from Appraisal Systems have said throughout the
process that the new assessments are based on market value.

An analysis by The Times found that the majority of the top 40 percent of residential
property owners in the borough will see their property taxes decrease under the new
assessment, while the majority of the bottom 60 percent will see their taxes increase.

Data for the township were just recently posted on the Appraisal Systems Web site. It is
unclear yet whether the township follows the same pattern as the borough.

During a recent borough council meeting, resident Anne Neumann suggested the council
should do something to help borough residents of the more modest homes who are facing
steep tax increases.

"My mathematical brain says this shift in property taxes toward what in other
communities would be mid-priced homes means rational market forces are at work,"
Neumann told the council. "My compassionate brain says this inequity must not stand,
however.

"Taxes must not be raised on many who are least able to pay and lowered on those who
can pay most," she said. "Some redress must be found immediately, before more of our
long-time friends and neighbors are driven from Princeton. And, if the borough can legally
shift the tax burden back more onto people like me in the middle, whose taxes have also
been lowered, let it come soon while our tax breaks still seem like windfalls."

Neumann said there is a perceived inequity.

"We cannot let any Princetonian believe this imbalance is acceptable," she said. "We
cannot say merely that individuals who feel they have been unfairly assessed should seek
an individual remedy."

She said the perceived inequity is not individual, but is systemic.

"It constitutes a pattern too large to ignore," she said. "This perceived inequity is
something borough council must be perceived as trying to remedy. Otherwise those of us
in the community who are not hurting very much today may fear that, when we hurt
more in the future, no one will come to our aid."

Neumann asked what assessment standards the council's contract with Appraisal
Systems specified, and she asked if the council was satisfied that those standards were
met. She also asked whether enough recent sales data in all neighborhoods were available
to make proper assessments.

"Had house prices begun rising or were they still declining on the appraisal base date,
October 2009, and had they done so equally for low- and high-priced houses? " she asked.

"As for individual assessments, are Appraisal Systems' fair market values' realistically
what all of our neighbors could get for their houses?

"How do they compare to insurance values, for example," she wondered, "and is this
relevant?

"Could the borough collect recent insurance evaluations in the affected neighborhoods and
compare them with Appraisal Systems' values?

"Could a Princeton realtor volunteer to assess randomly selected houses and offer a
second opinion? Is it possible that revaluation was in some cases too hasty?"

Assuming there were no problems with how the appraisals were conducted, Neumann
said the council should work to make people aware of any property tax relief programs
that are available to them. She also asked whether the borough could provide some sort of
local property tax rebate. One possibility, she said, is that additional money from
Princeton University in the form of payments in lieu of taxes could be used for rebates for
residents whose property taxes have risen above a certain percentage of household
income.
Date: 2010/04/02

In Princetons,a taxing time Residents dispute assessments

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

Ken Griebell's taxes have almost doubled since he moved to Princeton Borough five years
ago. People in his neighborhood are having trouble selling their homes, and they have
received much less than expected, he says.

"Now it's like I'm being hit with a 22 percent surcharge," he said of his newest property
assessment and the potential for higher taxes. Griebell said he dreams of staying in town
and raising his grandchildren in Princeton, but that future is uncertain.

Griebell was one of more than 130 Princeton residents from the township and borough
who packed a meeting Wednesday night to talk about property values and ask questions
about the recent revaluations in both towns.

They filled the seats, sat in the aisles and stood in the back of the Princeton Township
meeting room for three hours to hear representatives from the reassessment firm
Appraisal Systems explain the assessment process.

Some people expressed concern that they or their neighbors would have no choice but to
move away as a result of the revaluations. And based on their own analyses, a number of
people in both towns believe the revaluations will cause the tax burden to be distributed
unevenly.

Borough resident David Baxendale said he thought the appraisal company's approach was
flawed and failed the community, favoring landlords and the upscale part of town.

"You've overvalued the houses in the poor parts of town, and undervalued properties in
the upscale part of town," he said. "It's a travesty. What you are doing is forcing people
who don't have means out of this town."

Addressing the crowd, Ernest Del Guercio, the CEO of Appraisal Systems, said his firm
determined new assessment values based on the true market value of each property as of
Oct. 1, 2009.

He said the company followed appraisal methodologies outlined by state law and studied
all the sales in the two towns over a three-year period to arrive at true market value. Each
town was divided into neighborhoods based on similar characteristics.
The company inspected and measured every property outside, and 90 percent of all
properties were inspected inside, he said. Properties where the owners did not give the
company access to the inside were assessed at the highest, most reasonable potential
value, he added.

Del Guercio said the assessments are consistent with market value. "We do not determine
the value on entry level properties or interpret or predict the value of high-end
properties," he said. "The market does that. We are appraisers. We do not tax. Our job is
done when we provide the correct value in accordance with the market. We've done so
very accurately. To suggest our work is flawed is not very fair."

A few residents said banks appraised their homes within a month of the reassessment,
with Appraisal Systems' valuations being much higher. One resident said her assessment
by Appraisal Systems was $91,000 more than her bank appraisal. Brett Trout, a vice
president of Appraisal Systems, told her to make an appointment with the company to
discuss the issue.

Borough resident Dan Preston questioned how fair the company's yardstick for measuring
market value could be in such a volatile real estate market, noting that, "We have been
through the midst of one of the worst financial disasters since the Great Depression."

Trout said the company looked at sales data for a three-year period and adjusted
assessments to account for any market changes month to month. If there were no sales in
a neighborhood over the three-year period, sales from a comparable neighborhood were
used. Trout added that about 9 percent of the property in the two municipalities was sold
over the three years, a more than adequate number, he said, to help determine
assessments.

Residents wanted to know how land value was factored in, and they asked that the land
value data be posted on the company's website. Del Guercio said the company would
post the land value data.

Tax Assessor Neal Snyder, who serves both the borough and township, said he thought
the company did a good job overall, and an informal survey of some residents found they
were satisfied with the company's workmanship.

Township resident Betsy Stokes disagreed. "I take issue with the statement that the
people who came around and inspected did a good job," she said. "They listed the wrong
number of bathrooms; they didn't know the difference between a one- and two-story
house."

While some residents said the session was helpful, others said they had hoped for more
information. Borough resident Don Cox said he was expecting a presentation using one
sample neighborhood as an example. "The overview you gave is one I can find on the New
Jersey Treasury website," he said.

Residents with individual concerns were told to make an appointment with Appraisal
Systems. The company will continue to meet with people and make adjustments to
values until May 1. The tax assessor must submit assessments to the county by May 14.

Trout said that by the end of the week the company will mail cards to property owners
listing their assessments, along with any recent adjustments.
Date: 2010/04/03

Tax rate disparity analyzed Princeton Twp. residents angered

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - A Times analysis of the townshipwide property

revaluation shows that homeowners with the lowest property values would see their
property taxes increase by the greatest percentage, on average, while those with the
highest values would see their taxes decrease.

The data follow a pattern similar to the borough's that has sparked concern that some
residents with lesser means will shoulder an unfair portion of the tax burden.

A meeting earlier this week drew more than 130 residents of the borough and township
who sought answers from the appraisal company that is doing both revaluations.

A look at two homes in the township at the opposite end of the spectrum reveals the
potential effects of the reassessment. For example, 54 Birch Ave. was formerly assessed
at $137,700. The property has increased about 2.7 times its former value, with a
proposed new assessment of $371,400. Taxes under the old assessment would have been
about $4,995 for 2009. Under the new assessment, they would be about $6,934, a
difference of about $1,939, or almost 40 percent.

Then there is 220 Ridge Road, formerly assessed at $1.66 million. The property has
increased 1.7 times its former value and carries a proposed new assessment of about
$2.83 million. Taxes under the old assessment would have been about $60,083 for 2009.
Under the new assessment they would be $52,897, a decrease of about $7,185, after
rounding, or about 12 percent.

A review of the individual proposed assessments for the almost 5,000 properties in the
township that are posted on the website of the company conducting the revaluation,
Appraisal Systems, shows that about 54 percent of homeowners would see an increase in
property taxes based on the new assessment, while about 46 percent would see a
decrease, assuming the tax levy does not go up for 2010.

According to data from Appraisal Systems, the total assessed value for all property in the
township was about $2.44 billion in 2009.

The total assessed value after the revaluation is about $4.74 billion. Residential properties
now make up 86.8 percent of the total ratable base, a tiny increase over 86.7 percent in
2009.
The company says on its website that the average residential property owner would pay
$42 less in taxes under the new assessment. According to Appraisal Systems, the average
assessed value in 2009 was $431,700.

The new average listed on the company's website is $837,100.

At a community forum on the reassessment Wednesday night, some residents said they
feared the shift in the tax burden would force them or their friends out of town.

"You've calculated for every conceivable value but human value," said township resident
Victor Bakal. "People are living in these houses. In one part of town, a house was bought
by an investment banker for $3 million. In the other part of town lives an 80-year-old
retiree who moved here 60 years ago. Now that house has appreciated, but the $3 million
house has gone down and the person is getting a tax break. The senior is going to pay
more, but the senior's income doesn't change. Do you believe this is fair?"

Ernest Del Guercio, the CEO of Appraisal Systems, said the company follows the
assessment guidelines of the state, which bases assessments on true market value.

"In New Jersey, the constitution doesn't speak to the occupant of the house," he said.
"You have an income tax that speaks to that issue.…We cannot make, and do not have it
within our power to make social decisions of that magnitude. I do have empathy for the
situation, of course I do."

Representatives for Appraisal Systems said true market value is determined by analyzing
sales over the three-year period prior to Oct. 1, 2009. Representatives from the company
and officials urged residents to make an appointment with Appraisal Systems if they
have questions or concerns about their assessment.

Residents have until May 1 to meet with Appraisal Systems about assessments. Notices
are being mailed out to residents in the coming days listing their proposed property
assessments.

Those figures account for any adjustments made to assessments based on meetings with
Appraisal Systems.

Residents have 45 days from the mailing date of notices to make a tax appeal to the
county for this year.

Several teardown and vacant properties where new houses were built that were originally
in the lowest tier of value increased several times their value, with more than a dozen
increasing 10 times their value or more.

Including those properties in the analysis, the bottom tier saw an average tax increase of
about 35 percent. When those properties were removed from the analysis, the average tax
increase for the group was only 24 percent.
Date: 2010/04/16

University tax bill reduced in Princetons Revaluation taking toll

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - The biggest taxpayer in the borough and township will pay
almost half a million dollars less to the two Princetons and Mercer County as a result of
the ongoing property revaluation, a Times analysis has found.

Princeton University would pay about $451,183 less for its taxable properties in
Princeton Borough and Princeton Township based on a review of preliminary
reassessment data.

In addition, the revaluation has potentially weakened the towns' bargaining position in
talks with the university for greater payments in lieu of taxes, because in theory the
towns could collect far less in taxes if the university's tax-exempt property were taxable.

The university would pay about $260,000 less in municipal, school and county taxes for
its taxable borough properties and about $191,000 less for its taxable township properties
for 2010, assuming the municipal, school and county tax levies remained flat for this year.

According to data from the local tax assessor's office, the value of the university's total
taxable property in the borough -- including vacant land, residential property and
commercial property -- doubled as a result of the assessment, increasing from $85.14
million in 2009 to $173.08 million in 2010.

Despite the doubling of property value, the university will see a lower tax bill because the
tax formula is based on changes in property valuation throughout the two towns.

In the borough the university would pay $76,100 less in taxes for vacant land, $159,943
less for residential properties, and $24,075 less for commercial properties based on the
new assessments.

In the township, the value of the university's taxable properties increased about 1.8 times
their original value, up from $115.15 million in 2009 to $212.18 million in 2010.

In that town, the university would pay $9,102 more for vacant land, $36,471 more for
residential properties, and $236,640 less for commercial properties based on the new
assessments.

Although the university does not pay taxes on the bulk of its property, which is tax-
exempt, the property is still assessed as part of the revaluation. In both the borough and
the township, the university's tax exempt properties increased only slightly in value as a
whole.

In 2009 the university's tax-exempt properties in the borough were valued at about
$842.8 million. Under the new assessment, they went up 1.2 times their original value and
are now valued at $1.01 billion, in rounded numbers.

The university's tax-exempt properties in the township went up 1.1 times their original
value, increasing from $282.37 million to $320.59 million, in rounded numbers.

The tax-exempt figures are important because residents and some local officials have
argued that the university should be making larger payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT).
Officials have met with university representatives twice in the last several weeks in an
attempt to negotiate more PILOT contributions. Those talks are still ongoing.

Some officials and residents have argued that the amount the university pays should be
based on a percentage of the total potential value of all of the school's properties. If the
school paid municipal, county and school taxes on all its tax exempt properties in the
borough and township in 2009, the total tax on exempt properties would have been about
$46.4 million. Under the revaluation that total would drop to $25.9 million.

At the borough council meeting Tuesday night, resident Anne Neumann noted that the
university's properties did not increase at the same rate as the average property in the
borough.

"Why is there this discrepancy and what, if anything, would the borough council do about
this?" she said.

"On its face, why would land not owned by the university go up in value so much more
than land owned by the university over the same time period?" Councilman Roger
Martindell said.

Unlike residential properties, which are valued based on market value, the university's
tax-exempt properties were valued based on replacement cost, minus depreciation, plus
land value, according to local officials.

Some residents also have questioned why the university will pay less taxes on Palmer
House at 1 Bayard Lane. The property was assessed as a commercial building, with its
value determined based on income potential.

Tax Assessor Neal Snyder and representatives from Appraisal Systems did not respond
to inquiries about the methods used for the university assessment.
Date: 2010/04/30

Princeton councilman calls for public forum

By Krystal Knapp


Special to The Times

PRINCETON BOROUGH - Councilman Roger Martindell has called for the borough to
hold a public forum to discuss the overall impact of the recent property revaluation and
such issues as how it will affect Princeton University and the John Witherspoon
neighborhood.

"We should have a meeting to discuss some of the overarching issues of the effects of the
revaluation," Martindell said at the Tuesday night council meeting. "Why does the John
Witherspoon neighborhood seem to be hit so hard? Why are Princeton University land
values lower than what might have been expected? One can tell from the tenor of the
discussion in the community that a lot of people are concerned."

Revaluation itself does not raise taxes, but it can change the balance of who pays what
share. An analysis of the Princeton revaluation data shows that homeowners in the
township and borough with more modest homes will, on average, pay more property
taxes as a result of the revaluation because their property values increased more than the
average property. Owners of more expensive homes will pay less on average.

The revaluation data also shows that Princeton University will be paying about $450,000
less in local taxes on its taxable properties in the two Princetons as a result of the
revaluation.

"I'm not saying the revaluation is invalid, but a lot of people are concerned, and given the
level of concern it would be useful to address the issues in a rational, open way so people
can see the process, and things can be made more transparent," Martindell said. "I would
hope we would take the issue up sooner than later."

Other council members agreed a public forum is in order. Councilwoman Barbara Trelstad
said she wants an explanation of how the market value of condominiums is determined.

Officials are puzzled why the county intends to apply an adjustment formula to
property values to determine the borough's share of county taxes even though the
borough's assessed values now supposedly reflect true market value. Council members
requested that the county tax administrator attend the public meeting or meet with the
borough's finance committee to explain the process.

Councilman David Goldfarb said he preferred a public meeting, and that a meeting with
the finance committee should be a last resort. Goldfarb said the county formula made it
seem that the borough was underassessed and that it was on its way to another
revaluation.

In a phone interview yesterday, Mercer County Tax Administrator Martin Guhl said that
was not the case.

"The ratio is developed for the apportionment of county taxes," Guhl explained. "It does
not mean the properties that were just assessed are not assessed at 100 percent of market
value."

The percentage reflects the ratio of assessed value this year to true value last year, Guhl
said.

Guhl said he would be glad to meet with the borough's finance committee and explain the
revaluation process, how the county tax formula is developed, and any other concerns.

Resident Anne Neumann, who is seeking a seat on the council this year, submitted a
proposed resolution to the council Tuesday night calling for a review of the university's
revaluation to determine if it accurately reflects the value of the university's properties.

Council President Andy Koontz said the borough lawyer will review the proposed
resolution and that it could possibly be discussed at a future council meeting.

Resident Jo Butler, who is also running for council, said 22 people attended revaluation
counseling sessions run by volunteers and library staff in recent weeks. She recommended
that when the next revaluation takes place, information sessions be held at the senior
center. She also said the official cards listing the new assessment figures that are sent to
each property owner should include an estimate of what the taxes would be as a result of
the revaluation.
Date: 2010/05/10

Witherspoon residents see bad signs in tax billsIn historically black Princeton
neighborhood, they wonder if revaluation is prelude to 'renewal

By Krystal Knapp


 Special to The Times

PRINCETON BOROUGH "" Jacqueline Swain said she almost fainted when she saw
how high the value of her home in the John Witherspoon neighborhood rose under the
recent Princeton property revaluation.

Her duplex on a 960-square-foot lot on Lytle Street increased 4.3 times in value, from
$94,300 to $410,800. The jump means her property taxes would about double, going
from just over $4,000 to more than $8,000.

"I was in shock when I found out," she said. "My lot is so small, I barely have three feet
of land all the way around the house."

Like many other African-Americans in the Witherspoon neighborhood, which straddles

the borough and township, the third-generation Princetonian has deep roots in the
community of modest homes just north of Palmer Square, bounded by Witherspoon
Street on the east and John Street on the west.

Now, many in the community worry that those roots will wither away, with people
being forced to move because they can no longer afford their taxes.

The black community is accustomed to fearing for its future. Memories of the days when
blacks could not eat in restaurants on Nassau Street still linger, and attempts in the 1950s
to displace the community in the name of urban renewal still sting. Residents have long
feared gentrification, and those fears are greater than ever as a result of the revaluation.

While the average home in the borough increased about 2.2 times in value, a Times
analysis shows that the average home in the Witherspoon section of the borough went up
about 2.8 times. In the township, the average home increased about 1.8 times in value,
compared with 2.9 times in the Witherspoon section. For the neighborhood as a whole,
the average assessment increased from $122,935 to $335,312, with 19 percent of
properties now valued between $400,000 and $500,000 and about 11 percent above the
half-million-dollar mark.

While a revaluation does not in itself increase taxes, it can affect who pays what share.
Based on preliminary figures, about 89 percent of Witherspoon's approximately 350
residential property owners will see their taxes go up as a result of the revaluation. The
average Witherspoon resident will pay about 40 percent more in taxes.

Meanwhile, in other sections of the two Princetons, owners of million-dollar homes will,
on average, see their property taxes decrease, an outcome that angers residents of
Witherspoon and other neighborhoods.

While representatives from the company that conducted the revaluation say the
assessments represent 100 percent of true market value based on sales over the past few
years, some in the Witherspoon neighborhood are not convinced.

Many residents point to the new luxury townhouses that are rising just across Paul
Robeson Place and a handful of renovation projects and acknowledge that values have
gone up in the neighborhood that was an affordable entry into the Princeton during the
real estate boom, but they do not think their values have gone up as much as the
revaluation data suggests, particularly now that boom has gone bust. And then there are
those who suspect something more sinister at work.

"How can it be that houses on Library Place and Morven went up lower than average
while our homes went up higher?" asked Birch Avenue resident Leighton Newlin,
mentioning two of the borough's toniest addresses. He believes the revaluation is an effort
to push people out of town.

"This whole thing could be our one-way ticket out," he said as he remembered the days
when his neighborhood housed the town dump, a slaughterhouse and domestic workers
and was called "The Bottom."

Jim Floyd, who served as the first African-American mayor of the township 40 years
ago, is more cautious when coming to any conclusion.

"Does anyone really understand how the revaluation was done, though?" Floyd asked. He
added that he wonders if overcrowding, noise and the piles of garbage waiting for pick-up
on the neighborhood streets were factored into the formula at all.

Floyd has led three neighborhood meetings on the issue. Residents have noted properties
that stand out the most. There is Swain's, then there is the Helen Bess's John Street
property, which went up almost 7.2 times its original value from $95,000 to $682,600.

There is also 7 Green St., owned by Dorothy Diehl, which increased from $100,000 to
$382,000. Diehl's lot totals less than 1,600 square feet. Her land value went up almost 17
times, from $17,300 to $293,000. For reasons residents can't fathom, a modernistic J.
Robert Hillier creation on Quarry Street that sold for $933,000 has a land value of
$199,000 "" about a third less than Diehl's, even though its lot is more than double hers in
size.
Diehl worries about paying almost $8,000 in taxes, nearly double what she did last year,
and frets that her house would be difficult to sell given its small size, lack of driveway and
the increased taxes.

Some officials have offered residents assurances that the assessments can be readjusted in
future years through a compliance plan if sales data shows the neighborhood is out of
sync with the real estate market, to which Floyd had a simple response: "I'm in hospice,
and all you are going to offer me is a maintenance plan?"

Residents are encouraging every homeowner in the neighborhood whose property

increased above the average to do so. With the May 14 appeal filing deadline looming,
volunteers knocked on doors Friday to distribute appeal forms and offer assistance to
those who can't afford the filing fee. People will be at Mt. Pisgah to help people fill out
forms and look up recent home sales the first part of the week. The residents have not
ruled out protests or a lawsuit.

"We have to do everything we can to save this community," Newlin said. "What would
this town be like without any diversity?"
Date: 2010/05/14

Councilman rejects reval conspiracy talk

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - There was no grand conspiracy to drive residents out of the
John Witherspoon neighborhood by jacking up their property assessments in the recent
revaluation, Borough Councilman David Goldfarb said at Tuesday's council meeting.

"The revaluation results are not by design," Goldfarb said. "They are based on data that is
fairly extensive," he said.

Goldfarb said the borough's finance committee met with County Tax Administrator
Marty Guhl and Borough Assessor Neal Snyder last Friday to go over questions
residents have about the revaluation.

The revaluation reflects the real estate market over the last few years, with values in some
neighborhoods, including Witherspoon, going up higher than others because of the sales in
those neighborhoods, Goldfarb said. "There are winners and losers in any revaluation
process," he said.

The assessments in the Witherspoon neighborhood are based on 11 properties in

Princeton Borough and 12 in Princeton Township that actually sold or were actively
marketed from 2007 through 2009, he said. For those properties, the assessed values
increased 2.7 times the original value in the borough, and 2.6 times the original value in the
township. By comparison, the average borough property increased 2.1 times its original
value and the average township property went up 1.9 times its original value.

"Some people especially think the Hillier Quarry Street condos skewed the
neighborhood," Goldfarb said. But they only went up 2.8 times their original value, he
said.

"The reason the assessments are high is that the properties sold for prices that were
substantially higher (than their old assessments)," he said. "As a result, the entire
neighborhood was deemed to be more valuable relative to the rest of community than it
had been in the previous assessment."

The list of properties that sold in the Witherspoon neighborhood shows that nine
properties sold in the borough and eight in the township. Six other properties were or are
on the market.
For the borough, prices ranged from $395,000 to $930,000 for the Hillier condos. For the
township, prices ranged from $250,000 to $500,000.

Mayor Mildred Trotman said she thought the properties that sold attracted higher prices
because they were new construction.

"That is part of what is going on," Goldfarb said. "To an extent they have greater value
because people see the potential to buy a property there and build something new."

Goldfarb also offered an explanation as to why Princeton University's properties values

went up less as a whole than most other properties in town.

"Most of the university is on one very large tax parcel," he said. "Therefore it does not
have the same market potential as smaller parcels have. ... In most cases it is academic
because the university is not paying taxes anyway."

Goldfarb said if anyone feels they have been over-assessed, they should appeal. The
deadline for filing a form with the county is today.
Date: 2010/07/22

Residents' anger, taxes on rise in Princeton Twp.

Revaluation results questioned

By Krystal Knapp


 SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - Hector Ortigoza's heart sank when he opened his 2010 tax
bill. As a result of the recent township revaluation, his bill for 2010 jumped to $9,286,
almost double the $4,714 he paid in 2009.

"I'll have to move now, it's as simple as that" Ortigoza told the township committee
Monday night. "I've lived here over 10 years and I love this town, but with the high taxes,
I just can't afford it any more."

Residents of the township recently received their tax bills, which are adjusted to reflect
new property values based on the recent revaluation. With the arrival of the bills, the
harsh reality of the effects of the revaluation is sinking in for many residents, who don't
know how they will afford to stay in Princeton.

While owners of more expensive homes in the two Princetons will, on average, pay less as
a result of the revaluation, according to a Times analysis of property tax records, the
bottom 50 percent of homeowners are seeing their taxes go up, with some like Ortigoza
paying double.

More and more, residents are questioning what will happen to diversity in Princeton if
lower- and middle-income people are driven out because of the shift in the property tax
burden. But the more fundamental question they are asking is, was the revaluation done
properly? Residents who are analyzing the data themselves believe the process is flawed,
and are calling on officials to conduct an audit.

"When I opened up my tax bill, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry," said Random
Road resident Ralph Perry. "I live in a small ranch ... you assessed my house out of the
sky. My house is assessed at $818,000. No ranch in my neighborhood has ever sold for
more than $705,000. If I put it on the market now I could probably get $650,000 for it."

Perry said while the township budget summary he received in the mail says the average
tax increase this year is 1.7 percent, or $65, his rate increased by 30.5 percent, or $3,623.
"Someone is trying to pull the rug over my head," he said. "This is a horror story."

Realtor Jim Firestone said while officials spend a great deal of time looking at how
taxpayer money is spent, they should give equal scrutiny to how tax revenue is collected
to make sure it is done fairly.

While the appraisal company, Appraisal Systems, has said repeatedly that the
assessments reflect true market value, Firestone and others question the methodology
used and want it explained in detail. Firestone has done a detailed study of the new
assessments, walking door to door in many cases, and says he has found all sorts of errors
and inconsistencies.

Kip Cherry of Dempsey Avenue said from looking at the assessment data, it is clear that
the land value is driving the new assessments. Land values have risen dramatically, while
home values, on average, have remained static. Cherry said small lots have been given
about the same value as much larger lots in her neighborhood, which she said does not
make sense. In previous revaluations, residents say the size of the lot mattered more. "It's
all very counterintuitive," she said. "There is no correlation between the lot size and its
value."

Dale Meade of Oakland Street said residents repeatedly asked for details of the
methodology used and supporting data back in the spring, but never got a straight answer.
He said he spent more than 200 hours reviewing property records in the tax assessor's
office, and estimates that up to 30 percent had some kind of error small or large.

"I don't have much confidence in the process that was used, and I don't think you should
either," he said. "An avalanche is coming. For many people the revaluation is a disaster.
This is not an exaggeration. The township committee needs to get out in front of this. A
number of people in the community are energized on this issue .... It's not about money.
It is about what is right."

Meade asked how the township would make things up to people who are overcharged if
the revaluation turns out to be flawed. Borough resident Tina Clement asked if there is a
way to freeze taxes this year until the issue is sorted out.

Dan Preston of Moore Street, who used to be an economic forecaster, said a systematic
review is in order because there are too many anecdotes about flawed assessments to
ignore. If state laws prohibit officials from taking action, he said officials need to work
with other towns and become advocates for changing laws.

Deputy Mayor Chad Goerner told residents officials are aware of their concerns and have
met with county officials to discuss the revaluation. He said he was told the methodology
used was acceptable. "We're not saying we agree," he said. "We are incredibly frustrated,
too. It would benefit all of us to get the Mercer tax board in front of everyone. It would
be good for us to understand specifically what power we have in changing the results.
When the process is mandated by the county, we have no control over the outcome once
we select the appraisal firm."
Mayor Bernie Miller echoed Goerner's comments, and gave former township mayor Jim
Floyd permission to use the township community room to hold a meeting for concerned
citizens next Monday at 7:30 p.m.

Toby Israel of Walnut Lane questioned how the township's hands are tied when it is the
township that entered into a contract with the appraisal company.

"The township has a responsibility to make sure all the taxpayers are fairly and equitably
assessed," she said. "In my neighborhood, seniors are realizing they may have to sell and
get out of town. Self-employed writers and artists are in the same dilemma."

Israel said concerned residents are forming not a tea party, but a we party: "We the
people of Princeton are joining together to protest an assessment that is mathematically
and morally wrong."
Date: 2010/07/28

Princeton Twp. revaluation tales bring shock, outrage

Residents demand action, not just sympathy, from township committee

By Krystal Knapp

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP -- His property taxes in Princeton Township were already a

hefty sum, or so the resident thought. He was paying $21,000 a year. Then he received
his 2010 tax bill.

As a result of the recent property revaluation, his bill is now more than $40,000.

The crowd gasped at a meeting Monday night as the resident shouted out those figures
when describing how the revaluation has hurt him. Similar tales of woe followed, with
residents from a variety of neighborhoods saying they can no longer afford the taxes and
don't know how they will pay their tax bill on time.

"My taxes have gone up 52 percent," said another resident who lives in affordable
housing in the Washington Oaks development. "Do they have to be collected this year? Is
there a way to pay them later?"

More than 200 people packed the town hall, filling the seats, crowding the aisles, and
spilling out into the hallway for a meeting organized by fellow residents to discuss the
revaluation, which some believe was deeply flawed and may force people to leave town.

"The underlying implication of all of this is, what kind of community will Princeton
become?" said resident Jean Stratton. "Will it become an enclave for the rich, and lose all
the diversity it is known for?"

Residents came to express their anger, vent their frustration and try to get answers.
Elected officials expressed sympathy and said they are trying to do what they can to
help, but said Mercer County is actually in charge. Even though many residents want the
revaluation overturned, township officials said they have no power to do so.

"We all understand the results have been a personal disaster to a lot of people," said
township Committeewoman Liz Lempert. "They have also been potentially a disaster for
the community."

Deputy Mayor Chad Goerner said the township can help individual residents work with
the appraiser to adjust faulty valuations, but the township has no legal power to overturn
or mitigate the results of home assessments. The last revaluation was done in 1996, and
real estate values have grown tremendously since then.

"When you see the impact on the community it's incredibly heartbreaking," Goerner said.

But for many residents, sympathy wasn't enough. They wanted action. Some want to
hire a lawyer.

"I expect more from committee members and officials than words of encouragement and
heartbreak," said resident Jonathan LeBoeuf. "You need to look around this room. The
results need to be invalidated. The reactions from officials make me almost angrier than
getting the tax bill. You need to lobby for us with the appraisal company and the county.
We need better answers."

Some residents questioned how neighborhoods were defined for the revaluation, while
others wanted to know how lot values were determined and why smaller lots are worth
more per acre than large lots. In many cases, the land value has almost quadrupled since
the last revaluation, and makes up about 80 percent of the total property value. Residents
pointed to errors in individual assessments and property record cards, which are available
at the tax assessor's office for review.

Tony Lunn of Princeton Borough -- where the same firm also recently completed a
revaluation -- noted that when he reviewed his record, it indicated that he had a 400-
square-foot, in-ground pool in his yard. "We do not have a pool," he said. "We do have a
small fish pond." The error was corrected and resulted in a reduction in the assessment
that was equivalent to a $1,700 tax reduction.

Tax assessor Neal Snyder explained how land values are determined. Snyder, who works
for the state's Division of Taxation, said he must follow state laws regarding assessments.
"Unfortunately I can't get emotions involved in assessing," he said. "I can only look at
what is sold, and what the trends are, based on sales."

Snyder praised the appraisal company, Appraisal Systems, which was the lowest bidder
for the revaluation, as reliable, and said he is happy they did the revaluation. They and
Snyder designated neighborhoods for the revaluation based on zoning and housing stock,
he said, and a citizen revaluation committee reviewed the results. He said he can monitor
sales and adjust neighborhoods annually if needed.

Realtor Jim Firestone has been meeting with a growing number of residents to look at
individual issues and errors, which will be brought to the assessor to look at. What started
as a move to help the Witherspoon Jackson neighborhood has grown into a community
group, with more than 210 people signing up to be on the mailing list Monday night.

While some residents said the revaluation shosuld be done over, others said property tax
laws in the state need to be reformed. And others criticized municipal spending, with one
saying, "Our tax rates are ridiculous."
Date: 2010/07/30

Tax bill anxiety in Princeton Borough

As a result of the recent boroughwide property revaluation, some people will see
large increases in their tax bills, while others will see sizable decreases.

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - When borough property owners receive their 2010 tax bills
in the coming weeks, a few surprises will be tucked in the envelopes.

As a result of the recent boroughwide property revaluation, some people will see large
increases in their tax bills, while others will see sizable decreases.

What all will receive, in addition to a letter explaining how the bill is structured, is a copy
of an article about the debate whether Princeton University should pay the borough more
in lieu of taxes, along with a newspaper editorial that calls on the school to pay more.

Bracing for a potential backlash from residents similar to what township officials
experienced in recent weeks after their tax bills were mailed out, borough council members
spent the end of the council meeting this week discussing what should go into the
borough's tax bill mailing.

Councilman Kevin Wilkes said he and the rest of the council agreed it would be good to
include copies of a recent Bloomberg News article that notes how little wealthy Princeton
University contributes to the borough compared to what it would pay if its property
were fully taxed. The article also ponders whether the school is more like a "hedge fund"
that does education on the side, as opposed to a dedicated educational institution.

The editorial to be included is a July 17 piece from The Star-Ledger that calls on the
school to contribute more to its hometown.

Wilkes said both the article and editorial are pertinent to the borough's tax dilemma.

Borough Administrator Robert Bruschi said the borough is seeking permission to reprint
the editorial and article for inclusion in the mailing.

Last year the university, which has an endowment of about $12.6 billion, contributed
roughly $12.3 million in taxes, fees and voluntary payments to Princeton-area towns and
to Mercer County. The university pays about $1.2 million in voluntary payments to the
borough annually, but the agreement to do so comes to an end next year. Officials met
with university representatives in the spring to try to negotiate a higher amount, but
nothing has been resolved yet.

Officials also agreed a letter was needed to explain how the tax bills are structured.
Payments for the first two quarters of the year are based on 2009 rates, therefore any
increase for 2010 is loaded into the second two quarters. That means residents who saw
substantial increases will be paying the entire increase over just two quarters.

"Some people will be getting a large reduction, though," said Councilman David Goldfarb,
cautioning that the wording of the letter should be chosen carefully.

Mayor Mildred Trotman was skeptical that the extra items, such as the editorial and the
article, would have much effect on people's reactions when they see their bills. "I don't
think it will make that much of a difference, I really don't," she said.

But Wilkes and other council members who on Monday attended a meeting about the
revaluation disagreed. More than 200 residents from both Princetons turned out to
address their concerns and vent their anger.

"You could see the sticker shock in people's eyes," Wilkes said.

The borough will send the tax bills out in the coming weeks. The council voted to extend
the deadline for paying the tax bills until Sept. 1, because bills will not go out on time.
Officials said the reason for the wait was that the state delayed certifying municipal tax
levies.

As a result of the revaluation, homeowners with more expensive homes will, on average,
see their taxes go down in both the borough and the township, while owners of more
modest homes will see their taxes go up. Some residents are seeing their taxes double.

What started as a small group of residents concerned about the effects of the revaluation
on the John Witherspoon neighborhood has grown to a movement of more than 250
residents who question some results and want more information about the methodology
used to determine assessments. The group calls itself Princeton Fair Tax.

Realtor Jim Firestone, who lives in the borough, asked the borough council this week to
schedule time at a future meeting for the group to express concerns to officials.

Firestone also asked that the borough join with township officials in asking the appraisal
company that conducted the revaluation to come back and describe the revaluation
methodology to the public.

"We are asking you to stand up to the very people you hired and expect their help,"
Firestone said. "We ask you to help your constituency help themselves."
Township committee members have written to the revaluation firm, Appraisal Systems,
asking for a public forum. The letter, sent yesterday, was also signed by borough officials.

"The impact of our recent revaluation has been a personal disaster for many," the letter
reads. "It also threatens to change the face of our town by ripping through neighborhoods
of modestly priced homes and turning them unaffordable to longtime residents overnight."

"Appraisal Systems is not responsible for market forces, and we understand your job is
to value properties based solely on current housing prices," the letter reads. "But given
the dramatic shifts in home values, many residents have asked for a thorough explanation
of how you calculated the new property assessments. It is imperative that our
community understands the methodology used."
Date: 2010/08/06

Official: Home values match market

Tax assessor defends recent revaluations in the Princetons

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - The Princeton tax assessor has issued a public letter
defending the controversial borough and township property revaluation, saying recent
sales of homes in the township suggest that the assessments were close to market value.

Many residents of the Princetons have balked at the new assessments on their homes
which in some cases will lead to steep tax increases that they think are unjustified.

In his letter, tax assessor Neal Snyder also noted that township tax assessments were 14
years out of date before the revaluation and that many valuation trends during that time
are the cause of the very different new assessments.

"The goal of a revaluation is to establish equitable property values for tax assessment
purposes that are reflective of current market values," Snyder said. "Revaluations often
result in a shift of the tax burden among residential neighborhoods and between residential
and commercial properties."

But residents critical of the revaluation still want more information on how the
revaluation was conducted.

Property owners of more expensive homes in the two Princetons will, on average, see
their taxes decrease as a result of the revaluation, while owners of more modest homes
will see a tax increase, according to a Times analysis. This shift and the assessment figures
have angered some residents, and many question the accuracy of the results. More than
200 people turned out for a community meeting on the issue last month.

The letter from Snyder was distributed to reporters Wednesday by the township
administration. Since the last revaluation in 1996, Snyder said, the real estate market has
experienced significant changes.

"There have been periods of significant appreciation of market values and, more recently,
some contraction in market values due to the recession," he said. "Residential areas within
the Princetons have been subjected to a variety of valuation trends."
The revaluation of property in the Princetons was ordered by the Mercer County Board
of Taxation and approved by the state for implementation in 2010, Snyder said. The
county tax board issued the revaluation order, he said, because assessments in the
Princetons were out of date and nonconforming.

Although the revaluations have sparked an uproar, Snyder said the number of appeals
filed by homeowners are not more numerous than usual.

Only about 5 percent of residential property owners in the two Princetons filed appeals
challenging their assessments, Snyder, said, adding that the percentage is normal after a
revaluation.

According to data provided by the county tax administrator's office yesterday, in the
township, 339 residential property owners filed appeals, and in the borough 152
challenged their assessments, or about 7 percent of residential property owners in each of
the municipalities.The best means of gauging the fairness of a revaluation, Snyder said, is
by comparing assessments to recent market sales.

A market analysis for the borough and township from October to July, he said, shows
that the revaluation was done fairly. Snyder said the numbers so far "present a positive
and equitable revaluation program."

For the borough, Snyder said 48 sales took place from Oct. 1 to July 2. When the
assessed values and sales are each averaged, the ratio of assessments to sales is 94.75
percent.

For the township, Snyder said 102 residential sales took place in the same period, and the
ratio of assessments to sales is 96.91 percent.

A Times review of the township sales data shows that five of the 102 houses sold for
prices 10 to 18 percent lower than they were assessed. Another 21 sold for 1 to 10
percent less than their assessments.

Seventeen homes sold within 1 percent of their assessed value, 38 homes sold for 1 to 10
percent more than their assessed value, and 21 homes sold for 10 to 55 percent more than
their assessed values.

Real estate agent Jim Firestone of the new resident group Princeton Fair Tax said Snyder's
letter and what he called the limited statistics that accompany it don't convince him that
the revaluation is accurate.

"It pretends to be an objective statistical study to test the validity of reevaluation by

comparing subsequent sales data to their assessments to show uniformity," Firestone
said.
Firestone said comparing the overall average of assessments to the average of sales is
meaningless. The individual figures need to be looked at carefully, particularly for the
houses that sold for much less or much more than they were assessed for, he said.

Firestone also contends that for houses that were on the market during the revaluation,
the appraisal company knew their listing prices, and thus they used that data in
determining assessments for those properties.

He said it is therefore not surprising that the assessments would be close to the actual sale
prices.

Firestone said residents should push for more information. His group still plans to host a
second community meeting to discuss the revaluation on Aug. 9 at 7:30 at the township
municipal building.

"As citizens we need to see the work behind the assessment to see what is wrong, and we
need our politicians to pursue the appraisal company to get the materials. It should be
open public record," he said.

"It is insensitive that when a whole family or a whole class are being pushed out of town,
we would think to justify it with a statistical study of correctness, rather than examining
where the appraisal method was misapplied."
Date: 2010/08/11

For Princeton taxpayers, a pain-storming session

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - Phased-in tax increases. Lower interest rates on delinquent

taxes. Even a private fund to help people pay taxes.

These are among the ideas elected officials of the two Princetons are considering to help
residents get over the hump created by the recent property revaluation, which is causing
sharp property tax increases for many homeowners.

But many residents think those ideas are not enough. The bigger issue, they said, is
whether the revaluation was done correctly. About 200 residents -- 75 from the borough -
- packed a standing-room-only meeting Monday night to discuss the revaluation and what
should be done. "It's a hot night in Princeton and the temperature is rising," township
resident Tom Pyle told the crowd. "So are the taxes and so is the blood pressure of a lot
of folks."

Local officials told residents that in light of the recent property revaluation, they are
recommending that interest rates on delinquent taxes be reduced. They are also looking
into whether a privately funded assistance program could be set up to help people who
can't afford their taxes.

Township Committeewoman Liz Lempert told the crowd that a few officials met with
state Sen. Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, and Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D- Princeton, last
week to see if the Princetons could phase in the tax increase under a state revaluation
relief act. But the act requires that a town or area be declared blighted or in need of
rehabilitation or redevelopment.

Officials are researching whether it would be possible to amend the language in the act and
whether a revised law could help those facing the biggest tax increases. The problem,
Lempert said, is that everyone has to be treated equally. If some people's taxes are phased
in, the other taxpayers would have to pay the difference.

"Somehow if we could set up a private fund that can assist people with the phase-in, then
we wouldn't be hampered by the state constitution," Lempert said. "The question is who
would step up to run it? It would be a big job."

Former township mayor Jim Floyd, the moderator of the forum held Monday by the
community group Princeton Fair Tax, said support for a phase-in implies that officials are
fine with the revaluation process. "Are you indeed endorsing the process or saying that
the process was proper and you accept it?" he said. "Yes or no?"

Lempert and Township Committeeman Lance Liverman hesitated. They could not answer
yes or no.

"There is no easy answer," Liverman said.

"We are working on this on multiple fronts," Lempert said.

"Some of us are very heartbroken," Liverman said. "We feel the same pain you feel. I
think one thing you need to understand is that we were mandated by the county tax board
to have the revaluation done. This is way over our heads in so many areas, and
constitution-wise, we can only do so much."

Liverman and Lempert, both Democrats, face two Republican challengers in the
November election.

One of the GOP candidates, Doug Miles, was highly critical of the revaluation process.

"It is asking a bit much to accept excuses for why this really corrupt, uneven, flawed
process has been able to occur," Miles said, adding that officials should be accountable to
the public.

Residents questioned why only three of the dozen elected officials in the borough and
township attended the meeting. Borough Councilman Kevin Wilkes sat quietly in the back
row.

The gathering was so packed that people who did not get seats sat on the floor, stood
around the room, or watched a simulcast of the almost three-hour discussion from another
room.

Pyle, the township resident, said he decided to get involved after looking at the
revaluation results in his neighborhood. Like many others, he fears that people who can't
afford higher taxes as a result of the revaluation will be forced to move.

"The variability in assessments is rather stunning," Pyle said. "I don't understand what is
happening and I want to research it to understand what is driving the assessments. But
the more I hear and the more I fear the risk this imposes on the Princeton community, the
less patient I am and the more I feel we should just throw the whole thing out."

Statements like Pyle's were greeted with applause, cheers and "amens" from the audience.

Some residents questioned whether they could sell their homes for the assessed values.
Many say they want the revaluation process demystified. Township resident Sam
Hamod said he thinks the only way to get results is legal action.

"If we wait until we exhaust ourselves with research, we will be victimized," Hamod said.
If we only do research, it is not going to be enough. We need to think about legal action
now. "

Date: 2010/08/15

In Princeton Twp., a taxing reality

Residents question revaluation methodology

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - For some taxpayers, the little two-car garage on the
undersized lot is symbolic of what they feel is wrong with the recent Princeton property
revaluation.

The white garage, on Birch Avenue in the John Witherspoon neighborhood, sits at the top
of a short driveway, two cars parked in front if it. The garage isn't used as a garage, but as
a house, and a closer look reveals curtained windows, electricity and plumbing.

The owner of the garage-turned-dwelling, Carl Brown, lives in a large two-story house
next to the garage. In past years, he paid modest taxes on the garage his son now lives in --
but no more.

Like other residents in the two Princetons, Brown was more than a little shocked when he
received his recent tax bill.

For 2010, he will pay $5,125 in taxes for the garage, or $3,630 more than he paid last
year. Combined with the taxes he owes on his house, which is valued at $324,000 after a
county tax appeal, Brown will pay a total of $11,401 in taxes for the house and garage.

"I don't know what I'm going to do, I guess I'm going to have to cut back on my eating,"
Brown, 73, joked as he held up his receipt for his third-quarter taxes.

The 0.07-acre lot the garage sits on is valued at $217,500. The garage itself is valued at
$47,100, for a total value of $264,600 for the lot and garage combined. The value of the
lot accounts for 82 percent of the combined value of the lot and garage.
The garage property is one example of how land values are driving the new assessments.
Previously comprising roughly 35 percent of the total residential property value, land
values now account for, on average, about 63 percent of a residential property value in the
borough and 59 percent in the township, according to an analysis of property records by
The Times.

What concerns residents is how these land values were determined.

Many residents believe the system is skewed against smaller houses on smaller lots
across town, in neighborhoods from rich to modest, with smaller lots being worth much
more on a per-acre basis.

But Mercer County Tax Administrator Martin Guhl said land values can't be compared
on a per-acre basis.

What matters, he said, is site value, which he described as the land's utility, or "the ability
to put a house on it."

In a town like Princeton, where there is not much vacant land for sale, land values are
determined by looking at recent house sales.

The appraisal company and the tax assessor divide the municipality into
"neighborhoods," which are determined by zoning and housing stock. The land value for a
neighborhood is extracted by taking individual sales in the neighborhood and calculating
the cost to build the house, minus depreciation.

The house value is subtracted from the sale price to come up with a land value. Site values
are then determined based on the neighborhood land value data.

Guhl said the methodology is used by appraisal firms across the state and in the county.

One example: A neighborhood is zoned for homes to be built on lots that are half an acre
or larger. Every lot in the neighborhood that is a half acre or larger would be given the
same site value. Added to the site value is a value based on acreage.

Any land above a half acre is considered "excess acreage," Guhl said, and would be
assigned a lower value per acre.

Residents still question how the method was applied in Princeton, and they fear shifts in
the property tax burden will drive many people out of town. They want to see the data
used to come up with site values, and they want to know more about how
"neighborhoods" were determined.

The residents say land values often appear to be too high in the case of smaller lots, and
they question whether their assessed values reflect what the smaller homes could sell for.

"I'm concerned about how the methodology varies as it goes from neighborhood to
neighborhood," township resident Dale Meade told an audience of more than 200
residents at a forum last Monday.

He described instances where there are big jumps in values sometimes as soon as a
neighborhood border is crossed, even on the same street.

Meade is one of the leaders of Princeton Fair Tax, a group of more than 250 residents
who have joined together in response to the revaluation results.

The group has packed town hall twice, started a website, www.princetontax.info, and
formed study groups for neighborhoods across the two Princetons to analyze the
revaluation data.

Guhl says if the group looks at sales data since the revaluation, the data show that so far,
the assessments are in line with market values.

But the resident group is not convinced that the data prove the revaluation was done
correctly, and members of the group want to review the information in more detail, along
with monitoring future sales and gathering more information.

Guhl said an appeals process exists to make corrections to individual properties that may
have been overassessed.

If residents think assessments in a particular neighborhood are wrong, Guhl said local tax
assessor Neal Snyder would be glad to look at the information the group gathers and make
changes next year if warranted.

Each year a municipality can, with the approval of the county board of taxation, adjust
assessments for up to 50 percent of the properties in the municipality as part of a
maintenance plan, Guhl said.

A municipality can also conduct a reassessment if more than 50 percent of the properties
need to be adjusted, but that requires property inspections and the permission of the
county and the state.

The only adjustments still to be made this year, Guhl said, are those made as a result of
individual tax appeals.

The deadline for Princeton residents to file appeals was May 14, and many cases are still
being decided.
Brown, the owner of the garage-turned-dwelling, hoped to get the assessment for his
garage reduced through an appeal.

But he mistakenly filled out just one appeal form, and the tax board would not hear both
cases.

On the form, he listed the address of the garage and a description of the garage, but wrote
the lot and block number for the house.

The appraisal company did agree to reduce the value of his house by $72,000 the day
before his appeal hearing, but as for the garage, he, like many other residents, will have to
wait until next year.
Date: 2010/08/20

Appraiser defendsits revaluations Anger growing in Princetons

By Krystal Knapp


SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - The company that conducted the controversial property

revaluation for the two Princetons has issued a letter to local officials defending its
methodology and the revaluation results.

Many residents of both the borough and township have protested the new assessments,
which will in some cases lead to steep increases residents say are unjustified. Many
people fear lower and middle income residents will be driven out of town as a result.

In a six-page letter to the mayors of both the borough and the township, the head of the
firm that conducted the revaluation, Morristown-based Appraisal Systems Inc., touts the
revaluation process as fair and open, saying the company posted revaluation information
on its website and met with property owners who wanted to review their assessments
and property record data sheets.

"The transparency and openness practiced by ASI from the inception of the revaluation
process has been without equal in the industry," wrote Appraisal Systems CEO Ernest
Del Guercio. "To suggest the process has been anything other than totally transparent
and that "proprietary formulas, trade secrets and unexplained accounting have no place in
the process' is at the very least a mischaracterization of our efforts."

The letter from Del Guercio was sent in response to a letter officials sent to the company
a few weeks ago asking for a more detailed explanation of the revaluation methodology.

A Times analysis shows that on average, owners of more modest homes will see their
taxes increase as a result of the revaluation, while owners of more expensive homes, on
average, will see a decrease. Some owners of more modest homes are facing tax increases
of 30 to 50 percent or more.

In recent weeks, as residents have received tax bills that reflect the new assessments, a
public outcry has ensued, with more than 200 borough and township residents from
various neighborhoods packing town hall on two occasions. A third gathering is set for the
borough council meeting at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Del Guercio said his company is not responsible for the market forces reflected in the
new assessments and that uniformity and fairness have now been achieved as a result of
the revaluation. Included in the letter were recent sales data he said proves the
assessments are in line with market values.

The company also compared old assessment and sales data for 12 "higher-end" and seven
"entry-level" homes that sold in 2008 and 2009. The 12 higher-end homes were
previously assessed for about 41 percent of their true market value on average, while the
seven entry-level homes were assessed for only about 30 percent of their true market
value, on average. In other words, according to Del Guercio, owners of the higher-end
homes were paying more than their fair share.

"Clearly these pre-revaluation ratios demonstrated a "dramatic' inequity in assessed

values and were responsible in large part for the order to conduct a full and
comprehensive revaluation," he wrote. "While some would find comfort and safety in the
status quo, that is not an option that ASI could entertain and still meet the demands of all
controlling laws. We contributed in no way to (this) pre-existing set of facts."

The bulk of the letter reviews New Jersey law, the basic methodology used to determine
residential assessments, and the extraction method used to determine land values and site
values.

Residents from the new citizen group Princeton Fair Tax who have reviewed the
Appraisal Systems letter are unimpressed with the letter and comparisons of a small
number of high-end and entry-level homes, and say specific information about the
methodology used is still lacking.

"They didn't tell us anything we didn't already know about four months ago," said
township resident Dale Meade. "The devil is in the details, and we want to see the
details."

Many residents understand the general principles of the methodology, but want to see
specifically how it was applied to Princeton properties. A number of residents who met
with the company say they were never shown their property record data cards in the
meeting with Appraisal Systems. Residents want to know how the system was applied
not only to their own homes, but the various regions into which the two Princetons were
divided for the revaluation.

"We want to see specific examples of how they determined the land values for
neighborhoods from the scatter of data that they extracted from the sales in the three
years prior to Oct. 1, 2010," Meade said. "This should be readily available. We are also
interested in how they did the 50 percent of neighborhoods that had zero sales or just one
sale. The township committee should have insisted on seeing this before they approved
the tax list."

Meade, a retired deputy director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, said the
Fair Tax group, which includes people with statistics, mathematics, and real estate
backgrounds, is carrying out its own independent analysis of the revaluation data.

"We will then compare our results with ASI's and study our results to see how sensitive
they are to various small changes in assumptions," Meade said.

"Appraisal Systems should have done this, and they should share it with the township
committee now."
Date: 2010/08/23

Getting a break on taxes Princeton Township lowers penalties for late payments

By Krystal Knapp


 SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP - Homeowners struggling to pay their taxes because of the

recent township property revaluation will now be given a break on penalties for late
payments.

The township committee voted 4-0 last week to lower the interest rate on delinquent
taxes from an annual rate of 18 percent to 8 percent for the third and fourth quarters of
the year to help homeowners struggling to pay on time.

"This takes into consideration the difficulties township residents are having with their tax
bills as a result of the revaluation," Deputy Mayor Chad Goerner said. "It brings the
interest down, so it takes a little pressure off if someone is not able to pay on time."

Realtor Jim Firestone, one of the leaders of a group of more than 250 residents from the
township and borough who call themselves the Princeton Fair Tax Movement, asked why
the interest rate wasn't reduced even lower to the current standard rate in the market.

"If you are looking for an effective way to reduce the pain why not make it one, two or
three percent instead of eight percent?" Firestone asked.

Goerner said the township looked at lowering the rate even further or extending the grace
period to pay beyond 10 days, but decided against it.

"Reducing the rate to such a low level would encourage people not to pay," Goerner said.
"Only 25 percent of the taxes are municipal taxes, the rest are county and school taxes,
and we are required to pay those on time regardless of whether we collect them or not."

Firestone and other members of the fair tax group repeated their call for officials to look
into the revaluation and fix problems with the assessment that the group argues overvalue
smaller properties. As a result of the revaluation, owners of more modest homes will, on
average, pay more taxes, while owners of bigger homes will, on average, see their taxes
decrease.

The fair tax group wants errors for any property record data fixed as soon as possible and
says those errors should be addressed this year and should not be put off until next year.
But according to Mercer County Tax Administrator Martin Guhl, the only changes that
can be made for individual properties at this point are cases where individual homeowners
have filed an appeal with the county. The deadline to file was in May.

Firestone called on the township to try to reopen the appeal process, "so Princeton
property owners can get better shake." The township can adjust up to 50 percent of the
township's properties next year as part of a maintenance plan, but Firestone said that will
be too late for many property owners who can no longer afford their taxes. "We need to
move a little faster than next year," Firestone said.

Guhl said the township has no authority to reopen the process, which is guided by state
statute.

At the same meeting, the township committee and borough council discussed a proposed
$6.1 million new Community Park Pool complex. Firestone and other residents said
revaluation issues should take precedence over the project.

"You should table the bond ordinance until you do something about helping taxpayers
stay in town," Firestone said. "Instead consider a different bond, one to help your voters
pay their taxes. Many of those taxes increased 30 to 60 percent this month unexpectedly,
due to what we feel is a mistake, a flawed reassessment."

Goerner said the township has looked for ways to provide relief to taxpayers struggling
to pay their bills.

State law allows for a phase of increases over five years for areas in need of rehabilitation
or redevelopment, but the deadline has already passed.

The program also raises some issues in terms of how it is executed, Goerner said. If
homeowners seeing tax increases had those increases phased in, the rest of the property
owners in the township would have to have their taxes increased to pay the difference.
Goerner said the township's chief financial officer estimates the amount to be subsidized
for next year would be about $4 million.

"Other people's taxes would go up to achieve the phase in," Goerner said.

The fair tax group plans to pack the borough council meeting at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday to
raise concerns about the revaluation with borough officials.

Princeton Tax Assessor Neal Snyder says rent sales data shows the assessments are in
line with market value.

Residents question the data and still want more information.

Date: 2010/08/26

Residents demand answers about borough reval.

Want to know who made decisions for Princeton

By Krystal Knapp

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - Who signed the contract with the company that conducted
the boroughwide property revaluation, how were citizens chosen for a revaluation
committee, and why do the wealthy neighborhoods seem to benefit?

Those were just some of the questions posed to officials Tuesday night at a standing-
room-only council meeting attended by more than 125 residents who packed borough hall
to express concerns about the recent property revaluation and asked officials to take
action.

Although Princeton Township has had several public meetings about the revaluation, it
was the first opportunity for borough residents to face their elected leaders about the new
assessments.

"You really need to stop saying there is nothing you can do, that your hands are tied,
yada, yada," said borough resident Bernadine Hines. "It is more than obvious that
something has gone awry. You contracted with the appraisal company and paid for the
revaluation with taxpayer money, and you have the responsibility to get answers."

In the more than three-hour meeting during which Mayor Mildred Trotman pounded the
gavel more than once to silence the crowd, residents repeatedly called on officials to
address their concerns.

Residents are concerned that new assessments tend to shift the property tax burden more
onto modest homes than larger ones. Many believe the revaluation process was deeply
flawed.

Late in the meeting, after Councilman David Goldfarb said there is no indication the
revaluation was flawed and that changes in the housing market are to blame, people
booed and more than three-quarters of the audience walked out. They said public officials
were not taking the issues they raised seriously.

"It seems clear that the lower price properties in Princeton appreciated relative to higher
price homes," Goldfarb said. "We have seen this shift and the purpose of the revaluation
was to redistribute taxes based on fair market values."
"The trend is not the result of ineptitude or design, it is an economic reality in our
community," Goldfarb said. "Whether the appraisal company threw things up in the air
and sorted them out when they fell on the floor doesn't really matter if they got the
numbers right at the end."

Each resident was allowed to speak for just three minutes at the meeting if they had
signed up at the start.

Resident Eleanor Lewis said the issue was too important to cut residents off. "This is
affecting our pocketbooks and we are going to live with this for rest of our lives," she
said, but Trotman said time limits were necessary so the meeting would end at a
reasonable hour.

At the outset of the meeting, Goldfarb told residents assessments can only be changed by
the assessor, the county tax board, or the courts. "The council and mayor play no role in
changing anyone's assessment," he said. He said the only way to change the outcome
would be to file a lawsuit challenging the process, which would mean finding a judge
who would say it was flawed.

"From my perspective the chances of that are very slim," he said. "And if a lawsuit is
brought and the borough is a defendant, we would all be paying the cost of the suit."

Councilman Roger Martindell suggested instead that residents focus on ways to lower
taxes by pushing for consolidation with Princeton Township and pressuring Princeton
University to pay larger payments in lieu of taxes to the borough. He also suggested the
borough create an affordable housing program that would operate like a reverse
mortgage. The borough would pay taxes for residents who could not afford them, and the
residents could live in their homes until they die.

"If the John Witherspoon neighborhood is changing because of forces we can't otherwise
deal with, we could also liberalize the zoning so residents could then sell at the highest
possible value and get more money for their properties," he said.

Resident Jim Firestone, head of the group Princeton Fair Tax, asked officials to
acknowledge there are problems with the revaluation. "The biggest pattern we've seen
townwide is that small modest, older houses all over town have been hit with the biggest
increases," he said. "Often the large newer homes received substantial decreases."

Resident John Anagbo, who is a teacher, called the lack of answers about the process
mind boggling. "If I have two students, one gets a 50 on a test, and the other gets an 80,
and they ask why, I can't just say "Oh, I can't find the formula, I have it in a drawer
somewhere,'" Anagbo said. "I'd be getting all sorts of phone calls from parents."

Township resident Dale Meade said the big question is whether the appraisal company
applied its methodology properly. Artificial boundaries in neighborhoods resulted in
sharp changes in values in many cases and many neighborhoods had no home sales for
the years prior to the revaluation or only had one sale. "The house replacement values
seem artificially low, inflating land values," Meade said. "It is a disturbing trend that
benefits the rich and privileged."

Resident Eileen Bird said the system benefits new McMansions. "It seems we are setting
things up for tearing down starter homes people like me could afford and building bigger
houses. I don't know if I will be able to pay the taxes when I retire."

Township resident Dan Tamasi, 77, said the working class is being pushed out of
Princeton. "I've been here all my life. I am on a fixed income. I was born and raised here
and now I can't afford it."

Councilwoman Jenny Crumiller suggested the borough redo the revaluation next year to
see if the results match the recent one. "It's like when you go to the doctor and get a
devastating diagnosis," she said. "It's prudent to get a second opinion. It would provide
more reassurance it was fair, in my view."

Martindell asked that the borough lawyer look at whether it is possible to throw out the
revaluation, though he said he is not suggesting it be done. Others said the borough
should monitor sales and make changes to assessments more regularly when necessary
next year and in future years.

A few residents at the meeting were distributing fliers calling the revaluation the
"Princeton Bailout" for the rich and calling for people to "vote the bums out" of office.

Princeton residents demand answers about borough revaluation decisions

Date: 2010/08/29

Princeton Boro lowers penalties for late taxes

Follows township in giving temporary relief amid outrage over revaluations

By Krystal Knapp SPECIAL TO THE TIMES - PRINCETON BOROUGH

Following in the footsteps of Princeton Township, borough leaders are also lowering
penalties on late property tax payments in an effort to help struggling homeowners.

The Princeton Borough Council voted 6-0 last week to lower the interest rate on
delinquent taxes from an annual rate of 18 percent to 6 percent to help property owners
who can't pay on time. The lower interest rate applies to taxes owed up to $15,000. The
interest rate on amounts owed above $15,000 is still 18 percent.

Some residents have seen a steep increase in their taxes as a result of the recent property
revaluation. On average. the owners of more modest homes saw an increase in their
taxes, while the owners of more expensive homes, on average, saw their taxes decrease.

A few council members questioned whether the interest rate on delinquent taxes could be
lowered still further. Councilwoman Barbara Trelstad said the borough has to balance its
needs with the need to help residents.

"While want to be able to extend payments, the borough needs to receive revenues to pay
the bills," Trelstad said. "The borough needs enough revenue to meet cash-flow
requirements. We still must remit payments to the board of education and the county
regardless of what we collect," she said.

Councilman David Goldfarb said the borough does not want to set the interest rate too
low or apply the 6 percent rate to all payments because it might encourage some people
not to pay their taxes on time. "We don't want to be the lender of first resort to all sorts of
people who have credit card debt and so on," Goldfarb said. "We want to be fair, and
provide a cushion to people facing a shock."

Originally the 6 percent interest was supposed to apply to only the first $10,000 owed,
but the council upped it to $15,000 at he suggestion of Councilman Roger Martindell. "It
is something we can revisit if it is not working out," Trelstad said.

Martindell also suggested that the borough get rid of other penalty charges, and the
council agreed.

Earlier this month, the Princeton Township Committee voted to lower the interest rate on
delinquent taxes from an annual rate of 18 percent to 8 percent for the third and fourth
quarters of the year to help homeowners having trouble paying on time.

In another matter related to the controversial property revaluation, the Princeton Borough
Council also released the names of the members of a citizens revaluation committee that
assisted the tax assessor and the appraisal company with the revaluation. In recent weeks,
some residents of both Princetons have asked who the members of the committee are and
how they were chosen.

The five borough members of the revaluation committee were realtors Sue Borden and
Jan Weinberg, Mary McManus, Scott Sipprelle, and Caroline Clancy, the director of
Princeton University's office of real estate finance. McManus and Clancy also served on
the township revaluation committee, along with William Enslin and realtor Robin
Wallach.

Princeton Tax Assessor Neal Snyder told the council he met three or four times with the
group, and he communicated with members sometimes via the internet or by phone.

One of the most important functions of the group, he said, was designating
"neighborhoods" for the revaluation. Based on zoning and similar housing stock, the
appraisal company created the neighborhood map along with Snyder, and the committee
fine-tuned it, Snyder said.

"Once the delineations were set and the numbers started rolling in at the beginning of the
year, I'm not sure if the committee had a final meeting to look at those preliminary
numbers," Snyder said. "Any numbers that were changed were changed by the appraisal
company or me."

"We reached out to a couple of committee members, especially those in the real estate
business, to determine neighborhood values," Snyder said. "We picked their brains, and
they did help considerably. But once the final numbers were created and people received
their postcards with their new assessments, that was pretty much the end of their role," he
said.
Date: 2010/09/17

Dems at odds

Club leader resigns over fallout from letter to the editor

By Krystal Knapp

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

PRINCETON BOROUGH - A local Democratic club leader has resigned as a result of

the fallout from a letter she wrote scolding Democratic officials about the controversial
recent property revaluation and suggesting voters elect Republicans this November.

Mary Ellen Marino, the borough vice president of the Princeton Community Democratic
Organization (PCDO), said last night she has agreed to step down from her post.

During a meeting of the PCDO Executive Board Monday night, the majority of the
attendees said Marino should resign because of a letter to the editor that appeared in local
papers.

The shift in the tax burden from more expensive homes to more modest homes and the
question of how officials should respond has caused great concern among a number of
Democrats and created some tension within the party. In her letter to the editor, Marino
expressed concern for families who are unable to pay their taxes because of the recent
property revaluation and frustration with local Democratic officials.

In her letter that appeared in The Times on Sept. 3, Marino said a solution proposed by
borough officials to help residents pay their higher taxes would have gradually stripped
their homes of equity, leaving little for their heirs.

"Shame on all of you. I suggest we all vote Republican for borough and township
councils," she wrote.

David Cohen, president of the PCDO, said the calls for Marino's resignation were not
about her position on the revaluation issue, but what many felt was a lack of judgment on
her part in writing the letter.

"She didn't actually want the GOP to win, she wanted to pressure candidates and elected
officials to do something," Cohen said. "She didn't think through the ramifications. It
showed poor judgment in her leadership role."

Marino, a lifelong progressive Democrat, said last night that she is glad her letter drew
attention to the issue and prompted more discussion on the topic of the revaluation. She
said the club should not be afraid to put controversial issues before the public for
discussion.

Cohen said the party is still happy to have Marino as a member, adding, "Her maverick
status is valuable."

During the Monday night meeting, the board also decided to cancel a public forum
scheduled for Sept. 19 on the property revaluation. One of the panelists scheduled to
make a presentation had to drop out due to a scheduling conflict. Another panelist did not
have experience central to Princeton's concerns, Cohen said. That left only one panelist.

"A lot of people still felt they would like to do a program, but felt the time would be short
notice to schedule other speakers," Cohen said.

Cohen acknowledged there is some concern about how the revaluation issue could affect
the November elections on the local, county and federal level.

"The revaluation issue is a very emotional one in town right now," Cohen said. "There is
some concern that people in Princeton who regularly vote Democrat may not show up at
polls."
Date: 2010/09/18

Martindell offers reval remedies for Princeton

Borough councilman would seek more from university, share with township

By Krystal Knapp SPECIAL TO THE TIMES - PRINCETON BOROUGH

A borough councilman who is up for re-election this November is proposing three

measures to deal with some of the complications arising from the recent boroughwide
property revaluation.

Changes in property assessments mean sharply higher taxes for some residents, an
outcome that is feared may sap their personal wealth and force some to leave town.

Councilman Roger Martindell is asking council members to approve resolutions

reopening negotiations with Princeton University regarding payments in lieu of taxes,
looking at more shared services with Princeton Township, and appointing a revaluation
study commission.

The council will consider his proposals at the Sept. 28 public meeting at 7:30 p.m. at
borough hall.

Some of the resolutions were ideas Martindell raised at the Aug. 24 council meeting
attended by more than 125 residents, many who expressed their concerns about the
results of the recent revaluation and the resulting shift in the property tax burden from
more expensive homes to more modest homes.

"None of these is a silver bullet," said Martindell of the resolutions. "If we adopt them we
are put in position of taking some initiative to address issues that have arisen."

Martindell said the borough should immediately reopen negotiations with Princeton
University regarding payments in lieu of taxes. The borough's current agreement with the
university expires in December of 2011. "It is not too early to open up those negotiations
and this is the climate to do it in," he said. "Even if we sit down tomorrow, it could take
weeks if not months, to conclude an agreement."

The mayors of the borough and township already met with the president of the university
in the spring to discuss the issue, and had a second meeting with the local issues
committee of the school's board of trustees. A new agreement has not been reached yet.

A joint consolidation study commission is meeting regularly to look at whether the two
Princetons should consolidate or share more services like police and public works.
Martindell said in the meantime, the borough could look at sharing other services like
zoning, fire inspection, courts and the tax assessor's office. The borough could also look
at sharing services with other municipalities, he said.

Martindell is also recommending that the borough form a revaluation study commission
to review the recent revaluation and consider options to reduce the effects of the
revaluation on taxpayers who were adversely affected by it.

Liz Lempert, a fellow Democratic incumbent in the township, is proposing a similar

study group for the township. The borough commission proposed by Martindell would
consist of seven people appointed by the mayor, and would start its work no later than
Oct. 1 and issue a final report no later than Jan. 31.

"Unfortunately we have been put in a position as a government body to defend something

we are not really in a position to defend," Martindell said. "A broader group of
individuals could make an independent judgment as to its accuracy."

The Princeton Community Democratic Organization executive board passed a resolution

in early June calling on the borough council and township committee to form a study
commission within 30 days. The governing bodies did not follow up at the time. But
since June, hundreds of residents have shown up at government meetings and forums
expressing their anger about the revaluation, some calling for it to be done over.
2010/09/23

Aid sought to heal revaluation 'wounds

Princeton Township to explore payment options

By Krystal Knapp SPECIAL TO THE TIMES - PRINCETON TOWNSHIP

Reverse mortgages. Low-interest loans. Affordable housing subsidies.

Those are some of the solutions that elected officials have come up with to deal with the
effects of the township's controversial property revaluation.

The issues: Some residents are seeing their property taxes double as a result of the
revaluation. But while, on average, owners of more modest homes saw their taxes go up
after the revaluation, owners of more expensive homes actually saw their taxes go down.

Under options outlined this week at a four-hour township committee meeting,

homeowners who want to stay in Princeton but can't afford to pay their taxes might be
able to stay put if they are willing to borrow money, enter an affordable housing program,
or sacrifice some equity in their homes.

Officials made it clear that the township can't use public money to provide tax relief to
residents, but they said private initiatives could be created to offer assistance.

For example, township lawyer Ed Schmierer said, officials have talked to a local
nonprofit organization about creating a taxpayer relief fund. Donors would be solicited,
with a goal of raising about $300,000.

Low-interest loans would be made from this fund to individuals struggling to pay their
taxes this year.

There are strings. The borrowers would have to meet certain criteria, based on what
portion of their income goes toward housing. They would pay back the principal and
interest on the loan later, when they sell the property. Schmierer said a local nonprofit
organization is willing to establish such a fund, but he declined to name the organization.

In yet another proposed solution to the tax problem, property owners could enter an
affordable housing program that would be funded through developer fees. There would
be an income limit for that program: about $30,000 for one person and $49,000 for a two-
person household.

In addition to these ideas, officials have reached out to local banks to discuss the
possibility of making reverse mortgages available to homeowners who qualify. The
homeowner would tap the home's equity to pay the property taxes, and the banks would
be repaid when the homeowner sells the property.

About next year

A Mercer County official at the meeting said nothing can be done to adjust assessments
this year, but township officials talked to the group about what can be done next year.
They said individual property issues could be handled through the appeals process at the
county level, or the township tax assessor could conduct one of two adjustment programs.

Under the first program, known as a compliance plan, the values of up to 50 percent of
the properties in the township could be adjusted based on sales data, appeals and other
information that show properties in certain areas of town should be increased or
decreased in value.

The second program, a reassessment, would allow the assessor to adjust more than 50
percent of the properties. A reassessment would require that all properties be inspected
within four years. A reassessment would also require more manpower in the assessor's
office, officials noted.

Township committee members said they are not sure yet that they would support either
assessment program. In the end, though, the decision will be up to the assessor.

The majority of elected officials believe sales data show that more modest homes are
actually still underassessed, and that more expensive homes are selling for less than their
assessed value. So, an assessment program might hurt the very property owners who are
suffering.

"It would increase taxes again for folks at the lowest end of the spectrum," said
committeewoman Sue Nemeth. "I'm afraid the remedy could be worse than the illness."

In the end, the committee voted to create a residents task force to explore revaluation
issues such as the various options for tax relief and potential legislation.

Against the recommendation of Mercer County Tax Administrator Marty Guhl, who was
at the meeting, the committee also voted to mail property record cards to all property
owners. Guhl said mailing the cards would do more harm than good, and he urged
officials instead to encourage residents to meet with the assessor to review them. "People
misread the cards," he said. "People often don't understand the information in them."

Former Mayor Jim Floyd, who heads Princeton Fair Tax, said the group still wants to
meet with the mayor -- soon -- to discuss its findings.

"Something went wrong with the revaluation that demands all our attention. It especially
demands an open mind," Floyd said. "We have been working on this for months.
Unfortunately it was not considered an important issue until it got closer to election time.
We expect action from officials befitting the situation rather than putting off results for a
future working committee. And the onus is still on the appraisal company to fully explain
its methodology."

Resident Dale Meade, who has been tracking data about home sales trends himself,
disagreed with officials claims' that more moderate homes are still undervalued and more
expensive homes are overvalued. He said there is insufficient data to prove any trend yet.

Resident Tom Pyle asked officials if they were satisfied with the results of the revaluation
and if they believe the contract with the appraisal company was fulfilled. He also asked
officials if, in addition to the private initiatives they are supporting to help residents, they
have considered cutting township spending.