Letter to the editor: Unreasonable Tax Break Coming for Waterview

Dear Editor
letters
Next Year the waterview property will begin its “woodlands assessment” change for tax purposes. The property owner had a tree assessment performed by NJDEP using its character of mature upland forest to its benefit. Trees were measured and the property was deemed for “tax purposes only” Woodlands.

This detaching the status of its Market Value from the tax base; based on woodlands, instead of favoring the possibility for purchase as Open Space, allows the developer an unfair advantage and encourages forces favorable to developers within the Township. This unfair advantage puts the private property owner and outside the community forces in a position of unfair privilege by law. However this law is quite outside the principals of the laws alleged rightful order of necessity and universal fairness. It blatantly favors the private over the public interest.

This “woodland assessment” should rather make it easier for a Rezone by the Township to conservation,as the case with Troy Meadows which just occurred. It should make it more possible for the purchase with Open Space Funding. How can a property owner pay as little as $1,500 a year for property, allegedly worth $16 million. By denying this ratable to an exceedingly unfair tax rate and at the same time maintaining its Market Value for development degrades the very immortality of the law.

We must also keep in mind the property even if developed will only bring “perhaps” tax relief of $6.00 a year per household; maybe, as brought out by Former Councilman Jonathan Nelson. No matter how it is looked at no long term good can come of this; unless we have it as Open Space.

This same woodlands designation for tax purposes proves the value of the property as a natural resource asset, aquifer ground water recharge, flood control, biodiversity and community enhancement.

$1,500.00 is an unreasonably low number to pay, unless the property remains as woodland or rezoned as such.

Inglesino’s alleged compromise gives two sides to a one sided story

Nikolaus Hopstock

Comments

Comments