New tax bills cause some concern in Upper Freehold

Longtime residents,

those on fixed incomes hit the hardest

BY JANE MEGGITT

Staff Writer

A former mayor has called the new tax levies a hardship for some Upper Freehold residents.

Taxpayers recently received their first tax bills since last year's township-wide property revaluation. At the July 20 Township Committee meeting, Robert Abrams, a former mayor, said he has received numerous phone calls from people wondering what to do after they saw the new taxes they would have to pay.

Abrams said some lots in some parts of town were assessed at $250,000 per acre, while others were assessed at $85,000 per acre. He said farmland assessment went from $800 to $840 per acre.

Abrams, who served on the township's governing body for 23 years, said the new tax levies are a hardship for many older residents as well as those on fixed incomes.

Abrams said he got a call from a woman who said she is going to sell her property because of the new tax burden.

"People with 40 [or more] years in the township took a hit," he said, adding that these are people who have made a difference in the township and want to stay there.

Deputy Mayor William Miscoski said he agreed with Abrams that the "old-timers" were hit so heavily with the new assessments.

Miscoski said if he were not taking care of his mother, she would not be able to continue living in town. He added that school taxes, not municipal ones, are the problem.

Abrams commented how it's been stated that the new tax is $1.49 per $100 of assessed value, but that it is actually $1.59.

When asked about Abrams' comment, Tax Assessor Steve Walters said, "In notifying property owners of their new assessments, the revaluation firm noted that using the 2005 budget and the new tax values, the tax rate [used for comparison] would be approximately $1.49 per $100 of assessment as compared with the actual rate of $3.07."

He said the firm's letter also stated that it only used the 2005 tax rate for illustration since the 2006 budget and tax rates have yet to be adopted.

According to Walters, the rate quoted in the letter functioned to position the new assessments against the known 2005 budget, so property owners could compare them directly to their 2005 tax bill. He said that using the 2006 budget and the new tax values, the tax rate for comparison would be $1.59.

Abrams alleged that the township is losing money because rollback taxes on farms sold for development are not being taxed at the correct rate.

Walters said the preferential treatment afforded to farmland properties is only afforded to qualifying land. The underlying lots of residences and improvements are assessed "according to the same standard of practice" as all other property in the township. This is done in accordance with the Farmland Act of 1964, he said.

"Rollbacks are likewise a creature of statute," Walters said. "A rollback is a tax which is applied to properties [that], through change in use, leave the farmland assessment program."

He said the process begins with establishing the fact that the property is subject to the rollback. The next step is to establish the fair value of the property subject to the rollback.

"[Given] that fair value of properties differs from property to property, there is not a fixed rollback rate," he said. "Rather, the rollback is determined on a property-by-property basis."

Walters said the rollback is based on the fair value of the property in the year of its change in use. If the property was assessed as farmland during those years, then it would be based on the fair value of the property from the two previous years.