ACCOUNTABILITY THE PRESCRIPTION FOR WHAT AILS ANCORA

OpEd from Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini

The horrific conditions at Ancora Psychiatric Hospital have been well documented. Since July 2006, five patients have died, one a criminally insane killer who escaped and then committed suicide upon his return. Two other patients have been killed by other patients.

Add to that reports of patient abuse, fights between patients and staff, employees sleeping on the job, patient rounds being conducted by unqualified orderlies, staff members claiming credit for hours they didn’t work, staffing shortages, lack of staff training, ambiguous policies, and nepotism. It reads more like a script for a horror movie; unfortunately, it’s reality for the more than 750 patients at this severely overcrowded and troubled state-run hospital.

No human being, especially those who cannot care for themselves, should be subjected to such revolting conditions. These patients aren’t just ‘statistics’ in a report or a newspaper article. They are real people with a very real illness. They are our family members, our friends and neighbors. They have been admitted to Ancora for treatment, but sadly, many are receiving substandard care because they just aren’t a priority of the Corzine Administration.

Most of the reported abuses at Ancora have occurred during the governor’s watch and most likely could have been averted had he moved expeditiously to fill vacancies on the facility’s board of trustees.

One position has been vacant since 2003, two others since 2004. In addition, two members’ terms that expired in 2005 are still awaiting reappointment as is another’s whose term expired in 2006. A recommendation was recently made to fill another seat that expired in 2003.

Granted, Mr. Corzine inherited many of the vacancies, but, as the state’s top leader, it was his responsibility to fill them in a timely manner. This is the same governor who has repeatedly called for transparency and accountability in government.

Why then has he waited until now to file a recommendation to fill a seat that was vacated in 2003? What about the other vacancies? Governor Corzine’s failure to provide much needed oversight at Ancora speaks volumes about his priorities. Clearly, mental health residences are at the bottom of his political ladder.

Since the governor isn’t in any hurry to take action, then the Legislature must step up to the plate – now.

Recently, legislation calling for transparency at New Jersey’s general hospitals was debated during an Assembly Health & Senior Services Committee hearing. A-2607 requires hospital officials to conduct an annual public meeting to discuss hospital operations and delivery of services concerns. Its purpose is to ensure that members of the community served by a hospital have an opportunity to discuss issues related to the operation of the facility and express any concerns regarding the administrators and board of trustees.

This bill is a step in the right direction in our pursuit to improve quality of health care for our residents and require accountability. Unfortunately, it’s missing an important component – county and state-run psychiatric hospitals. As it is currently written, these facilities are not included in the bill. But they must be part of the equation. As a member of this committee, I advocated for their inclusion as I strongly believe the events at Ancora – and all such facilities - should be voiced to the public during these meetings.

Conversely, it’s important that the public be able to share its concerns as well. Open communication between facility officials and the community will result in accountability and that will go a long way in producing a much needed change in culture.

It was decided that the legislation would be amended on the floor the next time the Assembly convenes for a voting session. It is imperative that we follow through and make this happen.

In regards to Ancora, there are other avenues of change we can pursue as well. Mental Health Association officials have suggested bringing in an independent agency to investigate abuse complaints and stationing trained, uniformed security guards on floors with the most dangerous patients. Carolyn Beauchamp, President of the Mental Health Association in New Jersey suggested forming community advisory boards “to peel away the secrecy and the stigma” that surrounds the hospital.

These are common sense solutions the Legislature should seriously consider for providing for these patient’s basic needs and rights – adequate care and a safe environment. They are much needed prescriptions for what ails Ancora.

Assemblywoman Angelini represents the 11th Legislative District and is a member of the Assembly Health & Senior Services Committee

Healthy competition best way to fix problem of uninsured

An OpEd By JAY WEBBER

New Jersey Democrats recently unveiled the latest in a long line of big-ticket spending items: a universal health insurance mandate for New Jersey.

The plan would require every New Jerseyan to buy a health insurance policy, and if a person cannot afford a policy, the state would subsidize its cost. The initial annual price for this expansion of government is $1.7 billion. Gov. Corzine has acknowledged taxpayers simply cannot afford the proposal.

And when was the last time we saw a government program come in under budget in New Jersey? Audits already have found wasteful spending, poor oversight and downright fraud in the state's existing healthcare program.

Our state needs health-care reform, to be sure, but there is a better alternative to a taxpayer-funded, bureaucracy-based proposal. I have proposed the New Jersey Healthcare Choice Act, which would lower the cost of health insurance, slash the number of the 1.2 million New Jerseyans now uninsured and require no government subsidy. It is not another massive government program.

One commentator remarking on past attempts at health-care reform called New Jersey "the poster child for how to destroy a health insurance market." How did the state fail so spectacularly?

New Jersey law permits individuals to buy only high-end policies subject to our state's cumbersome and expensive regulations, which may be the most burdensome in the nation. Micromanaging lawmakers have locked us into a Hobson's choice of purchasing gold-plated, one-size-fits-all health coverage or living with no coverage at all.

The government's hyper-regulation of the health insurance market means we pay as much as three times more for coverage than our neighbors in Pennsylvania. For example, a single woman, 29, living in Montville might pay $2,040 annually for a bare-bones health policy. Across the Delaware River in Lansdale, Pa., the same individual would pay $810 for basic health coverage. A family of four living in Parsippany that pays $7,835 a year for low-end coverage would pay $3,172 in Blue Bell, Pa.

The New Jersey Healthcare Choice Act would permit New Jerseyans to access lower prices available in other states by buying health insurance from insurers approved to sell insurance in other states. Individuals, families and small employers would have the right to look for health insurance policies anywhere in the nation to best suit their needs and budgets. Nothing would force New Jerseyans into buying insurance outside New Jersey. Any consumer still would be free to buy New Jersey policies.

But many will not continue to shop only in the Garden State. Policies in our neighboring states are not inferior to those sold here. They just are less encumbered by government regulation. Those policies span a much greater range of affordability. Think of it this way: New Jersey requires everyone who has health coverage to own a Cadillac policy, while other states permit residents to choose from Honda, Chevrolet or Cadillac policies.

That increased accessibility encourages more uninsured people to buy health insurance without costing taxpayers a dime. Health-care choice would help people who lost insurance because they are temporarily out of work. An estimated 45 percent of uninsured people lack insurance for six months or less, most because they are between jobs.

Opening our market to out-of-state insurers would lower the cost of health coverage for those families by as much as 60 percent and would allow them to maintain health coverage during a tough time, without government assistance. Costs also would plummet for small employers, who often would provide health coverage for their employees but cannot afford it.

Liberating state health insurance markets is a trend across the country. Legislators in Maine, Wisconsin, Georgia, Colorado and California are in various stages of crafting proposals to permit their citizens to go out of state to buy insurance. A bill pending in Congress would accomplish this nationwide.

We live in a state that likes to consider itself progressive and cutting edge. If we are as ahead of the curve as we believe ourselves to be, then let us be the first to open our health insurance market to genuine competition. By loosening state government's iron-fisted grip on our citizens' insurance choices, we can make progress on an important social goal and save taxpayers from a mammoth and counterproductive health insurance mandate we cannot afford.

Assemblyman Jay Webber is a Republican from Morris County.

GOVERNOR CORZINE MUST DISCLOSE WHO IS SUPPORTING PRO-TOLL HIKE ADVOCACY GROUP

An OpEd by Assemblyman David Rible

Once again Governor Jon Corzine, the man who once promised transparency throughout his administration, is keeping the public in the dark.

For more than a year Governor Corzine held his cards close to the vest as it related to his asset monetization plan for our toll roads. Despite numerous attempts to access information, the Governor steadfastly refused to disclose the details of his plan.

The Governor then went into court to prevent legislators from gaining access to an $800,000 taxpayer financed consulting report that analyzed the various impacts of his secret toll hike proposal on New Jersey motorists.

Finally, in January of this year Governor Corzine unveiled his plan to borrow between up to $40 billion while increasing tolls by 800 percent. Even as he revealed this information, the Governor was reluctant to release any details about exactly how the plan would be structured.

Now, as Governor Corzine travels around the state trying to sell his toll-hike and borrowing proposal, he is enlisting the help of a non-profit advocacy group he has created to organize a pro-toll hike public relations campaign.

This organization, called Save Our State New Jersey, has already benefited from $500,000 of Corzine’s own money and is likely to have raised money from other sources as well to promote the Governor’s plan. The problem is, Save Our State NJ is yet to detail its fundraising activities or its donors.

This means that the public remains in the dark about who exactly is putting up big money to help pay for the Governor’s pro-toll hike campaign. This represents a major problem, particularly in a state where accusations of influence peddling and pay-to-play are ubiquitous.

It is important that this organization disclose who is contributing money to their efforts to sell the Governor’s toll hike plan. Having an organization that is spending money to advocate for a key public policy initiative of the Governor, without disclosing the names of donors to that group, raises serious concerns.

Is the organization a front for those who stand to benefit handsomely from the sale of bonds or the projects they will finance? Who knows? And that’s the problem.

It is not a stretch, given the well documented culture of corruption in New Jersey, that individuals could be donating money to this group with hopes of being rewarded with state contracts or business in the future. Publicly disclosing the names of donors to this group could minimize these pay-to-play concerns – if those concerns are unfounded.

Just this week former state Senator Joseph Coniglio was indicted on charges that he abused a secretive legislative grant program to enrich himself. Last year state Senator Wayne Bryant was accused of steering grants to an institution that had provided him with what allegedly amounted to a no-show job.

The public has plenty of reason to be cynical about the way things operate in Trenton and the Governor’s group of secret financial backers does nothing to allay those concerns.

Put simply, a private group that is actively campaigning for one of the Governor’s key public policy initiatives, operating with $500,000 in start-up money provided personally by the Governor, has an obligation to the public to disclose its contributors.

The Governor has already lined up some influential Trenton insiders from the world of lobbying and politics to publicly support his plan. These are the people who are supporting his plan with their words, but it would be interesting to see who is supporting his plan with their wallets.

Another question yet to be answered is what will happen to these funds should the Governor’s toll plan fail to win approval? Will it simply be spent advocating the next plan the Governor offers?

With more than 100 tax increases in the past six years and a slowing economy, New Jersey is already unaffordable for middle class families. This toll hike plan will only make matters worse by not only driving up costs for those who commute on these toll roads, but also by increasing the cost of consumer goods that must be shipped on those roads.

It is a good bet that none of the people supporting this pro-toll hike campaign are having the same difficulty making ends meet as the average New Jersey family. If they want to support the Governor’s plan with their money, they should at least allow their names and contributions to be made public.

Assemblyman David Rible serves the 11th Legislative District in Monmouth County.

Toll road "corporation" lacks adequate oversight

By Assemblywoman Amy Handlin

To the Editor:

Remember the Wizard of Oz? Behind the bluster and ballyhoo, he turned out to be just a misguided man behind a curtain, trying to create a fantasy world where all wishes come true.

To his credit, Gov. Corzine is not hiding behind a curtain as he tries to sell his toll road plan as part of his debt reduction initiative. On the contrary, he is touting it with considerable ballyhoo of his own. But it's no less a fantasy.

Even Dorothy would be suspicious of one of the plan's basic elements: an elaborate new bureaucracy called a Public Benefit Corporation. I'd venture a guess that fewer than 100 state residents ever have heard of a PBC. But we've all heard all too much of New Jersey's experience with autonomous, taxpayer-funded, politically insulated state authorities. While the governor insists that a PBC is different from an authority, that's like claiming "monetization" is different from massive, unprecedented borrowing.

The long-term purpose of the PBC will be to manage the Garden State Parkway, New Jersey Turnpike, Atlantic City Expressway and part of Route 440. There will be a contract between the state and the PBC that dictates safety standards, maintenance requirements and operating conditions. Day-to-day decisions will be made by what the governor calls "a professional, qualified board and management team, independent of us." And that's the problem.

New Jersey already has hundreds of independent public bodies with the power to tax, borrow and spend. It doesn't matter whether they're called authorities, commissions, boards, PBCs or other euphemisms. Collectively, these bodies are out of control.

The governor's PBC would borrow from $32 billion to $38 billion — more than the gross national product of some developing countries. There is nothing to stop big checks from being written on that tempting new account for over-the-top expenditures like those of existing public bodies. A few examples:

The New Jersey Economic Development Authority paid $125 million to two Wall Street giants — Lehman Brothers and Morgan Stanley — solely to cancel an earlier deal. That single decision cost more than a year's worth of revenue generated by 13 state fees.

The South Jersey Transportation Authority manages the Atlantic City Expressway. (Sound familiar?) But it also funded a parking garage in Camden that was not in any way connected to its operations.

The New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority administers education loans for low-income students. An audit found that it also spent $235,940 on parties, food, travel and other questionable expenses.

NJ Transit, while hiking train and bus fares for millions of riders, hired two well-connected political insiders to lobby other political insiders for more public money. The lobbyists' fees range from $6,000 to $15,000 per month. They enjoy breakfast meetings at a Manhattan hotel billed to taxpayers at up to $60 per person.

In an attempt to rein in New Jersey's independent public bodies, I sponsored legislation to scrutinize their operations and recommend to the governor and Legislature that they be merged, consolidated or abolished when necessary. While this legislation has gathered dust, we face the creation of yet another unaccountable entity to undertake the most expensive and risky venture in state history.

The PBC's executives will be paid princely salaries commensurate with those in the private sector. A potential patronage pit, its only oversight will come from a board of citizens appointed by the governor. It will be empowered to financially crush commuters, devastate commercial truckers and overwhelm local roads.

There's one consolation. Supporters can say honestly there will be no wasteful spending or ethical abuses in a new toll road authority — because it will be called a PBC, not an authority.

New Jersey is tired of government by wizardry. Even a Scarecrow without a brain could see the real solutions — slash spending, stop rampant borrowing and restore public trust.

There's another possible response. Maybe if we start calling Corzine the Wizard, he'll transport us all to the Emerald City. At least Munchkins weren't taxed.

Sincerely,

Amy H. Handlin
Assemblywoman, District 13

By Assemblyman Peter Biondi

Dear Editor:

Governor Corzine last month warned nearly 150 mayors assembled at the State House that unless his 800 percent toll increase plan is approved, there will not be enough money to fund property tax relief in this year ’s budget.

The governor’s threat, which is tantamount to political extortion, is confirmation of  the Corzine Administration’s failure to provide sustainable and permanent property tax “reform” despite its claims to the contrary.

When property tax rebate checks were mailed last year prior to Legislative elections, Mr. Corzine and his Democrat allies heaped praise upon themselves claiming the rebates were the real deal – that they were lasting cuts, not merely an election-year gimmick.

Our governor’s recent behavior, however, tells us otherwise. Not even six months after the checks arrived, what little relief taxpayers received is suddenly threatened because Mr. Corzine has now made property tax rebates part of his massive road tax equation.

While Assembly Republicans called for a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the permanency of the relief, Corzine and Democrats promised sustainability through an increase in the state sales tax. Incredulously, it is now tied to an outrageous proposal that will see tolls rise on our state roads for the next 75, possibly 99 years.

It is reprehensible that New  Jersey taxpayers are being used as pawns in what equates to a political blackmail plot. The governor’s strong-arm tactics are repugnant behavior for any elected official, much less the head of a state. They also reveal a disturbing pattern -- it’s the governor’s way or the highway. Unfortunately, in this case, Mr. Corzine is the only one who will soon be able to afford the “highway.”

Peter Biondi
Assembly Republican Conference Leader
16th Legislative District

Now is the time for a bipartisan assault on gang-violence

By Assemblyman kevin O'toole

To the Editor:

The brutal and shocking murder of three college-bound students in Newark reinforces the immediate need for state, county and local officials to set all differences aside and work together in a coordinated fashion to attack the growing problem of gang violence and violent crime, especially in our cities. I commend Newark Mayor Cory Booker for his determination to focus on the real issue – crime – and his refusal to be sidetracked by peripheral concerns. This is no time for political wrangling between political parties – or within political parties.

This is a critical time in Newark’s history. Our state’s largest city has been making remarkable strides under its new mayor. It is undergoing an urban renaissance that, when complete, could serve as a model for the nation. Violent crime and gang activities threaten the ongoing reformation of Newark and other cities. It must be confronted in a forceful manner with all the resources at our disposal.

I call on Governor Jon Corzine, state Attorney General Anne Milgram, U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie and the state Legislature to convene a summit that would bring together officials and law enforcement agencies from every level of government to come up with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy to fight back and eliminate the scourge of gang violence – in our cities and the suburbs. It would be a mistake to deal with this problem in a piecemeal fashion. This is not the time for short-term solutions and temporary fixes.

This could be a defining moment New Jersey, one that can shape its future course. We have the talent. We have the means. It’s time to join forces and use them so similar tragedies can be averted. Our children deserve no less.

Sincerely,

Kevin J. O’Toole
Assemblyman, District 40

CORZINE’S HIGHWAY ROBBERY

An OpEd by Assembly
Republican Leader Alex DeCroce

In one of New Jersey’s most elaborate fiscal gimmick since Governor Florio had the state sell itself a portion of a New Jersey highway in 1991, Governor Jon Corzine and Democrats in the Legislature are preparing to sell the rights to future toll revenue generated by the New Jersey Turnpike to private investors. Put simply, this is highway robbery.

Not only will this result in toll increases every year for decades to come, but much like the $37 billion mountain of state debt, it will deprive the state of much needed revenue for operations in the future that will likely result in higher taxes.

This would be just the latest in a long line of fiscal gimmicks that have undermined state finances ensuring a bleak future for New Jersey’s budget and the state’s taxpayers.

Disturbingly, administration sources have indicated to the media that the Governor was unlikely to push for the proposal until after Election Day, and Corzine has refused to provide any details about his plan.

This delay in providing the public with answers about the plan gives Democrat legislators the ability to tell voters now that they have “grave concerns” about the asset sale, but then after Election Day they can approve it and say they “have no choice.”

Meanwhile, the state budget approved by the Legislature in a largely party-line vote on June 21 gave the Governor a blank check to negotiate this asset sale deal. The budget provided for an unlimited amount of money to be spent on “legal and engineering fees, financial advisors and other consultants and services associated with, as well as any other costs determined necessary in preparation for, the monetization, sale or lease of public assets.”

Later realizing the unpopularity of the plan to sell the toll road, Corzine vetoed out his own use of the word “sale.”

The Governor and other Democrats are jittery about calling it a sale – preferring to use terms like “asset monetization” or “asset extraction.” But the Wall Street jargon can’t conceal the truth. Whether it’s selling the Turnpike to a corporation or selling the tolls collected on the Turnpike, the state will be exchanging something of value for money, which is the common sense definition of a sale.

Selling the Turnpike, Garden State Parkway and the Atlantic City Expressway will mean higher tolls. But it will also increase congestion, particularly truck congestion, on local roads. Truckers will use alternative routes to avoid paying much higher tolls, much like they did in 1991 when then Governor Florio’s road sale plan led to higher tolls, thereby driving big rig trucks onto local roads.

Their plan to sell these toll road assets is a fiscal gimmick allowing Democrats to continue their unfettered expenditure of public money. State spending has soared by $11 billion – or almost 50 percent – in the past 6 years.

Governor Corzine took office proclaiming, “The fiscal health of the State of New Jersey has plunged perilously close to ruin,” and promising to rehabilitate the State back to financial health. Now the Governor claims auctioning off state assets, the ultimate one-time only cash infusion, is the only solution to New Jersey’s fiscal woes. The Governor hasn’t seriously pursued any alternative, including the most obvious one – cutting wasteful and unnecessary government spending.

Republicans have proposed spending cuts of $4.2 billion over the past three years that would have saved taxpayers billions of dollars and reduced the state’s structural deficit. The Corzine administration and Democrats in the Legislature have rejected those proposals, essentially saying not a dollar in state spending can be cut.

Since April, the Corzine Administration has been promising to make its proposal public. In May, they said the proposal was nearly complete. But now, with polls showing New Jersey residents overwhelmingly opposed to selling the Turnpike, the administration wants to delay making its proposal public.

Nothing good grows in the dark and New Jersey taxpayers will not be fooled by this shroud of secrecy. Wall Street financiers are not going to give the State as much as $15 billion without knowing they can make a lot more money on the deal. The Governor has an obligation to put his proposal before the public, sooner rather later, so that New Jersey residents can decide for themselves whether this is another one-shot, unwise, fiscal gimmick.

Republicans think it’s pretty clear that his plan risks putting the State in the fast lane to financial ruin. Let’s see the details.

Alex DeCroce is the Assembly Republican Leader and represents the 26th Legislative District in Morris and Passaic Counties.

DEP's waterfront access proposal
unfair to property owners

BY STEVEN J. CORODEMUS

Late last year, the state Department of Environmental Protection proposed new
public beach and waterfront access regulations
that may be overly broad and harmful to waterfront property owners.

While I am a strong supporter of giving public access to the beach and other waterfront areas for recreational purposes, this access must be properly balanced with the property rights of homeowners and businesses located along the water.

Under the DEP's proposed regulations, waterfront property owners would be required to convey a dedicated easement to the state to guarantee 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week public access from the street through their private property and along the waterfront boundaries of their lot.

These new regulations will likely affect owners of industrial, commercial, multi-dwelling and single-family residences. I have been seeking input from those parties on the proposed regulations.

While the regulations have not yet been officially adopted, they may be moving closer to approval. Three public meetings were convened late last year. Many of the affected property owners were preparing for the holidays and were likely unaware of the proposed regulations and public meetings until earlier this year.

With little time to review the proposal I hastily submitted my objections immediately prior to the public comment deadline of Jan. 4. Nearly 700 other citizens filed comments as well.

Since that time, I have been studying the proposed regulations, conferring with engineers, environmental attorneys, commercial marina owners, single-family residential owners and the DEP.

While the regulations would apply to homes along the Atlantic Ocean, property immediately adjoining the Raritan Bay, Sandy Hook Bay, the Delaware River and other "tidal waters" with a beach or dune are
also affected.

If your property is in one of these areas and you need a permit from the DEP for a variety of improvements, you would have to convey a public access easement. We all believe in the public's right to access nature's most beautiful resource — the ocean. We want to be good stewards for the travel and tourism business, which is one of New Jersey's leading industries. The state should ensure residents and visitors are able to enjoy their day at the Jersey Shore.

But I also believe the state can achieve these goals by taking into consideration present and future public access facilities such as state, county and municipal beaches and parks in lieu of a very drastic measure of taking private property without any compensation.

In addition to the concerns of homeowners regarding their property rights, waterfront businesses and industries will have legitimate security concerns if they are unable to control who is accessing their property at all hours of the day and night.

State Environmental Protection Commissioner Lisa Jackson is planning to visit this area. I spoke to her a few months ago. She said she would give me time to work with the DEP to resolve this matter. I intend to discuss this issue with her if given the opportunity.

There should be no action to adopt and enforce these new regulations until the DEP has heard from those who will be directly affected and has taken steps to improve upon the regulations issued last year.

I hope the DEP will realize it is in everyone's best interest to take the time to listen to input from all stakeholders in this process and will attempt to address their concerns in any revision of the regulations.

Steven J. Corodemus is a Republican member of the Assembly who represents the 11th District in Monmouth County.

Homeland Security Progress ~
Now for Some Accountability

By Sean Kean

Over the past several weeks I exchanged letters with our new Attorney General, Stuart Rabner, on the subject of a homeland security grant program that has was badly politicized between 2002 and 2005 and efforts to correct that problem.

I have been impressed thus far that Attorney General Rabner’s attention to the matter is much improved over the actions of former Attorney General Harvey, his predecessor, who seemed unwilling to acknowledge any problems with a program that sent 93 percent of homeland security dollars to Democrat-controlled legislative districts – and not a single cent to my district.

I had called for Harvey to resign over his role in the scandal, and Attorney General Rabner’s thoughtful and serious responses have indicated a welcome change in attitude. Unfortunately, I believe there is a continuing lack of accountability for those involved in the initial improper manipulation of these grant funds.

As many readers may recall, under past administrations of Governors McGreevey and Codey, more than $20 million of homeland security funds meant for local police, fire, and first aid officials was handed out by former Attorney General Peter Harvey and senior officials based purely on politics.

From 2002 through 2005, $21.3 million of the $22.9 million in grants – 93 percent of the total – went to towns in Democrat-controlled legislative districts.

Police chiefs and public safety directors in towns like Asbury Park, Neptune Township, Long Branch, and Wall, were all encouraged to submit applications but then saw them discarded without serious consideration by officials who put politics ahead of public safety.

Public safety officials were essentially instructed to waste their time and resources putting together applications that were never going to be seriously considered. This was tantamount to pulling a fire alarm or filing a false police report as a joke.

The news got worse when we learned that many towns who did receive funding under this program, apparently never needed – or cared to utilized – those funds. New Jersey municipalities have forfeited $2.78 million in homeland security grants for failing to use them according to a Gannett New Jersey report.

It appears that some of this grant money was available but went unused for three years, even though some of these towns had asked for the money for specific needs. According to Gannett, Newark, the state's largest city, left $191,250 on the table — 70 percent of its grants. Edison left $170,000 on the table and Jersey City left $143,600 unspent.

If there was any question about the lack of merit-based decisions in this process, this news has provided the answer. While towns in my district with legitimate homeland security needs, such as the ferry terminals to New York and the airport in Wall, were denied funds, other municipalities were failing to use the dollars they were given.

I wrote to the Attorney General in early April with two requests. First, I asked him to halt the flow of $2.6 million of remaining funds and redirect them to true homeland security needs. Second, I asked him to find out who was responsible for wasting the time and resources of public safety officials in a political game and hold them accountable.

On the first request, I received some good news. The Attorney general responded that no more funds will be awarded unless certain paperwork was in order as of March 30, 2007. That means the new Attorney general has finally pulled the plug on the outflow of these funds, and $2.6 million of the money will ultimately be redirected to real homeland security needs.

I am, however, disappointed with the response to my request for someone to be held accountable. The Attorney General has still not held anyone accountable for making our public safety officials spend scarce time and resources filling out applications they had no intention of seriously considering.

This means there are still officials in an important positions in State government who politicized homeland security funds during a time of war and heightened terrorist threats. It’s a disgrace and it should be addressed now.

One official who had a hand in other grant program abuses currently directs finances in the Attorney General’s Office. Two years ago, the Chief of Staff of the Department of Community Affairs, who is currently a fiscal administrator at the Department of Law and Public Safety, worked hand in hand with Governor McGreevey’s staff politicizing property tax relief from the $10 million Livable
Communities Program.

When people responsible for various grant program abuses are finally removed from important government positions, we can put this issue behind us. If you share my thoughts and want accountability, please write to me so I can share your outrage with our new Attorney General. Hopefully he will act on them.

Assemblyman Sean Kean represents the 11th Legislative District in Monmouth County.

Democratic property-tax relief:
Neither lasting nor substantial

BY LEONARD LANCE AND ALEX DeCROCE

Property taxes are the curse of living in New Jersey, and last fall's special legislative session
did little to relieve the suffering.

Senate President Richard Codey and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts recently published the opinion article "Tax Relief is in sight" (April 27) defending the recently adopted property-tax "reform" package passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Jon Corzine.

While the Democratic leaders of our respective houses in the Legislature seem pleased with the property-tax reform program they have created, we believe the taxpayers of New Jersey will soon see this as another election-year gimmick that ignores the fundamental factors that are driving up tax rates and making our state increasingly unaffordable for middle-class residents.

It was our hope when the Legislature embarked on last summer's property-tax reform special session that it would result in the substantial and lasting property-tax relief that Democratic leaders
had been promising for five years.

But it soon became apparent that the process was not going to produce the real reform that was necessary to provide long-term, substantial tax relief to our state's beleaguered property taxpayers.

For several months, Democratic lawmakers chipped away at the many worthwhile reform proposals that had been issued by the special session committees last November. By the time the bills were drafted and voted on in the Legislature this January and February, we were left with little to show for last summer's hearings.

When the four property-tax reform committees issued reports in mid-November, they made 98 recommendations that could have resulted in as much as $2 billion in savings.

In the months following the release of those reports, the Democratic majority repeatedly took steps to scale back the reform proposals. First, the proposal to eliminate dual-office holding was squashed. Then a group of Hudson County legislators successfully fought to
limit the authority of a new state comptroller by prohibiting the comptroller's office from looking into spending by municipalities or school districts.

The direct property-tax relief that was put on the table for New Jersey's taxpayers at the end of the process also falls well short of what is needed to stem the recent surge in property-tax bills, which rose by more than 7 percent last year and are likely to rise by at least that amount this year.

Under the Democratic plan, some taxpayers will see no relief at all, while others will see so little relief that their property-tax credit will be less than the increase in their property-tax bills this year alone. Seniors and two-income middle-class families may not see any more relief than they get under the existing rebate program.

Property taxes have increased by an average of 36 percent statewide over the past five years. The Democratic tax "relief" plan will provide only a 20 percent reduction for families earning less than $100,000 in combined income. If your household income is more than $100,000, Democratic leaders consider you "rich" and you will get only a 15 percent cut.

Those families that earn more than $150,000 receive just a 10 percent cut, and those earning more than $250,000 get no relief. Meanwhile, most senior citizens who already get $1,200 through the Homestead Rebate program will see little or no additional relief.

Democrats have been promising, over the past five years, to deliver a permanent means to lower property taxes. The current plan falls well short of that goal. In fact, for taxpayers in 491 municipalities, the average tax credit will not cover the increase in property-tax bills since Democrats took control of state government in 2002.

Republicans in the Assembly had proposed a constitutionally dedicated 20 percent, across-the- board property-tax cut with a 30 percent cut for seniors and families earning less than $250,000. This would have been substantial relief for all homeowners. And it would have been sustainable because we intended to fund it through $2 billion in spending cuts we outlined during the budget process. The Democrats voted down this legislative proposal.

Instead, the plan the Democrats adopted -- which provides much less substantial relief -- will have to be funded using two years' worth of revenue from last year's sales tax increase. In reality, New Jersey taxpayers are financing the minimal tax relief they are slated to receive from this program through the higher sales taxes they have been paying since last October. This means that there is no funding source to sustain the program beyond this year.

With so many cost-saving reforms cast aside, and the Democrats choosing to fund the relief through tax-hike revenue rather than cuts
in wasteful government spending, this may end up being a one-time, election-year gimmick. The property-tax relief could vanish after
next January.

We had an opportunity to provide meaningful, lasting property- tax relief. The Legislature could have done better, but the Democrats were content to settle for half-measures and watered-down reform. We on the Republican side of the aisle -- including those who voted
for it because it was the only property-tax relief plan Democrats were willing to consider -- will continue fighting for real reforms that will provide substantial property- tax relief that homeowners can count
on in the future.

Leonard Lance, R-Flemington, is the Senate Republican leader. Alex DeCroce, R-Morris Plains, is the Assembly Republican leader.

Initiative and referendum
would return power to people

BY LEONARD T. CONNORS JR.,
CHRISTOPHER J. CONNORS & BRIAN E. RUMPF

It is becoming painfully apparent that the mass exodus of residents and businesses from our state requires a new approach by the state government that alleviates an overbearing tax system adversely

affecting residents' quality-of-life and weakens New Jersey's economy by driving away businesses while stunting job growth. Consequently, people feel too far removed from their government, relegated to second-class status when compared to special interests.

To change our state's direction or to give it direction, depending on your view, the average citizen must be brought back into the process. A means of accomplishing this exists through legislation pending before the Legislature.

The state's downward spiral requires a new approach whereby regular citizens, who may not be affiliated with larger special-interest groups, are provided a stronger, more forceful voice in how their government is run. New Jersey's adoption of initiative and referendum (I&R) could offer residents that ability and prove to be the springboard from which the reforms everyone is waiting for are realized.

For those not familiar with the terms, initiative involves placing a proposed law or constitutional amendment on the ballot by collecting a specified number of signatures on a petition. Depending on the process, initiative can either go through the Legislature or bypass it. Referendum, depending on its form, allows voters to approve or reject an act of the Legislature by placing it on the ballot for repeal in response to a citizen petition.

It is time for the legislative leadership in Trenton to create more opportunities for residents to determine the course of our state.

Comprehensive legislation (SCR-133/ACR-226) has been introduced by Assemblyman Richard Merkt, R-Morris. We enthusiastically support this move to allow initiative and referendum in New Jersey.

The bill would amend the state constitution to give residents the power to enact or repeal laws pertaining to state spending, appropriations and taxation as well as the issuance of long-term public debt. It also establishes that a statewide referendum petition will be submitted to the voters if it contains voter signatures in each of at least 14 counties equal to at least 25 percent of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election.

Whenever broad or complex changes to the system are proposed, there are detractors. However, the current condition of our state's finances for the present and foreseeable future can be described, at best, as dismal. Hence, change is both necessary and warranted. Like many of our constituents, we are frustrated and perplexed by the spend-and-borrow approach adopted by the state's leadership. These reckless policies put New Jersey even further in the hole and create mountains of debt and interest payments for taxpayers.

The configuration of New Jersey's political power base is structured to resist systemic change. This should not be surprising; those who have the power stand to benefit from the status quo. North Jersey, which has greater representation because of its larger population, uses its numerical advantage in the Legislature to push policies that, more often than not, entail increased government spending that disproportionately benefits its districts.

Education aid and other state funding policies are reflective of this dynamic in state government. Years of flat education and municipal aid by the state has taken its toll and created an atmosphere of disenchantment in which residents feel powerless against the controlling elements of our government.

It is also important to recognize that the pervasive influence of money in government has pushed many people away from the political process who feel that because they cannot make a large campaign contribution, their word stands for little.

To reshape and redefine state policies so that a broader spectrum of people benefit, including those paying far more than their fair share of taxes, there needs to be a vehicle to attract and empower reluctant citizens to engage in the political process. Initiative and referendum could be the catalyst for the far-reaching reforms so desperately needed to improve the quality of life for overtaxed residents living in the shadow of an immense and costly state bureaucracy.

Doing nothing will only fuel more public discontentment and reinforce the view held by many that state government is disconnected from the concerns of everyday people. Further decline in participation by average citizens will only strengthen the positions of special interests who would be ensured a place at the front of the line to have their demands met first. Through its direct-democracy approach, initiative and referendum offers a means of turning our state around and putting power back into the hands of the people, where it belongs.

(Leonard T. Connors Jr. is a Republican state senator from the 9th Legislative District, which includes parts of Ocean, Burlington and Atlantic counties. Christopher J. Connors and Brian E. Rumpf are Republican members of the Assembly from the same district.)

Prime problem in Legislature:
Misplaced priorities

BY Amy H. Handlin

Man is the only animal that laughs. He is also the only animal that has a legislature.

I have recalled this aphorism all too often during my 16 months in Trenton. Unfortunately, New Jersey's government is a national laughingstock — a political circus replete with clowns and acrobats.

But most state residents aren't laughing. They are struggling to understand what's wrong, and to learn how, or if, they can help fix it. As we begin deliberations on the 2007 state budget, it's an opportune time for citizen input. To start the dialogue, I offer the following answers to five of my constituents' most frequently asked questions.

Why doesn't the Legislature do anything?

The problem isn't inaction. It's misplaced priorities.

For instance, we failed to fix the school funding formula, enact permanent property tax reform or ban pay-to-play. However, while thousands of residents flee the state and businesses move jobs elsewhere, we named an official dirt, protected the monk parakeet and criminalized sodomy with animals (both wild and domestic, in case you're wondering).

In our last two voting sessions, five hours were spent on speeches praising other politicians. Despite the federal subpoenas raining down like confetti, we could spare only about 20 minutes for ethics reform.

Clearly, the enemies of change hope that we reformers will be defeated by sheer battle fatigue. The obstructionists also try to blunt the vigilance of the press. Their anti-media strategy: Waste so much time that reporters will be too bored to pay attention.

Why is it so hard for many legislators to just stop spending?

Sometimes, it's because they know their spending will fuel more spending — on jobs, contracts and other goodies that can be directed to their friends, relatives and campaign contributors.

It's also because there's a permanent crisis-management mentality. Whether the issue is unfunded pension obligations, crumbling schools or starving hospitals, chances are it's been ignored or mismanaged for decades. So whatever high-paid political appointee is now in charge is desperate for a quick fix. There's just no time in the campaign calendar to seek thoughtful, long-term solutions.

What does this mean on the level of day-to-day operations? I recently met with several state auditors and Treasury officials to work on legislation addressing my concerns with legal bills. As an example, the Board of Public Utilities ran up a tab of $265,000 to fight a whistleblower lawsuit. More recently, the Office of Legislative Services hired outside counsel to block a subpoena from the U.S. Attorney in his ongoing investigation of public corruption. Obstructing the investigation was bad enough. Worse, taxpayers have been charged $55,000 for this "service" — with more bills to come.

One of the problems, I found, is that contracts for professional services may be only loosely monitored. Another is a lack of structural controls, like strict caps on the number of professionals' billable hours. I was surprised no one had addressed these issues, until I learned it's been 10 years since New Jersey's last audit of professional service contracts. Apparently an audit was about to begin just as the Schools Construction Corporation imploded. Remember what I said about crisis management?

What's the likelihood of selling the New Jersey Turnpike?

I will not vote in favor of a sale, and I believe the majority of legislators would oppose it, too.

Naming rights, however, remain on the table. At first blush, this seems a relatively benign way to raise some fast cash. But there are pitfalls. In particular, the dazzle of corporate largess could blind us to its subliminal messages.

Would you be proud of state symbols like the Trump Statehouse, Philip Morris School of Medicine and Dentistry, or StarKist Aquarium?

With Trenton in such disarray, how can you (or any legislator) help the state?

We can — and must — change how the public's business is done, one legislative district at a time. There are limitless opportunities.

While the Legislature argued about how to encourage shared services statewide, I convened several meetings on this topic among municipal and school officials throughout the 13th District. Among the outcomes is our plan to launch the state's first shared services Web site. It will be an online clearinghouse where towns and schools can post the items they can share and search efficiently for partners.

Another example: While Trenton remains an ethical dead zone, local officials in my district will be offered a comprehensive ethics training seminar that I am co-sponsoring with Brookdale Community College June 15. We hope our model will be adopted by districts all over the state.

Is there anything citizens can do?

New Jersey needs a massive grass-roots outcry for change, and every reader of this newspaper can be part of it.

Think your local or state representatives are panderers and fools? Be that as it may, I guarantee that they can count. Flood their offices with letters, e-mails and phone calls in numbers they can't ignore. At all levels of government, demand meaningful spending cuts and a ramped-up focus on ethics. Don't let up until it happens.

Of course, there will always be those old-school politicians who insist that they're right and you're wrong. They're the same ones who'll tell you we don't need clean elections, initiative and referendum or campaign finance reform.

And if you believe them, I have the naming rights to a bridge you might want to buy.

Amy H. Handlin is a Republican member of the Assembly representing the 13th Legislative District, which includes parts of Monmouth and Middlesex counties.

State's Taxpayers Are on the Hook
For $175 Billion in Benefits & Debt

BY RICHARD A. MERKT

Last month, Gov. Corzine unveiled his state budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1. The media duly reported Corzine's election-year property tax relief plan, but tucked away in the middle of his speech was the real story: a startling admission of New Jersey's dire fiscal crisis.

"The unfunded liability of today's pension system is nearly $25 billion," Corzine revealed, "and our unfunded health care liability approaches an incredible $80 billion." Thus, the governor publicly acknowledged for the first time that the taxpayers of New Jersey are on the hook for at least $105 billion in public employee benefits. Unfortunately, that's not all the bad news.

Corzine only hinted at an additional festering fiscal time bomb: state debt, which over the past six years has more than doubled to $37 billion. When you add in interest, the debt bill grows to more than $70 billion. So the total amount New Jersey taxpayers must fork over for public employee benefits and state debt exceeds $175 billion.

Now, $175 billion is really too huge a number to grasp, so it helps to break it down to a more understandable figure. For the typical New Jersey family of four, the tab for public employee benefits and state debt will come to more than $80,000. No wonder the governor preferred to focus on the $1,000 rebate checks he will mail out just before the election.

A $175 billion public liability dwarfs every other problem in New Jersey today. It poses a danger to the economic health and financial stability of our state. If not promptly faced, it will inevitably trigger massive tax hikes, huge cuts in public service or even state bankruptcy. Elected officials, from the governor on down, can no longer afford an ostrich-like response to the threat.

Thankfully, not all of this money is due immediately. Yet it still translates to an extra $6 billion to $7 billion in state spending every year for the next quarter century, or more than $3,000 in added annual taxes for every family in New Jersey, on top of what they already pay. And every year that passes without us facing up to the crisis makes it just that much harder to rescue state finances.

The Corzine administration recognizes the financial danger facing New Jersey, but it has yet to devise a meaningful strategy for dealing with it. The governor's proposed budget amounts to "business as usual" in Trenton, uses tax rebate checks to buy votes, hikes state spending by another 8 percent and fails to confront the biggest threat to New Jersey's future: its unfunded public liabilities. It is a timid and lame response to the state's looming fiscal nightmare.

The governor and Legislature should do two things:

Level with the people of New Jersey about just how serious the situation is, as well as its implications for the state budget. Tell them that we are more than $175 billion in the hole and that the budget is really about $7 billion out of balance as a result. We need to lighten the ship. There will be no major spending initiatives for the next five years at least.

Take the necessary steps now to bring things back into balance — retarding the growth of regular state spending until state revenues have caught up, a process that may take a few years. Implement a state employment reduction-by-attrition plan; institute a review of state programs and spending added over the past 10 years to see what can be tossed overboard without destroying the state; kill (not merely end) the "Christmas tree" budget additions; tell the Supreme Court that the free-spending in the Abbott school districts is over; legislate changes for all active state employees to revoke retirement at 55 and free health insurance benefits, and reinstate the unequivocal right of the people to veto any new debt authorized by the Legislature.

Perhaps it is understandable that Corzine is hesitant to tackle the major problem facing New Jersey in an election year. However, he should reflect on sage words he quoted last year during his inaugural speech: "If you think too much about being re-elected, it's very difficult to be worth re-electing." Woodrow Wilson was right on the money.

New Jersey does not have the luxury of waiting until a politically convenient moment to address its most pressing problem. We need a governor who not only recognizes the crisis, but also possesses the courage to tackle it head-on today, without worrying about the political fallout. Our people have 175 billion good reasons to demand that the governor act now, rather than playing it safe politically and touting fiscal gimmicks to balance state budgets in the future.

Richard A. Merkt is a Republican member of the Assembly who represents parts of Morris County.

Richard A. Merkt is a Republican member of the Assembly who represents parts of Morris County.

Talk of Toll Road Lease is
Part of Trenton's Shell Game

BY LEONARD T. CONNORS JR., CHRISTOPHER J. CONNORS AND BRIAN E. RUMPF

The state's sizable debt, an inability to manage its own finances and widespread discontent among taxpayers have created a circus-like atmosphere in Trenton.

Since it's an election year, the legislative leadership is willing to go to extreme measures to convince the general public that something is being done to fix the financial mess we find ourselves in. The most recent, and perhaps most outlandish example of this, is the recently unveiled proposal to lease the New Jersey Turnpike. Since it really doesn't address the root cause of the state's fiscal problems — runaway spending — our delegation opposes any attempt by the Legislature to lease or sell the Turnpike or the Garden State Parkway.

If you ever have been to the circus, you probably remember the huckster who runs the shell game in which unsuspecting contestants must guess what shell hides a pea. Those who've seen this act know that despite all the fancy hand movements and all the talk by the huckster, the game is nothing more than a sham. There is no pea under the shell, and the contestant never had a chance at winning.

This scenario could be used to describe the situation taxpayers have found themselves in with all the proposals to address the property tax crisis thrown at them over the past several months.

It is estimated that leasing the Turnpike to a private company for 75 years would generate between $10 billion and $15 billion. Proponents state they want the money used to pay off some of the state's debt. People should be deeply concerned this will release enough money for the spenders in Trenton to go on a spending free-for-all. You can bet that, if this happens, the special interests will be circling the Statehouse like vultures.

With the way this state spends, the money generated from leasing a state toll road would be gone before you know it, and we'll be right back where we started — deep in the hole. Only we would have leased one of the most vital transportation arteries in the state to a private company, which for all we know, could turn out to be owned and operated by a foreign country.

It is important to look at the proposal to sell the Turnpike for what it is: an admission by the state that it is incapable of operating the roadway, despite not being required to produce a profit. What do you think will happen to the cost of tolls if the state hands over the Turnpike to a company that reports to a board of directors?

In its present form, the bill that would allow for the leasing of the Turnpike stipulates that tolls could increase only with the rate of inflation. But as we have all witnessed over the past several weeks, bills can be gutted in the legislative process, like the comptroller proposal, to better serve the powers that be at the expense of the taxpayer.

Any company that takes over the Turnpike is going to make turning a profit its first priority. It is also possible that keeping the stockholders happy may adversely affect road maintenance or the completion of needed construction projects if these responsibilities end up hurting the bottom line. Other than toll increases, there aren't going to be many avenues to increase profit margins, which ultimately all businesses must do to survive. So can we realistically expect that tolls will not sharply increase on the Turnpike if it becomes a business entity of a major corporation?

Finally, as just about any financial adviser will tell you, selling off assets is the first sign of bankruptcy. Leasing the Turnpike, which is among the most significant assets in the state's possession, would be an unmistakable act of desperation. Even compared to the budget gimmicks conjured up by the McGreevey administration in past years, this would certainly take the prize. It also would be an addition to the state's consistent track record of fiscal mismanagement highlighted by deficit spending and higher taxation.

The "quick fix" offered under this plan will not provide the long-term structural changes needed to overhaul the state's deteriorating financial condition and, therefore, should be dismissed outright. Significant spending reductions and a more fiscally conservative approach to the use of taxpayer dollars are what is needed to put this state on a sound financial footing.

Leonard T. Connors Jr., is a Republican state senator from the 9th District, which includes parts of Ocean, Atlantic and Burlington counties. Christopher J. Connors and Brian E. Rumpf are Republican Assembly members from that district.