Residents Would Save Under Consolidation

If Princeton Township and Princeton Borough were to consolidate in 2011, the average borough homeowner would save $568 a year while the average township homeowner would save $424 a year.

Those numbers, which could still be adjusted slightly and are conservative estimates, are what the finance subcommittee of Princeton’s Consolidation and Shared Services Study Commission plans to present to the public on Wednesday, said Chad Goerner, the township mayor who chairs the finance subcommittee.

It’s impossible to estimate exactly what borough and township residents would actually save under consolidation – if voters choose to approve such a measure- because Princeton’s equalization rate can change from year to year, members of the consolidation finance subcommittee said a meeting on Monday.

“It’s our best guess based on the data we have available,” said Commission Chairman Anton Lahnston.

Much of Monday’s meeting was spent discussing how to present the financial impacs of consolidation in a way in a clear, concise and accurate way.

The public presentation is expected to show the direct anticipated savings from consolidation along with secondary, more indirect savings.

“I think we agree on what the analysis is, it’s all about the presentation,” said David Goldfarb, borough councilor and subcommittee member. “If we go out of our way to make sure people understand it, I don’t think we can go astray.”

The average savings are calculated as follows:

The average borough home is taxed $3,222 a year. Under consolidation, residents would save an estimated $194 in direct costs and an additional $374 in indirect costs like county and school taxes.

The average township home is taxed $3,596 per year. Under consolidation, residents would save $248 in direct costs and another $176 in indirect costs.

Mark Pfeiffer, deputy director of the state’s division of Local Government Service, , told the subcommittee on Monday that under consolidation, Princeton’s assessor would need to reassess more than 51 percent of properties to bring everyone closer to market value. This would entail minor mathematical changes, not door-to-door visits, Pfeiffer said.  

Goerner said such a reassessment should not result in any large-scale changes, only minor adjustments and would be done instead of using an equalization method.