An unlikely savior

There is no mistaking that a certain portion of the Teaneck electorate is energized by the new Council's zeal for seeking ways to reduce the homeowner tax burden. A steady stream of letters to the Suburbanite has acclaimed the vision of the Council and its performance over the past few months. A few residents have sought to contrast the outlook of the current leadership with that exhibited during the tenure of former Mayor Kates, claiming that the past few years represented a lost opportunity to tackle long festering problems and expressing relief that things appear to be changing.

While not caught up in the whirlwind of excitement, I can acknowledge that things are looking up in Teaneck. Change is in the air, and the dynamism of the young Council is certainly a welcome change from the plodding ways of its lame duck predecessor. For all the zeal and eager anticipation of great things to come, however, it is worth remembering that the most important deliberations on Teaneck's financial future are taking place not in the Municipal Building, but in Trenton.

To that end, the proposals emerging from the special joint legislative committees on property taxes may mean far more to Teaneck taxpayers in the long run than a mixed use development here or a parking deck there, even if the Council succeeds in moving these ideas from concept to reality. That's not to say that sensible development to boost ratables is a waste of time. It should be pursued aggressively, but with a complete understanding of its limited benefits given the constraints on Teaneck. The real savings can only come from the expenditure side.

That's why I'm saving my excitement (and eventual disappointment, probably) for the potentially transformational proposals under consideration by the Committee on Government Consolidation and Shared Services, as reported on today in the Star-Ledger.

Take, for example, the proposed consolidation of school district bureaucracy and infrastructure. The potential savings for Teaneck are tremendous. As a very rough indication, if Teaneck's per pupil spending on administration were just cut to the current state average, we'd have the equivalent of a ratable worth about $1 million per year. Cut per pupil spending on school maintenance to only 25% above the statewide average (instead of 36% above) and there's another $600k ratable right there. Let's see the development planner come up with equivalents of those in short order.

These goals would be quite attainable if they were mandated by Trenton. They are nearly impossible if left to an enthusiastic but largely powerless Council and an unmotivated Board of Education. It's strange to say it, but the best hope for Teaneck is our less than distinguished state government.