Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pilot Revenue Sharing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate over PILOT revenue sharing: municipalities warn of development impacts as school advocates seek transparency
Summary
S1807, which would require municipalities to share certain payments in lieu of taxes with school districts and give boards a role in negotiations, was amended and released; municipal groups cautioned it could blunt economic development and asked for fiscal analysis.
The committee amended and released S1807, a bill that would require municipalities to share certain payments in lieu of property taxes (PILOTs) with school districts, expand notice and information-sharing requirements, and specify that school superintendents lead negotiations on behalf of boards of education.
Lori Buckalew of the New Jersey State League of Municipalities testified in opposition, arguing that reallocating PILOT revenue would weaken municipalities' ability to spur redevelopment in blighted areas and asked for a fiscal note to quantify the impact. "The requirements proposed in S18-07 will significantly weaken the ability of municipalities to spur redevelopment in blighted areas," she said.
Supporters included Garden State Coalition of Schools and individual board representatives who said boards should have a seat at the table when exemptions and abatements are negotiated because pilot agreements can affect school budgets and enrollment. Harrison Silver of the New Jersey School Boards Association endorsed the bill's aim to involve boards earlier but warned the committee's amendment requiring districts to offset their tax levy by pilot revenue could create structural imbalances.
The chair described the bill as an attempt to bring fairness and transparency to pilot negotiations while allowing alternative arrangements and committed to clarifying amendment language before the next step. The committee released the bill as amended.
