Ask the Governor; #101; Gov. Jon Corzine

. . . . . Major funding for Ask the Governor is made possible in part by Performance Insurance, a New Jersey company protecting individuals, families and business. The New York Shipping Association, the men and women of the Port of New York and New Jersey, Delivering more goods to more places. And by Lockheed Martin, New Jersey's Lockheed Martin employees. We never forget who we're working for, with additional support provided by Albert and Janice Gemper.

. Hello, I'm Jim Hooker. Welcome to the first edition of NJN's Ask the Governor. It's an opportunity for you, the people of New Jersey, to ask the state's chief executive about taxes, education, politics or any other issue that's on your mind. If you have a question for the governor, call us at 1-800-323-8852. That's 1-800-323-8852. Governor, thanks a lot for joining us. Great to be here, Jim. Well, it's been a busy and at times contentious first year in office, as you know, there was an historic eight day state government shutdown last summer that led to the shuttering of state parks and Atlantic City casinos and a clash with the legislative leaders of the governor's own party. There was also that increase in the sales tax. There were also measures the governor recently signed into law like providing funding for stem cell research, legalized needle exchange and a civil union law

that followed a state supreme court ruling extending rights enjoyed by married heterosexual couples to committed gay couples. And there's also that special session of the legislature on property taxes that the governor opened last summer in hopes of driving down those highest such taxes in the nation. So, governor, I have a sneaking suspicion that there may be a call or two on just that property tax reform tonight. It seems to be on people's minds. It probably might have a question or two. I have one. As efforts are underway, are you satisfied with the reform package? As you know, some critics are calling it watered down. Some cases beyond recognition and some of those critics are in your own party. Well, I think that, first of all, the package is not complete. We have a lot of work to do still in the Senate to make sure that the package comes out holistically in a strong fashion. And I think I expect that to happen on Monday. But I want to see the results. We have to then parse through all the language. Make sure that it is as secure as I'd like to think it is. As I've said, we probably won't get the whole loaf of relief and reform.

But I believe this is probably the most significant tax relief and reform package has been put together in the last 25, 30 years in the state of New Jersey. And it's not perfect. I don't think that you have democracies where people come together and legislatures and debate issues that you come out with exactly every item that you would want. We're going to have a strong controller. I guarantee you it will have. That controller's office will have the ability to go and do any investigation, any inspection or any audit that it chooses to do. It will not have to back away from looking at all of the things that I think will bring security to or increase security to the view that we're looking at what's going on financially around the state. The big question is whether we have enough resources, both budgetary and human resources to be able to execute the job that we're asking to do.

I think people are going to like the credit program. About 95% of New Jersey's public is going to get a meaningful, meaningful property tax credit. That's 20% to 50% on $100,000 in less income earners, 15% for $150,000 to $100,000 earners, $250,000 down to $150,000 will be 10%. And by the way, also going to double the return, it actually will be a rebate in this particular case for renters. We've yet to structure that exactly, but that's one of the things that I think is a hidden advantage. We're going to put as much as $300 million into renters who end up paying property tax on a flow through basis. And we need to help particularly moderate middle income rebate owners. We have some other reform issues that have been a lot harder to get through issues with respect to the most debated item, which is a cap on the growth of property taxes so that we don't end up losing all the advantage that we're giving to the individual taxpayer by the credit by having property taxes grow.

And there's a lot of kickin' in screaming. I talked about 800 pound gorillas running up and down the turnpike. Well, they're running up and down and they still are. And when those people that say it's a light cap, they ought to listen to the lobbyists that are running up and down the halls of the state house trying to get it changed. You know, we're going to take callers that might be remiss if I didn't ask you this one follow-up question though. Is it sustainable? As you know, that's a big question we may even get one tonight, but in case we don't, is it sustainable? It's an election year, the entire legislature's up, you know, that's the big question. I've made sustainability a precondition and the credit program, as I see it today, is sustainable. We have other issues that are going on at the same time that are very real and very challenging for the state. You mentioned some of the reasons that we had the shutdown last summer, but the problem we have in this state is we have spent beyond recurring revenues on an ongoing basis, year after year.

Republicans, Democrats, everybody who has party to this process, and we have to correct that. And the biggest one is the unfunded pension liabilities for state workers, which is about $25 billion. And the unfunded health care benefits, which are about $45 billion. And these are real numbers. They have to be addressed whether we had property tax reform or not. And those have to be addressed in collective bargaining and through reforms that we try to bring about through the legislature. All right, governor, thank you. And in fact, on the budget, our first caller has a question on the budget. And this is Joseph from South Hampton. So Joseph, if you're still there, you have the governor's ear. Go right ahead. Thanks for calling. Thank you very much. Good evening, Joseph. Good evening. And thank you for the opportunity and your efforts on the taxpayer's behalf. I appreciate it. We've still got a lot of work to do. You know, there are miles to go. And by the way, Joseph, before you ask the question, I want to make the point that whatever we get done in this package, and it will get done, in my view, in the next week to 10 days, whatever we get done, we have more to do.

Reforms come over time. They are not instant gratification issues. And we're not going to stop until we have made meaningful impact on a long term basis on reforms and sustainability. I'm sorry, Joseph. I just want to make that point. Thank you. I wanted to offer a suggestion, get your idea on it on reducing costs. Why not let the people help you out in your efforts by having the townships and the school districts. We require them to post their budgets and their expenditures in detail on the web. Let us look at it. I mean, we're small towns. So we know what's going on. And we can then perhaps even question our government officials when they're when we see a questionable item and maybe refer even that sort of thing to the controller's office that you mentioned earlier. It's amazing how great minds think of like you've got a great mind. I don't, but the people in the legislature actually in the core bill, which the speaker is the primary pusher of the concept has asked for just exactly what you are suggesting to have public transparency to budgets, which will allow the public to understand what is in a budget.

And if they then have reason to protest or raise issues, they can raise them both politically on how they vote, but they could also raise those with the controller. The controller is going to respond as would a US attorney or as would an attorney general to propositions of where they thought there were problems to be looked at. And we have every investigative inspection and audit authority in the language inside the controller's office and we're going to make that office work. And Joseph mentioned the computer on the web. Isn't that part of that bill? It is part of the bill. I will tell you that that's going to take some time to get up for 616 school districts and 566 municipalities and all the fire districts.

It costs something to actually do the programming, but we're going to work at it and get it up in phases. All right, Governor, thanks. And in fact, about all of those school districts and towns, our next caller wants to talk about perhaps lessening some of those about consolidation. This will be Leonard from Elizabeth Leonard. Are you there? Yes, sir. I am. All right. You have the governors here. Go right Leonard. Thank you for taking my call. My pleasure. Much has been said about consolidation of various types, municipal counties, school boards, etc. And I wrote this idea that I have to the co-chairman of the legislative committee. It was handling consolidation. This idea concerns the legislature. Originally, you may not remember New Jersey had 21 legislative districts, one for each county. That became illegal under the one man, one vote. This is pre-19. Why can't we now consolidate the legislature to 20 districts by combining geographically adjacent legislative districts from 40 to 20?

Have 20 senators, 20 assemblymen and reduce the legislative budget to one third of what it is. Well, Governor, you can't even get them to give up dual office holding. I don't know. You're working on that, too. No matter fact, in the assembly bill, there is an elimination on a prospective basis. And, you know, I'd rather see it total, but it is a major step forward on this issue. You mentioned pre-47 Constitution. I think the Senate, at least, with the 21 counties was in the 60s, late 60s where that rule came down. But the real issue on why this doesn't work is one man, one vote, propositions that flow out of the U.S. Constitution. And I don't think, for instance, that one senator from Bergen County would compare favorably where there are about 900,000 citizens, and if I'm not mistaken, about 120,000 in Kate May.

So you did. Right now, the right now, the districts are virtually equal. Yep. The districts are virtually equal now. Combining two adjacent districts, there will still be 20 equal population districts instead of 40. Plus, you will save all the money that would be going into legislative costs and future pension. Well, you would be able to allocate out districts on a population or one person, one vote methodology with lower numbers of legislators. I don't think you'd be able to put it into counties. You might end up with still two or three senators out of Bergen County and Kate May would have to be combined with Cumberland or Atlantic. I feel that you would be able to do that, but you wouldn't be able to do it and have it contiguous with counties.

I will tell you, and I think Jim is probably more right than wrong, tongue and cheek. You're talking about reducing the number of legislators who would have to vote for that principle on their own. And, you know, there are hills that I don't mind climbing. We're working on some of them on dual office holding, paid a play, which I really believe we ought to be including in this package of activities that we're doing to reform government. But this is one that I don't really think the exercise would be worth the effort because I think you would end up losing your ability to work with the legislature and be very, very tough to pass, just on a pragmatic basis. All right. Thank you very much, Leonard. Thanks, Leonard. All right. And I thought for a second there we were going to get to here, which legislators you might eliminate. Well, I have a few ideas, but I think I'll keep that to myself. There you go. All right. Well, next up we have Jenny from Bayon and she'd like to talk about dissection used in schools with today's medical advances.

So Jenny, you take it from there. You have the governor. Thanks for calling in. Good evening, governor. I wanted to first off, thank you for, I think you and Commissioner Jackson for stopping the black bear hunt. That was great. And I also think you're doing a fantastic job. You have our support in Bayon. That's nice of you. My question is, do you think that dissection should be allowed in elementary and high schools with a good portion of the medical and veterinary schools using technology instead? Well, I think that this is a question that I ought to leave to experts on how you teach individuals more than me answering a carte blanche. I will say that I remember biology in high school and it actually was one part of science that actually stimulated most of the kids to get involved and to be curious. And a lot of folks went on to be doctors and get into medicine because of the experiences they had here.

I think given your comment on the bear hunt, I suspect that you believe in animal rights and think this is probably a direction we shouldn't take. I'm not sure how effective taking this away from the ability to use some of the amphibians and others keeps this away from being able to actually grow. Grow our learning experience as well enough for kids, but I have to admit I'm far enough removed from this kind of question that I would turn it over to experts. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Jenny. And next governor, we have Marilyn from Columbus and she'd like to talk about senior taxes, senior citizen taxes. I presume Marilyn, thanks for joining us. Marilyn? Hey, Marilyn.

Okay, she's there. Marilyn, thanks for calling in. You have the governor. Thank you governor for taking my call. My pleasure. I'm interested in knowing what happens to seniors who normally get $1,200 and now would get less if the taxes are not $6,000. They would lose some money that they depend on to pay out the bills. Marilyn, can I can I can I can I answer that question? Marilyn, let's let's take one question at a time, okay? Okay, thank you. And it may only be one question per caller. There's a lot of folks stacked up like airplanes over north. Marilyn, you you will get either the $1,200 that you were already getting on your senior homestead rebate or the higher proposition if you happen. Sorry, I can't hear you. So get your $1,200 or the higher credit if it is calculated to be larger than the $1,200 as a senior. So you're not going to lose anything on what you now get and if the calculation of your credit would be higher number than the $1,200, you'd get that rather than the former $1,200. All right, Marilyn, thank you very much for calling in. Next we have Karen from Northfield who wants to talk about abstinence in a school's funding.

So go ahead, Karen, you have the governor. Hello, governor. Hi, Karen. Hi, I'm a mother of two young girls who within the next few years will enter the New Jersey Public School system. And I read in the Atlantic City press that your administration rejected a $900,000 federal grant that would have been used to teach abstinence funding in the public school system. And I'm just wondering what basis you did that or would it, was it in any way related possibly to a president bush administration bias that might be there or what were your reasons for that? Very clear. I believe that teaching abstinence is fine, but we also ought to have other elements of protection for our children taught in our sex education classes. And if you were to take this money, it was to preclude your ability to have other elements in the curriculum.

And I just didn't think that was smart because I think we need a more complete curriculum. I don't need to interrupt you, but could you be specific as to what it would have precluded? That's where I'm getting mixed information. Well, you know, it doesn't, you don't have the ability, if I understand this right, to talk about protection and safe sex and all of the other kinds of things that would keep children from having unwanted pregnancies. And exposed to other problems that come with the transmission of diseases. So it was because it was restrictive on what can actually be taught in the classroom. Okay. I guess my concern would then be I have to do a little bit more research into it because information that I was provided was that it wasn't restrictive in the grant that was given. That restrict what could be taught, but additional programs within the schools could then be taught safe sex, you know, the issues that you were talking about.

But that if you were to take this money, the money would be used to teach abstinence. I understand that. So I guess my concern here is a citizen and I'm in a form, I consider myself an informed citizen, ability to get accurate information. Sure. If you have any, I will recommend where I could go to find out if information I've been provided, the information you're providing to us. Karen, Karen, we're going to, we're going to cut in here. We have, we have as the governor's folks, let us know before the taping. Our folks upstairs will take your name and number and the governor's folks will get back to you. Oh, that would be great. On those questions, thanks. That would be terrific. All right. Thanks a lot for calling in. Okay, thank you. And we have, next up, we have Brett from Wayne and governor, he wants to talk about state mandatory flu vaccines. Brett, go ahead. Thanks for calling in. Hey, governor, how you doing? Pretty good. How are you doing?

I'm doing very good. This isn't just about the flu vaccine. This is about four vaccines that the health department is trying to mandate for, for infant and 12 year olds. I just spoke in Trenton on a public hearing of this past Friday, the overwhelming majority of people were against this mandate. And I would, I'd love to meet and talk to you about the certain issues with vaccines. But really, my concern is that children are now getting up to, it's going to be somewhere in the 80s of vaccines injected into them by the age of four to six. When I mean vaccines, MMR has three and one. I'm talking that many different vaccines injected into an infant when we have no long-term studies, no true safety studies. And there's so many different issues with it, but I'm asking you. Well, as you know, I've been very active on this, the Marisol issue. It's not just a thymarisol.

Right. But that is definitely an issue. The cumulative effect, if you have multiple vaccines is a problem and a concern. We also have concern, though, if we leave children exposed to the issues that are attempting to be addressed, the data is not 100% conclusive. But we are trying to make certain, as best we can, with the best science that we have, to offer the best opportunity for our children to have health. Now, there are real questions about the cumulative impact of some of the preservatives, not just the Marisol, that are included in the vaccines. And I've asked these questions and the best science from the Department of Health that they have reviewed tells us that this is something that they would say we are better served by protecting the kids' health with the vaccine. And we are taking the risk, de minimis as they would calculate it on the other score.

Now, I think it's one that has to be reviewed continuously. My last thing is that it should be that the parents have a choice because the problem is children can die from the vaccine and they have died from the vaccine. They can get seizures, brain damage. Okay, so the question to the governor is that parents should have a choice. Yes, they should not be mandated. And there is a bill right now. Let's hear what the governor thinks whether the parents should have a choice. Many parents are not paying the same degree of attention. And I think that there are implications, particularly on contagious diseases, that if you don't deal on a universal basis, you end up with infections and spread. And I think there's a real trade-off here. We're trying to follow the best science. And as I said, I think that's an ongoing, almost everyday event to make sure that what we're practicing is the best public health. And it's a tricky issue and I don't deny that parents have a reason to be concerned based on history of how we've put preservatives into a number of these vaccines.

Thanks, governor. Tough balancing act. Thank you, Brett. And next we have Francis from Jersey City who would like to talk about property taxes. That's a pretty big field. So, Francis, go right ahead and thanks for calling in. Welcome into the pool, Francis. There are a few people talking about it. I have Francis from Jersey City who would like to talk about property taxes. That's a pretty big field. So, Francis, go right ahead and thanks for calling in. Do we have, do we have Francis? We do not have Francis on the line. Now we have Ed from Woodbridge. So, governor, Francis will have to take that dip in the pool another time. Ed from Woodbridge is wants to talk about incarceration rules. So, Ed, go right ahead. Do you have the governor? Hey, Ed. My name is Ed Richelerno. I was convicted of a crime 15 years ago. Five hours after someone left my house accused me of touching him. And I told them to bring him to the hospital six and a half hours later.

He went to the hospital, got convicted for 10 years, supposed to be therapy. And it's, it's, how do you say it? In other words, you're forced to take therapy and you don't need it. And they blackmail you with everything else. And then it's 65 million dollars. Where, where, where are you Ed? Which, which, which, do we still have that on the line? 65 million dollars a year for seven and a half years. We do have that on the line. Ed, let me, let me, let me try this because of that. Let's, let's, let's, let's, let's, let me go up to 20, 30,000 feet on this question. First of all, the most important responsibility of government is to protect our society. And within that mandate and responsibility, the most important job is to protect our children in my view.

They are our future. They are everything that we hope and dream of for future life in our state and across the country. And we have to be careful. We have to take every means to be certain that we're protecting them. I don't know the circumstances of the situation that you're describing. This is one of those places where our society, and I believe rightfully, airs on the sides of protecting children, if there is a reasonable perspective to believe that there's a risk. And I'm, I'm, I'm generally considered what people would consider liberal on a political scale. But this is one of those issues that I feel very strongly we need to protect our kids first, then figure out the other issues that might fall. And Governor, just as a way, by way of background to our viewers, I think you're talking about where sex offenders are convicted.

They serve their time. And then because they're considered dangerous, they continue to be held by the state in near raw waste. Well, there are a couple of different places around the state, and they stay in therapy, if you will. But in part, it is a belief that this is a very hard disease, if you will, or a disability, if you will, to actually ever get to cure. Okay, thanks, Governor. And thank you, Ed, from Woodbridge. And next we have Richard from Edison, if he's still on the line, and he wants to talk about property tax relief. So he'll get into the pool where Francis didn't. Richard, are you there? Well, he's not going to get on the pool either. Hey, Richard. Is Richard there? No, we have, so we're going to go to Jonel. And my pronouncing that right from Springfield Township, and Jonel wants to talk about pensions. Is that right, Jonel? And my pronouncing? Go ahead. Hi, Jonel. Can you hear me? Barely.

Okay. Okay. I'll see if I can speak a little louder. Jim Hooker will be running off the stage here in a minute. Okay, Jonel. Your question. What's your question, Governor? All right. I have an observation and a question. First of all, the American dream is to succeed. Now, I feel as though people are being penalized, those who have worked their butts off and have sacrificed for years, and maybe making a buck over a hundred thousand, all of a sudden, their penalized. They can't get 20% like those underneath. So the American dream is gone by the wayside. That's my observation. My question is, don't you owe money to the employees pensions that were not put in funded in the past as they were supposed to have been? Okay. Let me make a comment on the first point. I believe in the American dream and have experienced it probably as positively as almost any individual.

I grew up with very, well, as normal, but fairly limited financial opportunities with a great education, got a chance to experience unbelievably wonderful elements of American life. The fact is that when you get to do that, to those who much is given, much is expected. And we have in our system a progressive perspective about how we deal with taxes. We means test some of the things that we give out and benefits. We want to make sure that people who are left out of the system have a chance, at least at having a safety net. And the whole system is built on a progressivity element that is built into it. And I think that that's what we've tried to capture in the credit program. I think it's sound. It is always going to have some friction at the margins, which is no question about it. Same thing happens when you go into a tax bracket that is higher.

So I think we're following up on those kinds of considerations. As it relates to the pension, yes, you're absolutely right. For the last 10 years, up until this last budget, and Jim talked about the sales tax and talked about the shutdown, the biggest fight was about how much money we were going to start putting into the pensions with respect to our obligation for state employee retirements. We have signed contracts. We have an obligation. It happens to be a $25 billion unfunded obligation to pay pensions for retirees who have worked all their life and are counting on it. And I believe like you that we need to make sure that we are sensitive to fulfilling our requirements. Now, I'd like some help from the employees in the sense that we might want to change the program for future employees so that we will have the ability or a better ability to actually meet our obligations going forward to the people that we've already contracted for. And I just had one final thing. A lot of employees think somehow or another are retirees that we're going to take pensions away from them. We're not taking pensions away from them.

The legislature in 1997 wrote into law what they call a non-forfittable rights clause that means nobody can take away their pension. Now, if you've worked here five years or you're retired or five years or more, your pensions are secure. And most people would say anybody that's worked here a day pensions are secure. So I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and I believe that the government ought to live up to its contractual obligations and we ought to be putting money into the pension system. And that's one of the reasons that you'll see expenditures at the state level actually growing in the next few years because we're starting to pick up our responsibility. And I'll just fill in the blank there. Governor, you did put in, was it a billion or 1.3 billion? 1.3. 1.3 billion was put into the pension fund this year, the first time virtually any money put in a ten years. More than that have been put in in ten years combined.

Okay. So, Governor, thanks for now. We're going to take a short break and when we return we'll take more of our calls from our viewers. And we'll be right back with Governor Corazon. That's in just two minutes. So stay with us and we'll get to more of your questions on the other side of this break. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Hello, I'm Jim Hooker. Welcome back to Ask the Governor.

We're Governor John Corazon is our guest and where you the viewer can put your questions to the Garden State's chief executive directly and unfiltered. We've been taking calls for the last half hour. Let's go back to the phones and let's take more questions from the public and the first one will be Jim from West Milford. And I believe Jim wants to talk about property tax relief, Governor Jim. You're on the line. Go right ahead. Hey Jim. Good evening, Governor. Thanks for calling. Governor, Township like West Milford is 100% in a highland preservation area. And as a result, we have some devastating property taxes up here. Currently, for instance, I pay four times the national average of property taxes. Do you have any plans to divert some of the watershed or water tax surcharge money to a Township like West Milford for any additional plans for extra aid to a Township like West Milford?

We have definite problem, in my view, in the highlands, in both what some people would say that takings of property rights, the ability to develop. And in some communities where no development would be allowed to not have some makeup for those communities. We're talking about something that's called transfer development rights, which would end up shifting money that people might pay to build in some place where there is the opportunity to have zoning that will allow growth to generate revenues to be able to reward those places that have accepted or were forced by the Highlands Act to accept low growth. And so, yes, is the answer. We have to get those in place. They're very controversial. I basically believe that we're going to have to have some kind of recognition of the loss of property values that individuals have. Sometimes that shows up in taxes, by the way, loss of value through our Garden State Preservation Fund. I've made that point number of times. When we renew it, we should have some set aside to help relieve some of that pressure.

All right. Thank you very much, Jim, from West Milford. We appreciate that call. And next we have Stuart from Cherry Hill. Stuart wants to talk about special education costs, if I read him right. And Stuart, you're on the line with the governor. Thanks a lot for calling in. Oh, thank you. And good evening to both of you. On the father of a young son with autism. And one of the things that I've realized and come to be aware of is how towns are struggling with special education costs and how these lead to battles and even cutting special education bodies. What I'd like to do is offer an idea that could possibly reduce property taxes and pay for special education. And that would be instead of throw the idea out to you that instead of using all the money just to give a tax credit for that plan. What if instead some of that was used to pay down the approximately $1.3 billion that the towns are paying on special education costs. Now that would reduce property taxes because every dollar the state adds to special education.

It reduces the town having to pay that and people would still see that credit because their property taxes would go down by that amount. So I was trying to come up a little away because I just didn't want to come and ask you for money for these kids. But if I were a parent with an autistic child, I would be just as much a voice for recognition that we need to work with these children and provide a thorough and efficient education and opportunity to the best of their ability. So you don't have to apologize for that. One of the things that we're working on which will be necessity whether it is included in the property tax reform or it comes shortly thereafter is a new school funding formula. The Supreme Court has required that this administration come up with a new way for how we distribute funds. And one of the important ingredients that we are going to use as a magnet for how funds will be distributed is the number of special education children in a school district.

And it will be one of those factors that ends up improving the flow of funds where there are heavy concentration of special needs kids. And my hope is, and based on the trial runs I've seen, we're doing a better job of that by taking this into account in this very complex formula. And I hope to have that. We hope we'll have it in this budget season. If we don't, we certainly will. Next year we're working on it. We've got to vet it with the public, got to vet it with the legislature, got to vet it with an enormous number of people who might have an opinion about it. I think you are exactly right. One of the major drivers for property taxes at the local level is the education budget and education budget and special ed. And we have a moral responsibility in my view to be responsive to that need. And there are folks who move to districts specifically for their special education programs. I know there is an autistic youth who lives a block from myself and spoke with his dad. And he said, in fact, they moved to my town because it had good special education service.

There are a couple other nuances in which it's true. People move to New Jersey because we have some of the best programs with respect to curriculum programs for our special needs kids and particularly with respect to autism. We're not perfect. We've got a lot of work to do. And we have to think about when autistic children become autistic adults, which is another challenge. But there are a couple of other points. One of the things that I think people have missed is that we ought to be thinking about sharing the educational responsibility of our special needs kids in ways that we're now not always considering. We're doing a district by district by district and most instances. There are a few instances where we're looking for shared opportunities to have the skills and the impact.

This is a place where there could be real positive outflow. And the second thing I'd say is raise cane with your congressional delegation. Most of them are already on this gambit is that the federal government is only giving a 17% of what they promised would be 40% of the funding for special education. I often hear that the local community is complaining about mandates without money coming from Trenton. This is one of the most serious mandates that's coming out of Washington that has been totally unfunded and it's really about 30 years worth of problems. And as the cost of special education has gotten more and more severe, this is one of those things that we've got to fight for. And while we're on education, I'd just like to ask you a quick follow-up. We were told on NJN last week by a couple of senators, Democrats, Joe Crimes, Chairman of the Party. School funding wouldn't be ready for probably four or five months. So what are schools, how should they plan for the coming year if you could give it to us?

You know, I'm a big fan of Joe Crimes, so I don't want to dispute him in public. If we can get it sooner, we will. We're going to do it right, not fast. This is... And so how do districts plan for the fall then? If we cannot get a school funding formula through the legislature and on my desk that has wide support in the next six to eight weeks, we're going to have to back away from the time schedule and come up with Plan B, which would be an interim situation. I might want to use the formula for designating how we would allocate funds next year. We're thinking about that as a proposition. But it's important to get this right. As most of the public knows, we've been dealing with out-of-school funding formula for a better part of a decade. It's been administrative. It has never worked. It has led to great, great stress in our state. And we're trying our level best to try to come up with something that proves achievement, proves performance, sustains our great school system, which produces good output, but making sure that we do that on a fair basis.

All right. Thanks, Governor. And thanks, Stuart, in Cherry Hill. Now we go to Robert and Tom's River, who wants to talk about housing prices. And yes, Robert, they're not cheap here in New Jersey. Are they government? Robert, go right ahead. Do you have the governors here? Hey, Robert. Hey, how you doing? Good. Yeah, I just... I don't know. The measly little tax repair in that we get. And losing $30,000 on my house over here, and I still can't sell it. And I don't know. I just don't understand. Well, Robert, I'm responsible for a lot of things, and I'm not trying to say I'm walking away from this. We have a bubble in house prices that occurred pretty consistently across the country that over the last six months to nine months, it's sort of come to an end. And some communities, the loss and value of homes has been 20%, 25%, other places that hasn't been quite so much. And in fact, there are places in New Jersey and in the country where the prices are still going up.

But the fact is, as interest rates went up, a lot of the prices, the houses came down a bit. And that's really a national economic condition, much more than it is in New Jersey. We're not saying that our high property taxes and the high cost of living in New Jersey doesn't contribute to it, and we're working to try to correct that through the property tax relief and reform issue and trying to bring government spending under control. But the real issue on house prices is something that's sort of a bigger economic event that's going on in the country. Thanks, Governor. Thanks, Robert. And next, we have Angelie, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, if not, please correct me. And Angelie is from Sarahville. And Angelie, you want to talk about an immigration question. You have the governor's attention. Go right ahead. Thanks for calling in. Good evening, Governor.

Angelie, go ahead with your question. Very good. How are you? I'm a U.S. citizen. I've been in the United States for 21 years now. I was adopted at the age of nine. And I wanted to know if I can follow from my birth mother, which is in Jamaica, Kingston, Jamaica. Well, I think we have a cross-border legal issue, not just a U.S. issue. Actually, this topic is being debated in the legislature right now about having every adopted child. There's a proposal to have every adopted child to be able to find out who their birth parents are. I actually support the concept. But when you have a situation where the birth parents aren't U.S. citizens, then you have to deal with the laws of that country as well as what we have here in the United States. This is a local issue or state issue. So we wouldn't be able to enforce that desire unless the laws are so written in Jamaica.

Okay. Angelie, thanks a lot for calling in. I hope that helps with your question. And next we have Mark from Shaman Township. And Mark, you'd like to talk about selling state assets? Hey, Mr. Governor. Hey, Mark. Hey, there he is. Okay. I just want to know why you would consider leasing or selling our toll roads. So a company when we're going to see much more a greater return in the long run. And how New Jersey would benefit Mark. Mark, I promise you, if we can't structure a transaction or a lease arrangement or a sale to our pension funds or a setup of a company owned by the state of New Jersey that gives the public confidence that there will be rational prices, public safety on the highways. If we can't do that, capital expenditures to widen turnpikes or make sure the potholes are filled in, then we shouldn't do this. And I've said that, but we should examine the cost and the benefits of the way the turnpike is run today versus the cost and benefits of some other structure.

And I'm not saying that it should go to a private company. We need to look at how is the taxpayer of New Jersey going to be most advantage. And right now this state has very high taxes. And we have very real demands for open space purchases like the fellow from Wells Malford was talking about. A need to make sure that we invest in our higher education. We have a need to invest in our highways. We have a need to make sure that we have a health care system that is available to everyone in our state. And without some new ability to have revenue flows, we won't have the ability to invest in these kinds of initiatives. And the way that could happen is for us to generate revenue from some structure, whether it's the turnpike or whether it's the naming rights, whether it's the development rights, the air rights. This doesn't even have to be the highways. If we can generate dollars that will pay off debt, pay off our credit card bills so that we don't have to pay the interest on it on our budget.

So we don't have to pay the principal and the interest because the debt has been eliminated, then we will have a lot greater flexibility in how we manage the affairs of the state without raising taxes. That's why we're considering it. I'm not recommending that yet, but we're studying it. We're going to study it very thoroughly. We're going to have a full open transparent discussion, obviously with the legislature, but with the public at large. We'll see whether it makes sense and whether we can create a view that we're looking after the long term best interest of the public, not the short term interest, not to balance the budget, but to figure out how we can invest in these other long term needs of our state. Please tell me that you'll veto the tax reform bills because they're laden with all kinds of other things, and I voted for you.

Thank you very much for the support. There are elements of the tax reform bill that I like. I have to see about whether the things that I don't like overwhelm it. I think some of the things that I read in the press are a little off kilter with what reality is. I know the bill that has passed with regard to the controller is a lot stronger and a lot more meaningful for the public than it has been presented. We're going to have to spend some time explaining to newspapers, to the public, and others why I believe it is a strong bill. I believe that if we get the right person to run this office, we will have new financial controls that will make a difference in waste fraud and abuse that goes on in the state. Thank you, Mark. Governor, we're fast running low on the hourglass here, but can I ask you a quick follow? Did I understand you to say you wouldn't go with a company outside New Jersey? I said we will look at how we might be able to structure it by either the pension funds, the turn bike itself, others.

We could refinance. This is the kind of thing I worked on for many years in the world that I came from and it doesn't have to be done only in the private sector. You have to look at what the costs in the benefits are. One last question on that. You said part of it to pay down the debt. How much would you? First of all, I don't know how we can, when you change how much you can raise prices, when you say I'm not going to spend anything to protect the roads, you can get a lot of money. If you're going to do something that is rational for the people who live in the state, you might not get as much. Whatever we get, the first thing we have to do is substantial reduction of debt. Okay, thanks, governor. Okay, thank you, Mark. Let's go to Marissa from Edison who has a question about charity care. Marissa, you have the governor. Thanks for calling in. Go ahead. Marissa. There she is. Marissa, go ahead. Ask up.

Hi, thank you. Good evening, governor. My name is Marissa and I'm a nurse at work in the hospital. Yes. And my question is, what is being done for the reimbursement to hospital that provides charity care to the communities? It just becomes a major issue, having our clinic closed and all that. So, you know, who's going to give care to the community? Marissa, this is one of the most agonizing problems I deal with because we have so many uninsured people in our nation and in New Jersey. It's about 1.3 million uninsured. There's probably several million underinsured. There are many situations when people's only place to go for health care is to the emergency room. And if it's a serious situation, then they go to the hospital and they don't have the resources to be able to pay their bills. We build up the charity care. It's absolutely devastating to the hospital, devastating the family.

And we're not getting enough help from the federal government. But the fact is this problem isn't going to get cured until we have a major reform in health insurance at a national level. We're going to end up proposing something that looks not too far off of what you've heard about, universal access in other states. I think it will be more probable that we can actually get it done than in other states, but it is a major, major problem. All right. Marissa, thank you very much, Governor. Thank you. Quick question from Camden, La Violet. Thanks for calling in. Quick question to the governor. We're running out of time. La Violet, go ahead. Yes, I was embarrassed to watch Diane Sawyer's interview on her report rather about Camden and the situation there. And you know, I've never been embarrassed to say I lived in New Jersey before, but after that I can't believe how those children are living the conditions, the crime rate.

I was just wondering if, you know, what we're going to do about that. First of all, I think everyone is both troubled and you could say embarrassed, but the fact is is that we have children who are left out of the system across the state and across this country. It's not unique only with Camden. It happens to be more concentrated there. We have to make sure that our school system works, there's safety in the streets, and we actually need to put money into providing for food and healthcare for these children. It's a big problem. I'm committed to working at it. And that is the last word for the evening because we have run out of time. The hourglass is finally emptied, and I'd like to thank our viewers for your questions. And sorry we could not get to all of our callers. Governor, of course, I would like to thank you for coming in and taking the time to join us. We're going to do this again, right? I'd love to. We will. Every other month from what I read, I'm Jim Hooker. So for all of us here at NJN News, thanks for watching. Thanks for your calls. Have a good night.

Major funding for Ask the Governor has been made possible in part by Proformance Insurance, a New Jersey company protecting individuals, families and business. The New York Shipping Association, the men and women at the port of New York and New Jersey delivering more goods to more places. And by Lockheed Martin, New Jersey's Lockheed Martin employees, we never forget who we're working for, with additional support provided by Albert and Janice Gemper. State House and political reporters are our guests each week, Friday nights at 630 and Sunday mornings at 10 on reporters round table. Join us.