Vote "NO" on One!
Posted October 16, 2009

Two years ago, New Jersey voters resoundingly rejected a ballot question that would have cost taxpayers $450 million.

Apparently, Trenton didn't get the "Stop Spending Our Money" message, because now, $400 million is again on the ballot, this time to fund so-called open-space preservation.

Specifically, ballot Question One asks:

Shall the "Green Acres, Water Supply and Floodplain Protection, and Farmland and Historic Preservation Bond Act of 2009," which authorizes the State to issue bonds in the amount of $400 million to provide moneys for (1) the acquisition and development of lands for recreation and conservation purposes, including lands that protect water supplies, (2) the preservation of farmland for agricultural or horticultural use and production, (3) the acquisition, for recreation and conservation purposes, of properties that are prone to or have incurred flood or storm damage, and (4) funding historic preservation projects; and providing the ways and means to pay the interest on the debt and also to pay and discharge the principal thereof, with full public disclosure of all spending, be approved?

Green Acres. Water Supply. Preservation. Farmland. Recreation. On the surface, they all sound very noble.  After all, who isn't for "historic preservation," "recreation and conservation," or "the preservation of farmland for agricultural or horticultural use and production."

But don't be fooled. These noble feelings are just what the question's supporters are hoping to capitalize on.

But history is an excellent teacher.

And as www.StopHigherTaxes.com founder Steve Lonegan points out, of $200 million borrowed in 2007 for supposedly "Green Acres" projects, at least $50 million funded things like parking lots, fences, and artificial turf. Hardly conservationist projects!

In reality, the real question is – With our state facing over $44 billion in debt, is now the time to borrow nearly half a billion to fund an initiative that has a history of misusing funds to the tune of many millions of dollars?

The answer, of course, is no.

Think of your own finances and those of your family. When a family cannot afford something, the question isn't, "How can we convince someone to let us borrow the money to buy it." No, the decision is, "We must delay this want to focus our resources on our true needs." 

Naturally, we believe history should be preserved, the water supply protected, and our natural resources conserved both for today and for future generations. But we do not believe in burdening these same future generations with the skyrocketing cost of Trenton's borrow and spend – and misspend – mentality.

Ballot Question One may sound good on the surface, but look beyond the language, read between the lines, and retrace the facts of history, and you'll find good intentions paving the road to half a billion in spending, an ever-growing state debt, and a fiscal obligation on the part of the state that can only be repaid by squeezing New Jersey taxpayers even more tightly than they are already squeezed!

New Jersey simply cannot afford right now to borrow $400 million for any reason.

And more importantly, New Jersey taxpayers simply cannot afford it.

As you prepare to cast your vote on November 3, we urge you to vote NO on Ballot Question One.

Archive