Home |  Elder Rights |  Health |  Pension Watch |  Rural Aging |  Armed Conflict |  Aging Watch at the UN  

Mission  |  Contact Us  |  Internships  |  Donate Now!  

back

WEST WINDSOR, N.J., Feb. 26 — Suburbs have always had one big idea, to be comfortable and safe places for families with children. But local politicians here and around the country are working hard these days to cater to a new generation of suburban V.I.P.'s — those retired couples in the three- or four-bedroom houses down the street. People like Fred and Mary Froehlich.

The Froehlichs love the Cape that Mr. Froehlich built with his own hands 46 years ago, when West Windsor was mostly farmland and not the vast plain of expensive houses it has become. They love the way their five grown children still come home for family gatherings. What they do not love are the taxes, $6,000 a year, which happen to be the same as Mrs. Froehlich's annual Social Security benefit. 

So like a lot of suburban retirees, Mr. Froelich is trying to persuade his wife to move, in their case to a spot in Delaware where taxes are a tenth of what they are here. But Mrs. Froehlich is resisting, and although she may not yet know it, she has an ally in Carole Carson, the mayor of West Windsor. 

For Ms. Carson has done the math and knows what it means when retirees move out and a new generation of families with children move in. It means more children swelling enrollment at local schools, more garbage to pick up, more cars on the road, more services generally.

Since it costs an average of $9,599 a year to send a child to the West Windsor-Plainsboro public schools — up nearly 28 percent in the past five years — even with state aid, one new child in the Froehlich's house would more than eat up the taxes the house produces. Two more would present the school district with a $20,000 annual education bill.

The impact of enrollment growth is especially severe in growing suburbs like West Windsor, a bedroom community of 20,000 near Princeton that has seen enrollment increase to 8,500 from about 5,000 10 years ago. While a small increase in enrollment might easily be absorbed in existing classrooms, the growth here has required two school construction referendums, in 1993 and again in 1996, in which voters approved spending a total of $114.7 million to build two new elementary schools, a new high school and an addition to an existing middle school.

So like other communities around the country, West Windsor is scrambling to find ways to keep as many elderly residents in their homes as long as possible. As the population ages, the development is already changing the face of suburbia. 

"It's a matter of cost-effectiveness, especially in a community like ours," said Ms. Carson. "The seniors are a tremendous asset to any community, and if you are not able to retain them, you end up, one, without the values they represent, and, two, with services that are much more expensive than if they stayed. So we need to do what we can to keep our seniors from moving away."

So Ms. Carson is leading a statewide drive to encourage retirees to stay in their family homes by reducing the punishing level of property taxation that, in conversation after conversation with retirees here, emerged as the No. 1 complaint of empty-nesters. 

In November, the New Jersey State League of Municipalities took up her cause and is now lobbying the State Legislature to increase the income eligibility for a state program that freezes the taxes for people over 65. A version of this idea has been introduced by Jack Collins, the speaker of the Assembly, that would double the income eligibility to $44,000, from $22,000. 

Earlier this month, Acting Gov. Donald T. DiFrancesco proposed raising the property tax rebate for the elderly, a separate program, to $750, from $500, while urging the Legislature to consider Mr. Collins's legislation without quite endorsing it. This afternoon, the Senate budget committee approved Mr. DiFrancesco's proposal.

In New York, Gov. George E. Pataki has similarly proposed expanding the state's property tax rebate system for the elderly. For married homeowners earning as much as $60,000, he would raise the average benefit by an average of about $300 a year over the next five years.

In Connecticut earlier this month, Gov. John G. Rowland devoted a large part of his budget message to the need to provide more generous in-home care for the elderly, saying that the longer they are able to remain self-sufficient, the less time they will spend in state-subsidized nursing homes.

Efforts like these, plus, perhaps, a waning appeal of Sunbelt retirement communities for some elderly people, have created a new suburban phenomenon some call the N.O.R.C., for "naturally occurring retirement community," said Elinor Ginzler, manager of the Long Term and Independent Living office of AARP, the association for middle-aged and elderly Americans.

"It is a setting where folks have aged in place," Ms. Ginzler said. "And people who live there recognize that in order to encourage that, you have to address the issues like taxes that accompany that development." 

Property tax abatements are hardly the only incentive to stay put that are being offered to the suburban elderly these days. Free or discounted public transportation, free medical screening and the opportunity to audit local college courses for little or no charge are also aimed at keeping them in place.

So are the "senior centers" — combination social clubs, gyms and clinics — that according to the National Council on the Aging have become ubiquitous in the suburbs. There are now 16,000 around the country, double the number in 1980, and most of them are in the suburbs. 

Still, here at the leading edge of suburban sprawl, the comforts, convenience and companionship offered by such amenities do not entirely overcome the problem that high taxes present to retirees.

"Taxes are the only expenses that keep going up for them," Mayor Carson said. "Their car insurance stays the same, their houses are paid for and they don't use a lot of electricity. But taxes keep going up, and it makes it hard for them to stay in their homes." 

In 1996, the taxes on a $250,000 home in West Windsor were $6,975, including $4,300 in school taxes, said Kay Reed, the township tax collector. In 2000, the taxes on the same house had risen to $8,450, with school taxes accounting for $5,550. 

For newcomers, West Windsor's well-regarded schools and their high test scores are a source of pride, but to Dick Harbourt and his wife, Marion, the resulting taxes are unbearable. He and Mrs. Harbourt live on $22,000 a year, and even though they qualified to have their taxes frozen in 1998, nearly a quarter of their income goes to pay the $5,000 annual bill. 

"When we built our house in '55, our taxes were less than $200," said Mr. Harbourt, 69, who used to have a small trucking company. "We expanded to raise five kids, and every room I added has a memory, a history. And I feel that all the new citizens moving in here are just confiscating our home to pay for their schools." 

Sitting around a big table at West Windsor's senior center, a clapboard structure designed to look a little like a traditional farmhouse, Mr. Harbourt and a dozen friends acknowledged that an earlier generation of residents, including retirees, had helped put their own children through school 30 or 40 years ago. They said they recognized that they have a similar obligation to today's children. In addition, the quality of the schools has greatly increased the values of their homes.

That said, as communities try to cater to longtime residents, some parents are mindful of empty-nesters' reputation as consistent "no" voters on local school bonds. Indeed, almost all the people at the senior center said they regularly voted against school budgets.

Acknowledging that others had helped support schools for their children, many longtime residents say that things are different now. To begin with, the cost of education has increased much faster than inflation or their incomes.

But also, they say, the newcomers who have doubled West Windsor's population in the last 15 years are too often professional couples whose transient, corporate careers in New York and Philadelphia keep them from developing the kind of commitment to the place, to the volunteer work and to the town boards that people like the Froehlichs and the Harbourts brought in their child- rearing days. 

"You talk to the people who move in and it's always the same" said Oliver Hilpot, who has lived here with his wife, Bette, for 45 years. "They move in for the schools, and as soon as their kids are out of high school, they're gone, because they don't want to pay the taxes. Well, if they don't like the taxes, why should we?" 

A few years ago, the Hilpots gave up their big house and moved to an upscale retirement condominium in West Windsor. A young family with one child bought their house, and now a second baby is on the way. 

At their spotless home on Cubberley Road, the Froehlichs think about the $115 a week it costs them just to stay in their house and wonder. 

"I'm ready to go," Mr. Froehlich, a retired construction supervisor, said. "But she" — a nod to his wife — "she's still on the fence."