*1 affirmed, judgment Appellate Division is and the hereby disposition matter remanded to the Law Division opinion. in accordance For and remandment —Chief Justice WILENTZ affirmance and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN—7.
Opposed—None. MUNICIPALITIES, THE OF NEW JERSEY STATE LEAGUE AN PROFIT, ASSOCIATION NOT FOR AND RICHARD B. NASHEL NASHEL, INDIVIDUALLY, AND SUSAN B. PLAINTIFFS-AP- PELLANTS, KIMMELMAN, I. GENERAL IRWIN ATTORNEY JERSEY, THE STATE OF OF NEW DEFENDANT-RESPON- DENT. Argued September 198 6 Decided March *2 appellants argued the cause Rosenblum Edward G. Rosenblum, (Rosenblum attorneys). & General, argued the Haushalter, Deputy Attorney Harry Z. Edwards, Attorney General of Cary respondent cause for {W. Ciancia, Attorney Assistant Jersey, attorney; James J. General, counsel). opinion of the Court was delivered
O’HERN, J. apparent conflict primarily resolve an
In this case we must of the New article provisions of the taxation two between taxation of all real requires One Jersey Constitution. value, other the same standard by uniform rules and from taxation grant exemptions Legislature to authorizes the legisla- in the context of the issue arises by general laws. The unoccupied, newly-construct- the taxation of moratorium on tive ed, single-family residences. history
Consideration of the two sections paramount focus of the Constitutional Convention on significance uniformity delegates’ clause to the deliberations on a primacy taxation article leads us to accord uniformity provision. requirement We hold that of uni- formity preclude granting exemption of such an from the burden taxation. do We therefore not address the question presented Appellate Division of whether act special legislation was invalid thus granted by general law.
I act, 54:4-23a, N.J.S.A. a response to a severe crisis housing industry double-digit occasioned the effect of *3 inflation and recession in the early and, 1980s. The act is brief originally 1982, 220, as c. enacted in L. stated: notwithstanding, building other law no or Any contrary other structure constructed on of real newly and intended for any parcel property occupancy single dwelling and use for residential as a shall be added to family subject to taxation until list as real assessment certificate of property the or certificate of occupancy has been issued and unless the temporary occupancy building or other structure for and used such actually occupied purposes; building however, that such or shall provided, structure be omitted from taxation for a not to exceed 24 months. At the of period termination the 24 following granting month or the of a period certificate or occupancy building certificate of and the and use the temporary occupancy occupation building for residential the or structure shall be purposes, assessed taxed following as the first month the the date of such day use remaining. of said then proportionate part year Nothing in act this shall construed as addition or applicable any to, existing building Nothing or alteration improvement of, or structure. any building act shall be construed to omit from or structure any building subject of a or structure to taxation to the effective portion date prior of this act. essence, act, In Attorney General describes 29, 1982, became effective on providing exemp- December tax, :8.16, from N.J.S.A. 54:4-1 to tion the local for a period years newly-constructed maximum two single-family, use dwelling, provided as a residential such building unoccupied occupancy remains and no certificate of subsequent A amendment clarified that has been issued. “newly only dwellings constructed” referred term whose 29, on or December 1982. L. commenced after construction c. 1.§ complete the recital of the accept shall as accurate and We legislation Attorney in the Gener- background for the contained questioned. since that recital has not been al’s brief result of 54:4-23a came about as a enactment N.J.S.A. Emergency Team Housing Action recommendations Assembly. State (HEAT), a committee to a severe in March 1981 to seek solutions HEAT was formed housing shortage report The June in the State. the hous- made recommendations address committee various shortage, including following specific recommendations: ing
Reducing the Build Cost to * Model Standards of Reasonable Off-Site Improvement Development * Building Tax from and Use Materials the Sales Exempt * Taxes Local Constructed Homes Property Unsold Exempt Newly are Until they Occupied * Footage Encourage Zones in Munici- of Maximum Establishment Square palities. added).] (emphasis [HEAT Report housing placed no units report suggested that unsold unoccupied and they were municipality while on burden unsold, units unoccupied residential thus recommended period vacancy as exempt during the from taxation should origi- As reducing cost of home. the ultimate a means *4 single- introduced, legislation only with detached nally the dealt modified passage, it was dwellings. In course of its family the struc- dwellings, just detached single-family all include to a the conditionally vetoed act because Kean tures. Governor exemption. respect period the to the deficiency with technical legis- the recognized the The Governor’s statement re- no that unfairness in the conclusion and concurred lation is burden taxpayers since little municipalities and other to sults new, unoccupied residential upon municipal services placed 426
construction. After modification in accordance the Gover- recommendations, bill, nor’s form, the in its final was enacted L.1982, c. 220. On signing, the occasion of the Governor noted “[b]y exempting price structure, the but not land, prior from property taxes occupancy, costs to the builder, passed along are buyer which to the are reduced.” 1983, present
In early plaintiffs and others filed an action to declare the act constituting special unconstitutional as a law (1947) IV, 7, in violation of New Constitution art. sec. para. (which prohibits from passing special laws) art., and the VIII, taxation article 1, sec. paras. 1 and 2. It paragraph specifically requires is 2 that exemptions from granted only by taxation be general laws. The Law Division held the statute special legislation constituted in viola- VIII, tion of para. article sec. 2. The court reasoned that granted statute exemption special from law exempted because it from only tax unoccupied single-family dwelling failing units while include other resi- living units, homes, dential such as mobile cooperatives, and (For rental-type property. purposes, residential the value of the upon based value the land and the improvements. Separate improve- evaluation of the land and step objective. ments is Appeals but toward that In re Ave., Inc., (1961).) Kents Atlantic 34 N.J. It concluded that the classification was its irrational in exclusion categories of those property. 197 N.J.Su- per. 89, (1984). Attorney appealed judgment General Appel-
late cross-appeal Division. No plaintiffs. filed On appeal, Appellate judgment Division reversed the Division, Law held legislation the statute to conformity VIII, 1, para. with art. sec. Appellate In the view, erroneously interpreted Division’s the trial had court term “single-family dwelling” to exclude certain new forms Appellate residential construction. The Division read the stat- exempt ute buildings “all newly structures are
427
property
for
any parcel of real
and ‘intended
constructed on
single family
purposes
occupancy and use for residential
”
homes, two-family
dwelling,’ arguably including the mobile
housing
thought
Law
dwellings,
cooperative
Division
and
plaintiffs
(1985). The
N.J.Super.
excluded.
were
seeking
review
this Court
for
petition
certification
filed a
judgment
ultimately reinstatement
and
judgment
is
the matter
posture of
Although
procedural
trial court.
tentative,
we believe it essential
resolve
thus somewhat
Accordingly,
granted
we
underlying constitutional issue.
(1985).
plaintiffs’
ARTICLE and Finance Taxation Section general (a) and under laws by shall assessed for taxation 1. be Property for or the State and taxed by uniform rules. All real assessed locally according taxing shall be assessed and districts allotment payment and such herein, as otherwise permitted proper- same standard of value, except taxing general rate of the district be at the shall taxed ty taxing district. for the use of such situated, granted Until laws. only Exemption may granted and from taxation validly law all exemptions otherwise provided altered from taxation may shall be continued. Exemptions now existence exempting used exclusively real and those personal property or repealed, except religious, law, as defined or charitable educational, cemetery purposes, organized conducted exclusive- or owned association corporation by any operating and not one more of such profit. ly 1(a) as paragraph shall refer to reference here we For ease of recognize two distinct clause, although we its uniformity by general laws property be taxed components all —that property be assessed at defined real rules and that uniform *6 same of general standard value and at the taxing rate of the district its for use.
Since interpretation our depends upon of clauses historical provisions context in which the two adopted, were it is necessary to refer to the well-documented contemporary ac- proceedings counts of the of the 1947 Constitutional Convention analysis. well as as later historical The predecessor 1844 Jersey New Constitution been had amended in 1875 problems to address existent preferential of taxation. The change forces motivated that first are clear. industry time, railroads, dominant of that exerted Legislature’s considerable taxing power influence over the had obtained for itself virtual 1 taxation. W. Sackett, (1895). Modern Battles Growing Trenton 19-23 sentiment mobilized Governor Parker led to a constitutional produced convention that the first limited against restraint preferential tax treatment for one industry. Roe v. Cf. Kervick, 191, (1964) 42 (discussing comparable N.J. re- using public straints on money private purposes). “[W]hen the State upon subsidies, once enters the business of we shall not fail to strong powerful discover that the interests are likely those most legislation, to control and that the weaker will profits taxed the stronger.” to enhance Ibid. (citation omitted). 1875, As in amended the tax clause Jersey Constitution, IV, 1844 New art. para. sec. read follows: shall be
Property assessed taxes under laws, and uniform rules, according to its true value. For seventy-five years eighteen almost guided those words Jersey's Legislature New development and courts in the of tax policy. monograph of Aaron K. Neeld in 2 contained Proceedings State Con- Constitutional (S. vention 1951) Crystal Goldmann H.& ed. (hereafter referred Proceedings), history to as describes that detail. We history summarize the description based on that correctly assumptions it on which states the because we believe acted. the Convention though county
All
are state taxes even
levied
taxes
municipal
power
taxation is an essential
purposes. The
sovereignty
scope
and is unlimited
inherent attribute of
inhibition or
may
constitutional
except as it
restrained
specific
legislative
In the absence
irrepealable
contract.
Legislature,
inhibition, it was concluded
constitutional
taxation,
sovereign power of
was free to
in the exercise
constitution,
prior
class
Under the
subjects
select
taxation.
compliance with the
long as there was
taxation was valid so
in-
class are
reasonably
rule
all
within the
classification
*7
class,
cluded,
throughout the whole
and
uniformity prevail
regularly
But it was
be
at true value.
taxed
according
its
property,
to
must be of
held that “classification
according
put,
not
characteristics,
it is
or the use to which
owner,
incidence of location of
or the mere
the status of
to
omitted).
(citations
property.” Id. at 1687
clause did not
the tax
similarly
It
concluded that since
taxes,
for
shall be assessed
require
that all
exemption
purposes
for
of
classify property
could
course,
of
observance
subject always, of
strict
for taxation
of a
single
a
member
Elimination of
classification rule.
The
the statute.
Ibid.
natural
class would invalidate
special
attempts to
or
create
“[Legislative
author wrote
con
property have been
persons and
limited classifications of
Thus,
attempted
tax clause.”
sistently
out under the
ruled
exempt firemen
special exemption
attempt
of
for
and an
$500
period
property within
improvements on real
exemption of
ed
improper
ground of
have
voided on
years
of five
been
McGrath, 70
(citing Tippett v.
1688
Id. at
classifications.
(E.
(Sup.Ct.1903), aff'd,
1904),
N.J.L. 110
charitable, religious, uses, (citing and educational id. Schwartz Taxation, County v. Essex 129 (Sup.Ct. Bd. N.J.L. 133 1942), aff'd, (E. 130 1943), N.J.L. 177 & A. and Burlington Distilling Assessors, Co. State Bd. (Sup.Ct. N.J.L. 92 1914),aff'd, (E. 1915). N.J.L. A.& This classification rule preferential allowed continued tax treatment for the rail Sackett, roads. 1 Trenton, supra, W. Modem Battles body evolved, As tax law a movement arose for the development of a new modern constitution for the State of Jersey. development source that movement and its have been ably described in Connors, R. The Process Consti tutional Revision in New Jersey: (1970) (herein 1940-1947 Connors). after The result was a 1941 commission that recom Jersey. mended a constitution new State of New This provisions later in by eventuated recommended Joint Legislative presented Committee a tax clause to public language: in this shall be assessed for under Property rules, taxes uniform laws, according 'd-'d . to standards of value as be but may law excess of pi granted true but value; law who may persons have shall been, are, shall or have been in active service branch of the any [Proceedings, military naval forces of the United States in time war. (citation omitted).] vol. 2 at 1694-95 supra, subjected political Constitution was cross-cur- *8 rents that the influenced outcome of its referendum. Various raised, objections motives, were some for ulterior others for genuine Connors, supra, Thus, concern. during at 98. the revision, campaign 1944 on controversy the constitutional * * * (the veterans) “designation arose over whether the of one (religion, education, would exclude all charity): expressio others est Proceedings, supra, unius exclusio alterius.” vol. 2 at appears 1695. It generally specific to be that conceded the provision only ground for for one class was one for defeat of 1944 the Constitution and that it caused the insertion in provision exemptions the 1947 draft of a Constitution for
431 exemptions so familiar to presumably to those historic advance Legislature. the time, developed over a decision a fire storm had
At the same had, in Appeals that the Jersey Court of Errors and of the New critics, permitted unconstitution- eyes for first time of its controversy in of real estate. al the taxation discrimination by which of the Railroad Tax Law a 1941 revision arose over railroad were devoted proceeds of second-class taxes fixed taxation was municipalities but the rate use of value, notwithstanding the fact the only per at $100 3% average for the State. below the tax rate figure was well 1946), (E. A. Kelly, 134 239 & City in v. N.J.L. Jersey decision 133 N.J.L. Appeals, Bd. Tax City v. State modifying Jersey crisis. precipitated the constitutional (Sup.Ct.1945), 202 sustained Supreme Court litigation explained Related means permissible it was a 1941 act on the basis of railroad of taxation more flexible burden “ease and make 134 N.J.L. Appeals, Bd. Tax property.” State State (E. 1947), held that o.b., & A. (1946), N.J.L. aff'd justified separate” when “legally favored classification was special to which the “particular or use on basis put.” 134 N.J.L. In property is in fact at railroad League Municipalities, for the attorney State words of Jersey respect the decision presented its views with Convention: City to the Constitutional in our tax clause of the present the first time since the Thus, adoption clause to construed that permit our courts have Constitution segregate but purposes, valuation railroad property only against other it a lower rate than paid assess also to deliberately * * [Proceedings, 573.] *. vol. supra, led to the a factor that Undoubtedly, this classification Connors, at 165. supra, of the 1944 Constitution. rejection ways reasons different it in different Thus was develop- of New addressed people of the State of 1947. Convention in the Constitutional a tax clause ment of Taxation on assigned to the Committee rules The Convention *9 and Finance the task fashioning a clause new from various sources, including property tax clause of the 1875 Constitu- tion.
Those who were concerned about continued existence of exemptions charitable, the traditional reli- gious, and other addressed the Committee about preserving need of precedents. those historical Some language dealing exemptions put had in to be the constitu- existing tion customary exemptions so that and would be con- tinued. This was to meet the expressio argument unius had process. undermined the specific 1944 constitutional A provision for veterans had to be written into the constitution by status, since that awas classification pro- use. Some posed exemptions granted only two-thirds vote Legislature, leading some members of the Committee to fear existing exemptions charitable, for the traditional educational, religious purposes would cease to exist and would Legislature by have be renewed a new a two-thirds language rejected. vote. That Others addressed Com- prevent on mittee the need of public the use funds religious purposes. purposes, For our on expres- we focus argument sio unius preserve existing on the decision to exemptions within the constitutional order.
The debate about uniformity inevitably pref centered on the position erential specifically afforded to railroad on possibility that real taxed for the benefit municipalities again subject could ever to discriminant taxa by Legislature. tion Regional See Meadowlands Rede velopment Agency v. State New Jersey, 63 N.J. appeal dismissed, 414 U.S. (1973)(Conford, L.Ed.2d J., t/a, concurring part, dissenting part). Hence it was that the later predominantly Committee focused attention on the uni formity issue. The municipal supporting interests an equal strongly represented by burden clause were parties from Hud (within County son which the allegedly bulk of the railroad land *10 existed) unfairly pre-1947 taxed under the laws at the Constitu- tional Convention. time, perceived Driscoll insis-
At the same Governor presented insuperable tence on taxation at true value obstacles i.e., applied types property, of business insofar as it to all intangibles, so forth. And so he personal property, and worked provide a more bring about taxation clause would to flexibility government, foreseeing possible need for to reach future taxes. Committee on Taxation was unable uniformity controver- agreement question on the of tax stage.” past to “boil over the committee sy was destined Connors, supra, -at 166. compromise, quite political struggle of this came a
Out of compromise in the candor its unique history in the such delete the true value presentation public, to the that would require as to requirement from the tax clause but would government, property, the lifeblood of local real then and now accomplish To this discriminatory be forever barred. burdens sen- suggested amendatory purpose there two specific were tences: general uniform shall for taxation under laws by be assessed Property the State for real property All assessed and taxed locally by
rules. according taxing to the shall be assessed allotment and to districts payment taxing tax rate of the district and taxed at the same standard of value taxing [Proceed- for the use of such district. situated, in which the is property 16) added).] (emphasis ings, (quoting No. vol. 1 at 773 amendment supra, sought the still-fa- to cure was The evil that the amendments industry, then the railroad given to one vorable treatment representative of the State industry. In the of the words League Municipalities, subject and should different
when it comes to real
that’s
entirely
property,
the franchise tax
on railroads].
not in
be confused with
[imposed
any way
with respect
every type
on that real
should
equal
burden
property
in New
today.
is
Now,
there
every type
corporation
corporation.
of real
class,
exception
of real
owner of
every
Every
property
type
utility companies,
railroad
the local rate —the
used for
purposes, pays
property
gas
milk
food
and electric companies,
processors,
companies —all
with a
interest
which are
affected
public
numerous
industries
vitally
types
just as much
as the
railroads,
local rate on their real
operation
pay
justification
taking
We can’t see what
there
property.
can be for
one
possible
type
enterprise
when it
only, particularly
operated
private profit
paying
just
giving
a franchise tax
of the others do and
any
rate on real
$3
* *
**
estate
it only.
nothing
It seems
us,
less than unconscionable
really,
that real property
* * *
earning
devoted,
finality,
dividends
should be
purpose
subsidized
other real
half-rate railroad tax rate when
is so
horribly
strangled
governmental
system
taxation and
which we have
operation
[Proceedings,
in this State.
supra,
vol.
641-42.]
dispute
Not all
about taxation of railroad property was set
tled
amendment. Taxation of
specifically
*11
purposes” presents
“used for railroad
special problems, see
York, Susquehanna
and Western Railroad Co. v. Ver
meulen,
(1965)
(separate
N.J.
assessment and collection
procedures for
II
Class
property permissible
railroad
if burden
of
equal),
taxation is
and
to
distinctions as
“main stem” and
other
“used for
purposes”
railroad
continue. New
York, Susquehanna
Railway Corp. Township
& Western
of
Hardyston,
(N.J.Tax Ct.1987).
When the presented amendment was delegates to the at the Constitutional Tuesday morning, August Convention on 26, Alstyne Senator Van it described thus: righting wrong. This isn’t but I think it the perfect, of a I think represents Legislature we that should follow this with a memorial to the to take a look up
at the railroad situation and the situation as a whole. This maintains the sovereign right of the I to with State, have control over the situation repeat, right one and that the to real exception, estate in classify different categories., again I I do not feel at repeat we are in quite point yet [Proceedings, (emphasis added).] this State. vol. 1 at 774-75 supra, He went on say quite that he felt convinced that if this go (and Convention would along another), with this amendment up having “we job can end a compromise done and reconcilia- State, tion that will astound the and I think will be for the best State, interests pass of the and that we can this Constitution in November.” at Id. 775.
The amendment’s significance. critics understood its Frank Murray, J. vice-chairman of the Convention Fi- Taxation and delegate nance Committee County, and from Essex cautioned adoption of such a of the Convention that the members substantially limit seriously very “very provision would taxation,” that it Legislature saying as to was power any in interest of any municipality “not the interest power place upon a limitation in this State to individual Proceedings, supra, Legislature the field of taxation.” passed No. 16 delegates the amendment vol. at 779. four, seventy-two vote of id. remaining at the last development obstacle a modern constitution for the people Connors, of the State New was concluded. su- pra, power on
How can we reconcile this restraint then power paragraph apparent in the next grant exemptions? process In the the tax clause exemption power separated out constitutional debate the was uniformity exemption language from the clause and the current put separate paragraph in the 2. We think that reconcilia- delegates recognition that when the tion can be achieved being power, they considered it dealt with the public purpose mold in the historical exercised —then educational, charitable, religious pur- primarily as seen proceedings of the Convention corroborate poses. The *12 delegates. the intention of the such was 10, 1947, July a committee colloquy In a that occurred on member reminded the members that great [d]uring campaign of will the amount debate public the 1944 recall you campaign waged against the the
there the of exemption, was over question granted being the to on Constitution which was then exemption proposed, Legislature continuing the would, prohibit veterans which by implication, time-honored, religious, grant and educational charitable the to exemptions (emphasis added).] [Proceedings, vol. at 655 supra, associations. presumption that the spoke of the constitutional Another recognized by every providing exemptions is law- “present law Constitution, being being under the but yer as not defined speaker at 614. Another by general consent.” Id. observed provision not be too delegates exemption urged that con- suggesting any he would “make reasonable specific, exemption cession, long of an clause so as the treatment policy only, involves of principle.’’ matters and not matters of added). (emphasis Id. at contemporary
These delegates observations of the coincided language with the the statement required law presentation annexed to the of the constitution to the voters of the State In Jersey. summary of New address people clause, of the State of Jersey report the tax delegates the elected stated:
Existing Exemptions Tax Are Given Recognition
Constitutional religious, present used statutory exemptions property educational, guaranteed charitable and are cemetery purposes new Constitution. A tax for veterans also property becomes the Constitu- part $500 [Proceedings, tion. vol. 2 at supra, 1323.] Given that the delegates constitutional focus of the on the taxation real upon judicial estate decision that had power sustained the Legislature, prior to the 1947 Convention, preferential Constitutional to allow the of real on estate based industry, classification of the Kelly, City supra, 134 given single N.J.L. galvanizing brought agreement event that about on a tax compromise article was a gave greater flexibility to the legislative executive and branches in all taxing types proper- ty estate, other apparent than real purpose provid- ing that real municipal dedicated to burden, should never be taxed unequal at an we cannot con- delegates clude that the intended that the could achieve, exemption clause, by the what could not be done under imposed upon constitutional restraints it. no matter For whether as exemption, viewed a classification or as an it is clear that the purpose challenged provision ailing is to aid an industry. legislative quite statement to the act is clear. Current law provides erected structure any newly assessed and may
taxed real when it is for use. This substantially has created ready a financial for builders and who cannot hardship developers consummate sales
437 dwellings. have new In order constructed upon they properties building much of this financial to an alleviate hardship already depressed single dwelling no this bill detached shall family would industry, provide until has been and taxed as real a certificate occupancy assessed property and unless is and used for residential issued the structure actually occupied Assembly Statement, Government Committee purposes. [Assembly Municipal c. No. 855, L.1982, 220.] argued industry it can that it is not the but And while benefit, purchaser gains the the same could be residential who passengers. railroad said of
III
judicial
legislative interpretation of the tax
Subsequent
Kingsley,
In
v.
37 N.J.
supports
article
this conclusion.
Switz
(1962), this
held
566
Court
unconstitutional
section
preferential property
Farmland Act that allowed for
tax treat-
qualifying
by assessing
ment for
farmlands
farmland at its
agriculture
rather than
fair market value. It based
value
its
holding
intepretation
on its
to real
made
respect
property
taxable
statute
local
purposes,
* * *
Art.
VIII,
par.
§ I,
1
forbids
It
treatment.
explicitly
preferential
taxed
real
that all
assessed
locally
expressly requires
according
taxing
“shall be assessed
allotment
districts
State
payment
general
rate and “shall be taxed at the
the same standard of value”
taxing
taxing
for the use of such
situated,
district
in which the
N.J. district.”
[37
584.]
election,
Jersey vot-
Subsequently, in the 1963
VIII,
one. See
by margin
1
of over two to
art.
ers amended
§
Farm-
Jersey’s
Through the
Note, “Preserving New
Forestland
(1985).
new
Act,”
Rutgers
155
Assessment
L.J.
land
special
1(b)
farmland
that the
accord
paragraph
mandated
State
treatment,
rendering
moot.
thereby
Switz
property tax
Passaic,
28 N.J.
City
Co.
In General Electric
dismissed,
(1958),
appeal
(1959),
U.S.
Finally, repeated note we to the amendments Constitu- required grant tion have been from taxation for property. citizens, real Provisions for persons, senior disabled surviving spouses persons of such variously have been presented public authorization, as well as a home- special provisions stead rebate for areas in need of rehabili- course, tation. Of the exception, perhaps, the home- rebate, status, stead these exemptions use; are accorded they expressive however are power of the limited of exemption. Attorney exemptions General has made reference to shelters, improvements, such pollution as fallout con- devices, systems, devices, trol automatic fire heating and solar the proposition exemption power pur- extends to this pose. needWe not debate here the difference between such exemptions security, related to national environmental health or public safety, and exemptions purpose stated be for the aiding depressed industry. note, however, We on their face improvements plainly these appear purposes gener- to advance ally society beneficial to as a particular whole to a unrelated industry or taxpayer. Recognition the status of the of such to much more accord with exceptions appear would exemption. power that surround history and tradition constitutional debate on the specific history of the Given the judi- and the consistent power property, to tax real legislative clause of the Constitution since interpretation of the tax cial ordinarily indulgence be accorded although every should policy, development in the of tax we believe *15 taxing power set forth in art. upon specific restraint VIII, 1, requires this decision. para. sec. crisis recognize that a severe financial not failed to
We have housing people the of the State of availability of faced in the legislation enacted. Fortu- time this at the today present not and we conditions are nately these economic disruption of financial significant of no been advised have sought any party has form decision. No planning by this again, we are conditions arise monetary relief. Should the power to deal with not without is confident that Its needs its attention. economy specific area of undoubtedly enable it to fashion general powers would without offend- industrial stimulation program for appropriate tax clause of Constitution. specific provision of the ing Appellate Divi- stated, judgment of the For the reasons is reversed. sion
CLIFFORD, J., concurring. me uncertain about opinion leaves Because the Court’s to be unconstitu- 54:4-23a is declared! basis on N.J.S.A. majority myself and the tional, between put I a little distance joining in the result. my reasons for by stating separately holding. If I unsure of the Court’s explain why am Let me proper- taxation of real uniformity rule for point is that the burdens, discriminatory “forever at ty, which ante bar[s]” clause, I then do exemption by resort to the cannot be avoided reference, ante significance of the Court’s quite grasp the to other property-improvement exemption statutes. might That leave impression reference one with the that dis- criminatory classification of real is only purpose offending unconstitutional when the legisla- tion particular industry. impression is benefit a That surrounding fortified the discussion “amendatory two sentences,” 433-434, ante at as opinion’s well flat-out “[r]ecognition [statutory] exemptions statement of such property improvements shelters, pollution such as fallout [for devices, control systems, hearing automatic fire and solar de- appears history to be accord with the and tradition that vices] power exemption.” surround this Ante at If that is holding, I should think that the would well say Court do so. not, however,
That my holding. “history would tradition that this power exemption” surround are well and forcefully stated the Court. Ante at 438. They require property, to real govern- “as then and now lifeblood ment, discriminatory burdens be forever barred.” Ante at *16 Coupled exemption 433. with the characterization mold,” 435, being clause to its at limited “historical ante with observation that “real dedicated to mu- nicipal tax should an unequal never taxed at added), opinion burden,” (emphasis can ante at 436-437 say read can clause never defeat the uniformity requirement property. for taxation of real That is my holding. of the view correct I would therefore encour- age real-property those who must wrestle law to has day believe that Court left for possibility another “public purpose” that a partial exemption classification for from real can be achieved without a constitu- tional amendment.
CLIFFORD, J., concurring in the result. WILENTZ, For reversal —Chief Justice Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN—7.
For affirmance —None. JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, STATE OF NEW ROCCO PESCATORE, PESCATORE, AND CARMROC COR- CARMINE PORATION, WEST TRADING AS SPARTAN FURNITURE OF YORK, CORPORATION, A NEW DEFENDANTS- NEW JERSEY APPELLANTS. April Argued March 198 7 Decided argued the Philip Pescatore DeVencentes C. Alfred Fatuto, (Galantucci attorneys for appellants & cause Pescatore; Pescatore, attorney for Carmroc Rocco C. Alfred etc.; Marino, Pesca- Corp., attorneys for Carmen Biagiotti & tore). General, Stem, Attorney argued the Deputy E.
Patricia ( Edwards, Attorney respondent Cary cause for W. General Jersey, attorney). PER CURIAM. substantially the reasons ex- judgment affirmed is Division, opinion Appellate whose
pressed opinion in the (1986). N.J.Super. reported WILENTZ, For and Justices Justice affirmance —Chief POLLOCK, O’HERN, CLIFFORD, HANDLER, GARIBALDI *17 and STEIN—7. reversal —None.
For