But this week, the Assembly gave final approval to a plan, signed Tuesday by the governor, that includes an override provision. Under the compromise, a simple majority in a town can override the cap, instead of the 60 percent initially sought by Christie.
Some legislators remain uneasy with the override measure.
"I know that we as a state have two New Jerseys, one that's the haves and [one that's] the have-nots," said Sen. Shirley Turner (D., Mercer), one of four senators, all Democrats, who voted against the bill. "My feeling is this 2 percent cap, which allows for voters to override the 2 percent cap, will further exacerbate the two New Jerseys. We will continue to be even more separate but unequal as far as education is concerned and the quality of life."
According to a study by the Municipal Finance Task Force in Massachusetts, a group created by an organization of the 10 chief executive officers for urban-core communities in metropolitan Boston, from 1983 to 2004 the chances of an override's success correlated strongly with the wealth of a community.
Twenty-seven percent of override attempts in the communities with incomes in the lower two-fifths succeeded, compared with 43 percent in the second-highest fifth and 57 percent in the highest fifth. Communities with incomes in the highest two-fifths also attempted more overrides, 1,627, than the lower two-fifths, 1,190.
Because Massachusetts directed extra state aid to the poorest communities, however, their budgets as well as those of the highest increased the most. Communities in the middle faced the tightest constraints because they could neither override the cap nor receive extra state aid.
Among the New Jersey lawmakers who voted for the compromise bill despite reservations about the override provision was Assemblyman John McKeon (D., Essex). He said not having the provision would have forced people to pay attention to how the cap affected all communities.
