THE GREAT DEBATE:
ARE ROLLING ASSESSMENTS FAIR AND EQUITABLE TO NORTH ARLINGTON HOMEOWNERS?
LONGTIME RESIDENTS AND SENIORS DON’T THINK SO AND PRONTI WON’T BUDGE, DOUBLING DOWN ON A FAILED & FLAWED PROCESS REJECTED BY 83% OF NJ TOWNS!
North Arlington – The great debate about rolling reassessments here in North Arlington, a practice used by only 17% of all of New Jersey’s 564 municipalities will be a strong issue for change when compounded by this year’s municipal tax hike, proliferation of apartment construction along Ridge Road and the sense that North Arlington is no longer small, safe, suburban or even affordable as this gentrification of longtime residents, especially seniors rages on!
According to census data, North Arlington has some 2,700 seniors or about 16% of the borough’s population that is on fixed incomes who find the current reassessment process unfair in many cases not equitable.
Two-term Republican incumbent Dan Pronti, a retired cop and real estate agent has pushed the notion of rolling reassessments his entire time as mayor, as the borough had to use some $5.2 million dollars in surplus, yet taxes continued to increase. For the spending and borrowing policies have strained the borough with more and more apartments, now in the hundreds with even more on the way. 
Democratic mayoral candidate, John Balwierczak, a life-long resident and graduate of North Arlington High School is running a more grass roots, populist effort as he wants to end the construction along Ridge Road that has resulted in empty storefronts and businesses, especially the ongoing vacancy of the old MELRAYS property, that 42,000 square foot facility that still remains dormant and empty.
Local Republicans have doubled down on this massive overdevelopment mission that is urbanizing North Arlington into another Belleville while Balwierczak prefers remaining the gateway to Bergen County, not Essex or Hudson counties.
“All that is unique, different and appealing about North Arlington is being diminished as we speak. Out-of-town builders and developers fund Pronti and the Republicans and taxes still climb and the ability to deliver basic services is now strained. It’s only a matter of time that our public-school population will increase, and once again Pronti is running an overtly partisan ticket to gain control of the Board of Education where politics will come first and academic performance last,” noted the Democrat.
Balwierczak pointed to the lack of communication by Pronti and the Republicans and that time for responsible two-party, consensus government is now.
“Wasting $10,000 on a phony newsletter with Dan’s face appearing 23 times over 12 pages is just narcissistic. No one cares how many hotdogs or slices of pizza he can eat in one sitting.” blasted the challenger. 
“Having myself, Dennis Papile & Jim Sever on the governing body will bring a healthy discussion to our future. If you’re not a Republican or MAGA, you have no voice or say. Having all Republicans only consolidates this political monopoly into the hands of a single individual and that’s Dan. Independents and Democrats need to have a place at the table too.”
Balwierczak believes should he and his running-mates be successful, North Arlington is the real winner.
“I can work with the remaining Republicans. I was a Republican. I would lead a bipartisan coalition to end the overdevelopment along Ridge Road, reform the reassessment process that gives homeowner’s a break, while offering some new ideas regarding our Passaic Riverfront, Porete Avenue, and other alternatives regarding infrastructure and a new vision for a better North Arlington.”
The issue of continued and constant rolling reassessments needs to change, which will give homeowners a break according to the candidate.
Balwierczak was to the point, is the current tax levy too high?
For North Arlington has used a rolling reassessment program since 2017, under which roughly 25% of properties are inspected each year and the assessments are continually updated, and Pronti continues to defend this misguided approach.
For the “fairness” question is much more compelling than are these rolling assessments accurate?
New Jersey’s constitutional principle is uniform taxation; property is supposed to be assessed at true value under uniform rules. The state itself recognizes reassessment as a mechanism for correcting inequities in assessments.
But here’s where the North Arlington debate on reassessment becomes polarizing and distinct. A system can be accurate but still create a strong perception or even a practical problemof unequal treatment of property owners be it residential or commercial.
For example, Homeowner A’s property is reassessed this year, and its value jumps 15%. Homeowner B’s comparable property isn’t reassessed until next year. Both properties were previously assessed similarly, but the market has risen substantially. For a period of time, two substantially similar homeowners can have materially different assessments!
That is precisely why New Jersey’s assessment rules emphasize uniformity. The state’s assessor handbook acknowledges that while the law contemplates annual assessment at true value, practical considerations generally lead municipalities to use base years or other assessment-maintenance systems rather than literally reappraising every property every year.
There is another equity issue apparent; who gets hit hardest?
A homeowner who has lived in the same house for 20 or 30 years may have a relatively modest income but substantially accumulated home equity. A reassessment doesn’t give that homeowner any additional cash—it simply increases the taxable value of the asset, and that once inherited advantage for the property owner is being swept away by Pronti’s misguided assessment practices.
“Someone who recently purchased a comparable home at a higher residential value already entered the process at a substantially higher assessment, said the candidate.
“The greater question to be considered Is it fair to impose potentially substantial tax increases on individual homeowners because their property happens to be randomly reassessed in a particular year, while comparable properties aren’t reassessed until later? That is the problem with the current system, and Pronti conveniently avoids that question.” 
While Pronti can claim that reassessment itself doesn’t determine how much money the municipality, county or school district collects. The tax levy is determined separately, and reassessments determine each property’s share of the levy.
And that doesn’t diminish the homeowner’s concern or validate a reassessment process that is supported by just 17% of NJ communities.
“Dan is simply on the wrong side of the equation and most residents are in disagreement with him. He can explain it away all he wants, but if I’m elected, I will fight for homeowner fairness and equity and I’ll lobby the Borough Council to endorse this reform on January 1st,” said Balwierczak.
In essence, the critical question isn’t whether reassessment “raises taxes” in the simplistic sense. It’s whether the resulting distribution of the tax burden is equitable.
“And that’s where I think Pronti should provide much more data and be transparent with taxpayers, so they get the full picture, not his campaign’s politicized version of the truth in an election year where he is clearly vulnerable.”
Balwierczak is proposing answers to these unanswered questions:
- Why is a rolling reassessment more equitable than reassessing the entire borough at the same time?
- How does the borough ensure that two substantially comparable homes aren’t taxed differently simply because one was reassessed in 2025 and the other in 2026?
- What percentage of North Arlington homeowners received assessment increases of 10%, 20%, 30% or more during the rolling reassessment program?
- How many homeowners successfully appealed for their reassessments, and what was the total amount of assessment reductions resulting from those appeals?
- What independent evidence demonstrates that rolling reassessment produces a more equitable distribution of the tax burden than a traditional borough-wide revaluation every several years?
If rolling reassessment is so demonstrably fair, why does North Arlington need to continually reassess individual homeowners rather than periodically establish a uniform borough-wide valuation?
“Dan Pronti should be able to demonstrate and explain in clear and concise language with actual data, that the system produces greater uniformity and equity than the alternatives,” said the Democratic challenger.
And New Jersey regulations actually encourage ongoing assessment programs and can permit reassessment on a five-year cycle, so the choice isn’t simply rolling reassessment versus doing nothing at all.
“This is not a question of accuracy; the question is whether these random reassessments are demonstrably the fairest way to distribute North Arlington’s property-tax burden—and to produce the numbers proving it so. This is an honest challenge to a policy that is unpopular with homeowners, and Pronti simply refuses to listen to reason for fear he might actually be wrong.”
“I won’t raise taxes unless necessary. In the meantime, my commitment is to tax fairness and equity and that’s why I believe I am the homeowner’s choice in this race for a better and more affordable North Arlington.”
IT TAKES A TEAM TO MAKE REAL CHANGE: 
Mayoral candidate John Balwierczak is running with longtime homeowners Dennis Papile, a school crossing guard and Jim Sever, married and a father of two, is a longtime union tile cutter & installer endorsed by the New Jersey State AFL-CIO.
All three have been endorsed by the Bergen County Central Labor Trades Council.
They are on the side of working families, renters, homeowners and most of all, seniors!
Talk to the North Arlington Team that is on your side!
Contact the campaign at (201) 655-8497 or e-mail [email protected]
Need to register or sign up for an absentee ballot?
They can assist you in that process.