On November 4th, NJ residents shall have two public questions on the ballot. Public question#1 will make it harder for the state legislature to borrow money using bonds. Public question #2 changes how municipal court judges are appointed.
I posted these questions for comment from active Libertarians. In explanation to question 2, John Paff wrote:
Under the present state constitution, a local mayor and council can appoint a municipal court judge only if the municipality has its own municipal court. For example, Franklin Township in Somerset County (where I live) has its own municipal court, so the judges of that court can be appointed by the Franklin Township Mayor and Council.
But, some municipalities don't have their own courts. Instead, they're part of a "regional municipal court." For example, East Amwell Township, Stockton Borough and Delaware Township in Hunterdon County all participate in a single regional municipal court. Under the present constitution, those towns cannot decide who the court's judges are. Rather, the judge needs to be appointed by the governor ith advice and consent of the senate. If the amendment passes, then the legislature can define an appointment procedure--which will probably involve having the participating towns collectively decide who to appoint.
I believe that the thought behind the amendment is that towns that would otherwise join a regional court (and theoretically save money) are reluctant to do so because they would lose the power to appoint the judges. I believe that how to vote on the amendment depends upon whether you believe that state-appointed judges are better or worse than those appointed locally and whether regionalizing the municipal court system is a good thing.