moobycow wrote:
There's nothing fishy about it, and it has almost nothing to do with how long you've owned a home (taxes don't reset upon purchase).

There are two issues.

1. By law the city has to do a reval every so often (I believe it may be 10 years)

2. Yes, people are entitled to complain when their neighbors tax bill is 1/2 theirs for the same value property. Just like you would complain if you found out your dry cleaner/auto mechanic or restaurant was charging you double they were someone else, for no discernible reason.

I say this as someone whose taxes are likely to go up a lot after a reval.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
While it is nice to believe that everything should be fair, I'd like to see those that bought in earlier to the area spend less. Those people helped pave the way for the new development.

If we had rolling reval, where taxes are normalized on sale, you'd at least have a semblance of a point. But we don't. So a hedge fund that buys 254 Montgomery St for $1,800,000 gets to pay an effective tax rate less than 1/3 of mine? Why? Your conception of "fair taxes" is bizarre. It's supposed to be based on real value, not something frozen in time. I repeat, when someone underpays, someone else is overpaying, and the reality in JC is that overpaying someone is likely less wealthy than the underpayer. Can you say "class warfare"?

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Mostly, you are looking at someone that has an unfinished basement then finishes it. That would be an improvement. Adding a bathroom will improve it. Adding an extension onto the house will trigger a reval. If you put a pool in your yard, that will trigger a reval. It really is almost every time you pull a permit.

I'm sorry, but you're incorrect. I've been told explicitly that a major repair like a new roof is a capitalized expense for tax purposes. It does not need to be an "addition" to the property, just a major repair. That said, I've never had a revision of an assessment of any kind, never mind a full reval, despite numerous permits for improvements.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JC_User wrote:
What kind of construction permits triggers a revaluation of a property and how extensive is that revaluation?

If you look at the tax info, there's separate lines for land and improvements. As I understand it, if you do major "capital improvements" they are added to the improvements line.

What work needs to be capitalized has always been a mystery to me. The IRS says "anything that improves the value of the property", but any repair at all also improves the value of the property!

hero69 wrote:
I didn't realize GS had so many employees in Jersey City, but doesn't NJ realize same-sex marriages from other states? what am I missing? Can't NJ residents just hop across the Hudson to get married if they want although I agree that this is not the best solution

SteveWilson29 wrote:
Quote:

LawyerElmo wrote:
Quote:

SteveWilson29 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
I was pulling for Steve to be elected mayor and I'm looking forward to seeing what he can do for this great city. However, before he starts running for a higher office, he absolutely needs to accomplish something here aside from winning elections.

Yeah, who does he think he is, Obama?

Slight difference between being a mayor of a mid-size city and holding a state-wide national office.

We're talking about Illinois here.

vindication15 wrote:
This discussion is very interesting. First off, no one should be harassed and no, it doesn't come with living in the city. City living does not equate to being harassed. "City" is generally an urban settlement with a large population and with that comes more pollution, more cars, more restaurants, more people, etc as compared to the suburbs or rural areas. Harassment is not associated with "city". That is like saying terrorism is associated with Muslim which is also blatantly biased and completely subjective.

As far as project housing, I think it is safe to say that although the idea might be noble, the implementation and "checks and balances" has been a colossal failure.

But to get right to the point, our schools in JC are failing our children (any viable measure of this proves my point - test scores, graduation rates, reading level, math level, etc.) so when these children grow up to be delinquent teens and delinquent young adults, are you really surprised?

Forget about your tax dollars funding public housing, how about your tax dollars funding these failing public schools - Dickinson, Snyder, Lincoln, Ferris? By any reasonable measure, they should all be closed down ASAP.

And yes, I'm aware that there are bright kids at these schools and hard working teachers but when overall, you have a failing institution, one or two kids or teachers does not justify failing the majority of kids. It's like a company with 1 or 2 hard workers and 99% failures. Would that company ever last more than a day? Can you imagine having your tax dollars pay for that company to stay open and produce a piss poor product? Unfortunately, the piss poor product that our JC public schools produce are the delinquents you see in the streets.

So far, no one running - Healy or Fulop - has really addressed what they will do to make our children more competitive.

ripple wrote:
We need to instill more respect for the commons, especially across ethnic/racial groups. People only treat the city like it's trash because they lack respect for their neighbors, and ultimately, themselves.

Prismatic wrote:
Again, that just sounds like being content with the way things are.

[quote]A good friend of mine had his girlfriend move in recently. She?s out of New York and they are living in Jersey. Every time she?s gets lost in the car the response is ?I don?t understand New Jersey!? It?s a fight he has all time. In the end it?s always, ?New Jersey just sucks.? Or ?New Jersey doesn?t make sense.?

I had a friend that used to work for the Daily News in the sports department. He was out of the Montclair area and commuted in each day. His editor, in a conversation, once told him, ?I?d never hire someone from outside New York.? [quote]

This is exactly why I do not support anything NYC. Yet knowing this, it seems more and more people want NJ to be associated with New York City. Like I don't understand. Knowing that NYC could care less about NJ, people feel inclined to try to harder to get them to like us. Its like we want to be the obsessive ex-girlfriend who doesn't get the point.

The stadium was partly paid for by NJ residents, and as far as I know, New York City didn't put money down for that stadium. so why should they be allowed to be advertised as a host? If they want to have their name on it the city should pay. NO EXCEPTIONS! And this is why we should keep what is ours as OURS, just like New York City's does.

Then all I ever hear from anyone is "we can't". That alone simply shows me how content people are with what we have.

WeBelongHere wrote:
Unlike Councilboy Stevie, MAYOR Healy has a record to run on. He's done a great job in difficult times. He's added police and kept the streets safe. He's held property taxes down. He's overseen great economic development not just downtown but everywhere. And when Sandy hit, who was it that was actually making the city work, protecting lives and property? Not Stevie boy, but MAYOR Healy. And unlike Stevie, He's got a wife and kids and grandkids WHO LIVE IN JERSEY CITY!

Prismatic wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Well, I think NJ could get a lot more love if it had better planning and infrastructure/mass transit.

That has nothing to do with it. Everything is about the "brand" known as New York. People know NY. A lot of the problem is that New Jersey seems just so very foreign to them. They say New Jersey and just lump the whole state as if it is one unit that is the same everywhere. They don?t say Jersey City and Hoboken and Newark and Seaside Heights and Atlantic City. It?s all just New Jersey.

And why don't they? You say that as if we cannot and should not create our "brand" and should just be content with letting New York City get all the credit and good stuff. This right here is the problem. Many are just happy with what we have or just have the mentality of "can't".

hero69 wrote:
Well, I think NJ could get a lot more love if it had better planning and infrastructure/mass transit.

MightyOz wrote:
Does anybody think that these "big city mayors" know anything about Jersey City, or know anything about Healy other than he signed onto their gun project?

Does anybody think that Fulop, or Jerry Walker, or Abdul Malik wouldn't get their endorsement if they were the incumbent?

Non issue.