In New Jersey, System to Help Poorest Schools Faces Criticism
Timothy Ivy for The New York Times

GARFIELD, N.J.? The residents of this tumbledown city of 30,000 routinely voted down school budgets over the years, leaving their schools so hard up by the early 1990s that broken windows were patched with cardboard and principals did their own typing because they could not afford secretaries.

State money allowed Garfield, N.J., to afford a new middle school, as well as amenities like modern computers and a year-round preschool.

Though school taxes remain relatively low, the 5,000 students in this city of former woolen mills and soda factories in Bergen County now enjoy many of the privileges of much wealthier suburban districts: year-round preschool, modern computer labs and a new $40 million middle school ? all of it paid for by the state of New Jersey.

Garfield is a so-called Abbott school district, one of 31 poor districts that have received a total of $35 billion in state aid since 1997 as part of an ambitious court-ordered social experiment to narrow the achievement gap between rich and poor students, whites and minorities. In a decision that set a precedent for school equality cases nationwide, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the poorest urban school districts should be given the resources to spend as much on their students as the wealthiest suburban districts do.

Now a growing number of New Jersey elected officials, educators and parents are calling for sweeping changes to this school financing system, saying that it has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars in the Abbott districts. For every success story like Garfield, where fourth-grade test scores have risen to the state average, there are chronic problems, like those in Newark, Camden and Asbury Park.

Today, the Abbott districts serve 286,500 children in kindergarten through 12th grade ? about 21 percent of the state?s students ? but get $4.2 billion a year in state aid, slightly more than half of all the state money given to New Jersey?s 616 school districts. The Abbotts are among the highest-spending school districts in the state, averaging $14,038 per student compared with $10,509 statewide. The vast majority of districts that fall between richest and poorest say they are increasingly bearing the burden of the Abbotts? getting so much of the money.

Gov. Jon S. Corzine has made school financing a priority in his efforts to reduce property taxes, and next month the State Legislature is expected to propose a new school aid formula that will seek to distribute aid to all school districts based on their numbers of poor students, rather than focusing on just 31 districts in what has been called an all-or-nothing approach. The Abbott districts and their advocates have vowed to fight any reduction in state aid, signaling another round of court battles.

In the meantime, state education officials plan to audit all 31 Abbotts in the next year after finding that the highest-spending districts were making the fewest gains. Asbury Park spent the most, $18,661 per student, in the 2004-5 school year. Still, slightly fewer than half the district?s fourth-grade students were proficient in state language arts and math tests in 2005. ?What we know is lots of money has been spent, and in some places, there is very little to show,? said Lucille E. Davy, the education commissioner.

For their part, the Abbott districts have criticized what they see as a bureaucratic system that undermines local authority and forces them to adopt programs that they do not need. For instance, Patrick Gagliardi, the Hoboken superintendent, said that he is required to provide full-day preschool to every 3- and 4-year-old child in his district, regardless of income, a mandate that now benefits many affluent families. ?The court intended to help poor people, not the wealthy,? he said. ?Now it?s costing the state more money, and it?s inefficient and flawed.?

The debate over the Abbott districts has spread outside urban centers to affluent suburban communities from Ridgewood to Cherry Hill, where local officials have repeatedly raised taxes and slashed school budgets to offset their own dwindling share of state aid. Many of them say the huge amounts of money given to Abbott schools versus non-Abbott schools has polarized parents and teachers between school districts

?We resent a system that has not provided adequately for our children,? said Elisabeth Ginsburg, the Board of Education president in Glen Ridge, where less than 5 percent of the $23.5 million school district budget is covered by state aid.

Critics often single out Hoboken as an example of an Abbott district that should no longer be one, since rapid development has drawn affluent newcomers. Hoboken actually gets far less state aid than other urban areas because it already spent more on its students than other Abbotts. Hoboken gets about $12.2 million a year, but as an Abbott, its plans for a new $25 million high school would be fully subsidized by the state.

In this year?s budget, state education officials withheld a total of $23 million from eight Abbott districts, including Garfield, where property values have risen but local taxes remain relatively low, forcing them to raise local taxes and shoulder more of their school costs. Republican lawmakers have also introduced a bill that would phase out 13 Abbott districts that have thrived economically in recent years.

?Why should we continue to support them?? asked Assemblyman Joseph R. Malone III, a former school administrator who has sponsored the bill. ?It?s like saying to somebody who?s on welfare: ?Stay on welfare and receive the benefits even if you?re a millionaire now.? ?

The Abbott districts grew out of a 1981 lawsuit, Abbott v. Burke, which claimed that the state had failed to remedy disparities between rich and poor school districts. In a series of decisions spanning two decades, the state?s highest court relied on an 1875 amendment to the New Jersey Constitution requiring the Legislature to establish a system of ?thorough and efficient? education for every child. It struck down the school financing system as unconstitutional in 1990, saying that it deprived poor urban districts of resources, and ordered lawmakers to address the problem.

After years of delays, the state court ruled in 1997 that the poorest urban districts should spend as much on their students as the wealthiest suburban districts. That exceeded the standard in other states to simply match the average state spending per student. The court designated 28 Abbott districts based on a state list of poor urban communities, and the Legislature added two more districts a year later. A third, Salem City, was included by lawmakers in 2004 after it sued to become an Abbott district.

Paul Tractenberg, a professor at Rutgers Law School in Newark who has advocated on behalf of the Abbotts, said the court ordered the current school financing system for lack of a better alternative, and largely left the future designation of Abbott districts to state legislators and education officials. He supports efforts to come up with a new school aid formula, saying, ?We?re spending the right amount in the Abbott districts; the problem is we?re not spending enough in the other poor districts.?

Assemblyman Bill Baroni, a Republican who does not represent an Abbott district, says that changing the Abbott system is such a politically divided issue that the Legislature has been generally reluctant to act. ?Every time there is talk of removing a school district,? he said, ?instantly massive political opposition forms in that district.?

But as New Jersey has struggled with fiscal problems, the Abbotts have come under increasing pressure to justify their high cost. The results are mixed across districts, but over all, the Abbotts have improved their test scores, particularly in the lower grades. For instance, 66 percent of Abbott students were proficient in the fourth-grade language arts test in 2005, compared with 29.5 percent in 1999, but that still falls below the 85.5 percent of proficient students in non-Abbott districts. The gap is larger on the math test and among students in higher grades.

Ellen Frede, co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research, said that larger gains would come as Abbott districts built on their strong preschool programs. In a 2005 report based on testing in the 15 largest Abbotts, her group found that students were better prepared for kindergarten. ?The overwhelming data is this is a good use of state taxpayer money,? she said.

But critics of the Abbotts say they have grown impatient with the problems in some districts. This month, a state fiscal monitor was appointed to oversee the scandal-ridden Camden district, where the superintendent, Annette Knox, resigned in June amid investigations into bonuses that she received. The district spent $15,420 per student in the 2004-5 school year, though its test scores lag behind the other Abbott districts.

Bart Leff, a spokesman for the Camden schools, said the district?s 15,500 students are mostly poor minorities who have ?significantly more need for the money? than those in better-off communities. ?We are an urban school district in a poverty-stricken city,? he said.

In contrast, the Abbott money has ushered in major changes in Garfield, reinvigorating the schools after decades of neglect and decline. In 2005, 79.9 percent of the district?s fourth-grade students were proficient in the language arts test, just below the statewide average of 81.2 percent. Garfield students performed even better in math, with 81.8 percent proficient compared with 80.2 percent statewide.

Nearly two-thirds of the district?s $66 million annual budget, or $41.7 million, is covered by state aid; the district has received a total of $370.7 million since 1997. The rest is raised largely through local taxes. Though property values have climbed in recent years, school officials said that many residents are senior citizens and recent immigrants who can ill afford any increases.

In the past three years, residents have twice rejected the school budget, including the one for the current school year. Under state law, Garfield city officials then propose cuts to the budget, but as an Abbott district, the total budget cannot fall below the previous year?s spending level. The budget rose by $915,000 this year after state education officials forced the city to raise taxes.

Nicholas L. Perrapato, the superintendent, said the district has come to rely on the Abbott money. He said it has allowed them to hire more teachers, reduce class sizes, and update textbooks and curriculums. (Second graders now learn PowerPoint.) It has meant that two new schools could be built ? the first in nearly 50 years ? and that students could get a taste of unheard-of luxuries such as teams for swimming, tennis and volleyball.

?Without the money, we?d be in dire straits,? Mr. Perrapato said. ?If they de-Abbotize us, you?re looking at rolling up the carpets because the people here would never be able to afford to keep the programs we have in place.?

there must be some realtors on this site - does this match with your experience downtown on properties that actually sold?

Quote:

I go in there all the time! That guys a hoot! He's the Don Rickles of fry cooks!

Decided to stop there for the first time, to take out a burger and fries. Was served by the rudest, nastiest SOB that ever worked in a restaurant. After being very patient with his nastiness, finally had to tell him F-U and walk out without the food. Anyone else with a similar experience there?

Housing prices still surging in Jersey's cities
While suburban markets cool, urban centers, led by AC, sizzle

Star-Ledger Staff Oct 29, 2006 BY ROBERT GEBELOFF

As the real estate market softens in New Jersey -- with sale prices flattening in a number of popular suburban towns -- one segment continues to boom: the state's 30 cities.

The median sale price for a home or condominium in urban communities rose 18 percent in the first six months of 2006, compared with a relatively modest 8 percent jump in the suburbs, according to a Star-Ledger analysis of home sales.

And while sales volume was down throughout the state, New Jersey's cities are claiming an increasing share of the action: 1 in 5 sales now, compared with 1 in 7 at the beginning of the decade, the analysis found.

Turnarounds continued in Newark and Jersey City, but the urban leader of late has been Atlantic City, where after years of being overlooked as a residential market, the median sales price jumped 25 percent in 2004, 29 percent in 2005 and 41 percent this year.

"We've become a different city, baby!" said Bevan Farber, who has sold condominiums at the Ocean Club on Atlantic City's boardwalk for two decades. "You'll have to forgive me for being excited. I've been here 21 years and nobody ever called me up to ask me about the prices going higher."

Another stark example could be found along Route 78. As recently as 2003, buyers paid almost a third more for homes in pastoral Hunterdon County than in densely populated Hudson. Now the price gap -- $385,000 versus $382,000 -- is just 1 percent.

Median prices actually fell in 33 mostly suburban towns that had enough sales volume to produce significant data, the analysis found, though prices are still up more than 90 percent since 2000 in half of those communities.

Glen Ridge in suburban Essex County, for example, saw prices drop by 1 percent this year to $505,000, after double-digit increases in four of the previous five years. East Brunswick was down a percentage point, though it's still up 109 percent since 2000.

Economists warn that the overall slowdown in price growth shown in the analysis -- 10 percent growth statewide this year through June compared with 15 percent in 2005 -- has in the last three months begun to turn into an all-out price slide.

"When I was going around last fall and winter making predictions, the concern I always had was suburban tract houses," said Joel Naroff, an economic adviser based in suburban Philadelphia. "Those houses are clearly getting priced out of the reach of the people who would normally live in those places."

Urban communities fared better in the past year in part because prices in cities are generally still lower than in the suburbs.

Naroff said many of New Jersey's cities are influenced by special situations: Jersey City has become home to many affluent Wall Streeters while Passaic has a growing middle-class Orthodox Jewish community.

In Newark, the state's largest city, prices jumped 20 percent for the second consecutive year. In Camden, the state's poorest city, the median price had risen only $4,500 between 2000 and 2005, to $43,500. This year, the median was up $14,500.

The analysis was based on home sales reported to the state, which monitors real estate values for administrative purposes. The state database contains all home sales, including newly built and existing homes, that officials deem to be made on the open market -- intrafamily transactions are excluded.

The data include all sales through June 30 of this year, so the analysis was based on comparing the first six months of 2006 to the same period in prior years.

NEW CASINO, NEW POPULARITY
Atlantic City prices began increasing in the summer of 2003, just as the $1.1 billion Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa was opening. The casino breathed new life into the city, in part because it showed the gaming industry was committed to expanding and in part because the Borgata markets itself to a younger clientele.

"Atlantic City has not had a single high-rise building brought onto the market in the past 20 years," said Tom Scannapieco, a developer who has been involved in numerous building projects in the city. "There is not an oversupply of condos. That's why you're seeing tremendous appreciation."

For the residential real estate market, there was also the matter of simple economics. The more prices ballooned in other Shore towns, the more Atlantic City looked like a bargain.

"Our prices were much lower than in surrounding communities," said Kevin Corcoran of Kevin Corcoran Real Estate. "People who wouldn't before consider buying something here are considering it now."

While prices have gone up, some are quick to point out that the transformation of Atlantic City has mostly benefited outsiders -- not full-time residents.

Developers used government subsidies to clear run-down housing in the northern inlet section. But even though the newly built housing is attractive and increasingly popular with buyers, the area still doesn't feel like a homey city neighborhood, said historian Bryant Simon.

"It's eerie and quiet," said Simon, a Temple University professor and author of "Boardwalk of Dreams: Atlantic City and the Fate of Urban America in 2004." "There are some pretty big houses that look nice, built in the new urban design style. But there's nobody outside."

But others say the changes are a major success. Tom Carver, who runs the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority -- the state agency that oversees the investment of fees collected from the gaming industry -- estimates more than $10 billion will be spent on commercial ventures in the city over the next few years, and that will further bolster the residential market.

"The value of land has increased dramatically, and so the ability to develop and sell in Atlantic City has also increased," he said.

A DIFFERENT DYNAMIC
To economists like Naroff, suburban real estate now resembles a pyramid scheme.

Suburban homeowners looking to move up and New Yorkers looking to move in get a premium on their home, and are able to afford higher prices in more affluent towns. But as these homeowners begin having trouble selling their own houses, demand for the ritzier communities also begins to fall.

"It's the kind of situation where if you can't sell your own house, you can't buy the next house up," he said.

But in places like Atlantic City, where prices are low and most of the buyers are shopping for second homes, that problem doesn't apply.

Tarron Weir, a Jersey City resident, doesn't care much for the casinos. In fact, he was considering spending $1.2 million for a luxury townhouse in Jersey City's riverfront Port Liberte development but changed his plans when he realized he could buy a house on the beach in Atlantic City for less than half that price.

"It's pretty reasonable compared to other Shore homes," he said. "From my master bedroom, I can see the ocean."

The house is part of Oceanside II, a residential development in the northern inlet section that was seeded by the state development agency, but has taken off on its own.

The agency sold one oceanfront lot to a developer for $189,000. Now the lot has a new 12-room beach house on it -- and a price tag of $1.7 million.

State records show the highest individual sale through June 30 was the $1.3 million a penthouse apartment went for in the Ocean Club last year. Farber said another penthouse went for slightly more in September.

Diane Tooshi, who recently bought a unit in the Bella -- a boardwalk condominium complex --for $470,000 said she intentionally avoided an ocean view. Instead, her apartment looks out over the glimmering lights of the Marina district and, in the distance, the Borgata.

"The ocean is the ocean is the ocean," explained Tooshi, a school psychologist from Manalapan who grew up in Bayonne. "If you're going to buy in Atlantic City, you want the city atmosphere. It's like with New York -- the skyline is what the city's about, not the Hudson River."

Robert Gebeloff may be reached at rgebeloff@starledger.com or (973) 392-1753.

Waterfront Project Reflects 2 Images of a Senator

New York Times By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI and RAY RIVERA
Published: October 29, 2006

BAYONNE, N.J. ? Senator Robert Menendez is not directly involved in building the new waterfront development that will soon rise here in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty. But his influence can be seen throughout it.

The project, which occupies the 437-acre site of the abandoned Military Ocean Terminal, is being built with the help of nearly $30 million in federal funds that Mr. Menendez secured using his trademark policy expertise and aggressive politicking. His work provided the seed money for a plan to produce movie studios and shops, marinas and waterfront parks, and 6,600 homes.

The project has also produced considerable work for some of his chief political supporters.

The first major contract to develop the site went to a company that hired a Menendez friend and political confidant, Donald Scarinci, to lobby for it. That developer later took on Mr. Menendez?s former campaign treasurer, Carl Goldberg, as a partner. Bonds for a portion of the project were underwritten by Dennis Enright, a top campaign contributor, while Kay LiCausi, a former Menendez Congressional aide and major fund-raiser, received lucrative work lobbying for the project.

Mr. Menendez said he had no role in securing the contracts for any of his friends. But the project, known as the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, nonetheless displays the two contrasting images of Mr. Menendez ? one a fiery advocate who brings home federal aid for his constituents, the other a political empire builder who detractors say pushes too much largess toward his friends.

Whether the considerable clout wielded by Mr. Menendez in Congress is matched by cronyism, or worse, at home, has become one of the central issues in the Senate race he is waging against State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr., his Republican challenger.

Republicans have portrayed Mr. Menendez as a modern-day political boss, presiding over an apparatus not of union stewards, ward heelers and precinct captains, but of lawyers, developers and lobbyists who fill his campaign coffers.

In a year when Republican candidates are on the defensive, Mr. Kean?s steady attacks on Mr. Menendez?s ethics have made the New Jersey race one of nation?s closest and nastiest. A defeat here, where Democrats have not lost a Senate race since 1972, would endanger the party?s hopes of winning control of the upper chamber.

Mr. Menendez brushes aside the questions about his ethics as ?guilt by geography,? a reference to his rise in politics in Hudson County, where the reputation for machine politics and official mischief is notable even by New Jersey standards. Mr. Menendez asserts that in 32 years in political office he has never once used his power to steer a contract to an ally.

Mr. Menendez?s supporters say the attacks are simply a way for Republicans to avoid talking about issues he has campaigned on, including Iraq, terrorism and stem cell research. ?Those are the things that matter to people, which Senator Menendez is far superior on, both in his knowledge and in his ability to articulate,? said State Senator Bernard Kenny, chairman of the Hudson County Democratic Organization.

Even Mr. Menendez?s critics concede his success in bringing federal transportation and environmental funds to the state while serving in the House for 13 years. That money helped revitalize blighted communities in his district, particularly a stretch along the Hudson that has come to be known as New Jersey?s Gold Coast.

It should not be odd then, Mr. Menendez says, that developers and business leaders have expressed their approval by contributing to his campaigns.

?If someone agrees with your policy goals, is it surprising that they would support you?? he said in a recent interview. ?What are they supposed to do? Give to someone who opposes their vision??

A Land of Scandal

In many ways Mr. Kean has tried to turn the election into a referendum on Hudson County and its checkered political history.

The densely packed county was once a destination for generations of Irish, Italian and Cuban immigrants, including Mr. Menendez?s parents, drawn by low rents and the promise of work in the factories and shipyards that stared across the harbor at the New York City skyline.

Today, the county functions almost like New York?s sixth borough, as young professionals, families and banking firms flee to cities like Hoboken and Jersey City in search of rents that are lower than in Manhattan.

But while the county?s demographics have shifted, and many of its communities have gained new vibrancy, its reputation for corruption has endured. It was here that Frank ?Boss? Hague, Jersey City mayor from 1917 to 1947, famously declared ?I am the law,? while ruling over a machine that controlled governors, judges and United States senators. When he died, he had a net worth of $10 million though his salary never eclipsed $8,000 a year.

Mr. Menendez in 1992 in Union City, the city where he grew up. He says he is proud of the way he fought his way up the ladder.

In the 1980s, after an onslaught of corruption cases hit the county, The Jersey Journal declared in a headline, ?No Hudson officials indicted today.?

These days, the political power structure is less influential and more decentralized than in the past. The taint of scandal continues, however. Since 2002, about 20 public officials, including former County Executive Robert Janiszewski, have been indicted or convicted of corruption charges.

But Mr. Menendez, who grew up in Union City, says he is proud of his roots and of the way that he fought his way up, unlike his opponent, the scion of a famous New Jersey political family who was appointed to his first posts in the State Assembly and Senate.

In fact, Mr. Menendez?s reputation as a tenacious infighter was born challenging the political establishment. In 1981, as a young lawyer serving as school board secretary, he became a government witness after discovering that the mayor, William V. Musto, who had been both mentor and father figure to him after his own father committed suicide, was diverting school funds to organized crime.

To many, the act was seen as a shameful betrayal, stirring so much resentment that Mr. Menendez said he took to wearing a bulletproof vest during the trial. When he made a bid to run against Mr. Musto for mayor, fliers filled the streets depicting him as a plump bird in a cage, with the caption, ?Once a canary, always a canary.?

Mr. Menendez lost the election, but four years later he ran again and won, becoming the state?s first Hispanic to be elected mayor.

He went on to become the first Hispanic elected to the State Assembly, the State Senate and, in 1993, the first to represent New Jersey in the House of Representatives, where he rose to be the third-ranking Democrat. Jon S. Corzine appointed him to finish out the final year of his Senate term after Mr. Corzine was elected governor in 2005.

In Washington, he has become a respected voice on issues like immigration and transportation, and a staunch defender of liberal causes like stem cell research and abortion rights. He has also broken with his party to support deregulation of the financial services industry, a growing force in the New Jersey economy, and his devout opposition to Fidel Castro has won him near folk-hero status, and generous campaign contributions, in South Florida.

But critics from both parties say that some of Mr. Menendez?s most ardent battles have been fought to preserve his own power, and protect government contracts of his patrons.

?If you?re going to cross him or his people, you?re in for the fight of your life,? said William O?Dea, a Democratic freeholder from Hudson County who has clashed with Mr. Menendez over the apportionment of county contracts.

A Friend?s Good Fortune

Perhaps no one has done more to foster Mr. Menendez?s political success than Mr. Scarinci, a childhood friend who has stood by him from the days when he was battling Mr. Musto, and before. And few have benefited more from that success: among Mr. Menendez?s first acts as Union City mayor was to name Mr. Scarinci city attorney.

Mr. Scarinci has since contributed more than $250,000 to state Democrats and helped raise millions more; he and his wife and members of his law firm have contributed more than $40,000 to Mr. Menendez?s Congressional campaigns since 1997. As his chief campaign fund-raiser, Mr. Scarinci was so closely associated with Mr. Menendez that many elected officials came to view him as the congressman?s emissary.

As he raised money for Mr. Menendez and helped him navigate the treacherous currents of Hudson County politics, Mr. Scarinci also won millions of dollars in state and local contracts for his law firm, many of them with government entities over which Mr. Menendez and his allies hold immense influence.

For example, after Mr. Menendez was named to head Gov. James E. McGreevey?s transition team, he lobbied vigorously to help Mr. Scarinci win a legal contract with the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority, according to three officials familiar with the appointment. Mr. Scarinci?s firm has made $2.8 million from that contract since 2002.

Mr. Scarinci does not deny that his firm has benefited from his political activity.

?It?s not the political connections as much as you?re involved,? he said in an interview earlier this year. ?So when they win, you?re not going to hire some stranger, you?re going to hire someone you?re comfortable with, someone you trust.?

Mr. Menendez insists that he has never helped Mr. Scarinci get or keep a contract, except when he was mayor and it was his duty to appoint legal counsel.

But in 1999, Mr. Menendez led a fierce recall effort against his former prot?g?, Mayor Rudy Garcia of Union City, because, Mr. Garcia says, he had fired Mr. Scarinci as city attorney. Mr. Menendez says it was because Mr. Garcia wanted his job in Congress. Whatever the cause, there was no mistaking who won: Mr. Garcia resigned as mayor in 2000, and his successor promptly rehired Mr. Scarinci.

Mr. Scarinci was forced to sever his ties with the campaign last month, after the release of audio tapes recorded in 1999 in which he is heard advising a client who held a lucrative psychiatric contract with Hudson County to hire another physician as a ?favor? to Mr. Menendez.

The psychiatrist with the contract, Oscar Sandoval, who is being sued by the county for allegedly bribing Mr. Janiszewski, the former county executive, to win contracts in the first place, said in an interview that Mr. Scarinci?s message was clear: hire Mr. Menendez?s friend or risk losing the contracts.

After the tapes were released, Mr. Scarinci issued written statements denying Dr. Sandoval?s allegations and insisting that his dealings with him were never directed or requested by Mr. Menendez.

True or not, the tapes have provided fodder to Mr. Kean, who in ads has promised to free New Jersey from ?the clutch of corruption.?

In September, United States Attorney Christopher J. Christie also subpoenaed the records of a Hudson County social services agency that leased a building, for $300,000 over nearly 10 years, from Mr. Menendez while, as a House member, he helped it win millions in federal financing. Mr. Kean has used the subpoenas to assert that Mr. Menendez is under criminal investigation, which Mr. Christie?s office has never confirmed. Mr. Menendez denies that he is under investigation and says that the House Ethics Committee?s legal counsel cleared the deal.

Questions About Contracts

Mr. Menendez?s involvement in the Bayonne project began in the mid-1990s, as he fought to save the base, which provided 2,500 jobs and was Bayonne?s largest employer. Once that fight was lost, he began a new battle for federal financing necessary to transform the site into a thriving addition to the local economy ? including $11.6 million from the Army for environmental cleanup, $7 million in Defense Department funds to stabilize the shoreline, and $3.2 million for road improvements to make the area more accessible to the New Jersey Turnpike.

Project officials say that Mr. Menendez had no role in awarding contracts and that without his support the development would never have gotten off the ground.

But the board created to oversee the project, the Bayonne Local Redevelopment Authority, was appointed by one of his allies, Mayor Joseph V. Doria Jr. The selection process for a developer ? which was based not on price but on the subjective assessment of the redevelopment authority ? was also led by people who are Menendez allies.

And the redevelopment authority?s first executive director was Nicholas A. Chiaravalloti, a lawyer who had once worked in Mr. Scarinci?s office. After assembling the contract specifications for the project, Mr. Chiaravalloti left in late 2002 to accept a job on Mr. Menendez?s Congressional staff.

Dozens of companies expressed interest in the development, and two submitted detailed written proposals. The new executive director, Nancy Kist, who had worked as Mr. Doria?s legal counsel before being appointed to the authority, said she forwarded both proposals to the board.

But at least one board member remembers seeing only the plan submitted by Fidelco Bayonne Realty ? Mr. Scarinci?s client. Two principals of the second group, George Figliolia, president of BG Builders, and Angelo Cali, a co-owner in Cali Futures, said they were never asked to give a presentation.

Maria Karczewski, who served on the seven-member board from 2002 until this January, said the Fidelco offer was the only one presented, though she said she did not believe Mr. Menendez had an influence on that decision. Three other board members said they recalled a presentation by Fidelco but could not recall whether they had seen the second one.

In public hearings, Ms. Kist urged the board to accept Fidelco?s proposal because it included movie and television production facilities as well as housing, and also gave local officials a voice in shaping the project.

But some city officials said that once Fidelco hired Mr. Scarinci, it was clear who would get the contract.

?People knew that Menendez was running the show because he brought all the federal money,? said City Councilman Anthony Chiappone, a rival of Mr. Doria who said he is frustrated that he and others have been excluded from the decision-making process. ?And everyone in Hudson County politics know that Scarinci is his No. 1 guy, so any contractor who hires him gets treated like they have Menendez?s seal of approval.?

Steve Kalafer, a principal in Fidelco, said he hired Mr. Scarinci?s firm because it had a long track record of getting waterfront development projects through Hudson County?s maze of legal and governmental regulations.

?In every community there?s one firm that has the experience and credibility with the local governing agencies to get projects done,? he said. ?I didn?t bother to interview any other firm because I didn?t want to try and reinvent the wheel.?

Mr. Kalafer said that Fidelco?s decision to bring Mr. Menendez?s former campaign treasurer, Carl Goldberg, into the project as a partner in 2005 was based on his track record as a developer rather than any political connections. He said that Mr. Menendez played no role in Fidelco?s decision to hire Mr. Scarinci or team up with Mr. Goldberg.

?Other than a smile and an occasional passing comment like, ?how?s the project going?? I?ve never had any discussions with the senator about it,? Mr. Kalafer said.

Royal Caribbean Cruises, one of the development?s first tenants, hired a former Menendez staffer and fund-raiser, Kay LiCausi, who was vice chairwoman of the Hudson County Democratic Organization, to lobby for state and federal support.

Ms. LiCausi left her job on Mr. Menendez?s staff in 2002, but she has maintained a close relationship with the congressman, who has acknowledged helping her get more than $200,000 in lobbying work for campaign committees over which he controlled or had strong influence. He has also recommended her for other lobbying work, which he compared to writing a reference letter for any deserving former employee.

In August 2004, just months after Royal Caribbean hired her, paying her more than $180,000 over the next two years, Mr. Menendez announced the first of two appropriations totaling $9.5 million to repair shoreline and extend a berth for the company?s huge cruise ships.

Mr. Menendez said in an interview last week that Ms. LiCausi?s role with the firm did not affect his actions, and that he did not consider it a conflict of interest to be obtaining tax dollars for companies who hire his own fund-raisers as lobbyists.

?If these people, these companies have success, that?s their own initiative,? he said, adding that several of the contractors involved in the project have never contributed to him or hired any of his supporters.

Royal Caribbean also hired Dennis Enright, a top contributor to Mr. Menendez, to underwrite a $16.5 million bond issue to help pay for terminal repairs.

A Royal Caribbean spokesman said the company never discussed the hires with Mr. Menendez, and that Ms. LiCausi and Mr. Enright were chosen because they were the best people for the job. Ms. LiCausi and Mr. Enright did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment for this article.

Mr. Menendez says that he is being held to a different standard because of where he comes from, saying that Mr. Kean has accepted campaign contributions from government contractors, and asserting that his opponent would never have received his first Assembly and State Senate appointments without his family?s considerable ?political muscle.?

?You do that when you come from Hudson County, it?s called bossism,? Mr. Menendez said. ?But I guess when you come from my opponent?s background, it?s just leadership.?

oh, this is a great plan for all you people that want "responsible development." in one fell swoop raise the charge from $1500 to $150,000-250,000.

Great idea, let the deal cut to approve, 3 40-60 story towers to impact any project over 8 units.

Start cheering kids. IF that goes through, all your hated developers will be leaving town and damn quick. There are not a whole lot of large parcels left to be developed downtown. All the currently approved ones will be grandfathered in. And no one will be paying that price to develop outside of downtown.

so bye bye to the growth of JC... Yeah!!!!

The skinny on this nut job from newport is that she is a stalker.I heard that when she was on good terms with the councilmen she would call ten times a day and get very mad when he sometimes would not pick up the phone.

She is now doing the samething to the mayors office so look for her to start bashing him when they can no longer take it anymore.

NWA website-six people who share one brain and it's defective.

Quote:

Err... why? Legitimate question. In conversation, I would most likely refer to a large group of people engaged in some kind of activity as a "gang."

**BlockWatch Mon, Oct 30**

Quote:

As far as I can see, Sonia always has her own agenda that is to fight against whatever Councilman Fulop has in his agenda. Perhaps she is planning to run for an office and trying to build her own base from getting involved in different issues.

What interest does she have on this parking issue? She just manipulated a poor old guy for getting involved in this situation.

Looking at her discussion board, she appears to be very manipulating and unstable person. Appears like an adult with the mind of a 10 year old. She thinks she represents a group of people as if she were an elected official while in fact she is just a self-centered self-proclaimed 'leader' wannabe. What makes it worse is to see how brainwashed all the people on her message board are.

Keep up the good work, Mr. Fulop!! Fulop for Mayor!!

10/28/2006

67-story tower approved for Pep Boys lot

Planning Board OK's 'Metropolitan'; residents concerned about height

Ricardo Kaulessar
Reporter staff writer


Soon another skyscraper will be hovering over the Jersey City skyline.

The Jersey City Planning Board at its Tuesday meeting approved the Metropolitan, a 67-story building to be built near Newport Mall. It will be built on the site of a Pep Boys Automotive store in Metro Plaza, across the street from the mall.

The 755-foot tower, when completed, will have 809 residential units with 817 parking spaces, approximately 809 of those in an eight-floor garage inside the building, and eight outside. There will be 12,445 square feet of retail space.

G&S Investors, a real estate investment company based in Port Chester, N.Y., will build the project. They have been the owners of the Metro Plaza shopping center since the early 1990s.

The designer is the architectural firm Arquitectonica of Miami. They also designed the Ellipse, a 460-foot residential tower planned for construction in Jersey City's Newport residential area.

They also designed the Westin Times Square hotel in New York City.

But several speakers from the public expressed concern over the project.


Concessions


The project will deviate from the Hudson Exchange Redevelopment Plan in several ways.

Among the deviations are decreasing the width of the parking spaces from 9 feet to 8.5 feet, which increase the number of spaces from 610 to 817.

The developers will also decrease the setbacks from the street on three sides of the building.

Bernardo Fort Brescia, architect for the project said there will be a 35,000 sq. ft "green roof" on the garage, which means landscaping and trees.

Other amenities include a swimming pool and tennis courts.

John Pavlovich, traffic engineer on the project, said a traffic signal would be installed on the street there was found to be a bigger increase than indicated in a traffic study they commissioned.


ShopRite won't close

Larry Inserra, Jr., owner of the ShopRite supermarket at Metro Plaza, dispelled any rumors that the supermarket would be closing as the result of the Metropolitan project, calling it "one of most successful stores in the chain."

Nevins McCann added that there are plans for a master plan for the area as the Metropolitan project would be the first phase of a larger development project that would span over 20 years, with retail always having a presence in the plaza. The master plan would include creating an extension of Fourth Street to run past the plaza to mitigate the projected increase of traffic in the future.

The public's turn

Members of the public then had an opportunity to present their issues.

Valerio Luccio, a Second Street resident and president of the Harsimus Cove Neighborhood Association, called the height of the building "a bit excessive."

He also questioned whether there will be configuration of the plaza, which Luccio said has acted as a barrier separating Downtown residents from the waterfront.

"The real problem I have with this whole thing is I don't have a lot of information, and this is very disappointing," he said. "The developers did not approach the neighborhood association or the community to discuss this whole plan with us."

Francis Schiller, another attorney for the project, said the proposed master plan for the plaza will be presented in a few months to the Planning Board, and his clients would make arrangements to meet with the community.

Catherine Grimm, a Heights resident, wondered if the building could be built as a "green" building, or environmentally friendly, with as solar panels to generate heat and plumbing to recycle rainwater. One representative for the project said there are no plans for a "green" building.

Richard Deagle, a Jersey Avenue resident, wondered why the master plan has not been presented before a site plan for the project, and why a building of this size is being constructed only blocks from already existing residential areas.

"We are talking five blocks from Jersey Avenue and seven blocks from Hamilton Park for the second tallest building in [New] Jersey," said Deagle.

Dan Falcon, a Newport resident, was also upset about the master plan not being presented before the Metropolitan site plan. He also requested that the application be tabled until there is a master plan.

Approval with conditions

The Planning Board did not heed Falcon's request, as they approved the application for the project, giving kudos to the architect for the design.

But before the vote, City Planner Maryann Bucci Carter said the parking width of 8.5 feet is a permitted width and that the building's height is also permitted within the existing redevelopment plan.

Planning Board Commissioner Leon Yost said that the developers should think carefully of so many parking spaces in an area where the NJ Transit light rail runs through, but gave his approval.

Commissioner Michael Sottolano said looking at the building, he was "overwhelmed" and "it's a tremendous project."

Ricardo Kaulessar can be reached at rkaulessar@hudsonreporter.com

10/28/2006

120-page affordable housing plan coming

Developers may have to pay $150,000+ per unit to skip requirement

Ricardo Kaulessar
Reporter staff writer


The document is being put together by Doug Greenfield, supervising planner for the Jersey City Department of Housing, Economic Development and Commerce, who is also heading up a team of city officials who have been counting the number of affordable housing units in the city.

The state now requires municipalities to provide one affordable housing unit for every eight market-rate units built and for every 25 jobs created in the city.

But the city is also considering another method of increasing its affordable housing stock - forcing developers to pay $150,000 or more for every affordable housing unit they decide to not to build.


New guidelines


The Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) is a state organization that sets guidelines for municipalities to meet their affordable housing obligations.

By their standards, "affordable" rental housing in New Jersey should not cost more than 28 percent of a person's income.

Previously, municipalities were assigned a specific number of affordable housing units to be built within their borders. Now, there is a ratio to market-rate units and jobs.

City Councilman Mariano Vega said last week that he has been involved with the city's formation of the plan, meeting with various city officials including Mayor Jerramiah Healy and offering input.

Vega did get into details of the plan, since it is still a "work-in-progress." But he praised the initiative of the plan, which he called "a major policy shift" for the city in terms of addressing affordable housing.

"It is important we meet our obligation in providing affordable housing in this city as all these condos are coming online," said Vega. "As someone who grew up in Downtown Jersey City in a cold-water flat, I am sensitive to this issue of making sure we provide for those who may be able to afford to stay in this city."

Vega said that the city has required much affordable housing in new buildings, but must also make sure old renovated buildings provide some.


Raising the fee


Right now, developers who opt not to build affordable housing in their market-rate units must pay the city a fee of $1,500 per unit. The fee then goes into the city's affordable housing trust fund, which is now up to $6 million, which in turn is meant to go toward building affordable housing projects.

However, the city may drastically raise the amount.

"What are we trying to do is come up with the right amount," said Vega. "Right now, we know it can go up somewhere from $150,000 to $250,000 per unit."

Vega said there is a model for the increased fee: The city's settlement with New Gold Equities regarding 111 First St. The settlement, which would allow New Gold to construct at least two residential towers and 710 units within the 111 First St. area, also calls for 58 units of affordable housing to be built by the developer off-site.

If the developer opts not to do so, then it will be charged $150,000 per unit, or $8.7 million.

However, the idea of raising fee has some cringing.

"We don't want to chase away the developers," Mayor Jerramiah Healy said last week. "We need to consider this issue carefully rather than stopping investment coming into the city."

Attorney Eugene Paolino of the Jersey City-based law firm Schumann Hanlon represents a number of projects throughout the city including the St. Francis Redevelopment Project, the Beacon on Baldwin Avenue and Essex Commons on Essex and Greene Streets.

Paolino said raising the fee would definitely pose a problem with his clients and other developers.

"I think that is going to let many developers to reconsider development in the city," said Paolino. "I think all of them want to do the right thing since affordable housing is not just a housing issue, but also a social issue," said Paolino.

Paolino also added, "There really needs to be a serious discussion between the development community, the city, and COAH in terms of the affordable housing obligation."


Long wait lists, and developers? problems


Even in Downtown Jersey City, considered by many to be nothing but condos and market rate rental apartments, there are affordable apartments. The Dixon Mills complex located on Wayne Street and older buildings at Newport have affordable housing units, as do the federally-funded low-income Jersey City Housing Authority complexes.But they often have long waiting lists.

And then there's Essex Commons. The 70-unit building located on Essex, Greene and Morris Streets has 14 units to be set aside as affordable housing as required under the Colgate Redevelopment Plan, which governs construction in the area.

But people looking to rent an affordable unit find themselves running into an obstacle - the building's owner has made them unavailable to rent.

City Councilman Steven Fulop (who represents the area where Essex Commons is located) has interceded on behalf on several people who have inquired on availability of affordable units, only to be turned away.

"In talks I have had with the developer regarding this matter, I've come away with the conclusion that they do not want to fulfill their obligation of renting these units," said Fulop.

As it turns, Fulop entered into a complicated situation, according to private attorney Eugene Paolino.

"This issue is subject to discussion with the city, but I cannot discuss any further," said Paolino.

However, Paolino did say that some of what is guiding the developers - Redwood Homes of Mountainside, N.J. - is the following: they did not receive tax abatement and they were saddled with the obligation after obtaining the property in bankruptcy court.

Both factors, coupled with having to rent the units as affordable housing, would place a financial burden upon the developers.

However, city planner Robert Cotter said last week Essex Commons has to comply with their obligation as provided in the redevelopment plan.


Ricardo Kaulessar can be reached at rkaulessar@hudsonreporter.com

Compromise reached over Korean War memorial access

Council approves resolution to open south end of Washington Street

Ricardo Kaulessar
Reporter staff writer

The Jersey City City Council passed a resolution at Wednesday night's meeting to open the southern end of Washington Street for greater access to the Korean War Memorial.

This part of Washington Street had been closed off to traffic by the city since 1997 as the result of nearby residents complaining about people hanging out in this area and creating a disturbance.

But this was considered a temporary move and the city never officially approved closure.

Since then, the area has been used an extension of nearby Morris Canal Park/Peninsula Park by pedestrians, especially families with young children.

In 2002, a memorial opened at the foot of Washington Street in tribute to the 127 Hudson County residents who died in the Korean War conflict that spanned from 1950 to 1953.

But in recent months, there has been a push from veterans to have the city remove the bollards, which were put up to close off the street. This would allow visitors to drive and park near the memorial.


Pushing for a compromise


Since September, representatives for the state, war veterans, the Historic Paulus Hook Association, nearby building complex Portside Towers, and City Councilman Steven Fulop, who represents the area, have communicated with one another to craft an agreement that would benefit all sides.

The resolution will allow car access to the memorial from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and the installation of nine parking spots adjacent to the memorial, three of those for handicapped visitors.

Also, the bollards placed across Washington Street will now only cover half the street to allow cars to enter, and signs will be placed indicating the monument.

Also, there are plans for Morris Canal Park, a state park, to be conveyed to the city for public use.

Fulop commented that he was happy to settle this matter.

But the 9-0 vote did not come without some contentious dialogue.



Is this a personal thing?


Among those not happy with the compromise was Sonia Maldonado, who is the president of the Newport Waterfront Association (NWA), a small community group.

The group has taken up the fight to have Washington Street completely open.

In a position paper drafted by the NWA this week, the group claims that those wanting the street closed "have not met the burden of demonstrating why public access to a public park should be restricted" and they called for Fulop to recuse himself from voting on the issue since he lives a few blocks from the area.

"We request that Mr. Fulop recuse himself from the matter because he owns property in the area and is a direct beneficiary of any decision made by the council in this matter," said Maldonado.

However, City Corporation Counsel Bill Matsikoudis said Fulop did not have to recuse himself from voting since this decision did not have a personal impact on his property.

Fulop shot back that Maldonado has a "personal hatred" against him and would oppose him no matter what the issue.

"This has become a personal issue on her part," said Fulop. "If I found a cure for cancer, she would say I didn't cure the right type of cancer."

Other residents who spoke out on the issue were mostly in favor of the compromise.

The resolution will go into effect 20 days from the time the council passes it.

Ricardo Kaulessar can be reached at rkaulessar@hudsonreporter.com

The dead end street accessible to car traffic invites more loitering, vagrancy, etc. It was in fact a real problem when the street was open to cars, and is not a problem now.

Shame on those who are accusing a respected member of the community of such racism.

A reasonable arrangement has been worked out which satisfied the neighborhood residents and the veterans. Those that are still opposed have an axe to grind with others involved or are trying to extend their 15 minutes of fame. The only people it really hurts are the veterans who would like to finalize the access agreement.

As can be seen above, I am very upset about what Sonia has said about a respected member of the community. But in her defense, two points warrant clarification...

1) As alluded to by Robin, Sonia Maldonado is not the wife of Junior Maldonado. I have no interest in re-hashing the whole history between Sonia's vendetta against councilman Fulop, but it has nothing to do with Junior.

2) The NWA did not propose 100 parking spaces on that block. That letter was written by Robert Vivien, the acting president of the Newport Neighborhood Association. The NNA used to exist as an independent neighborhood group but sort of faded away. Robert mentioned a few months ago that he wanted to bring the NNA back. It could serve a useful function, because the NWA is not actually a membership based organization. The "members" do not have the right to elect the trustees or the officers, they just select themselves.

Not all non-profits are membership based and there is no requirement that they be. I am a "member" of WBGO, the jazz public radio station in Newark. I get a cute little membership card and discounts at jazz clubs and other places, but I don't have a right to elect trustees. The Landmarks Conservancy was not incorporated as a membership based organization either (although we have talked about converting into one down the road).

But if you are a neighborhood group that purports to represent the residents of the neighborhood, it seems odd not to allow members to elect the directors and officers. So in that sense, I hope NNA is able to provide that function.

Having said that, Robert's claim that the street could be used as space for 100 cars is simply wrong.

I'll also say that I think both Junior Maldonado and Steve Fulop were/are good councilman. And they did/do have excellent aides as well.

Quote:

Alb, before you make anymore dumb comments and ridiculous assumptions, let?s get the record straight: Maldonado happens to be a very common last name, ie: Vega, Smith, Jones, etc.

But on the other hand, hmmm you may know better since you?re sure this was the doing of the former Councilman and/or his henchman?you know what?. I bet it was the former councilman?s aide, DAMM that Robin Pinkowitz!

Now, because I know just a tat more on this particular subject, since I am the former Councilman?s aide, there is no relation between the two Maldonado?s, again it?s a common name.

You know Alb, I always thought that you were just one of those folks that had a firm grip of the obvious, but after reading your latest conspiracy theory of the ?E. Junior Maldonado/ Steven Fulop feud? I realize that a firm grip of the obvious is way over your head.
Steve has a life, Junior has a life, and I suggest you get one too!

You really out did yourself with this one!

Quote:

I don't live in Paulus Hook, and I don't have a car, and I think the jerks at the NWA who think you need a car to visit a place that's two blocks from a beautiful light rail stop are incredibly obnoxious elitists.

I don't really know legally who's right here, but:

- My understanding is that Portside has offered to make any accommodations necessary to make sure Korean War veterans and others who are actually visiting the memorial can park.

- It's really absurd to think that someone should put 100 (!!!) parking spaces there. The city and state should totally go through some kind of amazing study before putting more than 5 or 6 parking spaces in a location like that. The suggestion that there should be 100 parking spaces there makes me wonder if this is some kind of effort to convert public land into the site for a skyscraper.

- It looks as if Maldonado is doing this just to punish Fulop for beating her husband. But Fulop is not actually in the pocket of the Paulus Hook people and, in fact, has gotten them mad by trying to negotiate a compromise with the alleged Korean War veterans, who are probably really just Maldonado's evil Fulop-destroying henchmen.

I understand that DanL might have valid concerns about Fulop's performance as a city councilman, but I think he's at least trying to be the city councilman we want him to be, and I think this Maldonado woman is a creep.

Quote:

If you live in a dead end street that has a war memorial placed in what was the cul-de-sac turnaround and fronts a skyscraper that has off street parking, you may get your wish.

Otherwise, you're just mixing apples and oranges.

And no, I don't live in Portside, or Paulus Hook for that matter. I live about as far from it as do Newport residents. I go to that park all the time and I, for one appreciate that there is no car traffic on that dead end street.

I am absolutely appalled that Sonia Maldonado would make such an unfounded attack on a respected member of the community such as Ms. Winant (by the way, it's "Dorcey" not "Dorothy."

The NWA has gotten absolutely desperate and is resorting to slinging mud at people when they don't get their way. It is disgraceful and pathetic.

I don't know if the bollards are racist, but they're certainly elitist. I'd like to see them ripped up immediately.

...then I'd like them placed on *my* street, because it would be so much quieter and safer around here without all those nasty cars. If your street has too many cars (or non-residents) on it, ask your councilman to get you some bollards, too.

Fight over closed street includes claims of racism
Friday, October 27, 2006
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

Before the battle of the bollards at the foot of Washington Street in Jersey City ended with a compromise to create nine parking spaces near the Korean War Memorial but otherwise keep the cul-de-sac car-free, a new element was introduced into the already divisive debate: race.

Sonia Maldonado, president of the Newport Waterfront Association, read a letter at Wednesday's City Council meeting written to her by Charlie Hannon, a Korean War veteran who initially endorsed the compromise plan but then changed his mind.

In the letter, Hannon claims that Dorothy Winant, an activist with the Historic Paulus Hook Association, said to him during a phone conversation, "We want to keep them (the bollards) up because we want to keep these little black kids out of our neighborhood, and keep the street safe."

Hannon, who attended the meeting but didn't speak, confirmed he penned the letter. When asked yesterday about the Hannon letter, Winant was aghast.

"That's a boldface lie," Winant said. "My God, I would never say anything like that."

Winant, a former Jersey Journal Everyday Hero, acknowledged she spoke to Hannon and told him that over the past 10 years when the bollards were taken down, the character of the quiet dead-end street that leads out to the waterfront and the Morris Canal entrance of Liberty State Park changed dramatically.

Crack vials and condoms could be found on the street and one local resident saw a couple having sex in a car while he was walking his daughter to school, she said. But the issue of race never came up, she said.

Several council members were shocked by Maldonado's reading, particularly Downtown Councilman Steve Fulop, who brokered the compromise between local residents who want the street closed to traffic and the veterans, who want access to the memorial. Fulop accused Maldonado of "playing the race card" and waging a campaign fueled by personal animus.

"If I solved cancer tomorrow, you would say it was the wrong kind of cancer," Fulop told Maldonado.

The plan, which calls for three handicapped and six other parking spaces, was approved by the council, 9-0. Vehicles will be allowed to enter the street between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.
Journal Link

JCLaw wrote: ". . . if you are paying more than 1.46% of your apartment's real current value today, you can dispute your taxes . . ."

Is this correct? That is, are the taxes we all "should" be paying equal to 1.46% of the market value? I know I should know this, but confirming with you guys is easier that pulling out all my tax documents

Anyway, if so, I might have a call to make

Thank you for taking the time to post some answers, but I believe and others can confirm that you have provided some mis-information.

Secaucus (later Bayonne, Hoboken and No. Bergen joined the suit) not Weehawken sued Jersey City, won a settlement and I believe precipitated 5% of PILOT's going to the county government. The total amount of taxes paid by Jersey City property owners to the county is not affected by PILOT agreements, just the amount paid by non-abatement/ non PILOT property tax payers which carry Jersey City's school and county tax burden.

The county does not set assessemts of individual property values, but does set the rate that non-abated properties pay through its approved budget and tax process. Each municipality in the county is assessed a portion of the budget raised by property taxes though calculation of the the total property values of the municipalities and then pay a pro rata share of the burden. Each city's portion of its tax to be collected and paid to the county then strikes the county tax rate for that municipality. Non-abatement properties can see their county tax rise whether the county taxes rise or not. If Jersey City's property values rise greater than other municipalities in the county as has occured recently, non-abated property owners see their county rate increase.

Same for the school taxes. Even with the huge state contribution, school taxes rise on non-abated properties.

Any increase in school or county taxes falls to non-abatement / non-PILOT properties.

Any increase in municipal taxes fall on non-abatement/ non-PILOT properties.

Your explantion on the revaluation process and impact make sense. My only comment would be that tax abated / PILOT properties would not see their taxes rise though a reval until their agreement expires which would cause an even greater municipal tax increase for "old school" owners.

Yes, the tax abatement / PILOT agreements appear to keep the municipal portion of our property taxes low (in short term) to avoid / minimize municipal tax increases and also used to avoid the municipal budget process by using "give back" contributions to various projects, institutions and activities when abatement agreements are approved.

I seriously doubt that the current process provides longterm sound fiscal management for the city.

The process as JCLAW also concurred with, needs to be opened up and reviewed by an independent auditor.

The only advantage PILOT's appear to provide Jersey City property tax payers is if they generate development that would otherwise not occur.

This discussion as come up before. Civic JC would like to see this process opened and examined. Any help would be appreciate and if you are interested, please contact me.


Quote:

Sorry, just bumping this up for the day in case late readers did not see it.

I have no idea how Steve Fulop does it. He has his regular job, nightly city council or neighborhood meetings, grad school at Columbia, and now hours of daily training at Synergy. I admire him, but boy does he make me feel lazy.

Yes, I think he's good for downtown JC, I could only give $26, but every little bit helps.

I got quite a thrill last night while walking down Montgomery towards Grove. I was on my way to Ibby?s when the Pimp walked right past me. He was dressed in head to toe orange complete with walking stick and feather trim on his orange pimp hat. He even said ?Hey? to me.

"Does anyone know when the last time the city performed a city-wide property assessment?

I know there is an effort underway in Hoboken to have one done. The theory there is that the politicians that are against it are dependent upon the "old school" Hoboken vote, and that demographic would likely be forced out of Hoboken if their taxes went up. On the upside, the reassessment keeps the total tax level the same, but redistributes the tax burden across the city based on current values. While I don't want to see people kicked out on the street because they can't afford the taxes, I also don't like the idea of property owners getting a free ride on the increased valuations of their property."


The last time the city performed a city-wide re-evaluation was just before the Schundler administration, and it is what contributed to his election. YES, the current valuations, which are older than 10-years old, create a tax situation where the "old school" vote pays less than its fair share and the lions share of the tax burden is carried by principally the PILOT payers and secondly by the newer buildings which had a PILOT that expired during the last 10 years. The current government will do ANYTHING to prevent a re-evaluation, including as many new PILOT deals as it can make, wild hotel taxes, transfer taxes, giant increases in municipal fees for water, utility hookups, fines, literally anything they can get their hands on to prevent a re-evaluation. This is because they view it as political suicide, given their past experience where a re-val of the "old school" voters' properties actually prompted them to dump the entire HCDO political monopoly in favor of a Conservative Republican (In Jersey City?! - Heaven Forbid!!!).

The typical JC old-timer's property is currently paying between .66%-1.0% of its true current market value. A huge discount to new taxes (1.46%) and PILOT taxes (1.66%). A re-evaluation could cause their taxes to actually double. The city should have managed this better by increasing the tax rate annually to keep up with the improvement in values, but then of course the Old-Timers would have been angry about their annual increases.

"I keep hearing different things about what happens at the end of that 20 year period.

Right now, my new property was purchased at about $400,000. Abated taxes come to 1.75% of purchase price. After 20 years, i've heard some say it'll go to 2 % some say more.. and i don't know what to believe... it would really make a difference in how long i keep this property.. so if you can clarify, it would be much appreciated.."

At the end of the 20 year period, the assessor will determine the current market value for your property (by looking at recent sales in your building, on your block, etc), multiply that value by the current Equilization Ratio (.28) and the current Tax Rate (.0522%). So if you bought your property for $400k and your current taxes are $7,000, and it comes off its PILOT January 1st 2007, and the assessor determines that it is worth say $500k, your new taxes will be $7,300.

No one can predict what the value of your unit or the rate and ratio of taxes will be 20 years from now. I seriously doubt you will still be living in the apartment at that point.

JCLAW:

As usual, very informative posts..

I know about abatements being "locked in" for 20 or so years (typically, some gradually increase...) but I keep hearing different things about what happens at the end of that 20 year period.

Right now, my new property was purchased at about $400,000. Abated taxes come to 1.75% of purchase price. After 20 years, i've heard some say it'll go to 2 % some say more.. and i don't know what to believe... it would really make a difference in how long i keep this property.. so if you can clarify, it would be much appreciated..