Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
31 user(s) are online (19 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 31

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (brewster)




Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Yvonne's numbers assume there are no PILOTS lowering the tax rate already.

Does anyone remember where in the mess of city/county/state docs is the table that shows the total PILOTS vs what they'd pay as ratables? I saw it once, but can't find it anymore.

Posted on: 7/21 12:12
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

K-Lo2 wrote:
Final rate is 1.488.


Oh man; once the rest of the state gets a whiff of that rate...


Hoboken was 1.592 last year, and no one made a stink about their Abbott. At least you can see the Abbott money in their schools, they have far more extracurriculars and enrichment.

Posted on: 7/20 11:06
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Seagull wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Seagull wrote:
What do you have against a home grow provision? That's what's most confusing to me. Why are you arguing against one?


Umm, I think you need to read slower. When you said you can always grow your own, I was merely pointing out that it might not necessarily be so.

I was warning against the possibility that New Jersey could not include a grow provision, after it was brought up that taxes were the primary motivation and they might limit grow. That does not mean I support it!


I now understand that you are not aware of the details of the bill. There is currently no provision for home growing in this bill. It's not a "possibility", it's the current reality. Also, at no point did I say you can, "always grow your own." I'm advocating for the right to do so, which under the current bill will still be illegal. Understand?


Yes, and that sucks. You're right, I did not read the bill, but in all your posts you did not actually say growing would still be illegal.

Posted on: 7/19 12:02
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Seagull wrote:
What do you have against a home grow provision? That's what's most confusing to me. Why are you arguing against one?


Umm, I think you need to read slower. When you said you can always grow your own, I was merely pointing out that it might not necessarily be so.

I was warning against the possibility that New Jersey could not include a grow provision, after it was brought up that taxes were the primary motivation and they might limit grow. That does not mean I support it!

Posted on: 7/19 1:55
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Seagull wrote:
An excellent straw man argument there.

Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Seagull wrote:
I don't personally have a problem with paying the tax on marijuana if there is a home grow provision. Alcohol is similarly taxed, but people also have the liberty to brew their own alcohol at home


Home brewing wasn't legalized till 1979.
https://beerandbrewing.com/the-day-homebrewing-was-legalized/


Huh? What argument do you think I am making? It's already been established that Washington passed recreational legalization without home growing. So it's not beyond the realm of possibility that New Jersey could do likewise.

Posted on: 7/18 20:52
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Seagull wrote:
I don't personally have a problem with paying the tax on marijuana if there is a home grow provision. Alcohol is similarly taxed, but people also have the liberty to brew their own alcohol at home


Home brewing wasn't legalized till 1979.
https://beerandbrewing.com/the-day-homebrewing-was-legalized/

Posted on: 7/18 13:01
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Seagull wrote:
The only state that did not include a home growing provision was Washington state, and if you look into it, the people in the state are now having to contact their elected officials to try to get on board with a home growing provision. NJ doesn't want a home grow provision because they want everyone to buy marijuana from the state. They keep saying this is for racial justice, but I think it would be more just of them to not be so transparently greedy. Many minorities are too poor to have a car to drive to a dispensary let alone have enough money to spend on overtaxed marijuana. If this is really about racial justice, they should prove it and provide the masses with a sensible home grow provision like Vermont. Two mature female plants in flowering at any time, and six plants total.


Didn't know about WA. But this "overtaxed" is overblown. If an $8 gram has $2 tax, do you really think that's so awful? Booze is similarly taxed and no one is hysterical. The dispensary limiting IS a big deal. If you have to drive an hour, or spend hours on public transit to reach the nearest dispensary, that's deliberate hardship.

Posted on: 7/18 12:27
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

MDM wrote:
Weed is even easier than tobacco (which has to be dried, toasted, and has other stuff added to it). Anyone with $500 to spare can setup a pretty nice grow room in a spare closet.


I don't think any of the rec legal states have outlawed growing your own, some have pretty liberal ideas of how much is required for "personal use", typically 4-6 plants. And as it turns out, the taxes are not a big deal when the market is driving the price into the basement. I hear in CA its crazy cheap now.

All the gloom and doom predictions of corporate control of this product don't make any sense as long as personal growing is possible. Corps will do all the concentrates and such, where the money is, just like ADM makes far more than the farmer growing corn.

Our state lawmakers are morons, wanting to legalize possession but leave all the distribution in the hands of criminals. Is this Rice guy on dealer's payrolls?

Quote:
Senator Ronald R. Rice, the chairman of the state’s legislative black caucus and one of the most vocal opponents of legalization, fears dispensaries would be concentrated in cities. “In my heart, and from my experience, I know the detriment it’s going to cause long-term in urban communities in particular,” he said. He supports decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of marijuana instead.

Posted on: 7/17 23:42
Top


Re: Boonton Reservoir
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Can anyone recall a change of any kind that Yvonne was FOR? Whatever it is, she's against it!




Posted on: 7/17 22:37
Top


Re: Developers at odds over future of Jersey City neighborhood
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
This is interesting. I assume this is the Mecca project:

http://wiki.realmart.com/golden-100-i ... ed-a-full-house-audience/

Looks like he was offering EB5 for investors in this building. How on earth does he have the connections for that?


That's interesting. So a guy with many millions in real estate as collateral couldn't or wouldn't just borrow development money from a bank in this era of historically low rates? Either he was trying to wring every penny out of the deal or the banks know why he's not a good risk.

Posted on: 7/11 20:46
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
The top biggest spenders includes votechs, charter schools, and K-8 districts. A direct K-12 comparison would yield different results.


What in the world are you talking about? Charters get a fraction of district schools and have to pay the mortgage or rent for their property out of that!

Posted on: 7/11 17:20
Top


Re: Developers at odds over future of Jersey City neighborhood
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Maybe the local owners wanted to see the results from the multi year delayed reval? Or maybe they wanted to see if any infrastructure improvements would take place (like extending Jersey Ave, or fixing Grand St, or improving sewerage?)


Or maybe they wanted to do nothing, sit back and watch their values soar with low taxes on undeveloped property. The land has been appreciating far faster than improvements. I get doing nothing, I do it very well myself, but that isn't what they agreed to over a decade ago.

Posted on: 7/11 12:24
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:
Brewster,
I am aware of the so called equalization rate. I almost included in my postbut figured it was common knowledge.


Ok, when you said "The rest of the city had been paying on an assessment that was a fraction of actual value." you gave the impression you thought they were paying their "fraction" assessed value but new was paying full FMV.

I don't know how abatement could be used to equalize property tax, they should only be used as they were intended to promote development of "blighted" areas. That they became expected by any developer is the problem, along with the developers greasing the pols to make it happen.

Posted on: 7/10 23:09
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:
The tax rate was was too high for new construction. The rest of the city had been paying on an assessment that was a fraction of actual value. Now that the reval has been done those differences do not exist. Going foward the abatments should be very limited.


You show a common misunderstanding about how this system works. Not that it's critical to this discussion, but I've made eliminating ignorance of this system a mission, to counter Yvonne's lies, smoke, and mirrors.

Older properties had a low assessment relative to FMV, but this was compensated for by the Equalization Rate, in 2017 23.66. What this meant was the assessments of the city as a whole were 23.66% of the FMV. When new (or gutted) ratable properties are assessed, they take 23.66% of FMV and make that it's new assessment, to keep it in line with the rest of the city as it would be taxed at the official rate (in 2017 7.8%).

Where the unfairness came from was some areas of the city appreciated faster or slower than others over 30 years, meaning they were outliers of that average represented by the Equalization Rate. This is how Downtown brownstones were paying 0.8% and Greenville hovels 4%. So a new JC ratable property would have been at 1.826% last year, higher than the older DT properties, but lower than most of the rest of the city, which were subsidizing the low taxed Downtowners. Got it?

https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxat ... lized/2017/2017Hudson.pdf

https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/lpt/gtr/Hudson17.pdf

Gotta love how Yvonne can't answer numbers with numbers, she just says she bothers tax officials, and then doesn't understand what they tell her.

Posted on: 7/10 20:35
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Before reval, the ratable base was 6 billion, about $2.4 to $2.8 billion is missing know as tax abatements. If they were added the ratable base would be nearly $9 billion and the tax rate would probably drop down to $55.00 per thousand instead of the $78.00 per thousand.


You keep repeating this kind of nonsense, utterly ignoring the lost PILOT revenue aspect. The rate would NOT go down like that since it would have to make up for the lost PILOTS, revenue you pretend does not exist.

Posted on: 7/10 12:58
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ecoindie wrote:
There was already two developments (including Mecca) in place to be built... you should read the article again. Also remember the 2008 crash and Hurricane Sandy, not exactly great development times.


Yet there has been new development of all scales completed and at least broken ground all over DT in that time, some also right next to the Tpk further north. It does not sound like Mr Mecca has credibility as a developer, a comment on NJ.com said he has never built anything anywhere, is just a speculator. It's a common speculator tactic to get permits before selling, it increases the price asked.

Posted on: 7/9 12:51
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Seems to me from reading the story that the owners are fighting the city, which after giving them 12 years to break ground has said that enough is enough and brought in Weiss. You gotta admit it's startlingly nasty back there.

Posted on: 7/9 12:12
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
We were told that this was a parade of horribles waiting to happen. One critic even tried to link this to school funding AND Katyn by saying the city was spending its own money and moved it to the Waterfront to showcase Mack Cali! Then there was the talk about crime, the inability to host an event of this size, and comparisons to the Bread and Circuses of the Roman Empire.

And after the event, the only complaint is - the fireworks started about 45 minutes late?

Child, please.


that reasoning only works if you ever paid attention to the cranks predicting the Apocalypse. Almost nobody does. But the undisputed fact is that the fireworks show started 45min late for what, >100k people? That's real, and unprofessional at the least. A professional organizing this large event would include an on-time clause in the contract, and if the chosen performer refuses, find one that will.

Posted on: 7/8 2:22
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Like I said earlier... why would anyone be surprised that a headlining rapper shows up late for a concert... whoever booked him is a real dope.

And if that comment by Fulop is accurate, it really demonstrates his inability to honestly assess a major screw up with a city sponsored event that had his name and face prominently displayed in the media campaign.

The main event was the fireworks not some egocentric rapper... or a mayor's statewide political asspirations.


I can't believe it, I agree with your post 100%! As for who brings kids to a loud concert, many apparently, but many also chose one of the plentiful shoreline spots NOT at the concert from which to view the fireworks. What we got was the tail wagging the Dogg, Snoop was an opening act for the fireworks, not the main event. Can you imagine a headliner waiting an hour for their opening act to finish?

Posted on: 7/7 11:57
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mpwJC wrote:
While an hour is on the later side, I'd be more surprised to attend a concert and have the act actually start at the scheduled/ticketed time. I generally assume that the band is going to come on at least 15-30 minutes after the scheduled start time. Heck, I've been at shows where the band starts close to the scheduled time (within 10 minutes) and people complained because they were still making their way through security so the venue wasn't full.

Anyway, you can't win. People will always find something to complain about.


If there's a major event afterwards that many thousands of people are waiting for who AREN'T EVEN AT THE CONCERT, then you start and end on time. I was in LSP by the 9/11 memorial, and fireworks viewing was perfect, when they finally got around to it. If I still had little kids with me I would have been furious.

Posted on: 7/6 19:30
Top


Re: Notice - Water outage in the Island
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

swooshy wrote:
Ask why PSEG is drilling in a sidewalk for a pole


No, ask why supposed professionals were drilling without having gotten a utility line markout like they are legally required to.

Posted on: 7/5 19:47
Top


Re: White Eagle Hall *UPCOMING SHOWS*
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

WhiteEagleHall wrote:
Hey Brewster, sorry you had a not great experience. Unfortunately some shows have different seating and pricing for seats, it must have been that you were in a reserved seat and that others in the balcony had been seated with the correct tickets.


Thanks for the response, but as I said, the reserved area was clearly marked, and we sat outside of it. Your people screwed up several times over no matter how you cut it. If they actually mismarked the area, unceremoniously rousting guests out of seats in which they had sat in in good faith, and been in for more than an hour, is still nasty.

Posted on: 7/5 19:44
Top


Re: Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza Expansion
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ILRie wrote:
Also, I think it's a little heartless to say that a parent concerned about the safety of his child walking to and from school isn't a "real concern."


Is that child walking to and from school between the hrs of 9pm and 2am when this area is hopping? During the day it's quite calm.

Posted on: 7/2 20:32
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Agreed on the PATH.. that schedule is just a disaster waiting to happen... especially where it empties out into the stage area. Feel like that schedule is just another opportunity to stick to Fulop and Jersey City.


Way more likely it's just the rigidity of Union contracts and shit like that. Think about it, you'd be asking people to work on the 4th that would be working otherwise.

Posted on: 7/2 11:26
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


I know I'm a curmudgeon, but am I the only one who thinks this sounds like stressful mayhem vs the chill LSP Fourths of sitting on the lawn to watch fireworks? I can't imagine what the area will be like with 200,000 people packed in there, but relaxing doesn't come to mind.

Posted on: 7/2 10:29
Top


Re: White Eagle Hall *UPCOMING SHOWS*
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Had an unpleasant experience there my first time, for Ani DiFranco a few weeks ago. Having a bad back that can't take standing in one place for hours, we got there very early and got seats next to the marked and roped VIP area in the balcony, which was about 1/2 of one side. Just before DiFranco came out, a beefy security guard came and unceremoniously kicked us out of our seats saying we were in VIP seats, and someone had made a mistake when placing the rope. He insisted the whole side of the balcony was VIP and the many others would be ejected, but very few were.

Even assuming it wasn't the complete BS it appeared to be, had it been properly marked we could have chosen other seats. Smart businesses don't alienate customers by making them pay for your screwups. DiFranco was great, but the incident gnawed at me standing in the back of the balcony for the rest of the show.

Posted on: 6/27 15:37
Top


Re: JC Council Proposes to Limit Public Speaking at Public Hearings
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
FWIW: the Jersey City Board of Education limits public speakers to 5 minutes.


As does the Hoboken Council. I was telling an ex member about this nonsense and they were horrified that anyone at all could filibuster the council meetings.

Posted on: 6/26 22:11
Top


Re: Zoning Question
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


I combined 2 units for my own use with appropriate permits, but haven't touched the CoO. As I understand it, it's not an issue at all till sale, and I'll be dead (condition of sale, never moving again) so I won't worry about it!

Posted on: 6/26 22:06
Top


Re: New racetrack idea pitched for in and around Liberty State Park
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


My parents used to live several miles from a racetrack in Riverhead and you could hear it clearly. Not good for LSP, even though as far as I can tell from this reportage the proposed track is entirely on private property. Are they going to take down all of those buildings including Camp Liberty, a JC treasure?

Posted on: 6/24 11:40
Top


Re: MVC Notice of License Expiration
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


My experiences at the various MVC has been fine, as long as you don't need to be tested on anything. Then you're fucked, those are the endless lines. My son had to wait 2 hrs at the Bayonne MVC just to get his eyes tested, as he'd already taken the written test at school. They had one line whether you were taking a written test or whatever.

Posted on: 6/19 11:10
Top



TopTop
« 1 (2) 3 4 5 ... 170 »






Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017