I imagine some users here live in tax abated buildings which are not ratable, ask the county. Jersey City is down more than $2 billion in ratable because tax abatements are not ratables. In fact, the ratable base went down an additional $46 million since last year according to the info that was given at the budget. The higher the ratable, the lower the tax base. Since abatements are not ratable, it hurts taxpayers and many abatements are paying less to the city than before according the the city budget.
But I want to also respond to Brewser who has a fascination with my tax records but hides behind a phony name. I lived through the reval, I saw neighbors who lost their homes. These neighbors were factory workers who bought their home in the 1960s and 1970s. They paid $10,000 for their homes and the taxes after reval were more than they paid for their homes. I had access to many records because I was part of the Coalition for Fair Taxation. As a volunteer, I went to homes to make sure the information from the city was accurate because the Coalition for Fair Taxation was considering a lawsuit. I meet the people who did lose their homes. I also met a neighbor of one homeowner who told me the owner of a particular property committed suicide after reval. His neighbor lost his wife to cancer the previous year and he didn't want to deal with the anxiety of losing his home. For the record, there was so many foreclosure that Bret Schundler bundle up these properties when he became mayor and sold them as the first "bulk lien" sale. People did not sell they lose their homes, they lost them.

It worked because I was able to re-finance my house but I saw many neighbors who lost their homes. Today banks are not giving loans, the person who purchased my home had to put down 30%. Before reval, downtown had a large Hispanic and black population. Many of them lost their homes through reval and many white seniors also lost their homes. Reval lowered the business owners taxes and increased the taxes for homeowners especially downtown.

Everyone on my block appealed. Most were around $300,000 I was the hightest one on the block at $375,000.

You are mistaken, my home was assessed at $375,000. The tax bill I received for 4 quarters after reval was close to $16,000. The previous year, I paid $3,000 and the year before that I paid around $2,000. My assessment dropped because I appealed. By the way, there was a property on my block owned by a realtor, this local realtor which I shall not name flipped this property every six months among its partners and that inflated figure was used against my property. At the time of reval in 1988, I was doing a gut rehab. No walls, working bathrooms, etc. To have that figure of $375,000 was ridiculous for 1988. For the record, when reval happens you pay more money into the first two quarters. Then you had to pay two quarters,I paid $10,000 before I appealed. I appealed five years in a row and dropped by assessment, no lawyers were used. Now I believe you pay one quarter.

Of course this country can restrict guns. They are restricted on airplanes. It takes guts another word for courage to restrict automatic guns. I hope our politicians are listening.

The right to bear arms should only apply to the weapons that was used in the Revolutionary War because that was its intent, not automatic weapons that can kill hundreds in the matter of seconds. Arms today could also mean the right to bear nuclear material.

The final tax rate is $71.84 per thousand. On a $100,000 assessment taxes increase $176.00 but few homes downtown and other parts of the city is at that $100,000 mark. I went to the budget hearing and was surprised at the number of abatements that are giving less to the city. Canco dropped $323,429 to $206,153 or Bostwick Court $281,704 to $69,282. Yes, some did go up. But if you pay regular taxes you will have an increase.

This would be a great location for a camera. The city could generate money from speeding drivers or pedistrians who cross the street while texting. Although I would admit it would be difficult to give a ticket to a pedestrian.

The intersection of Grove and Grand Sts were sectioned off today around 1:30 PM by the police. The light pole on the sidewalk was knocked down by a black car. This is the same spot an accident occurred when a car jumped onto the sidewalk and killed a pedestrian.

Some municipal employees are eligible for their jobs by being a resident, tax dollars train them, then they move out of the municipality. At that point they should be fired. They are many people willing to take their jobs with the high unemployment. This is a waste of money.

No, there was a bakery called 5 corners on Newark Avenue, they made excellent bread. It was near the 5 Corners Library.
I wasn't a fan of their cakes but their bread with light and cripsy.

He sold his nursing home downtown for the cash.

I know in the past and perhaps now, Gaughan had/has a state contract for burying unclaimed bodies.

I remember public parks having rest rooms. The city also had matrons in the parks to maintain the rest rooms and playgrounds. Van Vorst Park had rest rooms under the bandstand. I don't agree with parents decisions, but little ones have short intestines and they pass water quite fast. Parents should use the public rest rooms in the public library if they are at Van Vorst Park.

This report done by the county board of taxation is approximately 12 pages. There are different sections, one for churches, schools, cemeteries, and public buidlings. Each of those have their own section along with their value which is not added to the ratable base. Then there is the ratable base which presently is $5.8 billion. Finally there is another section which does not include public buildings, or churches or schools. This section is exempted from the ratable base. It includes public housing, affordable housing, luxury or sometimes referred to as market rate housing. It is exempted from the ratable base. This section is worth $2.8 billion. I am going to repeat myself because there might be a reading comprehension problem here. This last section $2.8 billion does not include churches, schools, public buildings, or cemeteries. This $2.8 billion is abated and is not added to the ratable base. The higher the ratable base the lower the taxes. This is the reason that Mayor Healy is doing the reval plus the fact that a higher ratable base means he can do more bonding.

All property is recorded according to the stats, Jersey City like older municipalities has a lot of non for profit buildings. I remember some towns complaining to the state years ago about the unfair burden of carrying these non for profit buildings, (they were talking about universities). But unlike these towns we carrying an additional burden of tax abatements.

This information that I quoted comes from the Hudson County Board of Taxation. Also, I have spoken to Don Kenny, the Administrator of the Hudson County Board of Taxation on several occasions. It is his job to collect data that the county uses for municipal tax rates in Hudson County. The rate is based on the municipal ratable base. And abatements are not included in this data, the reason my and other taxes are high. In JC, $2.8 billion is excluded in the ratable rate.

The information came from the Hudson Board of Taxation. I did not include churches, schools, cemeteries or public properties. These properties, the one-third are non-ratables. The higher the ratable, the lower the taxes. These one-third are not included in the ratable base. Also not all non-ratables pays property taxes. Some low income properties have a clause that allow them to deduct water, sewerage and utilities. As these cost go up the city receives nothing.

People forget that Brooklyn and the rest of NYC has an income tax and sales tax that goes to the city. JC has a property tax that excludes close to one-third of properties from taxation.

I regret I didn't post the accidents I saw involving bikes to jclist. As I said previously, I am not in favor of the city introducing bike lanes without doing a car cenus. It doesn't help that many downtown streets are closed for various reasons which adds to the traffic problems. I hope jclist viewers do post accidents here.

I did a show in 2011 when I realized JC failed to recognized its 350 anniversary in 2010. This show covers some of the battles sites.
https://vimeo.com/26250602

You should place your name on the council agenda for public speaking and tell your story at city hall.

Lincoln Park has pretty homes but there is a lot of crime. Last summer, I attended at St. Al's, when I noticed all the cars there had their windows busted. These cars were parked in front of the church.

Basically, you are saying you want to privilege of biking in the streets and if an accident happens, it is too bad. I am looking forward to more cameras placed along our streets. We live in a visual society. I guess when people are injured by bikers perhaps common sense will prevail. By putting in bike lanes, JC is giving a privilege to bike riders and holding motorist more accountable if an accident occurs. Cars owners have insurance, so even if it is the bike owner is at fault, guess who pays, the person with insurance. Rates rise in cities where there are more accidents. I will definitely be writing to our legislators on a local and state level. Motorist, regardless of vehicle should have insurance. An pedistrian who is injured by a biker and doesn't have insurance will be on taxpayers' dime.

Cars are required to have insurance. My point is bikes should also have insurance. They are moving vehicles, some which do not follow traffic laws. I have seen old people and families with children especially with baby carriages 'jump' at the last moment when a bike comes from no where down the street or sidewalk. Like I expressed before some people on this blog want the benefit with the responsiblity. They have a 'princess mentality.'

Here is an from San Francisco of a bike rider killing someone.
http://www.asianweek.com/2012/06/15/b ... derly-chinese-pedestrian/
The article I read in the NY Post some years ago, listed 6 deaths caused by bicyclist on NYC's streets in one year.

So it is OK, for a biker to knock down a pedestrian, causing injuries and not pay the medical bill? Is it OK for a biker to scrape a car and not pay the bill? While I don't normally buy the NY papers, I do remember the NY Post publishing the number of of deaths caused by bikes. A pedestrian knocked down by a biker and that person hits his/her head on concrete is just as dead if that person was hit by a car. I have seen many bikers who do not stop at the red or drive against the flow of traffic. Bikers are ready to sue if they are injured, then they such also be heald accountable if they caused an accident. Apparently, JC bikers on this blog have a "princess mentality." They want the benefit but they do no want to be held accountable.

Responsible bike riders? I wished there was a video camera several years ago, near city hall when a bike rider nearly ran over a pedestrian and hit a car. I am hoping more cameras are installed around JC so we can watch these responsible riders! They need insurance.

My earlier post on this subject, I mentioned how many people compared NYC bike's lanes and suggested JC should have similar. I stated JC have narrower streets, more developments are being built near these bike lanes (Boys Club), and a study was not done which should have included a car census. This census should also included traffic from the turnpike that bypass 14C, travel our streets to arrive at the tunnel. I totally believe more bike lanes will lead to accidents for bikers as well as pedestrians. There is an elections next year, so this bike lane really is a political subject. It is not done on the safety of bikers, pedestrians, or drivers in mind. JC is not NYC with mass transit and I see more accidents. Those painted lines down Grove Street give a false sense of security for bikers. I really hope the police department save the stats on these future bike/car accidents and not have them listed as motor vehicles accidents. More accidents in JC means higher car insurance. Maybe it is about time, bikers who are involved in accidents start paying insurance.

Bikes can be a viable option for transportation if people stop having children and people do not grow old developing arthritic limbs.