Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
49 user(s) are online (24 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 49

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (DanL)




Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Jersey City is only 80th on this list - Here's the median salary in every N.J. district

Posted on: 9/11 8:32
Top


Re: The Rivet
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Is it ready?

Rivet, a new residential bulding at 23 University Place Blvd. in Jersey City, suffered damage in a fire Thursday night.

https://articles.nj.com/hudson/index.s ... _of_5-story_jersey_ci.amp


Posted on: 8/22 8:32
Top


Re: Boonton Reservoir
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


what is unreasonable about reviewing the study of impacts performed by the Open Space Institute before giving away the access for nothing. And with no benefit to the residents of Jersey City and Hoboken who rely on this resource.

what is reasonable is what an online petition asks - https://www.change.org/p/help-protect- ... ly-from-recreational-uses

that:

* the Jersey City Environmental Commission be consulted on the proposal;

* the MUA Board be consulted on the proposal, and charged with conducting their own review of the proposal;

* the Open Space Institute study, if there is one, be released for public scrutiny;

*a concerted set of public hearings be held, at which residents be both informed about the proposal, and be given every opportunity to provide input.

what is the hurry to move forward on this?

Posted on: 8/13 22:38
Top


Re: Hatfield and McCoy's on Astor Place!
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


great, because you are twisting it around to again smear other groups. of course, I read the article. but instead of using as a counter to illustrate the many groups that get it right, you use to smear bonafide community groups. the one in the article which portrays mostly good people who lost it and took things way too far, is an example of a group that is not well organized, does not do outreach, nor draws people in with sound by-laws, elections, term limits etc.

so you don't advocate then for pro-development because you have our current "pro-development" mayor, who defeated a "pro-development" opponent and previously defeated and succeeded a "pro-development" mayor, who succeeded a "pro-development" mayor, who succeeded a "pro-development" mayor .... not sure it means that our government's actions are solely good. and people should not organize to express a different vision or dissatisfaction or feel that their best interests are subservient to development interests.

it is a good thing (in my mind) that these groups that you continue to smear, are among the most transparent organizations in the city. and I am grateful that there are people in our city that organize and advocate honestly for what they believe in.


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:

I'm done with this thread after this reply. If you bothered to read the originally attached article, you can see the leader of the NA abused her power to smear and intimidate the very residents they claim to represent. This obviously goes both ways.

And no, I have no ties to developers or have any developer interests. I simply understand how economics and supply/demand works, which many people who run these groups and claim to be outraged by increasing costs of living do not. To say the general public would not buy in - our supposedly "pro-development" mayor won with almost 80% of the vote along with a strong city council majority. The general public made it clear which side the argument they support. You lost in a landslide, perhaps it is, in fact, possible *your* ideas are way out of step with the general public.

Once again, another smear perpetuated by these groups against people who dare disagree - anyone in favor of density must be a real estate shill. Let's not forget that by limiting the housing supply, property owners who run these groups benefit from the high property values resulting from it. And I'm not even going to get into parking.

Posted on: 8/10 23:34
Top


Re: Hatfield and McCoy's on Astor Place!
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


why should anyone give you a break. you smear groups that you may not agree with it. these groups have earned credibility as being representative by organizing, having by-laws, rules, protocols, elections, terms (and some term limits). many are run better than our government (and they are mere volunteers.) there is nothing in law that gives them any power or authority. they earn it.

you can do the same and start a pro-development organization by making a commitment and doing the work. my guess is that you have a vested interest in development (but I could be wrong, I could even know you.) and the general public would not buy in.

it should not be surprising that people who mostly like their neighborhood the way it is and only wish to see moderate development and growth would commit the time to participate and work together to that end.


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:

Gimme a break, I'm not the only one here questioning how these groups operate. NIMBYs just don't like being told they are not the gatekeepers of all wisdom. Of course one of biggest NIMBYs, and also one of Jersey City's biggest losers in electoral history would be in favor of groups of self appointed know-nothings. And no, neighborhood groups are not representative democracies. That's why we have elections and vote for the city council and mayor. You of all people should know that.

Posted on: 8/10 21:40
Top


Re: Hatfield and McCoy's on Astor Place!
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


that is pretty funny, the guy/girl who posts as a Simpsons character is calling for transparency. only in Jersey City.

those that participate, get a say, that is how representative democracy works. you want to be represented, go to a meeting. if it take three to six months for minutes to show up on a website, so be it, that is better than most including our city at times.



Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Brewster, when did I say, "we like it as it is, it works for us, nothing should change, ever". I lived on Van Vorst Park for 40 years, some good things happened and some bad things happened. Here is the bad thing: having dogs barked 3:00 am in the morning when you are trying to sleep because people consider the total park as a dog park. Another bad classic, dog owners exercising their dogs at night on the equipment and sometimes the dogs relieves themselves on the equipment. It was the reason my children did not use the playground equipment in Van Vorst Park. Some of these classic bad things came from new neighbors.


You say that in regards to just about every issue Jersey City faces, be it parking, development, the Kaytn statue, street trees, bike lanes, millennials, new businesses, mass transit etc. etc. etc.

It also looks like my post struck a nerve, the VVPA website got updated for the first time in months today. Hey VVPA board members (they 100% read this forum), maybe start posting meeting minutes again and start being transparent with your community!

Posted on: 8/9 20:39
Top


Re: Boonton Reservoir
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


from a friend I respect and has expertise.

The City's plans to open our Boonton reservoir to public access and I'm concerned that this may impact the quality of water and the City will not have direct control over protecting and supervising public access to our water supply.

On July 25th Mayor Fulop confirmed that an agreement was in place for the Morris County Park Commission to develop and manage a trail around the Boonton Reservoir, which has been the primary water source for Jersey City since 1904. Fulop told the Daily Record that, "We've been working on this now for two years in Jersey City, and we're at a place where we think it will be in front of the council first week of September."

It is not clear to me who has been working on this deal for 2 years because key stakeholders like the people of Jersey City, the Jersey City Environmental Commission, and other community groups have not been engaged. Apparently, the hope is to push this through while folks are busy with summer vacations.

Although the Open Space Institute (OSI) has been engaged to conduct a study of the impacts to the reservoir, the study has not yet been released or reviewed by our Environmental Commission or the board of the Jersey City MUA. Despite this, the Mayor will be asking the City Council to approve the deal that will allow recreational access for 40 years at a cost of only $1. Yes, he is selling recreational access to our water supply for $1 with no benefit to the people of Jersey City.

Opening the reservoir area to recreational activities would require the construction of access roads, parking areas, pathways, etc., all of which would impact the already fragile and very limited protective vegetative cover. Runoff from rain and snow carries chemicals, sediments, pesticides, excess nutrients and many other pollutants from the land to the water. Maintaining a buffer strip of native vegetation along our reservoir plays an extremely important role in protecting water quality.

The native trees and plants around the reservoir minimize soil erosion and act as a filter that keeps contaminants from entering the water. Some areas along the Boonton Reservoir are highly susceptible to erosion and greatly depend on existing trees and plants to help minimize the rate of erosion. Any development of reservoir lands for trails, parking, or other recreational facilities will damage the ecosystems ability to protect our water supply, which may result in an increase in pollutants entering the reservoir and increased treatment costs.

A similar plan was dismissed after the terrorist attacks of September 2001 when it became clear that our water supply would be vulnerable if it were open to public access. Today, the risk of an intentional attack to compromise the water supply of the people of Jersey City still stands. Whether intentional or not, our water supply will be more vulnerable to further degradation if this plan proceeds.


and our own Environmental Commission states their concerns here - https://www.documentcloud.org/document ... at-Boonton-Reservoir.html

Posted on: 7/30 22:25
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


no, it is closer to 15-20% of the state average which makes sense for our demographics, special needs and ESL. With the current budget it will drop to around $21,886, less than 10% over average. our budget and cost per pupil only grew under state control.

we are not even among the 50 schools that spend the most per pupil.

https://www.nj.com/education/2017/05/t ... pend_the_most_per_pu.html

now, back to the topic at hand.

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
JC schools spend 25% more per student than the state average so calling them ‘starved for cash’ is misleading g, especially since JC funds such a tiny amount of the cost.


Bingo! The problem is an administrative one. I kinda wish the State would take back full control of JC schools until costs are under control.

25% more per student than state average is ridiculous, especially when you consider the level of service being provided... It's not as if our schools are 25% better than the state average.

The one way to force the issue is for the state to stop sending a ridiculous amount of money to JCBOE at the expenses of other school needs in the rest of the state. That would force JC schools to get their budget in order.

Posted on: 7/11 12:34
Top


Re: 'What is this, Russia?' Jersey City property owners fight developer
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Mostly agree, but! At present the city gets (at the expense of the schools and county) more money from most, but not all abatements than if a project was taxed conventionally. But with two caveats, the amounts are fixed or adjusted by contract whereas ratables will generate more tax dollars as the rate is increased AND some abatements actually do pay less, ie. 1 Journal Squared which pays $1200-$1500/yr per apartment.

In the short term, a dollar is a dollar, but as time goes on "rateables" are more valuable because they are "rateables." Abatements distort our local finances and allowed our city budget to balloon while claiming taxes are flat (the rate but not the amount) and our schools are starved (and feeling it.) The payroll tax will help, but will not fully replace the monies that our city "stole" from our schools.

Oh, and I absolutely do not believe that we should be trying raise tax dollars by taking people's residences via eminent domain. We have numerous examples of redevelopment plans that have taken decades to be built (partially built), Liberty Harbor, Colgate, Whitock Cordage, Hotel on the Square etc.






Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If property is tax abated, it does not help, that is a contract and the city spends that money as fast as it receives. If it is not tax abatement then it is a ratable, which stabilizes the tax base and the county, schools will get their fair share.


You have NO IDEA what you are talking about, but that has already been established! Ratable or abatement, it is still money to the city. Whatever money the city gets from an abatement, it represents actual "income" which means the city needs to raise less money via regular taxation.

And, of course, there is that little pesky fact you choose to ignore: the abatement payments actually add more money to the city coffers than if the property in question was paying regular taxes. Why don't we talk about that??


Bodhi, you know I am a fan, and it pains me to say this, but Yvonne's point is very valid. Yes, abatements add to the city's coffers, but at the expense of the schools. It works as long as the state never realizes they're overfunding the district and the state aid continues unchanged, or increases.

Right before our very eyes, we're seeing the house of cards situation unfold. The state now recognizes it sends way too much money to Jersey (those paying property taxes post reval will have one of the lowest property tax rates in the state), and are pulling the funding. If you had less abatements, the city would be better prepared to absorb the tax increase that will result from the state pulling the aid. Instead, they're going to levy a corporate tax. And when that option runs out, guess who pays? The rateable portion of the city. Fulop will stop at nothing to keep from raising municipal taxes to fund the schools, because he has a streak to protect, but that day WILL come. And it's going to be ugly.

Abataments definitely have their place. I'm not anti abatement. But, abatements in JC help any sitting mayor fund pet projects that win votes. When abused, you create a massive fiscal issue, just like the 30 year delayed tax reval.


Yes, abatements don't get shared with the county (except for a paltry 5%) but the city still contributes to the school budget! The school does not rely on just direct taxation and contributions by the state and federal governments. The city government also sends a chunk of money to the BOE.

The part that drives me nuts about Yvonne's selective presentation of information is that she conveniently leaves out that the city collects MORE money through the abatements than it would under regular taxation. That larger amount translates to lower taxes. Ultimately, the budget is essentially a fixed amount (call it X) and it is made up of several sources of revenue, mostly taxes, PILOTs (abatement payments) and things like fines and fees. If the PILOTs were to go down, then the revenue has to be made up elsewhere, and since you can't force fees and fines high enough, fast enough, the only viable solution is to increase revenue from taxation. That means taxes would have to go up to make up the decrease from revenue generated through abatements, and go up by a larger overall amount than the one paid through the PILOT to make up the effective difference.

Posted on: 7/11 10:44
Top


Re: 4th of July in JC @ Exchange Place - Featuring Snoop Dog
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Everything around here seems ass backwards, the headliner should have just performed after the fireworks. jc make it yours!

Quote:

brewster wrote:
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 22:05
Top


Re: Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza Expansion
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


I think Jersey City of late keeps muddying and commingling the idea of a plaza and open space with a park and green space. exchange place with or without the memorial statue is being changed from a plaza (town square) to park space. I think they are different and serves different purposes ...

Posted on: 7/2 12:40
Top


Re: Plan to limit public comment at Jersey City council meetings draws Fulop's ire
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


this summed up the value of not limiting 2nd reading comments and I hope you will express this again to our council members. I have already, but par for the course only received one acknowledgement out of 9.

Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
While some people may over use this right, we need to keep it as is. I've spoken recently re: the McGinley sq. Redevelopment Plan which went on for almost 3 hrs. It was extremely productive for the residents to have this time (and we were organized) as we got to ask the City Planners and developers a lot of questions before the council. In doing this, we exposed a lot of problems with the plan and a lot of lies and contradictions the developer had been telling during that meeting, and before. President Lavarro did a great job keeping speakers on topic. If we didn't have this open time limit to hash out details and make our case, the residents wouldn't have gotten any wins out of this deal. We won a few solid points, most notably abolishing the four large video screens the developer wanted to go on the building and secure money from them towards building the new park at the square.

Posted on: 7/1 14:53
Top


Re: Plastic bag bans coming to Hoboken, Jersey City
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


This makes a whole lot more sense than a ban on plastic bags.

funny, how things finally come around - http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... es-would-not-be-affected/

Quote:

user1111 wrote:
By Michael Sol Warren mwarren@njadvancemedia.com,
NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

In the midst of Trenton's swirling budget debate, New Jersey drew one step closer to becoming the first state to impose state-wide fees on single-use plastic and paper bags.

On Thursday night, state lawmakers approved a five-cent fee for every bag handed out at chain supermarkets and retailers. The measure applies to both paper and plastic bags. The goal of the fees is to discourage the use of single-use plastic bags and push consumers towards reusable bags instead.

"Most stores have made the change and now provide more environmentally friendly bags for customers," said Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen), the sponsor of the Assembly bill. "This bill encourages more stores to get on board and move away from using the bags that are harmful to the environment."

The bill now heads to Gov. Phil Murphy's desk.

"Governor Murphy will carefully consider any legislation that aims to protect the environment in New Jersey," said Dan Bryan, a spokesman for the Governor.
https://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018 ... 2box_nj-homepage-featured

Posted on: 6/22 15:12
Top


Re: Jersey City has big plans for 100 acres on West Side along Hackensack River
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


unfortunately everything.

as per the article, the city already owns 40% of the site but may owe Honeywell $25m, and at $1m per acre only has $15m value into the site. so the question could be how to leverage JC Together's affordable housing objective?

there were two downtown projects on Marin Blvd that received state EDC tax subsidies that averaged $500k per affordable unit with an additional long term tax abatement. that is a bitter pill for the average tax paying homeowner to swallow.

so, my thinking, whether the city attempts to take this is on or just subsidize private developers (for both), what is an acceptable level of subsidy per affordable unit?

can the subsidy be in the land and zoning (height and density.)


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:


What could possibly go wrong with the city acting as the master developer?


Posted on: 5/24 12:09
Top


Re: JC Landmarks Conservancy Awards
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


A little more info -

Now in its 18th year, the Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy is holding its preservation awards ceremony on Thursday, May 31 at 6:30pm at the landmark Loew's Jersey Theatre. It's hard believe that this grassroots organization is nearing the the end of its' second decade.

This is one of the magical evenings in Jersey City. Enjoy the majestic Loew's Jersey Theatre, hors d'oeuvres, beer and wine, and desert, with recognition for historic preservation efforts in Jersey City. Following the ceremony there will be a tour of the historic Loew's.

If you have never been to the Loew's, this is a great opportunity to see it, if you have, this will be a relaxing evening to take in the best of Jersey City.

For tickets and information, please see this link - Awards Ceremony






Quote:

RebeccaS wrote:
JC Landmarks Conservancy Awards

Hi all, here is information for this year's JCLC Awards event.

Please help us honor people and businesses who help steward the heritage of Jersey City's building, culture, and character.

http://www.jclandmarks.org/events/annual-preservation-awards/

Posted on: 5/24 11:51
Top


Re: Okay, so who here thinks the Katyn monument needs to go?
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


During the ''pro-old-timers'' term of Mayor Anthony Cucci of Jersey City, it was decided to put at Exchange Place a monument to the 1940 massacre of Polish soldiers in the Katyn forest. The 17-foot statue, a cavalryman with a bayonet through his back, is in the middle of what planners call ''the view corridor,'' framed by the World Trade Center Towers. That placement is itself a sort of memorial to the bygone strength of the old ethnic groups.

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/15/nyregion/on-the-waterfront.html

Posted on: 5/4 12:05
Top


Re: Democratic Party lobbyist Removed From Port Authority
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


and 5 years after our mayors election, his fans are still obsessed with Healy.




Quote:

CatDog wrote:
Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Good Lord!, I certainly hope Hillary has made that comforting
phone call.



#Special
1.5 years after the election and you're still obsessed with Hillary. Goodness.

Posted on: 4/25 22:06
Top


Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


I do not think anyone disagrees with your excellent analyses and assessment and yes, their first recommendation, "no further cuts to adjustment aid in districts spending below adequacy" supports the JCEA.

But the remaining 4 recommendations all ask for Jersey City to pay more ourselves; raise 2% cap (and increase levy), increase local levy, fair share of future local PILOTS and require local contribution to make up for or adjust for existing PILOTS.

Personally, I am by no means happy about additional taxes after our property taxes will increase increase 50% post reval and health insurance went up 30%, but the alternative, starving our schools is worse.



Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:
Quote:

ecinjc wrote:
Here’s a good overview of funding issues from Rutgers Edlaw. It’s a complex issue and will need more than just a portion of abatements to fix. But it’s good to understand that we are not overfunded based on the number of disadvantaged, eel,and special needs kids we serve. http://www.edlawcenter.org/assets/fil ... _School_Funding_Case_.pdf


This is b******t.

First of all, that's not from "Rutgers." It's from the Education Law Center, which has no formal connection to Rutgers.

The Education Law Center is an entity that gets a third of its budget from the NJEA and does whatever the NJEA wants it to do. It isn't an independent group at all.

Even if the ELC were an independent group and even if it were from Rutgers, so what? People from a university can be biased and/or wrong.


Second, you do not understand SFRA based on your description of what that report even says.

All that report points out is that Jersey City is below SFRA's (inflated) definition of Adequacy, a fact that no one disputes, but that normal people point out is due to Jersey City's refusal to raise its school taxes in any way proportional to its increase in wealth.

The report blames this all on the tax cap, but the JCBOE hasn't even consistently raised taxes at 2.0%, has never used banked cap, and has never considered a referendum on a higher levy.

The SFRA formula already accounts for the number of economically disadvantaged students a district has. There is no accounting for "eels," but students who are English Language Learners have an extra weight as well. Special ed classification actually doesn't have a weight in the SFRA formula (for any district.)

Because the Jersey City Public Schools have a high FRL-eligible rate and a high rate of students who are ELLs, it has a much higher Adequacy Budget per student than the average budget.

HOWEVER, SFRA isn't so simple as to solely give a district money based on its demographics because tax base is a factor in appropriate state aid too.

NJ's aid formula, like the formulas of all states, intends to give state aid in inverse proportion to a district's wealth.

Jersey City is not a "rich" district in terms of tax base, but it is an average district. Yet, despite being average in tax base, Jersey City's state aid per student is actually in the top 20 in New Jersey.

Although SFRA doesn't differentiate between residential and non-residential property, Jersey City also has about double the proportion of non-residential property of the average NJ town.

SFRA calculates a Local Fair Share for Jersey City (like it does all districts) of $370 million for 2017-18. SFRA calculates an Adequacy Budget for Jersey City of $630 million.

The difference between that $370 million that Jersey City is economically capable of paying is Equalization Aid, Special Ed aid, and Security Aid.

Jersey City, however, pays nowhere near its full Local Fair Share and it relies on Adjustment Aid to keep a low tax rate that will hit 0.42 in 2018-19, or one-third of the state average.

Although Jersey City's tax base is by far the state's largest (for 2018-19 it will be $180 million larger than the next largest district's (Hoboken's) Jersey City's tax levy is only the 16th largest in NJ, and is higher than poorer and smaller towns like Newark, Cherry Hill, West Orange, and Clifton.

Because of of the state's chronic budget problems, the state has nowhere near enough money to fairly or fully fund its many towns that have growing enrollments and shrinking tax bases.

Some districts are underaided (by the state) by $9000 per student.

Because the state cannot make the pie large enough to fully fund every district, it has to divide that pie more evenly.

http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/20 ... enter-jersey-city-is.html

Posted on: 4/3 9:48
Top


Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Jersey City is nowhere near the top of this list, last I looked about 10-15% above average. Iin Hudson County, less than Hoboken, Harrison and Union City -

The 50 school districts that spend the most per student in N.J.

The most — and least — expensive school districts in New Jersey

Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:
Quote:

newbie100 wrote:
BTW how many students does JC have and what is our per student spending?


New Jersey has three different ways to account for per student spending.

As another poster said, the Taxpayer Guide to Education Spending lists JC as spending $22,751 per student for
"Total Spending Per Pupil."

That amount includes pensions, construction spending, Social Security, and Post-Retirement Healthcare, plus spending from federal aid. It is the most inclusive, and most accurate, number for what any NJ school district's spending is. It is also 90% more per student than the national average.

If you are doing interstate comparisons, you should use Total Spending Per Pupil.

There is also "Budgetary Cost Per Pupil," which includes things that are directly under the BOE's control, essentially opex spending.

A district's Budgetary Cost Per Pupil is about $4000-$4500 per student less than its "Total Spending Per Pupil." JC's Budgetary Cost Per Pupil is $18,154 per student.

The state average for Budgetary Cost Per Pupil is about $15,000 per student.

HOWEVER, is is a third, most exclusive, number for spending that is used in the School Funding Reform Act. It only includes Equalization Aid, Sped Aid, Security Aid, the local tax levy, and Adjustment Aid. It excludes federal aid and all of the state's numerous indirect streams of aid. This third and lowest calculation of spending is called "Spending as Defined."

By this number Jersey City only spends $527,389,023 for 30,753 students, or $17,149 per student.

Since "Spending as Defined" excludes so much of Jersey City's spending, and because the School Funding Reform Act has a sky-high Adequacy budget for Jersey City, Jersey City is legally about $3100 per student below Adequacy even though its spending is well above NJ's average and dramatically above the national average.


Posted on: 4/3 9:14
Top


Re: N.J. city shuts down burlesque show, citing obscenity laws
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


He is NOT Councilman Solomon.

And this hoopla seems pretty orchestrated, but to what end? Does the mayor wish to distract from bad news, does he want to ride to the rescue and save the day? I guess we'll see.

The corporate council is appointed and reports to the mayor, serving at his/her pleasure. He would not go in a different direction publicly.

I do feel bad for both the performer and bar to be placed under pressure and the spotlight. Hopefully, they will eventually benefit from the publicity.


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Hey JCVoter, you're that Solomon guy right? Please do something about it now that you have the power.

Posted on: 3/30 12:42
Top


Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home



Yes, over-aided, but under-funded.

For those interested, good outside perspectives are -

http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/

and

https://civicparent.org/



Quote:

brewster wrote:
Has anyone ever run across a line item comparison of how JC spends vs other NJ districts? I have no trouble believing it's wasteful, but I have no idea in what way.

Also, Stateaidguy says we're overaided, but I don't recall hearing what our appropriate aid should be. It's surely not Zero.

Posted on: 3/30 12:31
Top


Re: Jersey City Council to introduce $587 million budget with zero tax increase
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


I agree that school funding is the same disaster it was before and after this administration took office .... but, you know as well as anyone, the machinations that this administration has done to keep the city portion of taxes flat while increasing spending by continuing to give out abatements (PILOTS) so the city keeps the portion of taxes from new development that would go to the schools (under funding the schools) for itself and raiding the JCMUA.

and what services have been improved?



Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Your one note opera rings a little flat here. How is that fact different than when he took over? It isn't. The point is, he has improved services while holding taxes flat over an extended period of time.

Frankly, I find you even more morally compromised than those you accuse. You truly believe this is a problem and continue to benefit from it. If it bothered you so much you would, at a minimum, leave.

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
What tune would he be singing if he wasn't getting a half billion a year from suburban taxpayers to pay for his schools??

Posted on: 3/20 13:12
Top


Re: Loew's Theater could be so much more...
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


just enjoyed another magical evening with many last night to the see The Quiet Man.

This short documentary by performers was put out recently -

Friends ofWonder: Courtney Barnett & Kurt Vile (Documentary)




Posted on: 3/18 12:01
Top


Re: NJ Rates Your Public Schools - What's Your PS Score?
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


the charters are here - https://s3.amazonaws.com/nj-data/Educa ... school_scores_2016_17.csv

charter schools are their own district and not part of the jersey city public school district.

Quote:

nuvi wrote:
We summarized the data for all schools listed with Jersey City as the District in a single easy to swallow format. Take a look at Jersey City Ed:

https://jerseycityed.com/nj-doe-school-ratings/

P.S. Having reviewed the data, some charter schools are present, but other charter schools (LCCS, TECCS, METS, University Academy) are absent because they were not listed with Jersey City as the District. Let me know if you know of other schools, and we will update the chart soon.

Posted on: 3/1 4:55
Top


Re: Jersey City Ed
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


well it is rather myopic and really limited. though, glad to see that Infinity was included, but why not Liberty HS and other programs? And it's wholly, deficient in covering a variety of charter schools. well, I guess one must start somewhere.

this is an outstanding piece on Jersey City high schools by Bridget D'Souza (Civic Parent - https://civicparent.org/) - http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... for-parents-and-students/. We hoped to move on to middle schools as many feed into high schools programs and if this something that you are interested in doing, I would be happy to work on it with you as along as it is inclusive of all Jersey City middle schools/programs.

http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... for-parents-and-students/

Quote:

nuvi wrote:
My wife and I have learned a lot about navigating the Jersey City public school system, particularly in the past few months as we have three kids all moving on to new schools in the fall. And while we certainly don’t know everything, we figured it would be worthwhile to share what we have learned. Click the link below and have a look:

Jersey City Ed

We hope to continue adding more content over time, and we are always open to feedback, questions, suggestions, and corrections. Feel free to point out oversights and omissions as well. The goal is to make it a useful resource for parents and students.

Posted on: 2/24 9:30
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home



Posted on: 2/7 10:25
Top


Re: VIP Diner Jersey City Being Flipped?
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


the last few times that I have been there, they had new menus and I think I saw a placard that they are now affiliated with the Manalapan and Milburn Diners. Always have liked it. Large, never too crowded, conveniently located by buses and PATH, and plenty of parking, and free sugar cookies by the register.

Posted on: 1/31 16:09
Top


Re: NJ Rates Your Public Schools - What's Your PS Score?
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


you are meandering again.

we only moved from 3rd to 8th St. while in Cordero and did not move to McGinley Square until both kids were in MS 4, where their program was for students citywide.

there used to be zone boundary (catchment) maps on the JCBoE website by school, but they now just ask one to call them at - 201-915-6201.

I am not up on the oversubscribing issue, which from recollection was with 3 year pre-k. Not a bad deal - free universal 3 and 4 year old pre-k.



Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

DanL wrote:
"brewster" who meanders a bit ...


I can accept that! I'm curious, was there any problem with your kids staying in Cordero after you moved out of the neighborhood? And do you know what's going on with the oversubscribing and busing, or even where to find a catchment map? I had a prospective tenant ask me which zone we were in, and while I thought it was still Cordero, I realized I didn't actually know. Conti is fairly close too.

Posted on: 1/31 16:01
Top


Re: Rent increases in light of revaluation
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


if one has been charging below markets rents, there will be clearly pressure/need to raise rent(s) as costs increase, but for those already charging market rate rent, they have been getting a windfall (as far as taxes as part of cost) and now their margin's will shrink.

on the other hand in areas that are seeing reductions in assessments and taxes, pressure on rents should ease, though I doubt they will be reducing them, unless the market forces them.

Posted on: 1/31 11:11
Top


Re: NJ Rates Your Public Schools - What's Your PS Score?
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


well, my children attended PS37 Cordero, 42.5 score, 38th percentile, and MS 4, 18.8 score and 9th percentile. we chose those schools. note that MS 4 includes 5 programs - AEP (accelerated, 4 years in 3), Hope (honors), general education, special needs and bridges (older kids above age for grades) which all are included in the score.

my children (a boy and a girl) have never encountered bullying.

there are great kids, teachers and programs throughout the district schools and there a few not so great of the same.

So no, the scores of those schools do not concern me at all, based on our experiences. and I believe our public district schools are competitive with private and charter options.

I mostly agree with "ecinjc", and with "brewster" who meanders a bit ...





Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

SunnyJC wrote:
We have been incredibly happy with our zoned school, PS5, in the village section of downtown. When we first were looking at schools, we were thinking private but had heard from neighborhood friends that PS5 was a lovely school. We went for a tour and talked to parents and were pleasantly surprised. We also toured some private schools and they just didn’t blow us away. We have found a great community at PS5 and are glad that we kept our mind open to public school. My firstborn is in kindergarten now and is already reading and doing great with math. She is in the dual language program. Our youngest will start PRe-K 3 next year.


Does it concern you that your school received a NJ state score of 52/100? What are your thoughts on that?

Posted on: 1/31 10:59
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 39 »






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