Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
57 user(s) are online (44 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 57

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (Dolomiti)




Re: Please Help Prato Bakery
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
The neighborhood residents and their respective Neighborhood Association are two totally different things.

1) Thanks for not recognizing that your interpretation of squeeg's post appears to have been wrong

2) As far as I can tell, the neighborhood residents have been pretty happy with Prato for some time now

3) I don't know of anything the HPNA has done to drive Prato off the block. Did I miss something?


Quote:
It's also no secret that they are very hostile to things a modern functioning city should have, like local retail and bike lanes....

What does any of that have to do with Prato?


Quote:
the NA board has its own agenda and its members by and large do not represent the community.

What, specifically, did the HPNA do to Prato? Especially during the past 2 years?

It sounds to me like you just don't like NA's, and are using unrelated matters as an excuse to bash them. Seems odd.

Posted on: 7/27 15:06
Top


Re: Please Help Prato Bakery
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
The OP (squeeg) seems quite elated they're leaving and is lauding the HPNA, indicating they had something to do with this decision.

So they drove out a very popular bakery that closes in the early evenings that most of the neighborhood really enjoyed. Wonderful. I hope the NA is happy with the hair salon/real estate office/some sort of preschool they'll wind up getting in its place.

I think you misunderstand squeeg's post.

Let's note that squeeg speaks for squeeg. Not for anyone else in JC, not for residents of the neighborhood, not the HPNA. S/he didn't even mention the HPNA. S/he said "Harsimus Cove community."

Squeeg also wasn't attacking Prato, s/he was attacking the landlord. From the post in question:

"Dear Prato - we love your coffee and your baked goods and we do wish you much luck in your new location....it was never about you or your products. It was always about your landlord who we punched in the nuts for their douchiness... "

Things have been good with Prato for well over a year now. The most recent news, as you can see in this very thread, is that Prato and/or the landlord tried to change the zoning from Cafe to Restaurant, which would allow a business there to apply for a liquor license. That was denied, but Prato did get a variance to expand from 20 seats to 34.

No one in the neighborhood has said or done anything opposing Prato since then. No one has tried to drive them out. Again, the owner said he liked being a part of the neighborhood. Despite a few issues, they've been good neighbors overall.

Or are you saying that people in the neighborhood buying coffee and sandwiches from Prato was a devious plot to kick them out of the neighborhood...?

Posted on: 7/27 10:46
Top


Re: Please Help Prato Bakery
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
I just don't understand... if what you seek is a suburban lifestyle, move to the burbs and leave city life for those who can hack it. Complaining about noise, and lights, seems incredibly petty.

Meaning what, exactly? Living in an urban neighborhood means you want drunk and disorderly people yelling at each other outside your window at 2AM, puking on your stoop?

Peace and quiet in an urban neighborhood is a virtue, and all too rare.

Plus, bars don't get to violate noise and parking ordinances just because they got there first.

Posted on: 7/26 20:41
Top


Re: Please Help Prato Bakery
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
The NA NIMBYs claim another scalp. These worthless organizations need to be dissolved.

Oh, whatever

I don't know what squeeg knows, but it sounds like it's the landlord who has chosen not to renew the lease. Prato has been doing a good business for quite some time now. Just last month, the owner of Prato was saying he liked being part of the neighborhood, and knowing their regular customers:
http://jerseycityeats.blogspot.com/20 ... et-vendor-prato.html#more

I see no indication that the neighborhood chased them out.

Posted on: 7/26 20:28
Top


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
How Santiago Calatrava was awarded the design for this is beyond me. The man has been sued so many times for leaks. He is known for a good visual aesthetic, but poor follow through.

IIRC there weren't many suits when he won the competition. It was quite some time ago, after all.

It's not really clear that the leaks are Calatrava's fault. It's not like these buildings are designed to leak, and architects have limited control over the GC and subcontractors.

Plus, when something goes wrong in a building, everyone gets sued, even "starchitects." It's mostly a game to wring money out of the insurers.

What Calatrava is on the hook for are some of the inflated costs, as his designs are rather expensive to construct. Even in that respect, there were a lot of factors that drove the cost of the Oculus through the roof, such as demanding more steel in the structure, or Bloomberg demanding an accelerated schedule.

Posted on: 7/21 16:38
Top


Re: Fulop foe loses tax appeal targeting mayor's home
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
It is pretty sad that, presented with such a great opportunity to shine a spotlight on the existing tax disparity, the mayor of our city has instead chosen to play dumb about the issue...
Fulop could have managed this situation into a win-win by simply acknowledging that the tax disparity is unfair, and that some people (like himself) are benefitting from the current situation at the expense of other people, but that there is nothing he can do until the reval is completed and new tax levies are assessed.

Did you not notice that he fought the reval tooth and nail? It's not surprising that he'd take this attitude.

Sadly, what we really should do is have a reval on a regular basis (e.g. every 5-7 years), specifically to avoid these huge battles over one-time corrections. What's sad is that we cannot rely on Fulop to do the right thing here.

Posted on: 7/21 9:57
Top


Re: Developers break ground on Jersey City micro-units apartment building
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
While that would make for a better layout, building code states that you can no longer have your main egress be though a kitchen.



What is the logic behind this? Would this also be the case if you had an apartment with one of those open kitchen / living room combinations?


In an emergency, the path of egress should probably not take people directly through a room where most home fires start.

That makes sense, but seems unavoidable in a shotgun apartment.

Posted on: 7/21 9:46
Top


Re: Developers break ground on Jersey City micro-units apartment building
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
So developers get around this by having the entrance in the bathroom. Our planning board approved this? It is time for a change in our planning board then.

Why?

Increased urban density is inevitable, and the design is small but appears to be quite efficient.

Nor is this necessarily unhygienic, as the toilet is in a sealed room. It's just... amusing.

Posted on: 7/20 16:22
Top


Re: Developers break ground on Jersey City micro-units apartment building
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
wait a minute...the front door to the apartment is in the bathroom? WTF?

Yep. Seems kind of typical for a NYC area apartment, no?

Posted on: 7/20 16:03
Top


Re: Developers break ground on Jersey City micro-units apartment building
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


$1300/mo for a fully furnished incredibly small unit, with lots of amenities (cafe, tv room, gym, roof deck). But no separate storage space. Ouch.

Plus, the entrance is the "Large Bathroom." Sweet.

Resized Image



Posted on: 7/20 12:42
Top


Re: FOUR MORE Shot - One Dead in JC Violence on Monday Night
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


As always, it's unfortunate to hear about such violence in JC.

That said, that's the 13th homicide in Jersey City, which is more or less the same pace as last year (24 total homicides).

Posted on: 7/4 10:44
Top


Re: Jersey City Reservoir Visit
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


I assume you mean the ex-reservoir on Summit.

I've been to it, but not on the grounds. It's, uh... a big pond. ;)

Apparently there are some events there, you can check out their Facebook page.
https://www.facebook.com/jcreservoir


Posted on: 6/27 16:21
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
There is nothing in those links which suggests inspectors will "assume that your unit is at the high end of the range of comparables" if they don't gain access. More bullshit disinformation. Why can't people be honest?

Resized Image

Posted on: 6/7 21:00
Top


Re: Zillow 07307 market report
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


I'd add that condo conversions are complex and expensive.

I don't know if it outweighs any theoretical tax benefits, but I doubt it. More likely is that they are making profits on rents, and assuming the properties will appreciate.

Or, just turning a profit. Buildings like Portside Towers are still rentals, after all these years....

Posted on: 5/31 20:51
Top


Re: Zillow 07307 market report
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
The median home value in 07307 is now $399,100, compared to $333,696 one year ago. Home values in your area are expected to increase 8.5% one year from now.

Holy crap.

Yep

Demand is high, inventory is low. Not just in JC, but all across the US. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2 ... housing-market/354486001/)

After the financial crisis, home builders overcorrected (surprise!) and didn't build enough homes to keep up with demand.

JC has been building, but most of the new units are rentals, and over 75% of units are rentals.

Good time to own a home, kind of a sucky time to buy one....

Posted on: 5/31 18:26
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Let's say she sells her current place for $1.3m after taxes and loss in value, and buys a place for $750k. That's $550k left over, and will cover 110 years of the higher property taxes.

Or, she buys a $1m home. The $300k left over covers 33 years of higher property taxes.

You left out the reverse mortgage option where she extracts 2% of value every year to pay taxes plus whatever interest fees and gets to stay in her home. Reverse mortgages are not intrinsically bad. However they can be abused by the unscrupulous just like any financial product.

Reverse mortgage is an option, and not a terrible one either, but I do have some concerns about it.

The first is that with very few exceptions (notably cars), I am not a fan of borrowing to pay expenses. Borrowing to enhance the value of a home makes a lot of sense to me; borrowing to cover a tax bill, less so.

In this case, it's not horrendous, as long as... Interest rates stay low; you get a fixed rate, not adjustable; the value of the property appreciates faster than the cost of the interest, plus the tax expense.

Which brings me to the second point, namely that reverse mortgages can be complex. My parents were pretty sharp at 70, but still might find it daunting, or get suckered into a bad deal.

Posted on: 5/26 16:14
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
After Hoboken did their revaluation in 2012 or 2013, not sure of the year, their ratable base went to $11 billion. Which means they were paying more to the county than Jersey City.

So what?

The reval is revenue neutral. If the ratable base goes up, the multiplier goes down.


Quote:
Dolomiti and Brewster want to deny the fact that your ratable based or tax abatements which are not ratables, have nothing to do with the taxes you pay.

That's because the requirement for the reval to be revenue neutral makes it largely irrelevant.

Plus, as much as we may like or dislike abatements, that's a done deal -- and it does not relieve anyone else of their tax burden.

If you do not support abatements, then you have plenty of avenues to speak out against them. Holding the reval hostage to them benefits no one.


Quote:
Tax abatements hurt the average homeowner because it hides the ratable base and cause the tax base to increase.

So you hate the idea that abated properties pay less property tax, but you're fine with people underpaying property taxes because the city can't be bothered to update the valuations?

And I might add, this counts as yet another post where you have no sympathy whatsoever for the JC residents who are overpaying their taxes because of delays in the reval. Sad!

Posted on: 5/26 16:09
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCBORN wrote:
Is this right?

with the example someone gave below.
Zillow estimates its value at $1.6 million. She currently pays around $11,200 in property taxes, and should be paying $30k.

Would this person be able to sell her home at $1.6M if her taxes are now $30k?

Maybe.

On one hand, it is reasonable to assume that the higher tax bill makes the property less desirable.

On the other, there is very little inventory in JC, and high demand. And it's not like there will be a bunch of similar properties in JC with dramatically lower tax rates.

If she refuses to pay more than $10k in property taxes, and wants to stay in the same neighborhood, she will need to seriously downsize; after the reval, that's the likely property tax rate for a $500k unit. That will definitely suck.

Let's say she sells her current place for $1.3m after taxes and loss in value, and buys a place for $750k. That's $550k left over, and will cover 110 years of the higher property taxes.

Or, she buys a $1m home. The $300k left over covers 33 years of higher property taxes.


Quote:
I am looking to buy a home in Jersey City. Would you recommend I wait a year to see how this all plays out? From what I am reading the home values in JC went down in 1988 after the last reval.

There are too many variables, such as your current home's value, or your rent, or all sorts of contingencies that will affect prices and your own ability to handle the mortgage, to make such specific advice via a web forum.

What I can say is that it seems unlikely that home prices will continue to appreciate between now and when the reval hits.

Plus... That was 1988. JC was different then.

You should look at Hoboken instead. In 2013 they did a reval after 17 years, with a market much more like JC today than JC in 1988. Lots of development; fairly hot market; limited inventory.

What happened? Property values jumped 12% in the year after the reval, with the average deed growing by $47k. Prices have continued to rise every year since.

While some individuals will choose to sell after the reval, I'm not sure you can count on a dramatic drop in prices at that time.

Posted on: 5/26 10:59
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Let me repeat, JC will never have a fair revaluation as long as $2.7 billion worth of property is excluded from the process.

Yet another attempt to change the subject.

It is the delay that has resulted in people who own $1.5 million dollar homes, paying 1/3 what they should.

And abatements didn't delay the reval.

And yet again! You show no sympathy whatsoever for the people who overpay on their taxes. Sad.

Posted on: 5/25 22:24
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
brewster:
The letters I wrote had to do with these subjects...

Don't change the subject.

Are you happy that one person underpays their taxes for years, knowing full well that means someone else is overpaying their taxes?

Should we feel sorry for someone whose taxes are going up, because the value of their home increased from $150k to $1.5 million?

Did delaying the reval make that better or worse?



Did I give the assessment to individual property owners? Did I stop the revaluation or did the mayor stop the revaluation? My attendance at meetings has nothing to do with the revaluation starting for stopping. I know you will like to link the two but your comments have no merit.

Your comments on this board have been exclusively about how terrible the reval is, how it's only going to hurt people, and so forth.

You have never expressed a single bit of sympathy for the people who are overpaying their taxes.

You have never expressed any interest in making the system more fair.

It doesn't occur to you that the people whose taxes are going up have been getting a deal for years -- at another taxpayer's expense.

When I ask you point blank about the people hurt by the status quo, you deflect, you ignore.

You express zero acknowledgement, or sympathy, or recognition of the other half of the problem. Not even an iota.

<< shakes head >>

Posted on: 5/25 21:07
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
brewster:
The letters I wrote had to do with these subjects...

Don't change the subject.

Are you happy that one person underpays their taxes for years, knowing full well that means someone else is overpaying their taxes?

Should we feel sorry for someone whose taxes are going up, because the value of their home increased from $150k to $1.5 million?

Did delaying the reval make that better or worse?


Posted on: 5/25 20:13
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
How did your article prove I am lying, Dolomiti?

I did not accuse you of lying. I pointed out that the law did not give the purchaser of the liens the ability to foreclose any faster than if the city had done it, and that you omitted how it dramatically increased compliance.


Quote:
Your article states the fact the Schundler had a bunk lien sale. Where did these homes come from?

It came from people who failed or refused to pay their property taxes. The city took out a lien, and then (with permission of the state legislature) sold the lien.


Quote:
People do not choose to give up their property to a lien buyer.

Property owners have a responsibility to pay their property taxes. If they can't afford it, then unfortunately they need to do something about it.

If they refuse, then they will have a lien placed on their property, and run the risk of foreclosure.


Quote:
McDonald from the JJ had the 1988 revaluation march in the papers recently.

So what?

Do you actually believe, at this point, that anything in that article is news to me?

Do you not understand that thousands of JC residents are paying MORE in taxes right now than they should?

Do you not recognize that the refusal to reval compounds the unfairness of the problem? And only makes it worse when the city actually does it?

And from whence should my sympathy spring forth? For example, the article you linked discusses Ms Narciso. Her home is assessed by the City at $145k; Zillow estimates its value at $1.6 million. She currently pays around $11,200 in property taxes, and should be paying $30k.

Yes, that's a big jump. You know what else that means? It means that she's been getting a tax break to the tune of $15,000 and up for years.

She got a huge tax break for decades/ Her home has shot up in value. A reval was inevitable. She should've been prepared.

Now, I will grant you that on one hand, it sucks that a 71 year old woman may have to move because her property taxes went up. That said, her home is worth somewhere around $1.6 million. There should be NO QUESTION that she can afford to buy something decent in JC, in her price range, with property taxes she can afford, AND take a vacation in Paris for a week to boot.

Request for sympathy: Denied.

Posted on: 5/25 17:41
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
By selling the bulk lien, that line was satisfied with the lien sale, not by taxpayers. So taxes got reduced. The state legislation had to be change in order for this to happened. Here is the downside, it allowed lien owners to aggressively foreclose sooner on properties.

Yeah... no.

The law did not change in a way that accelerated the time frame for foreclosures. What it did was give the city money up-front, and spared it the effort of foreclosing on tax delinquents.

You also ignored how it increased compliance from 78% to 99%.


Quote:
Many of those properties in that lien were small homeowners who couldnot pay their taxes from the revaluation.

So what?

Those homeowners were getting a big tax break for years, and had plenty of time to prepare and/or sell their homes long before any foreclosure proceedings.

And why did their taxes go up? Because the value of their property increased, far in excess of what the city estimated.

This is like someone winning $300,000 in the lottery, taking it all at once, spending it all in 6 months, and then finding out that they have to pay income tax on it.

I realize that life, law, taxes and real estate are complex. However, if you lost a $300,000 home because you didn't pay $10,000 in property taxes? 4 years after the reval? That's not the city's fault. If you own property, it is your responsibility to pay the taxes. If you can't afford the taxes, that sucks, but it's your responsibility to deal with it.

At some point, you have to take responsibility for your own mistakes.

I am also slightly disgusted that you have no sympathy whatsoever for the people who are overpaying their property taxes. Does no one face financial hardship because they're dealing with unfair property tax burdens?

Are you happy that families in Bergen-Lafayette and Greenville are paying your taxes? You good with that? That work for you?

It's not the reval that is unfair. It is the DELAYS in the reval that make the system unfair. What part of that is unclear to you?

Posted on: 5/25 16:06
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


2001 NYT article which discusses the bulk liens:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/19/nyr ... put-2=schundler+bulk+lien

Mr. Schundler prides himself on finding creative approaches to solving problems. And his earliest coup may stand up as his signal financial accomplishment. In the early 1990's, Jersey City property tax bills were so high that many people, unable to pay, were losing their homes to foreclosure. The city's tax collection rate fell so low at 78 percent that its budget was snowballing: it had to set aside as much money in each year's budget as was uncollected the year before.

Mr. Schundler broke that cycle.

After winning a special election in November 1992, Mr. Schundler, a former Wall Street broker and analyst, won a full term the following spring by promising a huge tax cut based on a bold, but complex idea. He found a way to recoup millions in back taxes the city had failed to collect. It took a special state law, which the Legislature's Republican leaders pushed through on his behalf.

The plan: Jersey City would bundle delinquent tax liens and sell them in bulk to underwriters, for $25 million in cash and a note for $19 million more. The underwriters would issue bonds, to be paid off as they collected back taxes or foreclosed on the properties.

It did not all go smoothly. Collections dragged out far longer than anticipated. Homeowners sued the underwriter, and in July were awarded $30 million in damages. Jersey City also sued the underwriters when its note went unpaid, and received a settlement of just $6.25 million.

Still, the bulk-lien deals dramatically improved the city's tax collections, as many property owners paid their taxes faster out of fear of foreclosure. For the last four years, the tax collection rate has been better than 99 percent. The city's reserve for uncollected taxes, meanwhile, is just $2.5 million, down from $25 million in 1993.

Henry A. Coleman, director of the Rutgers Center for Government Services, who studied the bulk lien sale, said Mr. Schundler brought many city properties back from tax delinquency. ''That's something he deserves credit for,'' he said.


Maybe that could happen again in the future, but... I sort of doubt it.

At any rate, it sounds like the foreclosures were happening before the liens, and people paid their taxes after the liens were sold.

Posted on: 5/24 15:11
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

mfadam wrote:
Let's say the typical DTJC rowhouse goes from about 12K in taxes to 24K - a simple double. What do you think that does to post-Reval valuations?

Maybe 15% haircut?


Depends on rates, if you assume your buyer is borrowing and has a fixed monthly nut in mind. $12k more in tax means $1k less in borrowing power. At 4.5% on a 30 yr, $1000 gets you $200k. So assuming the buyer has the extra downpayment, they're budget is $200k less than it was pre-reval.

Or, it depends on demand.

Demand for properties in JC is high, and inventory is tight. Even extreme events like Sandy didn't make a dent in property values.


Quote:
Yvonne, prove what you're saying, otherwise it's more lies. Tax liens are sold at auction and the residual after taxes and loans are paid is returned to the owner.

Actually, Schundler did sell off the tax liens to an underwriter. It required state legislation to pass. There were issues with how it was handled, which make it rather unlikely that will be repeated.

What Yvonne doesn't mention is that despite the problems, it produced a 99% compliance rate.

She also doesn't recognize that thousands of homeowners are getting screwed; or that pushing back the revals makes the system unfair, which causes all the problems that she's crying about in the first place.

Posted on: 5/23 20:43
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
So, I used the ArcGIS reval, and picked a house with a recent sale date.

2016 purchase: $1.3m
2004 purchase: $700k
1997 purchase: $280k
2016 property taxes: $11k (or 0.85%)
Current assmt: $146k

I presume that after the reval, assuming the house is still worth $1.3m, their taxes will go up to $24,700.

If so, then what is the likely basis for their current property tax? It seems too high to be based off the "current assmt" figure in the database.


The actual tax rate on the assessed value is 7.7% (as opposed to an effective rate applied to FMV), thus my calculator turns up $11,242 when you multiply $146k x 0.077.

Rithmatic, man. Do you get it that between revals they raise the rate not the assessments?

Actually, I don't understand the mechanisms that they used to calculate current property tax rates in between the revals. Hence the question.

Posted on: 5/22 19:18
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
So, I used the ArcGIS reval, and picked a house with a recent sale date.

2016 purchase: $1.3m
2004 purchase: $700k
1997 purchase: $280k
2016 property taxes: $11k (or 0.85%)
Current assmt: $146k

I presume that after the reval, assuming the house is still worth $1.3m, their taxes will go up to $24,700.

If so, then what is the likely basis for their current property tax? It seems too high to be based off the "current assmt" figure in the database.


I don't have the actual numbers handy in front of me, but the assessed values are just about one fourth of the estimated value. In other words, the city thinks that property is worth about 650K. That is why the reval is long overdue.

I get that part. What I'm not clear on is:

• What is "current assmt" in the database
• Does it have any relation to the current property tax
• If not, then keeping in mind JC hasn't done a reval in nearly 30 years, what is the current tax amount based on?

Posted on: 5/22 19:14
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If Tommy was sharper about real estate, he could have appealed his taxes, but only down to the effective rate of 2.1%.

What's the mechanism / reason for the limit on the effect of the appeal?


You can only win an appeal if you prove your FMV is more than 15% off your assessment/ratio (what they say it's worth). And even if you win, the effective rate only goes down to FMV/ratio, effectively around that 2.2% mark. That's still more than double what the legacy DT properties are paying.

According to Bamb00zle he was paying 0.7% before he sold. Well played sir. Maybe. I know if Yvonne had held on instead of bailing she and Mr Yvonne could have made another 1/2 million at least. That surely would have been more than the hit it would take for the taxes doubling.

Hmmm

So, I used the ArcGIS reval, and picked a house with a recent sale date.

2016 purchase: $1.3m
2004 purchase: $700k
1997 purchase: $280k
2016 property taxes: $11k (or 0.85%)
Current assmt: $146k

I presume that after the reval, assuming the house is still worth $1.3m, their taxes will go up to $24,700.

If so, then what is the likely basis for their current property tax? It seems too high to be based off the "current assmt" figure in the database.

Posted on: 5/22 11:30
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Oh, I forgot to mention. If you rent in JC, and your landlord's property taxes go up, do you think that will have any effect on your rent...?

Posted on: 5/21 20:17
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
All this makes me even happier that I recently sold and moved to a rental. A tax rate of 2.1% on my former property would triple my taxes, and the impact on the property value would be severe, much more than the capital gains tax I'll pay.

Property taxes need to be adjusted to be fair. However, because of irresponsible actions by successive JC Administrations in avoiding a reval for 28 years it will be very painful. And when the State shifts more school costs to JC it will be worse. Even if that takes a couple of years, people will see it coming so it will hit property values.

The idea of a reverse mortgage to pay more tax to this dysfunctional City, particularly in view of a likely substantial hit to property values in the near future, has no appeal to me. The way I see it I've taken my gains and will wait.

Other factors are important to me as well. Transportation woes on NJT and PATH are only going to get a lot worse when all the over-development is completed. And with all those apartments becoming available and a softening NYC rental market the DT JC property market is going to look a whole lot different when those new assessment notices go out in about 12 months IMHO.

Uh huh fascinating

Hoboken completed its reval some time in 2013. Property values have gained 65% since January 2013. While JC RE prices are hardly guaranteed to increase under any circumstances, it's unlikely that the reval will seriously undermine property values in the long run.

Plus, the reval will be painful for some people -- and beneficial to others, namely the people who were carrying your water while you owned your place.

Thus, it seems highly unlikely that you can take the proceeds of your old apartment, and subtract the cost of rent (which is likely to increase next year), and buy back into the market in early 2019 without paying more. And properties that might be cheap? Those will have, wait for it... bigger tax bills, probably too big for you to want to pay.

We keep hearing people bitch about PATH, and problems keep not getting worse. Not to mention that by 2019 or so, at least some of the signal improvements will be phased in. And let's get real, it's going to be a lot easier to commute to NYC via the PATH train in 2019 than by driving or NJ Transit, and cheaper than taking a ferry (which will only benefit you if you live and work close to the ferry terminals) or a bus from the suburbs.

I.e. even if PATH sucks, everything else is probably gonna be worse.

Renting has some advantages. There are many viable reasons to sell a home and rent. Saving money by dodging a property tax increase that won't hit for about a year? It what may still be a hot market in the interim? Not sure that's one of them.

Posted on: 5/21 19:55
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 28 »






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