Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
40 user(s) are online (34 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 39

terrencemcd, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (Dolomiti)




Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#1
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
#2
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
#3
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
#4
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
#5
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
#6
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
#7
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
#8
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
#9
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
#10
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
#11
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
#12
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
#13
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
#14
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
#15
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
#16
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
#17
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
#18
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


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


Quote:

Yvonne 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?


2/3 of homeowners will pay their fair share, but 1/3 will not be affected - tax abated properties. So therefore, there will never be a fair share of taxes.

1) I was asking why brewster is asserting that there is some type of limit on the effectiveness or reductions via an appeal.

2) I call BS on the idea that 1/3 of Jersey City housing units are abated.

3) Regardless of anything with with abatements, the reval makes property taxes more fair. And contrary to Monroe's claim, despite the fact that it's going to negatively impact me personally, I still advocate not just for this reval, but for more frequent revaluations.

Posted on: 5/21 12:55
Top


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


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?

Posted on: 5/20 19:21
Top


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


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Everyone says people should pay their 'fair share', until they're the ones who need to pay their fair share.

My taxes will go up.

People need to pay their fair share. That includes me.

I'm not thrilled about it, but fair is fair.

Posted on: 5/20 19:06
Top


Re: chalk messages around downtown.
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

EvilivE wrote:
if i go out there and start writing pro-trump slogans, you'll sooon see who all the snowflakes are... in addition to our original chalk-wielding revolutionaries, of course.

Oh, I'm sure people would complain. The question is, would they complain more or less than you? And more or less anxiously, or stridently, or bitterly than you?

My guess is it'd be about the same.

Posted on: 5/8 19:44
Top


Re: chalk messages around downtown.
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

EvilivE wrote:
someone has too much time on their hands, and is hell-bent on letting us all know it. 'resist' and "impeach" writtten inside chalk hearts, as if suggesting it's colorfully cute to upend our government's leadership, during a time of heightened political tensions, simply because the other crooked candidate didn't win.

I don't know whether chalking (yes, that's a thing) is legal in JC. It's illegal in some areas, in part because it's classified as vandalism (even if there is no permanent damage), and because it's not seen as a critical impediment to free speech (there are plenty of other outlets that don't involve marking up state or private property). There may be issues if such laws are enforced selectively, but generally speaking those laws have held up in court.

That said: There is no need to be such a Sensitive Snowflake. People don't like the President; he's not getting more popular. You might as well get used to it.

Posted on: 5/8 17:21
Top


Re: Cutting down large trees on Barrow Street
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
I recently learned that NYC chose to bury it's power & telecom lines in the 1st decade of the 20th century. Jersey, as always, still half assed.


Give it time. It's only been 100 years. Such advanced concepts take time to spread and take hold.

Yes, and I'm sure if they announced a plan to bury the power lines today, there would be an explosion of complaints by JC residents / JC List posters. Sidewalks torn up, short power outages, possible flood damage, the outrageous costs, and whatever pol recommends it will of course be pilloried and accused of taking donations/kickbacks....

Underground isn't a slam dunk, by the way. It's significantly more expensive to install and maintain, especially in developed areas; it's harder to upgrade; they aren't more reliable; failures are harder to locate; they're more susceptible to flood damage.

All that to save the occasional tree?

Posted on: 5/8 15:22
Top


Re: what's the status of White Eagle Hall?
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Website seems to be blank, by the way....

Posted on: 5/1 13:32
Top


Re: The city and the Friends of the Loew's could be heading back to court.
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

earthling wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
I don't know what to make of the legal issues, but the physical interior of the building in terms of rehabilitation is at a standstill imho.


The physical restoration and rehabilitation has been at a practical standstill since years ago. That is why I support the idea of bringing in a professional organization to run the place and oversee its renovation. I totally get that FOL saved the place from the wrecking ball, but they are definitely not up to the task of seeing through the effort of restoring the place to its former grandeur.


place needs truckloads of money to bring up to date. commercial investor is not guarantee that they will save the place.

i can picture them running it to the ground and turning into condos one day. fulop is proven to fail us time and again, and catering to his wall street masters

Would you like some vermouth with your bitters?

There was already a bidding process, and a contract awarded (AEG Live + Mana Contemporary + NJCU). Part of the deal is that AEG Live pitches in $3.5 million for the renovation.

The Loews is not for sale. No part of the contract sells the property to anyone. The city owns it, and will keep it. The contract most certainly does not allow AEG to turn it into condos.

Along with public interest in making it some kind of performing arts space, that's as good a guarantee as we're going to get.

Posted on: 4/28 15:53
Top


Re: Fulop to solicit proposals from for-profit companies to replace FOL in running the Loew’s theater
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

kencares wrote:
It's sagas like this that remind you Steve Flop is just another Goldman Sachs politician in bed with Kushner.

The Loews is a local gem and should be managed by a local organization as a non-profit, not sold off to the highest bidder to extract profits for some mega corporation.

A non-profit will have a tough time raising the funds to fix the facility, let alone manage it properly. FOL certainly has shown it's not up to it.

The bid that was put out a year or so ago required that FOL program something like 6 days per year... which is more than FOL can currently manage.

We should also note that despite all the feuding, it sounds like FOL and Fulop are now in talks to move forward.

Posted on: 4/28 15:45
Top


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


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I remember that march, it went from City Hall to the County Building. I lost neighbors in that revaluation.

Boo freaking hoo.

The reval is revenue neutral. That means for every person whose taxes go up, someone else's tax will go down.

Those neighbors? The ones whose taxes went up? That was because they weren't paying their fair share. They were getting a tax break, while someone else was paying more than they should have.

Tax abatements has nothing whatsoever to do with this. The problem is that JC hasn't done a reval since 1988, which results in massive imbalances.

I realize it's one of your many pet peeves, but the problem isn't abatements. It's that mayor after mayor have refused to do their jobs, and order a reval.

Posted on: 4/27 12:33
Top


Re: another fulop protected slum burns down
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

neverleft wrote:
It is a disaster waiting to happen and when it does a slick lawyer is going to request the complaint logs from JC’s help desk and sue the city for inaction.

Yaay, another prediction of DOOM. We never get enough of those in JC


Quote:
All the city needs to do is ask the people in the know…

Or, those "people in the know" can report possible violators.

http://www.jerseycitynj.gov/hedc.aspx?id=1180


Quote:
They will tell you how many different names are on the overseas letters.

They're federal employees. Not spies for the Division of Housing Code Enforcement.

Posted on: 4/24 19:19
Top


Re: another fulop protected slum burns down
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

earthling wrote:
there is a fire like once a week. duh.

You do know there are over 110,000 residential units in Jersey City?


Quote:
>What qualifies as a "slum" to you?
34 gray street

Right, so basically... You have no actual data to back up your claims.


Quote:
>>jj never did a follow up to their own stories.

>How much of a follow-up does there need to be on a fire?

i will settle on a single one. if i were an editor, there would have been an investigative report on 20 000+ of illegal dwellings in jc.

Right. Because it's not like local media budgets have taken a massive hit, so that they can follow your fantasy allegations.

Where is this 20k number coming from? That's nearly 20% of all units in JC.


Quote:
>That's a pretty serious allegation. What's that based on?

knowledge. just ask him: 201-547-5200

So basically, you're pulling it out of your ass.

Thanks for nothin'.

Posted on: 4/24 19:14
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 27 »






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