Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
52 user(s) are online (27 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 3
Guests: 49

third_street_hats, Dinger, bodhipooh, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (JCGuys)




Re: GoFundMe $$$ fill an Exploited LOOP-HOLE in NJ Open Public Records Act [OPRA] in <1hour !
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Goal is met. congratulations

Posted on: 3/26 11:06
Top


Re: Mayor Fulop to Introduce 2017 Budget with No Tax Increase Tonight March 22nd, 2017
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Stringer wrote:

No tax hike in $572M 2017 Jersey City budget

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on March 23, 2017 at 2:19 PM, updated March 23, 2017 at 2:21 PM

JERSEY CITY -- The City Council last night unanimously introduced a $572 million budget for 2017 that comes with no municipal tax hike.

In a statement, Mayor Steve Fulop credited an increase in hotel tax collections, municipal court fines and revenue from tax abatements for the steady tax rate. This is the third year in a row municipal taxes are not expected to rise.

The city will now move to the budget hearing stage, when department directors will appear before the council to explain their spending requests for the year. The budget isn't usually formally adopted until at least the summer.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... _2017_budget_with_no.html



I guess that means parking tickets... lol

Resized Image

Posted on: 3/24 12:48
Top


Re: Mayor Fulop to Introduce 2017 Budget with No Tax Increase Tonight March 22nd, 2017
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is amazing how taxes or fees go up but the story is no tax increase. Here is one example of increase. In 2012, homeowners paid $12.5 million in the franchise agreement (water). Today, it is $19 million. Instead of giving the public a refund, we are paying more. How about adding up the increase of fees that the city charge residents?


Yvonne, I actually agree with you. How about decreasing property taxes by $6.5 million to make up for the increase in water rates?? Just annoying politicking from city hall.

State changes in school aid can't come soon enough. I'm tired of this BS.


Posted on: 3/24 12:46
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Anyone saying this land is worthless is missing the fact that a plot half as large, across the street, sold for $35 million dollars TWO YEARS AGO.


Exactly!

That sale was for 7.5 acres and has a bunch of serious environmental conditions affecting value. (or $4.7 million an acre).

Fast forward two-years, the Sci-Tech City lands is 16 acres... if put on the private market for highest and best use, this land comes in conservatively at $50 million+ maybe $75 million. Again, I still strongly support Sci-Tech City project even at a land valuation of $100 million, but why do people tell lies and say the land has no value. Seriously?

Posted on: 3/24 12:42
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


While I fully support this project, I'm frustrated by the rose-colored glasses worn by Dolomiti. Why toe the party line still even as this is approved, and look at the serious issues facing this project.

My prediction

1) This will not be built in in current form as LSC will come nowhere near the amount of funding needed for construction AND there is no bank in the world crazy enough that will lend on such shaky financial projections.

2) Even if this somehow gets built, it will never turn a profit due to accounting tricks and the nature of a non-profit business. There will be decisions made to limit what's considered profit even if they come close.

I do want to see this built, but please show me a pro-forma or similar development anywhere in the world where this has happened.

I suspect the plot of land will just remain vacant for nearly a decade until a more feasible plan is put in place.

Even though I fully support this project, watch I be attacked by pro Fulop minions for not drinking the kool-aid. LOL Why can't people just be real and honest about this situation instead of the age of alternative facts.

Any feedback, good or bad, on the above is welcomed.





Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

stc4blues wrote:
I still don't understand what's going on with this $78M. De we have:

1. Doners' giving $78M to a non-profit entity, which then
2. loans it to a for-profit entity (against the value of the land?),
3. which must then repay the loan to the non-profit entity. Hence,
4. The City's 50/50 split of the net doesn't kick in until that loan is repaid.

Is that what's going on?

That's not my understanding.

1. LSC fundraises and gets $78m from donors
2. LSC will invite investors for another $55m worth
3. LSC takes out loans for the rest of the project
4. Nothing has to be repaid to the donors
5. The city starts getting paid for the land, after the project makes $78m in profits; they are paid 50% of subsequent profits.
6. Once the land is paid off, the city's share drops to 20%.

Posted on: 3/24 12:28
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

light12v wrote:
LAST EVENING ANY PROSPECT FOR ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 16 ACRES TO JC TAX RATE-ABLES WAS ELIMINATED BY OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS.

YOU CAN SEND YOUR THANK-YOU CARDS TO:
MAYOR Steven Fulop
Council President Rolando R. Lavarro, Jr.
Councilwoman at Large Joyce Watterman
Councilman at Large Daniel Rivera
Ward A (Greenville) Councilman Frank Gajewski
Ward E (Downtown) Councilwoman Candice Osborne
Ward F (Bergen/Lafayette) Councilman Jermaine Robinson




Excellent news!

Posted on: 3/23 7:47
Top


Re: U.S. Sen. Menendez - new federal investigation
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Now this should be interesting to watch... this was a political hit job from the previous admin "non- political" DOJ... now with all the NJ connections in the WH. What can we do to make this all go away?

Let's start watching how the senator starts voting? Starting with a Scotus vote?


LoL

Posted on: 3/21 20:25
Top


Re: Stop Sale of Public Land to Developers, Promote a Green City
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bricks wrote:
A petition was just launched on Change.org opposing the city selling a wooded lot to a developer who will clear out the trees and build apartments. The city lacks green space and this is being done without the land going to public auction. This same developer already cleared out all of the trees at a lot just down the street from this, and over a year and a half later, that lot just sits blighted and overgrown with weeds.

Please sign the petition if you oppose this.

https://www.change.org/p/rolando-r-lav ... a-green-city-for-our-kids


Instead of a usless change.org petition, why don't you open a GoFundMe account to purchase the land and keep the trees.

I want to voice my support and sale and development of this lot. I'm going to email Lavarro now.

Posted on: 3/20 12:20
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:



Quote:
Now we're to believe that a $22 Million organization, which can't break even, can build a $230 Million++ SciTech Scity. The redeveloper is UNKNOWN...

LSC is in charge, and have appointed trustees. They are raising money already for the project. It's a bit early for too much more than a master plan.

Oddly enough, Fulop hated the 2008 loan, and is backing this plan. Go figure.

I also have to say, I vastly prefer to the previous plan, which was a 10 story hotel and conference center. Don't you?


Why not also include a hotel and conference center on a portion of the site if it makes the project and Sci-Tech City more economically feasible.

10 story hotel and huge conference center is not a good fit for the site in general.

That said, it sounds like the site will have a small conference center, and 50 units of temporary housing for visitors.

It's also a little difficult to have a big hotel and conference center occupying the same space as a project that combines commercial, residential and a school.


I don't disagree with any of your points, Dolomiti. I'll clarify my point: I don't believe Sci-Tech City, as originally planned, is economically feasible and thus will never be built or significantly scaled back from the fancy renderings we're seeing now. This reliance on philanthropic dollars is fantasy and the rushing through of this without an appraisal of the land reeks of something.

Don't get me wrong, the land could be worth $100 million. I still think it's a great project. I just lack confidence that the appropriate funding is in place without tapping into that land value by selling a portion for traditional development with proven track record of producing income (i.e. offices, residential).

The entire site is 16 acres. Three or four or those acres will need to be sold to traditional developments to maximize the highest and best use of the land in order to fund the other improvements, in my opinion. I hope my opinion is wrong, but I just don't see Liberty Science Center's board pulling this off.

Please, someone, prove me wrong and demonstrate that Liberty Science Center has the financial capacity to carry out SciTech City as planned.


Posted on: 3/18 0:08
Top


Re: Buying to live in Bergen-Lafayette a good idea?
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Not saying ole Harry here isn't B-L born-n-raised, but it's kinda funny how many people want to slam the door closed after they move in. From our Gold Coast to the Pacific Northwest, people move somewhere and then get all up at the other people who are coming and "ruining it".


Hypocrites.

Plus I never understood the argument from the anti-gentrifies. By somehow keeping people and investment out on certain areas for fear it may become unaffordable, almost calling for a reverse redlining policy or that it's better to keep a community cheap and ghetto instead of seeking to improve it too much for it will attract the hipster crowd.

The only way to keep things affordable is to ensure there is ample supply to keep up with demand. Jersey City does a pretty good job at this actually.

Posted on: 3/17 23:58
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Naysayers & critics: What's your point? What would you prefer?

1: Current plan

2: LSC gets charged market value for land, which likely sinks the project, and leads to 3.

3: The land gets sold to highest bidder, which is back to JC business usual, where nothing but money talks. The land is built out to the maximum possible revenue generating structures with no regard to benefiting the community.

Is there a "4"?


There's gotta be a mix. Don't get me wrong, I like Plan #1, but the only way it's getting funded if there is an infusion of private investment if a small portion of the site is sold at market value to private interest for a condo/apartment/office/hotel/etc...

Please prove me wrong, but there is no way this nearly $300,000,000 project moves forward without tapping into the awesome values in the real estate market. Please prove me wrong.

Posted on: 3/17 21:41
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

terrencemcd wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
So LSC is 'raising' 78 million that will have to be repaid-that's a loan, right?

Where is that money coming from? Branded coffee mugs in the gift shop? LSC tshirts sold online? I'm sure the parking fees they collect now go to operating expenses, so added parking won't help.


It was not explained to me the way Donnelly explained it. The city told me, after speaking with the LSC CEO, that LSC is going to tap into its donor base for the $78M they believe it will take to get the project off the ground. The way they see it, they are diverting that $78M from LSC, so once SciTech Scity is built and starts making money, SciTech Scity, which will have profit-generating features like a hotel, is going to "pay back" LSC the $78M.


Thanks. I would love to see the financials for LSC. I bet they're too optimistic. Not against this proposal. I just want to make sure it gets built and generates enough revenue for it to work.

Posted on: 3/15 14:21
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:



Quote:
Now we're to believe that a $22 Million organization, which can't break even, can build a $230 Million++ SciTech Scity. The redeveloper is UNKNOWN...

LSC is in charge, and have appointed trustees. They are raising money already for the project. It's a bit early for too much more than a master plan.

Oddly enough, Fulop hated the 2008 loan, and is backing this plan. Go figure.

I also have to say, I vastly prefer to the previous plan, which was a 10 story hotel and conference center. Don't you?


Why not also include a hotel and conference center on a portion of the site if it makes the project and Sci-Tech City more economically feasible.

Posted on: 3/15 12:07
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mfadam wrote:
having spent a lot of time at LSC with kids I wouldn't bet on a big spillover impact into DTJC restaurants. LSC is an auto based destination. People drive in from the burbs and run their kids around for 3 hours and then pack it up and head home in their minivan or SUV. I think the odds of the average user making the extra drive to DTJC to eat are slim.


Agreed with this 100%

Posted on: 3/15 12:04
Top


Re: Sad Times for Public Forums -- [ Part 1 of...Many...(If need be)... ]
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Resized Image

Posted on: 3/11 12:46
Top


Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


I can't wait until the inevitable change in the school funding formula and these losers will have to face the reality of tens of millions in budget cuts.

They should take their party down to Trenton if their beef is with abatements.

Quote:

Stringer wrote:

Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on March 09, 2017 at 12:10 PM, updated March 09, 2017 at 2:04 PM

JERSEY CITY -- A group of about two dozen people wearing party hats, clutching invitations and bearing a cake descended on the City Council meeting yesterday to commemorate a special milestone.

No, it wasn't a council member's birthday. Last night saw the council voting on what the protesters/partygoers said was the 70th tax abatement of Mayor Steve Fulop's administration (it may have been the 71st).

The surprise party, the brainchild of ex-school board member and former Fulop ally Ellen Simon, was an effort to convince the council to vote down the abatement, a 20-year deal for a 63-unit building planned for Bennett Street.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... atements_with_surpri.html


Posted on: 3/9 16:43
Top


Re: Controversy swirls around Jersey City synagogue
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


A bunch of Nazis in this thread. A church/communuty center should be allowed to open anywhere. But i disagree with the property tax exemption.

Posted on: 3/3 16:34
Top


Re: Jersey City 2017 Mayor’s Race
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Resized Image

Posted on: 3/2 16:17
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

landshark wrote:
One street over:
https://www.zillow.com/homes/82-prospect-st,-jersey-city,-nj-07307_rb/

Was the Heights supposed to be in the 1/3 that taxes stayed the same?


Yup. Can't wait for the reval to happen so we can see who had the best prediction. I'm thinking 1.75% of fair market value. Greenville will be in the best shape. There will be winners and losers in the heights. The biggest losers will be the land speculators that are sitting on $50 million properties that are only assessed for $100,000 back in 1987.

Posted on: 3/2 12:41
Top


Re: Best internet or internet+tv options
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

anonymess wrote:
I hate talking about this stuff; it only gets me riled up.

But... I had a problem with FIOS. The speed was a fraction of what it was supposed to be. Long story short... the tech came out, did a temporary fix and the speed is better, though not what I'm paying for. As it turns out, the equipment is already outdated (installed 6 years ago) and needs to be updated. I live in a mid-size condo bldg. and building mgmt has no idea who to contact at Verizon. They tried.

In any event, I don't want to pay for a speed I don't get. I spoke with seemingly someone at Verizon who gave a hoot, a supervisor in tech support. He said he would deal with the upgrade issue as well as having someone from billing call to adjust my account. He also left a number where I could reach him, though he said he would contact me the next day, a week ago now. Never happened. The phone number he gave me just rings endlessly.

Par for the course, nothing promised happened. Billing tells me there's nothing they can do and no one knows who the heck to talk to about upgrading the equipment for my section of the building. I've banged my head against the wall enough times with Verizon FIOS and don't feel like jumping through hoops again. However, it's highway robbery to have to pay for an Internet speed that they cannot provide. Unfortunately, the only competition is just as bad, if not worse. Help!


Quit whining and go with someone else.

Posted on: 2/27 16:14
Top


Re: Why aren't the meetings broadcasted on the JC channel?
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Didn't you call her a racist?

Posted on: 2/25 16:56
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


You guys are nuts. If this land was sold at market value, we wouldn't get any of the community benefits coming from SciTech, such as the K12 school, the science and technology incubator, or the unique architecture. This will also have economic spin offs bringing much needed jobs!

This $20 million subsidy from the city is needed to make this happen, or we would just get the run of the mill apartments and condos here.

I think the city already does a good job at marketing and selling vacant and underutilized city land for redevelopment and having it produce revenue in the form of PILOT payments or property taxes. I would just put that process on steroids sell to whatever developer is willing to pay the most money up front plus whatever would generate the most in taxes. I think that's already happening in Journal Square with all the big mega towers going up.


Posted on: 2/25 11:54
Top


Re: Is the finish line moving for Jersey City's Ward F residents? | Morgan
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
The best way to make sure Ward F is affordable is to ensure there is an abundant supply of new housing being created in other wards. If rents are rising every year, it means there is not enough new supply hitting the market. Ward F residents should strongly encourage that development take place in the city's hot spots (downtown and Journal Square).


You have the right idea, but unfortunately JC is a small piece of the metro RE ecosystem. No one is building significant amounts of affordable housing, most is luxury, though that does have a trickle down effect.

As has been discussed here before, one of the biggest obstacles to increasing affordable housing is density zoning, both here and in the burbs. Take your typical 50x100 double lot in a R1 zone, R1 is most of JC. You could build a 20 unit building there easily. But R1 limits it to 35 ft high and 2 units, so you get 2 ugly Bayonne boxes, each 2 units, and fairly pricey given what crap they are because the fixed costs of construction are being concentrated in so few units.


I agree with everything you said. JC is a small piece of the metro region, but it's the only place we have direct control over.

Plus the only way to get more moderately priced housing built is for a gross abundant oversupply in the luxury market. Developers will always chase after the highest return - and at some point - developers will switch their attention to more moderately priced units because they can't hit their margins in the luxury market due to an oversupply.

That's starting to happen a little bit in the ultra luxury market in Manhattan. There is also a theory that if a high income resident moves into a new luxury building, that frees up their current, more moderately priced residence for those with more moderate incomes. I do believe in this theory, strictly from a supply and demand point of view, but the literature on it is thin.

I'll give JC a B+ for increasing the housing supply. NYC gets a C-. And everyone else in the metro area gets a fat F.

Posted on: 2/24 13:52
Top


Re: Is the finish line moving for Jersey City's Ward F residents? | Morgan
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


The best way to make sure Ward F is affordable is to ensure there is an abundant supply of new housing being created in other wards. If rents are rising every year, it means there is not enough new supply hitting the market. Ward F residents should strongly encourage that development take place in the city's hot spots (downtown and Journal Square).

Posted on: 2/23 16:01
Top


Re: JC Man Arrested for Videotaping Women in Shower
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


More important question is why were all these women showering at his house...

Posted on: 2/21 22:18
Top


Re: Battle against the "Bayonne Box" in The Heights
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


I feel like any chance for zoning change would come far too late. Nearly half of the homes on my street in the Heights have been torn down and replaced with Boxes. Shame on Councilman Yun for focusing tons of energy on parking while the character of the community is replaced with identical, pink-salmon Boxes.

I guess we're stuck with the pitched roofs too.

Posted on: 2/21 22:16
Top


Re: Battle against the "Bayonne Box" in The Heights
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

Jiuk wrote:
The Heights is really being torn in two directions right about now.
One side is pulling towards cool rehabilitation of older homes and the other towards salmon colored boxes with hideous stainless steel and chrome railings.



I shop in Bayonne a lot and I must say, they do not have the steel and chrome railings. As to why the Planning Board allow this, I cannot say. One of the problems with new construction which happens across JC, there are no set backs. New construction should follow the character of the block and not stick out. Where is the planning in the Planning Board?


I'm not in disagreement with you hear Yvonne. At least one single-family construction.

Posted on: 2/21 22:10
Top


Re: Jersey City activists target Trump, Kushner
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
There are many lifelong republicans and conservatives who strongly oppose the current administration and much of what they stand for. Not all protesters are liberals/democrats/snowflakes/etc...


This protest against Kushner Companies to get back at the President is utterly stupid though. Do you agree?

Posted on: 2/21 22:08
Top


Re: Jersey City activists target Trump, Kushner
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Not a fan at all of the President, but this protest is utterly stupid. I too hope business is boosted by all this.

Economic growth means jobs.

Posted on: 2/21 22:07
Top


Re: UberEATS, the ride-hailing app delivers
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

itgirl wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Was gonna order something, but $4.99 is too high. lol


Maybe if you live downtown, but where I live the delivery pickings are slim. It's a fair price to get delivery from a place that wouldn't ordinarily deliver to me, and I'd have to visit in person to pick-up/dine in (with tip, etc.). I'm looking at you Razza.

Going to try this out this weekend.


I live in the Heights and plenty of options on Seamless\Grubhub that are cheaper than UberEats. But fine, be my guess, throw your money away.

Posted on: 2/17 20:41
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 20 »






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