Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
42 user(s) are online (29 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 41

Frinjc, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (light12v)




Re: HC proposes $538 million budget with tax increases for 6 towns
#1
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

neverleft wrote:
Hudson County proposes $538 million budget with tax increases for 6 towns

BY CAITLIN MOTA
The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY - Hudson County has proposed a $538 million budget that would raise taxes in six of its 12 municipalities this year.

The Hudson County Board of Freeholders is expected to make a final vote on the budget, which is $2 million less than it was in 2016, at the body's June 8 meeting.

Under the proposed budget, Jersey City residents would see the largest county tax increase, up roughly 9 percent from last year. West New York, Weehawken, and Hoboken could see about a 6 percent hike. East Newark would see about a 3 percent jump, and North Bergen would see just over a 1 percent increase.

While Jersey City hasn't seen a municipal tax increase in three years, it is the second year in a row the county's largest city will be hit hard by county tax hikes. In 2016, Jersey City saw a 10 percent increase.

Hoboken, too, saw a 4 percent hike 2016.


http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... s.html#incart_river_index


Can someone please explain why & how different municipalities within HC are levied with such different percentages of increase ?
Thanks.

Posted on: 7/14 10:44
Top


Re: ESPYS - Hurley wins Best Coach Award
#2
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Annod wrote:
VIDEO: Bob Hurley, former St. Anthony basketball coach, honored at ESPY Awards

By
Nicholas Parco
New York Daily News
Wednesday, July 12, 2017, 10:09 PM

He isn’t coaching hoops anymore, but the accolades keep on coming for Bob Hurley.

The former head of the storied boys basketball program at St. Anthony High School in Jersey City, which closed earlier this year, won the Best Coach Award at the ESPYs Wednesday night.

Hurley, one of two Basketball Hall of Famers who only coached at the high school level, went 1,162-119 and won 28 state titles to go along with four national championships in his 45 seasons running the show at St. Anthony’s.

“It’s really a great honor to be here tonight,” Hurley said during in his acceptance speech. “Getting this award alongside all these iconic coaches, but even more specifically it’s a great honor to be representing all these great coaches.”

He then thanked his family, including his sons, URI head coach Dan Hurley and Arizona State’s Bobby Hurley, who were in attendance, for making what he has always referred to as “the miracle” of St. Anthony’s possible.

“It’s a great honor to be representing all these coaches in the high school ranks,” Bob Hurley said. “Because every athlete that has come up on this stage tonight, no matter what sport they play, each one of them had a coach in high school, junior college, or maybe even before who played a critical role in their development as an athlete and it’s the whole person part that I have always taken a lot of pride in.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/bas ... d-espys-article-1.3322143



BIG Congrats to Coach Hurley,,,, but the kid killed it !

Posted on: 7/13 18:23
Top


Re: window replacement - historic district
#3
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
You do need to follow the “rules”, which you can find in the JC code at 345-30 and 345-71. Since it's a part of “Zoning” other general provisions apply as well, found throughout the Code and State Laws. Although you must follow the rules, rest assured Dan and the HPC won't do the same. They'll ignore the bounds of their authority, which are limited to “historic preservation”. Instead they'll demand the sun, moon and stars and won't give you a permit till they get what they want. The devil in understanding all this is in the details, which are widely mis-understood and applied. Read on if you choose, and you might learn something about the way the HPC and HPO operate in Jersey City.

First, you need to understand a little about the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL). The MLUL is the enabling legislation from which the City draws its limited authority to regulate “historic preservation.” “Preservation” is the key word used in the applicable sections of the MLUL . Why is the word “preservation” so important? Well, in matters of historic preservation the enabling MLUL limits the regulatory powers it grants municipalities to preservation and ONLY preservation. “Reconstruction”, “restoration” and other such activities are NOT mentioned in the MLUL, and are, therefore, EXCLUDED as activities the City has any authority to compel.

So what about the word “preservation” in particular? Here we turn to the ordinary, obvious meaning of the word. It is plainly apparent it is only possible to “preserve” something that currently exists. The term “historic preservation” itself makes reference to something that is from history – that is, something that exists from the past. Conversely, if something does not exist, there is nothing to “preserve”. Put another way, if a historic feature no longer exists, then it can't be preserved. A fake, historic-appearing, replication of some non-existant feature or aspect of a building might be made by “reconstruction” or “recreation”, but those activities are not “preservation.”

With all that as background now to the matter of window replacement. First, take a careful look at the wording of the City code. It's found at 345-71 L. 1. b. I'll reproduce here for ease of reference, and have added the bold for emphasis of a key clause:

L. Additional Regulations for Alterations and Additions to Buildings and New Construction.
1. Windows.
b. Replacement.
i. If historic windows have deteriorated to a point precluding repair, rehabilitation or restoration, based on documentation submitted by the applicant, or a field inspection by the Historic Preservation Officer, replacement windows may be approved under a Certificate of No Effect if they match the historic windows in terms of configuration, operation, details, material and finish. Variations in details will be permitted if such variations do not significantly affect the visual characteristics of the historic window, including the shadow effect of muntins and sash on the glazing. In evaluating "significant" effect, other factors to be considered shall be the age of the building and its architectural quality, as well as the extent of reduction in the total glazed area of the proposed sash compared to the existing sash. For narrow wood windows (less than fifteen (15) inches wide), the reduction shall be limited to ten percent (10%); for wood windows, fifteen (15) inches or wider, the reduction shall be limited to six percent; for metal double-hung windows (of any size), the reduction shall be limited to ten percent (10%).
ii. In buildings less than thirty (30) years old, the replacement windows need not match the historic window in terms of materials. The finish, however, must match the finish of the original windows. On secondary facades, windows which are visible from a public thoroughfare need only match the historic windows in terms of configuration and finish.
iii. Proposals for replacement windows which do not meet these conditions will require a Certificate of Appropriateness

You'll notice the words used are about historic windows that STILL EXIST, although perhaps in such a state of disrepair that it is no longer possible to make them serviceable through means of repair, rehabilitation or reconstruction. Please note that the word reconstruction is used here to in reference to something that still exists, and needs to be preserved. It is not referring to the construction of something completely new where nothing presently exists. This latter use of “reconstruction” has a technical definition found in the definitions section of the Code, and more clearly in the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Historic Preservation.

So, if your historic windows still exist, they must be preserved (by means of repair, rehabilitation or reconstruction). If your historic windows can't be preserved you're going to have to replace them with essentially identical, fake “historic” copies. And those copies don't come cheap. $3,500 a piece for long, parlor-level windows last time I checked, and that was a couple of years ago.

Now to “non-historic” windows in an old building. This situation is very frequent because many of the houses in the historic districts had the original wood windows removed and replaced, often by aluminum windows, at some past time. Obviously, the historic windows are no longer present, so they can't be preserved. It is notable that the Code is completely silent on the situation of replacement of a non-historic window in an old building. There isn't a word about it. But there is no mystery in that, it is exactly as you'd expect. City Codes can't include wording that is inconsistent with the City's limited power to regulate. The City does not have the legal authority to order or require the replacement of non-historic windows by historic windows in an old building, so words to that effect aren't in the Code. Recall the City can only regulate “preservation.” Ordering someone to replace a non-historic window with a fake-historic looking window would not be “preservation”, it would be “restoration” or “reconstruction” – and is therefore outside the City's authority to require.

Nevertheless, if your existing windows are not historic, then this is where the “demand the sun, moon and stars” hits you – Dan and the HPC will try to have you believe they have the authority to demand that you replace those non-historic windows with “fake historic” ones. And worse, if you are unlucky enough to have had your long parlor-level windows bricked up sometime in the past, well then they'll try to make you restore those long window openings as well. More expense.

These activities are not “preservation” of an existing historic feature. They are “restoration” of the building to its appearance from time time in the past. These kinds of demands by the HPC and HPO are beyond their legal authority to regulate “preservation.” All the definitions are in the Code. Again, better definitions are found in the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Historic preservation. The latter definitions are much clearer than the City's, particularly the one for '”restoration” which is so badly written in the JC Code as to fail the “understandable by a person of common intelligence” standard.

As I've noted previously, the HPC and HPO get away with this abuse of their authority because many homeowners simply give in to the demands. It's expensive, time consuming and a hassle to take the HPC and HPO on. And you can't count on ANY support from our esteemed council persons. They're too busy doing the bidding of the Mayor. You can fight, but you'd need to hire an attorney intimately familiar with all the detailed requirements of zoning law. That's expensive, often more that the cost of the work and so the City gets its way. For owners who can't afford the expensive, extensive work demanded, well they often just sell, driven out of their neighborhoods by the heavy handed and abusive use of these zoning codes. That's how it goes down in JC – always has, probably always will.....
So SAD, however TBT, keepin it REAL

Posted on: 7/13 13:37
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#4
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Amateur Hour, as Usual under the MF Rule!

What is ReallyPathetic is that these Bozos are getting paid Millions while they waste our valuable eve. time slot to provide us with Their Mis-Information BWO MS Power-Point........
[how sad is that !!]

SR. IT translation:::
Elect CLOWNS, Expect to See-a-Circus

Posted on: 4/12 19:42
Top


Re: Tax Appeal Filed Against Mayor Fulop
#5
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Bread & Circuses : CHECK

Maybe Fulop can call upon on buddy Paul Hoffman from LSC, nom de plume Dr. Crypton, for some Chess advice here .....

http://www.thephtest.com/paulhoffman_bio.html



Posted on: 4/5 17:45
Top


Re: Commotion by Grove and Mercer Saturday Night
#6
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Toomas wrote:
... does anyone have any information regarding the group of 15/30 teens who were causing a commotion around Grove and Mercer last evening.



Did U call our Mayor, RCC, Jim Shea, or JCPD ???
NO Info Available or Response from the POWERS that Reign ???

Posted on: 4/2 17:15
Top


Re: Fulop drops out of 2017 race endorses longtime foe Bill Matsikoudis….
#7
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

JerseyCityNj wrote:
The Sound Machine part literally had me laughing out loud.


Me too,,,,,,HYSTERICAL

Posted on: 4/1 21:46
Top


Re: Fulop ties to Kushner?
#8
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

iGreg wrote:
These are all nice Yeshiva boys, y'all got nothing to worry about.


You are leaving David Barry of Ironstate Development Co., who is a top tier board member of Liberty Science Center/ SciTech City, & his esteemed father Joseph Barry, who pleaded guilty to making five cash payments totaling $114,900 to former County Executive Robert Janiszewski to secure state and federal funding for his Shipyard project, out of the Triad mix here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Barry_(real_estate_developer)



Posted on: 4/1 21:43
Top


A Blast From the Past
#9
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away



Posted on: 4/1 2:29
Top


Re: Man shot dead in Jersey City, marking second fatal shooting this week
#10
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

ecoindie wrote:
Is anyone else wondering where are those 900 cops Fulop talked about?

We saw most of them in attendance on Thursday evening at Fulop's 6th State of the City Ward B Speech-a-Thon.

Posted on: 3/31 23:40
Top


Re: Fulop state-of-the-city speech-a-thon kicks off Tuesday
#11
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


AND Has Now CONCLUDED.

Any Insights from those who attended in any Ward???

Posted on: 3/31 19:01
Top


Re: Man shot dead in Jersey City, marking second fatal shooting this week
#12
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

buddyboy wrote:
What excuse is Fulop going to use for this act of violence?
He blamed the last murder on bail reform. Maybe his propaganda
minister Jen Morill will come up with something better.


After she [Ms. Mor__ ] is done calling Child Protective Services ?? OOPS...getting confused trying to keep up, Victim being over 18yrs. old doesn't Qualify.

There is always the Old Standby of Warmer than Usual WEATHER Conditions ....

OtherWise Engaged hasn't been claimed yet.

Posted on: 3/30 2:17

Edited by light12v on 2017/3/30 2:33:35
Edited by light12v on 2017/3/30 2:35:29
Edited by light12v on 2017/3/30 2:36:31
Top


Re: Man shot dead in Jersey City, marking second fatal shooting this week
#13
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Mayor Fulop [b]w/ City Paid Minions in Tow are way TOO BUSY
either
attending Kelly Conway-born in NJ, 'Deflection PlayBook' Re-Fresher Workshops
or
making HIS Public Appearances Around Town SAFE....

-while he Hijacks Slumlord JCTogether Rally TO LEAD THE MARCH, bearing Citations by the 100,s ..after 3-1/2 yrs. of being MIA
-Grandstands 4 Election Year Photo-Ops, TAKING CREDIT for OPW [Other People's Work-Product],
-Delivers SIX [6] State of the City UNI_Directional 'Infomercial' Addresses instead of ONE....[A Case Study in HOW TO Campaign at Taxpayer Expense as An 'Incumbent Perk' Home Advantage]
or
-simply diverts City Workers from their Critical Job Functions & Higher Priorities
to Populate the Rooms of his Fundraisers...& other Public Appearances

-& particular to City Councilpersons, truncates Caucus Meetings causing the 6+ Hour Runaway Train Chaos 2nd reading 3/22/17 of 16 Acres Land-Give-Away [shown here Un-Edited ::: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-1a8kBaHCo

-& Particular to JCPD to ensure that his Executive Order Transgender City Hall Bathroom usage mandate is complied with !

THESE ARE BUSY TIMES IN Fulop's POLITICAL TIMELINE/QUEST 4 RE-ELECTION In Our City's 1ST NATIONAL/MUNICIPAL Hybrid November Election
[.... Got to GetIn UNDER THE REVAL WIRE & Secure HimSELF 4 More Years to Reign, before Voter's/JC Constituents receive WRITTEN CONFIRMATION of Their Personal POST-Reval PROPERTY TAX OBLIGATIONS. & have a Rude Awakening.]

Doing ALL this Tough Work of CONTROLLING the NARRATIVE to cover one's 'Alternative Facts' tracks must be a Never-Ending, Time-Consuming Endeavor.

Posted on: 3/30 1:35
Top


Re: Homeowner's Insurance
#14
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

HamiltonParker wrote:
I too live in a Circa Abraham Lincoln, flat roof house and received homeowner's insurance through Chubb, who holds all of our other policies. It's pricey, for sure, but when we've had claims with them in the past (frozen water pipes) and everything was handled with remarkable speed. They're known as the *white glove* choice but the premium paid for their services was quickly forgotten when bad things happened.


I Agree about Chubb being the best, for all of the reasons that you stated.

My premiums have not increased to any significant degree since signing up for my Historic Home in 2006.
[but I must give credit to my agent at Muller who is on top of her game & the best I have ever seen in 40+years.]

Posted on: 3/29 21:14
Top


Re: Homeowner's Insurance
#15
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

heights wrote:
I wish I had a friend in the insurance business then I would not have to give out my name, rank, and serial number just to get a quote. I bet those in the industry could get and give a ball park figure anytime.


IMHO::::Best in the Business for all of my properties, residential/commercial/mixed-use buildings w/ all kinds of roofs [who became a friend of over 17yrs.] is Donna Stokes at MULLER INSURANCE , 930 Washington St, Hoboken, NJ 07030
Phone: (201) 659-2403

Posted on: 3/29 21:06
Top


Re: SCITECH City
#16
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

justJC wrote:
Ready, set, discuss!

Why did these docs have to be OPRA'ed?

Did the Council members read them?

What's a science specialty hotel?

And there's this: Bleeding edge technology is a category of technologies so new that they could have a high risk of being unreliable and lead adopters to incur greater expense in order to make use of them. So has City leadership adequately protected JC with this land hand-off?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-wndxx3kEacX2t3NnUwN2xQR3M/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-wndxx3kEacLXUzd2tyZ0hGVXc/view

1] "Why did these docs have to be OPRA'ed?"
because they were withheld, not made available to the public for the asking from the city clerk's office, or distributed by any method in advance of council meeting 2nd reading/vote.

2] "Did the Council members read them?"
councilpersons that i have spoken with stated that they were not currently provided these [in 2017] & cannot recall seeing them before -- in 2016 or 2015.
be reminded that several councilpersons were not sitting back in 2015, which is the year that these documents were penned.

3] "What's a science specialty hotel?"
anyone's guess. i have not been able to verify any concrete meaning from hospitality experts or accredited dictionary.

4] " So has City leadership adequately protected JC with this land hand-off?"
no. this bum rushed transfer of 16 acres of UN-appraised real property [12 Jersey City proper + 4 MUA] Literally takes away any control over this project from the city council [elected by the people] & places Total Control in the hands of JCRA [a board Appointed by & serving at the Mayor's discretion]

Posted on: 3/29 19:18
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#17
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Mao wrote:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/#inbox/15b16bbeb4dfba06

Above is the link to the Memorandum of Understanding. Esther Winter went through the trouble (FOIA request) and expense (over $200) to get a copy of it. Guess what? She got it after the vote. So much for transparency.

Although personally, a fan of Charter Schools, why did the Council act coy, to say it as politely as possible, and say it was undetermined whether the school was to be a Charter or a regular public shool?

Also, the hotel is described in terms that suggest it will also assert non profit status (provide lodging for science visitors etc). Corp. Counsel Jeremy said that it would be for profit.

So this new entity will have one member and owner, namely the Science Center. An LLC with only one member is treated as an entity disregarded as separate from its owner for income tax purposes (but as a separate entity for purposes of employment tax and certain excise taxes), unless it files Form 8832 and affirmatively elects to be treated as a corporation.

this link takes me to my own g-mail account. can you please check it on your end & correct if necessary ? thanks

Posted on: 3/29 18:53
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#18
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

light12v wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Several months ago, when the city council created the redevelopment plan I spoke against this. Councilman Boggiano said the city told him this land was worthless at that meeting. His comments were picked up by Al Sullivan for the Jersey City Reporter. I don't remember the issue but I am sure you can still find it.

CITY COUNCIL DID NOT CREATE LIBERTY HARBOR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.
THEY MERELY AMENDED IT FROM IT'S 1973 CREATION TO PAVE THE WAY FOR FULOP'S VISION OF SCITECH CITY 2015,, AFTER DOING NOTHING FOR 2 YEARS ,, AND PUSHED IT THROUGH ON 01/25/17...WITHOUT DUE PROCESS SUPPORTED WITH ONLY SLOPPY PLANNING DIVISION WORK/MAPS & RENDERINGS.... IN A BUMS RUSH TO MEET FULOP'S ELECTION YEAR TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS.


As relevant as your comments are, I suggest that you TURN OFF THE CAPS LOCK ON YOUR KEYBOARD! It's annoying.

my bad. sorry, no yelling intended. [will do ee cummings lower case in the future, as i was never trained as a typist]

Posted on: 3/29 18:40
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#19
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

light12v wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Several months ago, when the city council created the redevelopment plan I spoke against this. Councilman Boggiano said the city told him this land was worthless at that meeting. His comments were picked up by Al Sullivan for the Jersey City Reporter. I don't remember the issue but I am sure you can still find it.

JUST FINISHED READING ORD#17-002 DOCS. AND YOU WERE THE ONLY SPEAKER AT THE 01/25/13 COUNCIL MEETING THAT I SEE ON THE DOCUMENTS


Yes, I was. Council-President Lavarro tried to cut me off by saying this not about transferring the land but I reminded him this is step one.

Posted on: 3/28 19:09
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#20
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Several months ago, when the city council created the redevelopment plan I spoke against this. Councilman Boggiano said the city told him this land was worthless at that meeting. His comments were picked up by Al Sullivan for the Jersey City Reporter. I don't remember the issue but I am sure you can still find it.

CITY COUNCIL DID NOT CREATE LIBERTY HARBOR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.
THEY MERELY AMENDED IT FROM IT'S 1973 CREATION TO PAVE THE WAY FOR FULOP'S VISION OF SCITECH CITY 2015,, AFTER DOING NOTHING FOR 2 YEARS ,, AND PUSHED IT THROUGH ON 01/25/17...WITHOUT DUE PROCESS SUPPORTED WITH ONLY SLOPPY PLANNING DIVISION WORK/MAPS & RENDERINGS.... IN A BUMS RUSH TO MEET FULOP'S ELECTION YEAR TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS.

Posted on: 3/28 19:07
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#21
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Several months ago, when the city council created the redevelopment plan I spoke against this. Councilman Boggiano said the city told him this land was worthless at that meeting. His comments were picked up by Al Sullivan for the Jersey City Reporter. I don't remember the issue but I am sure you can still find it.

JUST FINISHED READING ORD#17-003 DOCS. AND YOU WERE THE ONLY SPEAKER AT THE 01/25/13 COUNCIL MEETING THAT I SEE ON THE DOCUMENTS

Posted on: 3/28 18:42
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#22
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


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%.

YOU REALLY NEED TO 'BINGE' ON THIS UN-EDITED 6plus HOUR VIDEO OF THE ACTUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING & LISTEN TO PAUL HOFFMAN'S RECITAL OF HOW LSC RAISES PHILANTHROPIC FUNDS FROM DONORS & "LOANS" 78MM TO ITS NEWLY FORMED LLC [aka SCITECH CITY NOT4PROFIT]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-1a8kBaHCo&app=desktop

Posted on: 3/28 4:25
Top


Re: Stop the give away of taxpayers' city owned land. Ordinance 17-023
#23
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
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.


LAND LEASES TO 4PROFIT DEVELOPERS coupled w/ DEEP ABATEMENTS

Posted on: 3/28 3:44
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#24
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
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.

YOU ARE 'NUTS' TO BELIEVE/THINK THAT ANY PRIMARY EDUCATION FACILITY INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSAL WILL BE A JERSEY CITY PUBLIC SCHOOL, BUT THE RENDERINGS ARE NICE QUALITY.

Posted on: 3/28 2:31
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#25
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

Stringer wrote:

Fulop critics urge Jersey City Council to rethink $20M Liberty Science Center land deal

HUDSON COUNTY VIEW -By  John Heinis 

this is why its time for fulop to go! does this guy have any ethics! the building looks nice but i didn't realize he was gifting $20 million to the developers?

APPRAISAL ESTIMATES I AM HEARING FROM PRO.S ARE MORE LIKE 100-200MM given the new Transportation amenities already in place [HB LIGHTRAIL] & the Newly approved Access Roadway to DTJC.

Posted on: 3/28 2:24
Top


Re: Transformative SciTechsity Science Technology Campus LSC Advance Council Approval
#26
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

annieruiz wrote:
"Funding for the project is expected to come largely from venture partners and philanthropists"

Sounds great! I just hope they already know who is paying for this so we dont get stuck with the bill in a few years. Looking forward to it though.
HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL.

KEEP A LOOK-OUT FOR HOW MUCH IS CONTRIBUTED BY THE STATE OF NJ TAX INCENTIVES, JC ABATEMENTS OR LEVERAGING OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY FOR LOANS.....

Posted on: 3/28 2:07
Top


Re: Wow - LSC's Updated Plans for SciTech Scity
#27
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Which council members voted YES? Let's get their names out there.


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

Posted on: 3/28 1:33
Top


Re: Jersey City 'no knock' registry to target pushy real estate brokers
#28
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Stringer wrote:

Jersey City no-knock law to debut

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on March 27, 2017 at 2:39 PM, updated March 27, 2017 at 4:04 PM

JERSEY CITY -- Jersey City's new "no knock" registry that targets aggressive real estate investors is set to debut tomorrow.

Residents throughout Jersey City have complained about aggressive real estate investors who pester them about selling their homes. The ordinance, adopted unanimously earlier this month by the City Council, is similar to laws passed in South Jersey and upstate New York.

Residents who sign up for the registry will receive a decal to display on their property that tells solicitors to buzz off. The first decal is free if picked up in person at City Hall. Replacement decals are $5. If you want the decal mailed, the charge is $1.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ey_city_no-knock_law.html

LMAO
Right Up There with the priorities of Gender Neutral Bathrooms in City Hall, as bullets continue to fly in our Southside & Westside neighborhoods !

In light of Jersey City Council meeting of 3/22/17 & JCRA meeting 24 hours prior, is there any Decal in the works to ward off Billionaire Development Corporations who are harassing long time residents with their teams of legal eagles, hidden agendas, etc... thus lining their pockets with maximum profits at the expense of the non-abated homeowners/taxpayers aka ripping the JC General Public off at a Higher 'White Collar' Non_Street Level ?






Posted on: 3/28 0:45
Top


Re: GoFundMe $$$ fill an Exploited LOOP-HOLE in NJ Open Public Records Act [OPRA] in <1hour !
#29
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
The requestor is not asking for project documents, but asking for any email or other communications between Donnelly Fulop, Corp. Counsel, and Paul Hoffman regarding the land transfer. It is cast as widely as possible and also encompasses potentially attorney client privileged documents involving Farrell.

Under NJ's extremely liberal OPRA laws, this is likely a valid request. But it also is taxing on city resources, especially given the gratuitous decision to include Farell in the search.

This person and a handful of other "activists' have been filing OPRA requests for years and have essentially turned the city's staff into their personal gofers so they can try to find emails that they can selectively quote from. Remarkably, given the number of requests over the past few years, one would think that they could have found more. Asking her to compensate the city for the employee's time is more than reasonable in this instance.
IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT NOTHING WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON ON THE DAY OF THE 3/22/17 COUNCIL MEETING,
AND
JCRA BOARD [WHICH IS CHAIRED BY OUR COUNCIL PRESIDENT LAVARRO WITH ANOTHER SEATED COUNCIL MEMBER-RIVERA IN ATTENDANCE] HAD VOTED IN RESOLUTION #17-03-#26 BY UNANIMOUS 7-0 VOTE THE DAY BEFORE WHICH WAS NOT ON THEIR MEETING AGENDA WHICH STOPPED AT ITEM #21....[WHAT THE PUBLIC MUST RELY UPON TO SERVE AS PROPER NOTICE]

IMHO>
DON'T THINK THAT THESE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE CHARGES FIT YOUR SCENARIO OF "This person and a handful of other "activists' have been filing OPRA requests for years..."

1ST PARTY INVOLVEMENT + VOTE BY LAVARRO & RIVERA IN BOTH MEETINGS CARRY A SPECIAL OBLIGATION TO THEIR FELLOW COUNCILPERSONS & JERSEY CITY CONSTITUENTS.

LAST ATTORNEY I SPOKE WITH ADVISED DISCOVERY & THEIR SWORN TESTIMONY 'WOULD BE EASILY ADMISSIBLE IN ANY NJ COURT' !!

Posted on: 3/28 0:03
Top


Re: GoFundMe $$$ fill an Exploited LOOP-HOLE in NJ Open Public Records Act [OPRA] in <1hour !
#30
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
"In other words, the city is charging Esther for what is normally a request granted for free, in what appears to be an attempt to dissuade and discourage her from getting these documents. "

She means "free" as in free to her - not free to the taxpayers who are paying the city clerk to perform 5 hours of their ordinary work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

NOT ALL THAT COMPLICATED...."Tragedy_of_the_commons...."

City is charging EVERYONE Administrative Fees for sorting thru & RE-DACTING portions of Public Documents in an "attempt to dissuade and discourage her from getting these documents" to become informed.
Part of Fulop's policy to Control the Narrative !

Posted on: 3/27 16:26
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 »






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