Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
56 user(s) are online (33 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 2
Guests: 54

Frinjc, JCvoter, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (T-Bird)




Re: Jersey City has big plans for 100 acres on West Side along Hackensack River
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The reason for the upgrade - some old bonds were paid off.


Nope. From Moody's press release announcing the upgrade:

Rating Action: Moody's Upgrades Jersey City's GO to Aa3,
31 Oct 2016

New York, October 31, 2016 -- Summary Rating Rationale

Moody's Investors Service has upgraded to Aa3 from A1 the rating on Jersey City, NJ's outstanding General Obligation Unlimited Tax debt. Concurrently, Moody's has upgraded to A3 from Baa1 the enhanced rating on the city's MQBA enhanced debt. The underlying outlook remains stable while the enhanced rating carries the negative outlook attached to the MQBA program.

The upgrade to Aa3 reflects the city's rapidly growing, large and diverse tax base, satisfactory and improving finances, and manageable debt burden.

Debt went down very slightly in 2016 and, as you point out, is back up. According to Moody's updated research earlier this year, even at the higher levels there is no concern about the city's ability to repay its debt.

Quote:
In theory, if Fulop did not bond this year, our debt would have been reduced and taxes would have fallen.


Backwards. The debt has a very low interest rate and represents a small added burden on the city's finances. If new debt hadn't been incurred, the city would have had to pay for these expenses (setting aside the Bayfront borrowing, since that is a mortgage) out of general revenue. This would have meant higher taxes.

Obviously, people who actually look at these things for a living are not concerned about the city's debt level. They also understand that a $1 in the early '90's is not the same as a 2018 dollar.

Posted on: 10/11 13:16
Top


Re: Jersey City has big plans for 100 acres on West Side along Hackensack River
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The city debt increased this year to an additional $170 million, plus $45 million bonded several months ago, $14.5 million for terminal leave. If you add an additional $100 million for tax refunds. That is an additional $329.5 million for 2018. The gross debt is already $650 million, bringing the debt well over $900 million. Then there is the loss of $170 million from the state for the schools. Forget about being the best midsize city in America, we will be the next Detroit who went bankrupt.


And yet, the bond rating agencies continue to upgrade Jersey City - Moody's having done so twice in the last four years. The current rating of Aa3 indicates a negligible chance of default.

This debt will be repaid when the city sells the land. Could they end up selling it for less than they are paying? Possible, but the amount at risk is a very small fraction of what is being borrowed and not the likely outcome.

Yes - numbers can be big and scary (and for some, confusing!) - especially when taken out of context.

Posted on: 10/11 10:41
Top


Re: Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza Expansion
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


'For me, this is paradise': life in the Spanish city that banned cars

In Pontevedra, the usual soundtrack of a Spanish city has been replaced by the tweeting of birds and the chatter of humans

People don’t shout in Pontevedra – or they shout less. With all but the most essential traffic banished, there are no revving engines or honking horns, no metallic snarl of motorbikes or the roar of people trying make themselves heard above the din – none of the usual soundtrack of a Spanish city.

What you hear in the street instead are the tweeting of birds in the camellias, the tinkle of coffee spoons and the sound of human voices. Teachers herd crocodiles of small children across town without the constant fear that one of them will stray into traffic.

“Listen,” says the mayor, opening the windows of his office. From the street below rises the sound of human voices. “Before I became mayor 14,000 cars passed along this street every day. More cars passed through the city in a day than there are people living here.”

Miguel Anxo Fernández Lores has been mayor of the Galician city since 1999. His philosophy is simple: owning a car doesn’t give you the right to occupy the public space.

“How can it be that the elderly or children aren’t able to use the street because of cars?” asks César Mosquera, the city’s head of infrastructures. “How can it be that private property – the car – occupies the public space?”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/201 ... ty-banned-cars-pontevedra

Mayor Lores sounds like someone with vision who isn't afraid to think big.

Posted on: 9/19 13:40
Top


Re: Newport Half Marathon Newbie
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


They really need to push this race back about a month. The last three years (at least) have had temps in the mid to high 70s at the start and 80% to 100% humidity. If they did it mid-October, you'd almost certainly get much more favorable conditions.

Posted on: 9/17 21:52
Top


Re: Okay, so who here thinks the Katyn monument needs to go?
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
We need a local issue draw out the mid-term election voters in November.


And the Katyn monument is that issue? That is one steaming hot take, my friend.

Are you sure you want to drive up turnout locally? Guessing from previous citations of Alex Jones, I'd think you are looking for the other six JC republicans to show up. Probably more of the folks who turn out to vote no on Katyn are angry with Fulop from the left than the right.

Posted on: 8/17 9:08
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


I guess those vaunted NJ suburban schools failed you. Again, the subject is Sweeney.

Go over to the Abbot thread and rub yourself blind.

Posted on: 6/4 12:07
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
The thread is about JC looking for more ways to avoid self funding it own school children's education.


Holy shit. Here is the title of the thread:

"Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools"

It's literally (the most overused word of the decade, but made for this particular sentence) about the president of the senate suggesting a payroll tax.

Subject: Sweeney
Verb: proposes
Object: tax

There is a thread just a few down from this one:

"Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?" for your school funding circle jerk.

Posted on: 6/4 11:42
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


That may be what you are choosing to talk about. Bodhipooh was responding to Brewster's comment about non-resident employees working in Jersey City - which, in fact, is what the thread is about.

You are free to try to hijack every thread to fit your agenda, as you often do. We don't have to play along.

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Untrue. People working here but living outside JC could choose to work elsewhere. Or they could move to JC. They do have choices. They may not like them, but they have them.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote: I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.


To the school funding issue we're talking about, non-residents don't have a choice over the redistribution of tax money for schools. Trenton takes into account what it feels is the ability of each town to self fund their own schools, and gives much less back to affluent towns, more to others, and an obscene amount to Abbott districts. I guess someone from, say, Mendham could 'choose' to move to East Orange, but that's not really a choice, is it?

Posted on: 6/4 11:06
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Untrue. People working here but living outside JC could choose to work elsewhere. Or they could move to JC. They do have choices. They may not like them, but they have them.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote: I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.

Posted on: 6/4 10:51
Top


Re: Jersey City LIVE Falcon Camera - 101 Hudson Street
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Very cool update on "Junior" - the little eyas that was born in the JC nest:

https://exit63.wordpress.com/2018/05/22/junior-goes-to-sedge/

What a great story!


Thanks for posting that. What a great story!

Posted on: 5/28 17:13
Top


Re: Citi Bike
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Similar problem in much of downtown. They seem to manage the Grove St. and Exchange Place stations okay for the most part, but the redistribution of bikes elsewhere is very inconsistent - both in volume and timing. I used to see the bike van at the station across the street from my building at least a couple times a week - I don't think I've seen it since at least last summer.

The station by the Paulus Hook ferry terminal is too small and seems to be unmanaged. The fifteen or so spaces fill up in the morning before 8 and empty out in the evening by 6. For the price they charge, it wouldn't be too much to expect either a significantly larger station there (plenty of room for it) or active management of the bikes.

Posted on: 4/24 10:24
Top


Re: Group wants new highway leading to Jersey City Waterfront
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


What point exactly was that? That it's better to pay for a third (or, more likely, half) of a $30 billion project than it is to pay for the majority of an $8.5 billion - or even $10 billion project? Pissing away ten years on the hope he could prove he was a tough guy worthy of votes in Iowa and NH is something we'll all be paying for with higher taxes for a long time to come.

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
The main reason Gov Christie killed the tunnel is simple. NJ would have solely responsible to pay for the inevitable multi billion dollar cost overruns. NY, the Feds, the PA would not be responsible for a penny. It was a suckers deal, and he was right to flush it. The most recent proposal is much more equitable, proving his point.

Posted on: 4/10 15:24
Top


Re: Jersey City Council to introduce $587 million budget with zero tax increase
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Take a breath and re-read. It's not at all like the analogy you pose. He directly benefits from something he's identified as not only wrong but harming others. Yes, he should by all means advocate for a fix and try to effect change. But:

1) other than burping on here about it six times a day, I don't think he's really trying to do anything.

2) He doesn't believe things are changeable here (he constantly drones on about how local democratic rule prevents anything good from happening, ever.)

3.) The analogous people to whom you refer aren't benefiting from Trump's policies. They are working to change things that are harmful, either to themselves or others.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

What? By that logic, all liberals are more morally compromised than conservatives, and all should leave the country, instead of actively opposing the president and the policies they find morally abhorrent.

Posted on: 3/20 14:17
Top


Re: Jersey City Council to introduce $587 million budget with zero tax increase
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


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

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

Quote:

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

Posted on: 3/20 9:44
Top


Re: 'Porch pirate' charged with snatching bait package, throws fit at court appearance
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Another problem with three strikes laws is that law enforcement can be arbitrary. Low level felony offenses often have disparate arrest rates among various demographic and geographic categories. Some people with three strikes may have done nothing different than someone else who never even received their first strike.

Posted on: 3/8 12:35
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


No relation. But facts never get in the way when MonHannity gets going. His little nicknames are so cute - my daughter used to do that when she was seven.

Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Florio, Kenney and Raval-can we assume 'Florio' is Jim 'fillm flam' Florio, who is also a partner behind the group developing Canal Crossing in Greenville/BeLa?

We should not.

Apparently it's a man by the name of Edward J Florio.
http://www.fkrlaw.com/edward-j-florio/

I don't know who the guy is, or if he's related to any other Florios in NJ, but he has no apparent connection to Canal Crossing. From what I can tell, he's just an attorney.

Posted on: 3/6 10:34
Top


Re: Teacher Protests Disturbing Neighborhood
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Nonsense, wherever there is choice to opt out of forced contributions-many do.


Can you site specific examples with actual numbers that indicate "many", ideally from a credible source? "Many" should be a number that is large in percentage terms.

Posted on: 3/6 10:29
Top


Re: Come to City Hall this upcoming Wednesday to promote electric vehicle charging in JC #EVinJC
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


A few things, Yvonne...

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Here is the problem with you Brewster, you act very snooty and you are nothing but a bully. The point of this thread was to explain Fulop is wrong to give a 99 year lease for one dollar a year.


No - as the title indicates - the point of this thread was to encourage people to come to a meeting and support installing EV chargers.

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Personally, I do not agree that municipal government should be giving any 99 year leases for one dollar a year.


This is interesting. What is it that you think the city is giving away by allowing EV chargers to occupy that space? Oh, right - free on-street parking! So the "giveaway" is actually a modest improvement over the current situation in that the city will be getting something where previously it received nothing...

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The state government imposed a 23 cent tax on gas last year to pay for repair of roads, these electric cars are also using roads and there are no payment to the road repair as with the tax on gasoline.


This is actually an interesting point to debate. It's multi-faceted:

- Yes, EVs and other non-ICE vehicles will use the roads and not pay into their maintenance. Perhaps they should.
- On the other hand, by not emitting pollutants or CO2 they are not contributing to respiratory illnesses or warming the climate. Perhaps they should be exempt from a gasoline tax equivalent because of the relative benefits they provide.
- Also, by using electricity, EV owners are making greater contributions to the power grid infrastructure through the fees added into the billing for those services - maybe that's enough of an offset?
- I'm not sure what happened with the state ballot initiative to change this or if/when it might go into effect if it passed, but there is no legal requirement that gasoline taxes in NJ be used for road maintenance. They should, but they haven't been. Should we be looking to expand that discretionary slush fund before it's reformed?


Posted on: 3/6 10:22
Top


Re: Come to City Hall this upcoming Wednesday to promote electric vehicle charging in JC #EVinJC
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Subsidies and government benefits the oil and natural gas companies receive, off the top of my head:

- through their financial might, the ability to influence policy in wide range of areas, including diplomacy, tax, federal land use, the environment, trade (take a look at the biggest influencers within ALEC...)
- military protection and intervention on their behalf
- tax abatements and tax-friendly financings (industrial revenue bonds, typically) for their refineries and chemical plants.
- often the ability to walk away from environmental liabilities for pennies on the dollar (look no further than Exxon's recent Bayway/Bayonne settlement). And that's just for land and water - they almost never pay a penny for the air they pollute.
- land seizures for pipelines
- an entire transportation system built around the automobile that neither the carmakers nor the oil companies had to pay for, resulting in archaic policies oriented toward protecting the incumbency of that system.

Posted on: 3/5 20:40
Top


Re: Teacher Protests Disturbing Neighborhood
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Jeez, Obamacare itself lists four levels-bronze, silver, gold, and platinum. NJ teacher plans are platinum; Gov Christie said he could fund the pension gap if the public sector unions would drop to gold plans.


And of course you believed him.

You aren't making a dent in a $49 billion hole by moving public sector employees one level in their healthcare plans. Not saying small efforts don't add up, but that move alone would do very little.

Just once, stop and process the drivel you consume before you reflexively spew it on others. Just once. For your own sake.

Posted on: 3/1 17:12
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
there is a certain irony in witnessing the complete about-face from so many DTJC homeowners now clamoring for fiscal restraint, smaller government, and lower taxes.


Irony, but also hope. Being liberal doesn't necessarily mean you are required to be braindead and roll over for corrupt, bloated government as long as it's Democrat. It would be amazing if an outcome of all this is a surge of citizen oversight of where our money actually goes. It's hard to even find out! The maze of agencies and authorities are literally designed to prevent auditing.


I don't intend to speak for all "liberals" (I prefer "progressive"), but the problem you point to can be looked at two ways, Brewster. There are places that are solidly Democratic that have high taxes and people don't really complain all that much. Those are places where people actually get good services and infrastructure for their money. I'd be happy to continue paying what I'm paying if we had the type of schools, government services, public safety and infrastructure you'd expect for the money. So - yes, by all means, let's root out waste and corruption. Let's also get rid of incompetence wherever possible. But let's also set the bar higher - Jersey City has a long way to go in the improvement department before we start looking to cut back.

Posted on: 2/28 12:17
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JadedJC wrote:

And there's a special place for those who lie repeatedly.


Yeah. The White House.

Posted on: 2/27 0:33
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.


Here's some truth for you - since 2008, when we purchased our current home we've been paying a "non-ratable" PILOT (abatement) of $26,000 per year. When I look on the list of newly assessed properties, I don't see anyone on there who was previously paying a "ratable" property tax anywhere near that much.

Do you understand where those "not-ratable" PILOT payments go? To the city! (95% of it, anyway - a much, much higher percentage than "ratable" tax payments.) Look in the city budget - I haven't in the past few years, but there will be a line in there for PILOT revenues. It's probably in the $125 million to $150 million range (it was $115 million about five years ago.) Stabilize? Anyone who bought under a PILOT since about 2004 has likely been overpaying what they would have been without the payment.

I'll listen to the argument about school's being underfunded, but I didn't come up with this structure and it's hard to say I'm "taking advantage" of anything, since by all accounts I've been overpaying. Sure, I'll be underpaying for the next ten years, relative to the new assessments, but it probably ends up being a wash overall. As for the part that the county doesn't get - I'm glad they aren't getting anything from PILOTs. We should be looking seriously at how we dissolve county services - or (better yet) roll everything up into the county and eliminate municipalities in Hudson County. But to have both is redundant - why duplicate generally poor services with even poorer services?

Posted on: 2/26 14:29
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

dmark526 wrote:
The selling has already begun. 272 Barrow was put on the market in December for 3.3 million, the taxes went from 16K to 41K per year. They just lowered their asking to 3 million. I'm sure many more will follow.


They could be moving for any number of reasons. Big drops at the high end of the market - if you've mispriced - aren't that uncommon and while $300k is a big drop in $ terms, it's less than 10%. Of course the reval will hurt, but hard to tell if the reval is the big driver or aggressive pricing based on only one data point...

A couple of observations: they were assessed at $2,538,000 - well below even their reduced asking price.

They bought in 2004 for $425k. If they get $3mm, that's 7x what they paid for it.... Good for them - I hope they get it. But it's hard to feel too sorry for them.

Posted on: 2/14 14:19
Top


Re: Governor Murphy
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Webmaster wrote:
WARNING: You seem to not be familiar with the definition of decorum :

decorum
d??k??r?m/noun
behaviour in keeping with good taste and propriety.
"he had acted with the utmost decorum"
synonyms: propriety, properness, seemliness, decency, decorousness, good taste, correctness, appropriateness, appropriacy; politeness, courtesy, good manners; refinement, breeding, deportment, dignity, respectability, modesty, demureness
"he had acted with the utmost decorum


You've decided to put yourself out of business? Or you are just pro-troll?

Posted on: 2/13 12:39
Top


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


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:

NJ roads are fine. They aren't pristine, they aren't perfect, but they are fine.


Guess not.


Quote:
You mean, the 5 miles on Route 22? Or Elizabeth Ave? Or McClellan? Or do you mean 2 miles on Route 78?


The sentence prior should have made that obvious.


Quote:
And yet, somehow that totally escaped my attention the last time I was there (about 6 weeks ago).


And yet it was as true this morning as when I wrote it yesterday... as I said, you must not get out often.

Posted on: 2/12 11:08
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote: NJ roads are fine.


I thought about this today as I was headed east on 78 I’m the express lanes, just before the airport. A cop was parked in the right lane, angled in a way to force everyone into the left. Just after him we’re seven (7!!) cars on the side of the road with blown out tires - the result of hitting a manhole sized hole probably ten to twelve inches deep.

Seriously?

You're trying to claim that one problem, on one highway, that obviously happened right before you got there, proves than an entire state's roads are crap? Yeah no.


Do you get out of town much? If you did, you'd understand my experience was emblematic of a widespread problem. I drive 78 and 24 to and from Morristown three to five times a week; 78 is horrific - they fill the seams every couple of weeks and it lasts a few days. The stretch from the airport to about Hillside is unreal. 24 around the Short Hills Mall has a series of holes you have to slalom around. I got a chuckle today driving past those poor folks on the side of the road, thinking about how "fine" the roads are...

More to the point, what is with your smarmy condescension? You go from zero to asshole awfully fast.

Posted on: 2/11 21:34
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote: NJ roads are fine.


I thought about this today as I was headed east on 78 I’m the express lanes, just before the airport. A cop was parked in the right lane, angled in a way to force everyone into the left. Just after him we’re seven (7!!) cars on the side of the road with blown out tires - the result of hitting a manhole sized hole probably ten to twelve inches deep.

Posted on: 2/11 15:37
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Yvonne lived at 283 York St. What's amusing is that she sold at $1.18m to avoid the value drop from the the reval, less than half the current assessment of $2,477,600. That's leaving some money on the table!


OMG - that is hilarioius.

Posted on: 2/7 13:02
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:

Erm... My point is that people in the NYC metro area lose their **** if they aren't plowed out immediately. For example, a few years ago, NYC got hit with 11-16" of snow, and it took over a day to dig out pretty much every part of the city. As a result, outer boro residents demanded Bloomberg's decapitated head on a pike. I'm reasonably certain that residents of Idaho don't demand that level of service.


What does Idaho have to do with it? People in every city where it snows lose their **** when the roads don't get cleared. Chicago. Boston. Philadelphia. Oh wait, People in Idaho lose their shit when it snows, too?? Your reasonable certainty does not equate to being right.

Quote:
Actually, NJ is the extreme. Kansas is average. For total tax burdens:

NJ total tax rate = 10.14%
Kansas = 8.72%
Average for all 50 states = 8.57%


Source?

Quote:
We have a broken state-run rail system, public schools that range from elite in a few cases, good in some cases and poor to third-world in many more and roads that my Afghani Uber driver was complaining about being "worse than home" the other day.

Well, if you say an Uber driver said it, it must be true....

Quote:
NJ Transit isn't "broken." Last I checked, most of its problems are a result of using Amtrak lines.


Lines that run out of Hoboken (which as nothing to do with Amtrak) suffer frequent delays as well. Both Republican and Democratic leadership agree on the failings of NJT; they just disagree on the causes (underinvesting).

Quote:
NJ's schools are #10 in the US (per US News & World Report). Kansas, by the way, is #45.


Actually, Kansas is outperforming based on the way they fund their schools. NJ should be number 1 based on tax load. And that does zero to refute my point. There are a good number of good to great public schools in NJ. There are a lot of awful ones, too. The average NJ kid's experience (and certainly not the average urban NJ kid) isn't McNair. Given the resources, for NJ to not be top 3 (top 5 at a minimum) seems like a failure.

Quote:
You need look no further than Princeton - even critics of their recent consolidation are only complaining that it could have been implemented better but acknowledge that it worked.

Quote:
Yeah... no. The advocates are the one crowing about it, since it let them fire 23 employees. The critics point out that services are slightly reduced; they haven't harmonized a lot of town laws; that they had consolidated many services before merging; and that none of the surrounding communities have any interest in following suit.

That's not surprising, since the two cities could have fired 11 employees each and gotten the same result.


You don't just eliminate jobs. You eliminate the layers of law firms and auditing firms that get contracts (often as rewards for their involvement in the many elections that happen as a result of the byzantine layers of government as well as odd election calendars). You can reduce the need for some equipment (and the foregone maintenance that comes with it.) Not all of these are realized immediately.

Accepting the qualitative assessment of a few folks who point to a (in your word) "slight" reduction in services is no different than quoting an uber driver (by the by, most drivers I ride with from the airport have the same complaint. I just that it was insanely funny coming from the guy from Afghanistan.) Also - the bigger criticism of the Princeton rollup was that it didn't go far enough.

Quote:
East Newark already works with the Harrison school district; they share other resources with Harrison and Kearny. Gutenberg -- which is geographically tiny but has more than 10,000 residents -- also shares resources, does not have its own fire department, sends students to North Bergen. Weehakwen also has 10,000 residents, and again shares resources with North Bergen. Its schools are small -- and well-regarded. Usually, that's a good thing.

These tiny municipalities are already doing things that reduce their costs, and improve efficiencies. Large municipalities, as the Rutgers study points out, are not more efficient than larger ones. People also seem to like local control.

As a result, there are visible downsides and few upsides to consolidation -- unless you're going to use it as an excuse to cut staff, which also means you're going to reduce services.

The promise of big gains through consolidation is an illusion.


You don't need to create "large municipalities". You point to the small efforts these communities have made on shared services and have decided that's enough - why stop there? Combining Kearny, Harrison and East Newark doesn't create a "large municipality", nor would rolling up Guttenberg, Weehawken and WNew York. Density makes these areas prime candidates to become rolled up - and they'd realize a greater voice in Trenton as a result.


Posted on: 2/7 12:53
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 50 »






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