brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
The tax rate was was too high for new construction. The rest of the city had been paying on an assessment that was a fraction of actual value. Now that the reval has been done those differences do not exist. Going foward the abatments should be very limited.

You show a common misunderstanding about how this system works. Not that it's critical to this discussion, but I've made eliminating ignorance of this system a mission, to counter Yvonne's lies, smoke, and mirrors.

Older properties had a low assessment relative to FMV, but this was compensated for by the Equalization Rate, in 2017 23.66. What this meant was the assessments of the city as a whole were 23.66% of the FMV. When new (or gutted) ratable properties are assessed, they take 23.66% of FMV and make that it's new assessment, to keep it in line with the rest of the city as it would be taxed at the official rate (in 2017 7.8%).

Where the unfairness came from was some areas of the city appreciated faster or slower than others over 30 years, meaning they were outliers of that average represented by the Equalization Rate. This is how Downtown brownstones were paying 0.8% and Greenville hovels 4%. So a new JC ratable property would have been at 1.826% last year, higher than the older DT properties, but lower than most of the rest of the city, which were subsidizing the low taxed Downtowners. Got it?

https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxat ... lized/2017/2017Hudson.pdf

https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/lpt/gtr/Hudson17.pdf

Gotta love how Yvonne can't answer numbers with numbers, she just says she bothers tax officials, and then doesn't understand what they tell her.

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If property is tax abated, it does not help, that is a contract and the city spends that money as fast as it receives. If it is not tax abatement then it is a ratable, which stabilizes the tax base and the county, schools will get their fair share.

No abatement for 99 Hudson. And I agree with you that there really should only be 5 year abatement going forward for downtown. Other areas of the city still need a little help, but not 30 years.

K-Lo2 wrote:
This item has been moved to the July 24 Planning Board. Tonight's big item is the Mocco projects, built way beyond permitted plans using materials strictly forbidden. Should be fun.

penclfactory wrote:
Some really nice thinly-veiled racism on display here. Congrats JCList - you never disappoint! I too am nervous about the crowd he'll attract: an overabundance of Hoboken bros in their 30s (think 'Old School,' which made fun of white people liking Snoop 15 years ago).

oreoz wrote:
Quote:

baxtyre wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityNj wrote:
I hate this idea, it's the people who have to walk numerous blocks home after a long day of work with multiple bags of groceries that suffer the most from this. Hopefully they remember the same politicians that screwed them over with this idiotic ban the next election.

You act like the sky is falling. It's not very difficult to buy a reusable bag and keep it with you. Here, I found a small, affordable one for you already --> baggu.com/collections/reusable-bags

I was in Morocco recently where they've also banned plastic bags. They just had cloth ones instead, so no problems really.

hero69 wrote:
well, i hope the objective of this potential purchase is to make a decent rturn on tax payer money with providing affordable housing as a secondary goal.

robotdisko wrote:
Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
I like how you completely missed most of the what's actually in the Iran deal

What is really sad is they demanded cash and received cash.

wow a trumptard posted a meme, so it must be true. even when confronted with facts only a useless idiot would continue to spew fox news boolshit. dumb af.

JCGuys wrote:
It's this kinda crap that makes me want to vote Republican.

Democratic machine political bosses suck

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Are you sure it was a cop? I read he shoved newspaper boxes off the street

Yeah, well at least you can find coverage about that story.

HeightsNative wrote:
Yay JC! Start paying a comparable property tax rate! Start paying for your own schools!! LOL.

Monroe wrote:
How is it irrelevant? JC's tax rate is so ridiculously low because of Abbott.

thor800 wrote:
It was definitely long overdue for tax increases though a more liberal policy to appeals for unfair rates could have brought the same relief to Greenville or West Side.

In any case, even $16K on a $1M building is still a bargain compared to almost everywhere else in NJ. Once the market realizes this, things will normalize. I would expect it will take longer for single family homes in the $1M+ range compared to ones with rental units included.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

I_heart_JC wrote:

we are in P&K every other day. they're our go-to grocer. we will really feel their absence if they close.

Ugh, that would be super depressing. This is going to be one of those neighborhoods where regular stores that sell normal things that people need won't be able to exist. Food desert here we come!

La Conga is 1.5 blocks away from P&K.

Key Foods is 2.5 blocks away from P&K.

"Food desert?" Not so much.

This. So much drama... And, for the non stuck up crowd, there are two GIGANTIC food stores (ShopRite and BJs) not even 10 minutes away by foot. A downtowner crying about DTJC becoming a food desert is deliciously ridiculous.

jc_dweller wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
My wife just informed by the owners that P&K food market will close due to the pedestrian plaza. The rely on people pulling up and double parking to get groceries.

Surely you aren't suggesting that progressive urban development shouldn't happen so that a store, or at least a store's customers, can partake in illegal parking? Bay Street was a traffic nightmare that should have been enforced a decade (or more) ago. That they'd jump ship so soon (if this rumor is true) is shortsighted, and that they think they're above the law in order to generate business is laughable.

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
The timing couldn't have been worse - most properties were reassessed at the height of the market

This argument shows a lack of understanding about the revaluation and property taxes. Whether it had been at the height of the market, or bottom, it doesn't matter. If the market had been lower, then the property tax rate would have been higher.

The city needed collect X amount of money.

X = (total value of market) * (tax rate)

If (total value of market) is lower, then (tax rate) has to go up, as X is constant in a revaluation.

The only thing that would make a difference is how different areas stack or compare against each other. The almost four year delay in the reval actually helped DTJC, as that period saw an accelerated increase in valuation in areas outside of DTJC, which translated into properties outside of DTJC getting relative higher levies than they would have 5 years ago.

In any case, the timing matters little. The reval was overdue, and DTJC was in for a HUGE increase regardless of when the reval had been completed. Those who claim the timing was terrible because it is a high market don't understand the issue clearly.

No I completely understand the market - DTJC assessed at the highest values ever with no regard for corresponding drop in market value after taxes double and no guidance moving forward.

Yes it was way overdue and definitely not fair for residents in other words to overpay for years, but also not fair to saddle downtown with absurdly high taxes with no clear plan to reassess more regularly in the future.

They're not "absurdly high taxes"; they're exactly the taxes one should pay for a residence in a particular market. Also, at a rate of 1.62% is still one of the lowest tax RATES in the entire state. Try paying 2.3% or whatever the state average is, on these valuations, then I'd say whoa. But again, there are options: reverse mortgages, the senior freeze, etc.

thor800 wrote:
the statue is still staying very close to its original location. the uproar over moving it 60 meters away is laughable

stillinjc wrote:
Quote:

JSleeze wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:

"What is not up for debate is Fulops (sic) handling of the situation... outright bigotry on Twitter in the style of Trump.

For Fulop's tweets to be "bigotry", the opinions he's opposed to would have to be legitimate in your view. You're down with holocaust denial and anti-semitism?

Fulop is lying when he says that Speaker of the Polish Senate Stanislaw Karczewski is a Holocaust denier and an anti-semite.

Flat-out lie, meant to raise the stakes and piss everybody off even more.

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

Adonis wrote:
Seems like Federal tax law is simply becoming compliant with NJ tax law.

Hypocrisy indeed.

The federal tax change reduces the credit for ALL state and local taxes, and it's slashed it from an unlimited amount (non-AMT) to $10,000. They also reduced the tax benefits of mortgages.

NJ has had the same homeowner tax credit for years, not to mention that state taxes are significantly lower than federal. Oh, and Trenton didn't suddenly cut it in a way that targets Republican-leaning counties.

jcneighbor wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
I would love to see this fly but come on! Seriously he calls it divisive and wrong but Nj still caps the deduction at 10k. Really?

The $10k is the new Federal cap on deductions, and NJ is trying to find a way around that. Sure would be nice to still be able to deduct 90% of my taxes above $10k by treating it as a documented "charitable contribution" but my guess is that it's in for a tough legal fight. If it flies there will be another 10+ States all doing the same.

drifterx wrote:
That sounds really convincing, coming from a Trump fan.

What's next? You gonna tell me Trump doesn't pay off porn stars? Rudy just might disagree with you.