Good question FAB... because of the lack of reporting on the committee's operations we don't know whether its members are paid for their participation or not.

How else do you expect city hall to create jobs for the 'boys'!

Earl Morgan's article highlights one of the major deficiencies in the abatement process -- the composition of those who sit on the committee itself.

The city is a corporation, and no committee in a well run corporation these days should be dominated by insiders. This committee is composed nearly in its entirety of insiders. What type of quality decision making can result from what appears to be a rubber stamp process?

If the city were serious about improving the quality of decision making as to abatements, it would ensure that the committee would be comprised of at least 50% independent members. In other words, independent members who do not work for the city, the county and who are not related to anyone who does.

If a truly representative committee included a diverse group of independents from all Jersey City's Wards districts, then there might be a fighting chance to focus on issues relating to affordable housing and other reasonable contractual conditionalities, which could become part of the abatement discussion process and incorporated into a binding agreement with developers.

A second major deficiency is a total lack of transparency and regular public disclosure as to the operations of the committee.

There should at a minimum, be detailed public annual reports of the work of committee and a meaningful summary compilation of the terms and conditions of abatements approved (including a voting record), so they can be assessed and analyzed to determine whether the benefits of abatements truly outweigh the negatives. There should also be a summary report detailing the payment status of granted abatements and whether developers granted abatements are actually current in payments and keeping their agreements.

Just some food for thought.

All the best.

G

She has my vote!

Quote:

Arey for JC Mayor!

No minutes, no votes - they always say 'Yes'
Tuesday, May 22, 2007

'I f tax abatements are supposed to help the city, why are property taxes going up?"

"Where is the affordable housing for working class people and their families?"

These questions and others are being raised by Christine Carmody Arey, the lone civilian on Jersey City's Mayor's Tax Enhancement Committee, commonly, if erroneously, known as the tax abatement committee.

Besides Healy and City Council President Mariano Vega, the other 13 members who participate on the committee are all city department heads. Carmody Arey, a professor at New Jersey City University, was appointed to the committee by former Jersey City Mayor Glenn D. Cunningham when he created the entity nearly six years ago.

Carmody Arey is frustrated by the committee's failure to extract promises from developers to provide more low-income and affordable housing in return for the 20-and 30-year abatements they routinely receive from the city.

Carmody Arey said she is also distressed the developers aren't being pressed to develop apprenticeship programs and provide more jobs for city residents.

The committee's shortcomings are especially gauling to Carmody Arey given the 22 percent property tax increase the property owners who are not enjoying the exemptions were forced to absorb in the past two years.

"I see young families who would like to stay in Jersey City but can't afford it," Carmody Arey said. "When I ask other committee members or developers for the address or office of some central place where people can apply for affordable housing no one can give me an answer."

Carmody Arey said the tax enhancement panel hasn't denied any developer a tax exemptions, though on occasion it has required developers to revamp their application to provide more favorable terms for the city.

Contrast Carmody Arey's complaints with comments Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy made in a recent interview in which he defended his policy to continue granting tax exemptions.

The mayor said the tax committee, on which he serves as an "ex-officio" member, is the initial clearinghouse for proposed tax exemptions.

"Here's what happens," the mayor said, "The committee, made up of some council people and others, make the initial determination if an individual abatement is going to be good for the city. It passes its recommendation on to the entire City Council and then it comes to me."

Yeah, but this thing is not called the Mayor's Tax Enhancement Committee for nothing. Healy is a charter member. It's not some independent body, making objective decisions on the merits of tax exemption applications.

The only City Council member listed is Vega. The four members aside from Carmody Arey and Vega head municipal departments and owe their jobs to the mayor. The directors also serve in "ex-officio" capacity, rarely attending committee meetings. So, they send proxies or designees, members of their staffs, to represent them.

Should you be curious and would like to see the committee at work, lots of luck, since its meetings are not open to the public. However, developers and their lawyers, always know when and where to show up.

The committee keeps no minutes of its meetings, nor do its members actually vote on an exemption application.

When asked, Vega confirmed that instead of a vote, the committee reaches a "consensus" to approve or reject an application for an exemption, making it impossible to hold individual committee members accountable for their decisions.