Quote:

Let me address that on a personal basis: I live in the largest housing complex in Jersey City. The high rise I live in has a 30 year abatement. The amount paid "in lieu of taxes" from the Jersey City online tax records comes to an average of $1200 per apartment per year (charge for 600 apartments). These are large apartments with doomen, etc. This is after the buildings have been standing and abated since 1987. If these rentals were marketed, their average price would certainly exceed $300,000. THis situration applies to the nearly 4,000 apartments at Newport.

Though I am not certain of the allortement.

Of the $1200 paid on a junior 2 bedroom apartment, I don't know the exact breakdown for the school tax but I am certain that it is close to roundable down to $0.00 without being far off.

Perhaps CURRENT abatements are shorter and give more to schools, I can only speak of the old, generous and long term abatements that I know of first hand.

The first condo down here, James Monroe, has owners paying $4000-$6000/year in lieu on Junior 3 bedroom apartments of 1377 square feet plus ample terrace that are selling for $500,000 to $600,000. This building was opened in 1990.

If my math is correct, we actually pay $20,000+ per student for our failing schools. I'm sure it's all money well spent and there's no way to cut spending on this.

Brainwashed simpleton. What is this high standard of living of which you speak?
Failing Schools at $16,000 per student?
Skyrocketing crime?
Clean streets?
Stores closing left and right?
Absurd taxes?
Ridiculous city government?
Must mean all the brand spanking new projects.

Banana republics are run more efficiently, but he's happy to pay for all these amenities.

Well, now we know who voted for Healy.

Some of you people sound like the ignorant voters in California not wanting to pay up. Services and infrastructure costs money. Why blame Corzine for doing what he needs to do? I'd rather pay more taxes to main a relatively high standard of living.

NJ Supreme Court has ruled. The current funding formula is constitutional and no supplemental funding will be given to prior Abbott districts outside of the formula.

I dont think this is bad news for all prior Abbott districts but it is definitely bad news for Jersey City as relative to many other municipalities, the city has significant property wealth (a key factor in the new formula) and will be forced to pay an increasing share of the cost to educate its children.

This, coupled with a reduction in new PILOT payments and other real estate related one-shot revenues coming online in the coming years, spells trouble for JC. The city will have nowhere to turn but to taxpayers who are already struggling unless the local real estate/condo market turns around quickly.

This is not going to be pretty.

Rally to protest school cuts

Jersey Journal
Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Blaming Gov. Jon Corzine's new school funding formula for $23 million in cuts to programs in Jersey City public schools, a rally will be held tomorrow at noon by Parents and Communities United for Education at City Hall, 280 Grove St.

"The (Jersey City) school budget for next year includes cutting staff time, slashing tutoring, reducing social service and academic support programs that assist our children to stay in schools, perform better, and achieve academic excellence," the group said in a news release.

Parents to rally tomorrow against Corzine's school funding plan

by Amy Sara Clark / The Jersey Journal
Tuesday April 14, 2009, 3:43 PM

Parents and Communities United for Education is holding a rally opposing Gov. Jon Corzine's School Funding Reform Act, which, the group says, "reverses decades of efforts under Abbott court decisions to provide educational equity for children in poor urban districts, predominantly made up of Black and Latino communities."

The rally will be held Thursday, April 16, from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. at City Hall, 280 Grove St.

PCUE says the reduction in state aid to Jersey City has led to $24 million in cuts to the 2009-2010 school budget, and will particularly affect services for the district's Special Education students.

"The (Jersey City) school budget for next year includes cutting staff time, slashing tutoring, reducing social service and academic support programs that assist our children to stay in schools, perform better, and achieve academic excellence," the group said in a news release.

I guess its back to the good old system where the mega-rich could get fabulous educations with world class teachers in the very best private schools, the merely rich could go to great private schools, the modestly incomed could go to good public schools in their neighborbhoods and the poor could drop out of rotten inner city schools at 15 and get jobs flipping burgers.

Where were Corzine's kids educated?

UPDATE: Judge's ruling could mean end of Abbott schools funding
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Last updated: Wednesday March 25, 2009, 10:34 PM
BY KATHLEEN CARROLL
NorthJersey.com
STAFF WRITER

New Jersey?s effort to right educational wrongs by bankrolling a group of low-income school districts came one step closer to an end on Wednesday.

Judge Peter E. Doyne of Superior Court in Hackensack declared the state?s school-funding formula constitutional, ruling in favor of the Corzine administration and against advocates for poor students. The decision could abolish the controversial Abbott program, which has sent billions of state tax dollars to 31 low-income districts including Paterson, Passaic and Garfield.

A new funding formula that treats all districts the same ?represents a thoughtful, progressive attempt to assist at-risk children throughout the state of New Jersey, and not only those who by happenstance reside in Abbott districts,? Doyne wrote in a 280-page decision, agreeing with the major argument of the Corzine administration.

However, he said that Abbott districts should be allowed to ask for additional aid for at least three years, to see if, in the end, they receive less state money than they need. Doyne noted that Abbott districts may face exceptional challenges due to their low local tax collection and high concentrations of poverty, agreeing with the major argument made by Abbott districts.

Passaic Superintendent Robert Holster said he applauded that decision, because ?there?s still an open door for Abbott districts to demonstrate need.?

Governor Corzine called the ruling ?a significant victory for all school children,? but said he would challenge the judge?s recommendation that Abbott districts have access to extra state funding for at least the next three years.

The Education Law Center, which represents the Abbott districts, said its lawyers support extra funding for the districts but will continue to fight against the funding formula, because it will ?shortchange our neediest and most disadvantaged students.?

The matter now returns to state Supreme Court, which mandated the special state aid as part of the landmark Abbott v. Burke school-funding case. In the class-action suit, lawyers for poor children successfully argued that the school funding formula failed to ensure enough money was spent in low-income communities to provide the ?thorough and efficient? public education guaranteed by New Jersey?s constitution.

The Corzine administration last year asked the Supreme Court to void Abbott mandates, arguing that a new school funding formula fairly shares state aid among New Jersey?s 616 districts. The case landed in Hackensack after justices asked Doyne to review it and make a recommendation.

The ?Abbott? designation has brought small class sizes, new buildings, pre-school and full-day kindergarten to the 31 districts. But it also has pitted them against their suburban neighbors, who serve half of the state?s low-income students and have watched their local taxes skyrocket over the last decade.

In Garfield, Bergen County?s only Abbott district, officials said they would not be sad to see the designation go.

?To a certain extent, I feel it stigmatizes districts,? Business Administrator Dennis Frohnapfel said. ?In the new formula, the money follows the student, and that?s a good concept? The new funding formula has certainly benefited Garfield.?

The district has received greater amounts of aid since the state began using the new school funding formula last year, he said.

?They recalculated the aid based on our population, and since our special education population is increasing, the funding increased,? he said.

The new school funding formula awards aid based on enrollment, and then adds extra money per student for every student who is poor, has limited proficiency in English or receives special-education services. State officials have said it is superior to the system that calculates aid for Abbott and non-Abbott districts separately. But that special, separate status also shielded Abbott districts from the freezes in state school aid that the 585 non-Abbott districts had to contend with earlier this decade.

Lynne Strickland, who heads an advocacy group that primarily represents suburban districts, said she was heartened that the opinion was one that would help stabilize the debate over school funding in the state.

?It gives us a chance to step back, take a breath and work together to get ahead for the benefit of all the kids,? said Strickland, executive director of the Garden State Coalition of Schools. ?The Abbott decision divided us for so long.?

Assemblyman Scott Rumana, R-Wayne, applauded the ruling.

?For far too long our suburban districts have been forced to provide an unfair and disproportionate share of the school funding burden for Abbott districts,? he said in a statement. ?While Northern New Jersey suburban school districts remained flat-funded for years, Trenton poured billions of taxpayer money into Abbott schools, resulting in runaway property tax bills.?

But some in affluent North Jersey districts are critical of the funding formula, which also prescribes an ?adequacy? amount of how much districts should spend per student. They worry that the new funding formula will lower the bar for everyone.

Doyne?s opinion ?shattered faith in common sense,? said Richard Snyder, a Ramsey school trustee and executive director of Dollars and Sense, a Bergen-based school funding advocacy group.

State Sen. Gerald Cardinale, R-Cresskill, noted he was one of the few Republicans who voted in favor of the new school funding formula last year.

?This [new] formula is a way of phasing out Abbott without retreating from the notion that all kids deserve educational opportunity,? he said.

Staff writers Patricia Alex, Jennifer H. Cunningham, Giovanna Fabiano and John Reitmeyer contributed to this story.

? A state judge appointed by the Supreme Court has endorsed Gov. Jon Corzine's plan to change Abbott school funding, which could mean higher taxes for Abbott districts like Jersey City, Hoboken and Union City.

=========
FAVORS ABBOTT CRITICS
Judge boosts gov's ed funding plan
Thursday, March 26, 2009
By GEOFF MULVIHILL
Journal staff writer

ASSOCIATED PRESS

MOUNT LAUREL - In a decision that could end up costing five Hudson County school districts millions in state aid, a judge yesterday recommended that New Jersey's top court approve the Corzine administration's latest school funding formula.

A group representing children in some of the state's poorest cities had asked the state Supreme Court to find the changes unconstitutional because they could hurt those students.

In November, the court assigned Judge Peter Doyne to study the question in the latest round of litigation over how one of the nation's richest states should educate its poorest children.

In a series of landmark rulings dating to the 1980s, the state's high court has ordered New Jersey to do more for 31 of the poorest school districts. The rulings, known as the "Abbott" decisions, have triggered some deep political resentment from those who think judges go too far into policy questions and those who don't want to see so much tax money directed into just a few cities.

It's not clear when the Supreme Court might address the recommendation.

Jersey City, Union City, West New York, Harrison and Hoboken are all classified as Abbott districts. State aid in Jersey City, for example, pays more than $400 million of the roughly $600 million public schools tab.

If aid is cut, local taxpayers will likely have to make up the difference.

"Abbott funding is absolutely essential to Jersey City and to the other Abbott Districts," Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy said in a statement yesterday.

"The Abbott Districts have proven to be a success, particularly in the area of early childhood education, and we will do everything possible to keep that funding in place."

Union City Superintendent of Schools Stanley Sanger, who presides over a widely recognized urban education success story, fretted that his district could lose resources.

"All our initiatives and efforts and successes have proven that when urban children are given the opportunity and resources, they can excel," Sanger said. "We are hoping this will not diminish further opportunity and resources."

But Corzine's formula, based on the state aid going to poor children as opposed to poor districts, could benefit school districts in Hudson County not classified as Abbotts.

Doyne said he wants the state, for at least the first three years, to allow the low-income districts supplemental aid beyond what the formula allows. The judge called for a streamlined application process for that additional money.

David Wald, a spokesman for state Attorney General Anne Milgram, said yesterday that the state government's top lawyer opposes continuing the supplemental aid and would argue that to the Supreme Court.

David Sciarra, director of the Newark-based Education Law Center, which represents children in poor cities, did not immediately return calls for comment.

The state Supreme Court will now make a ruling.

Ken Thorbourne contributed to this story.

xerxes do you think a yuppie living in trump towers is going to send their kids to JC public schools?

Tax abatements are usually 5 years to residents and are only 20% off the total .example instead of paying $10k per year they are paying $8,000 per year.

The problem with hudson county is approx 40% of the city's population receives govt assistance and they dont pay into the system but their kids make up almost 80% of the school system.

Yuppies dont send their kids to city public schools. Look at the demographic of hoboken which is 90% caucasion. Go to Hoboken High at recess and tell me what the make up of the school is.

This is called a reality to check to all the libs on the board. ever hear of N.I.M.B.Y.? I'm for giving away everything as long as it's NOT IN MY BACKYARD.

I also have a conspiracy theory that maybe NJ is looking for a govt bailout like detroit recently did. Corzine will have pull with the new administration.

This is the biggest problem is this damn municipal system that Jersey uses - it is ridiculously wasteful. There is a guy in every Hudson County municipality that makes $200k a year to be the 'superintendent of schools.' Why not have one for Hudson county and pay him/her $400k and eliminate the other $1 million in waste? Seriously - consolidate school bus service, food programs, etc. - tons of redundant waste. Draw school lines so there is a cross section of low and high income kids - you foster an environment of both academic and athletic achievement.

This is one of my biggest issues with this state. I want the whole thing revamped. You want to see a system that works well - look at Virginia. Numerous nationally recognized primary public school systems and a college system that puts most other states to shame.

Jersey has the tax base to be the best, but wastes its funds on a system that is out dated.

Quote:

There is a big misuse of funds in Abbott districts and the administrators are the ones at fault. They use abbott money for other things besides materials for the classrooms. You could walk into a school and see the teacher using homemade materials or things he/she bought themselves, but then look into an administration building and you will see new everything including flat screen television sets and brand new office furniture. It's really sad. If they start cutting abbott districts funds, the teachers and children are the ones who will suffer, then good teachers will leave these districts as well.

Never fear,
Those that live in any luxury waterfront high rise condos built in the last 20 years don't pay school tax. So kids in Trump Towers and The Shore can go to public school for free.


The 70% increase in your school tax will go to fund these special exempt people because the money has to come from SOMEWHERE.

Quote:

We pay this guy $200K a year to be not sure and have a "wait-and-see approach"...way to serve the public buddy.

What I fear is that as the state pulls its distressed school funding, all those tax abatements the local government has gotten addicted to handing out for short-term cash are going to force those home owners of us not lucky enough to have a locked-in payment on the side to shoulder more than our share. The PILOT chickens are coming home to roost - and I'm worried about it. As if I needed another reason to loathe these local bumpkins...

Hoboken's landlords may pass 47 percent property tax hike along

Friday, November 21, 2008
By AMY SARA CLARK
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

HOBOKEN - Hoboken renters who think they are safe from the 47 percent property tax hike announced a few weeks ago could be in for a rude awakening.

Even some rent-controlled tenants could find themselves forking out more in rent as early as March, according to city officials.

When taxes go up, landlords of rent-controlled properties are allowed to apply to the city's Rent Leveling Board to tack on a "tax surcharge," said city spokesman Paul Drexel.

The tax surcharge could include the full amount of the tax increase split evenly among all the units in the rent-controlled property, Drexel said.

The amount would be split equally among the units even if the sizes of the apartments vary, he said.

Landlords can only add a tax surcharge once a year.

Landlords who haven't added a surcharge in 2008 can apply as early as Jan. 2, 2009 to pass on this year's tax increase to tenants, officials said.

The rent board will need a few weeks to consider the applications, and once landlords get an approval, they have to give their tenants 30 days notice of the hike, officials said.

So affected tenants have until at least March 1 to save up.

What kind of a hike can tenants expect?

City officials said the amount would vary by building, but gave as an example one "typical" 10-unit building, where each tenant could expect a hike of $48 per month if the landlord applies for the surcharge.

It's not just the school funding allocation formula that's going to be taking a bite out of us all, but NJ's own state budgetary challenges will compound the pain.

We might be able to squeak by on the school funding challenge, but there will be no ducking overall state budgetary cuts when they come.

At the end of the day, we need a BoE and school administration that is more proactive in anticipating and planning for significant state funding decreases, and doing their best to preserve the quality of education our city's kids deserve.

"Wait-and-See," is not a proactive approach to managing the school budget, and both the BoE and school administration need to be sent a message that it can't be done entirely on the back of the local taxpayers.

... and, oh yes, a similar problem is looming on the municipal side of your tax bill... but that's a topic for another thread.

All the best.

Geoff

Quote:

This guy is worth $200k+/yr? Lets start but cutting the salaries of the superintendents.

70%! WTF! I'm NOT paying it. I will board up my doors and windows and and not answer the phone. They will NEVER get me out of here. Why do these schools cost so much anyway? Why does it take 12 years to teach a kid to read and write? And why do we need all these kids anyway? We have enough kids now, we don't need anymore and they don't need to be so damn smart either. They just need to be smart enough to wipe our ass and make us soup when we get older. That's all that matters. I don't really care about the future of the human race, just my own comfort in my old age. When I'm dead, then the job of the human race is done.

How much will new formula raise school taxes?
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
By PAUL KOEPP
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

The state Supreme Court left Hudson County's Abbott school districts holding their breath yesterday when it set up hearings on a new funding formula that would choke off some of their state aid.

The court appointed Superior Court Judge Peter E. Doyne of Bergen County to hold hearings to examine whether the state can throw out the decades-old system of heavily funding 31 urban districts, including five in Hudson County: Jersey City, Hoboken, Union City, Harrison and West New York.

Jersey City would be the hardest hit. State aid accounts for $418 million of the district's $529 million operating budget in the 2008-09 school year. That is $8 million more aid than last year, but according to David Sciarra of the Education Law Center in Newark, the increases will stop there.

Sciarra, who is representing the Abbott districts, said Jersey City, West New York and Hoboken would not receive any further hikes in state under the new formula. Union City and Harrison would see 3 percent increases, he said.

"This formula ignored the standards set up by the Supreme Court for children in Abbott districts," Sciarra said, adding that schools may have to cut jobs and programs.

The Jersey City City Council adopted a resolution last week opposing the school formula, saying it would cause a budget shortfall of $25 million in the 2009-10 school year and $43 million the following year.

These hikes could send local school taxes soaring by 70 percent, said city Business Administrator Brian O'Reilly.

Based on its ratables, the city's "local fair share" for its public schools should be $196 million, according to state officials - more than twice the current school tax levy of $86.2 million.

Jersey City Superintendent of Schools Charles T. Epps Jr. said he isn't sure if the City Council's projections are correct and is adopting a wait-and-see approach to the new funding scheme.

"If it has an effect on academics, I'll have to really look at that," Epps said.