Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
I wouldn't be surprised if it was due to Mocco being more immersed in "old school JC" politics, which is pretty hostile to the charters. I've heard there's a political component to the fact that LCCS can't get Belmont Ave closed for recess when every other school can get a street closed, public or private. The fact that it's a county controlled road shouldn't keep hundreds of kids inside for recess, as it currently does.
Posted on: 2010/6/21 22:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
 |
I am sympathetic to funding more through income tax than property tax. However, Jersey City cannot adopt its own income tax. Any such reform would have to be statewide.
I also agree that there is some irony in a building that does not pay any school district taxes having a charter school located in the building. It is of course not limited to the residents of the building but you can be sure that the developer will tout it as an amenity. Nevertheless, it's a good thing that the Beacon will have a school that students from the neighborhood, and entire city, can go to. Especially since one criticism of the Beacon was that it was basically a fortress of luxury in a less well to do neighborhood. It certainly shows more foresight than Liberty Harbor, which didn't want to provide any space to LCCS, apparently because that developer saw no value in providing space to a school that "outsiders" could go to.
Posted on: 2010/6/21 22:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It sounds like a decent reasoning at first, but falls flat on it's face tripping over the fact that the majority of real estate value does not represent net worth, but rather debt. Especially these days, someone can "own" a $1m property, have absolutely no equity in it, and yet have to pay tens of thousands of taxes. So by your "wealth" formulation we should let them off the hook for those taxes, no?
Posted on: 2010/6/21 3:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
My preference to pay for all social functions is a progressive ASSET tax, which is a tax on WEALTH. Second choice would be a constant asset tax. And thus, a property tax comes far closer than an income tax.
To illustrate: a person inheriting $10 million and investing in 3% tax-free municipals gets $300,000 a year. He could easily buy a 3 million dollar property and send 5 kids to school without paying a penny under an income tax scheme. At least paying a real estate tax to finance schools, charter or otherwise, will have him paying something like a tax on wealth. Since ownership of real estate is in some degree proportional to wealth it is a good way to finance a city...and that's what most cities have done. But better is to do what some states have done: tax one's net worth every year. As for practical consequences of a city income tax, one need only look to NYC (and Yonkers.) The adoption of the income tax only added ANOTHER tax...the real estate tax still exists. The same would happen in Jersey City, and the politicians, the department managers, and the Mob would just take home larger satchels full of unmarked bills. And of course, allowing a City Council to abate the COUNTY and SCHOOL portion of taxes is illegal, plain and simple, whether the bribed judges in NJ think so or not. In fact charging people different taxes on equal real estate is unconstitutional on its face.
Posted on: 2010/6/19 13:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
Charter Schools are public schools. Charter schools are not the enemy.
Posted on: 2010/6/19 11:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
These expenses come with owning a building. If the senior didn't own a building, the senior would not have the expenses that come with it. Owning rental property/being a landlord is a business. The senior you are talking about is essentially running a business which only requires that she pay the associated expenses and pay for repairs when they are needed. The senior should evaluate if the business is providing what she needs. If the senior is strapped and struggling with the income she currently gets, she can sell the building, rent and live very comfortably, or live off the equity in the building through a reverse mortgage. Also, this place would be a zoo if we all had the choice of only paying for services we use. The thought of having a wad of cash on hand to pay the firefighters when they respond to my house comes to mind because no-one ever plans for a fire and that would probably be one of the first things many would chose not to pay. We already pay income taxes that support city services, the New Jersey Income Tax. We also pay sales tax (which for JC is an especially sweet deal because the city gets to keep the revenue from much of the sale activity downtown for city improvement through the UEZ program), property taxes, whether for an abated or non-abated property, and federal income taxes. This city gets more than its fair share from Trenton but money just seems to disappear in this city with little to show for it. I commend you for taking the city/council to task for their addiction to abatements and one shot budget gimmicks but attacking people who pay more than a tidy sum in property taxes to this city for wanting a decent public school is very misguided. When we send property taxes to the city we dont get to decide where it goes, the city does so keep pressuring the council to make better decisions but please stop attacking fellow property tax payers who are bent over the barrel right next to you.
Posted on: 2010/6/19 11:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
You're conflating two issues. Whether or not the Beacon has a tax exemption has nothing to do with charter schools. Schools have to park themselves somewhere. Since charters aren't given buildings, they have to rent from someone.
And what does "Charter schools should not be exempt from paying taxes" mean? Since when do public schools pay taxes? Again, what am I missing?
Posted on: 2010/6/19 1:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
My neighbor has an income of $40,000 (social security & rent) from which she pays taxes, $10,000 water $2,000 and all the other expense associated with owning a building. She will receive less than $200 from the senior freeze. But her board of ed taxes will go up as well as the other taxes. The people who want these services - charter schools should not be exempt from paying for them. In fairness I said JC should have an income tax.
Posted on: 2010/6/19 0:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Though you have to recognize the irony of a development exempt from school taxes receiving a big chunk of rental income from those same taxes.
Works well for them.
Posted on: 2010/6/18 21:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Brewster, nice to know that someone gets it.
Posted on: 2010/6/18 20:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yvonne, what part of "charters are open to all city resident's children" don't you get? The fact that the Beacon is offering to host a charter school means NOTHING about who attends it. If the school is actually good, the Beacon residents will have to enter a lottery to gain a seat like anyone else. Your rant about taxes has absolutely no relevance. To be credible, you actually have to listen to people who set you straight.
Posted on: 2010/6/18 15:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
A senior living on social security and rent from a building she owns is not a bad deal. I hope to be able to do that after years of working. Also, they could easily buy a condo (all cash) at the beacon if they sell the building they collect rents from. I wouldn't advise it, but they could. Everyone hates taxes, but if we have to pay taxes the system should be blended (include several ways to collect taxes..income, property, sales, etc.) to spread the burden to a broad group. NJ's property tax system is blended. Also a senior who owns the property he lives in is eligible for senior freeze, a program which provides a property tax reimbursement to offset property tax increases and Homestead Rebates which provides a rebate check of up to 20% of their property taxes, while a high income non-senior is eligible for neither. The person who bought a beacon condo did not make the rules and most likely pays more in taxes for their tax-abated condo than the senior who owns a multifamily downtown. Dollars are dollars. I think if you ask many here if they would prefer to have a high income and use most of their income to pay a mortgage for the expensive beacon condo you are talking about or having no income but social security and rents from buildings they own with no mortgage, they'll chose the latter. Income is not an accurate measure of wealth, net worth is. A person who owns a downtown multifamily house outright and collects rent on units in it will most likely have a higher net worth than a high income person paying a high mortgage on a beacon condo.
Posted on: 2010/6/18 14:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I have senior neighbors who I help fill out forms. They live on Security Security plus rent from their buildings. They do not qualify to buy a condo at the Beacon, but they are required to pay board of ed taxes that Beacon residents will not pay. This is unfair. As I stated earlier, JC should be off property and pay income tax. This is serious since the state is reducing its responsibilty to JC. The criteria for less state aid is a wealthier community, but the wealthier residents is not paying board of ed taxes but some expect a charter school from board of ed taxes.
Posted on: 2010/6/18 4:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm not sure what you mean by "their charter school" as if only children who live at the Beacon would be eligible to attend. Children from all over Jersey City, some of whose parents pay property taxes directly or through rents, are eligible to attend any charter school. I'm not clear why the tax status of the building in which the school is housed is pertinent.
Posted on: 2010/6/17 18:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This is the reason Jersey City needs to be off property taxes and use an income tax. The Beacon does not pay Board of Ed Taxes but will receive those funds for their charter school. Many people who pay Boad of Ed taxes cannot afford a Beacon condo. The Beacon has a 30 year tax abatement.
Posted on: 2010/6/16 14:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Here's a story that ran on the new Charter School coming to the Beacon:
http://www.globest.com/news/1680_1680/newjersey/300257-1.html
Posted on: 2010/6/14 15:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Good luck to them!!! THe first few years are the toughest. At least they have the real estate set.
Posted on: 2010/6/8 20:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
New Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Looks like a new Charter School for grades 6-12 may be coming to The Beacon. They also recently announced a new daycare center is opening there for kids 6 weeks to 5 years old, and are trying to bring in a kindergarten-5th grade school.
http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/jerse ... 75891946300011.xml&coll=3
Posted on: 2010/6/8 13:38
|
|||
|
||||