Quote:

This doesn't refute the argument. Nobody argued that the overall number of kids is low.

What was argued was that the ratio of kids to population is lower.

Quote:

That may be the case with preschools. However, it may be worth noting that the demographics in these waterfront abated buildings tilt heavily Asian. Since every Asian parent basically aims for their kid to go to Harvard, Yale, Stanford or Princeton (OK, maybe Brown if the kid is a slacker), I guarantee you, they will NOT be sending their kids to JC public schools by the time the kid reaches kindergarten. They'll either move to a suburb with kick-ass public schools or send the kid to private school.

I agree that people in abated properties are really paying premium and arguably much more than their properties are worth. I will disagree on how many kids are living in abated properties. You would be surprised how many of these new residents are using their local public pre-schools. So much so that the district has had a major capacity problem particularly downtown. One developer told me last year he couldn't believe how many more kids he had living in his properties.

Shelley Skinner

Abated properties are largely occupied by single people. You see some pre-schoolers, but almost zero elementary or high school age kids in places like Trump, Crystal Point, and Gulls Cove. This is because any sane parent will move out of Jersey City by the time their kids reach school age. So it isn't like PILOT payers are getting a free ride from JC schools or are overburdening the school system. Also, PILOT payers do not pay less in taxes. It is not a discount. It is protection from the whims of the council. In fact, most are currently overpaying, compared to long-time JC residents, due to the general decline in property values. The reval is long overdue.

The PILOT payments go directly to the municipal coffers and they do not share any of this money with the local board of ed. However when the state decides how much a local school district should receive it looks at all of the tax revenue the city has earned, it doesn't account for the 25% that is abated. Either the state or the local tax payer has to pick up the difference. This is a long winded way of saying that every abatement approved depends on someone besides the city to subsidize what should be the school portion.

Shelley Skinner

I thought the abatements were helpful to the city because Jersey City keeps all the money and does not have to share with the state?

Quote:

Well, for this to be true, those people must pay less than what they consume. I really doubt this is the case.

More likely, they are paying part of your bills.

So, what's that "suffering" you refer to? Is it like in old anecdote about "russian luck is when neighbor's cow dies" - so you "suffer" just thinking that someone else makes more money?




Now, here is something else to ponder. Basically the story goes like this: city wants new development. So, it gives abatements to attract developers. Developers come, they clean up vacant lots, abandoned warehouses, railways, - and build a new and clean neighborhood. And we all benefit.

But then there are some who do not feel like they benefited enough. Yeah, damn, we did not milk those developers sufficiently!

So, you want to "fight abatements" which is basically means you want to renege on the contract. Imagine you succeeded.

Next time the city will be looking for a developer - could you venture a guess how that people-who-renege-on-contracts reputation will pay of?

Absolutely with the abatements, they need to be challenged or re-worked. They are killing our city by shirking it's tax base, and the worst of all is the people who can afford the most taxes, the wealthy are getting the advantages of these abatements. While on the other hand those who can't afford it, the working families are forced to suffer.


This is why it sicken's me that someone like Syed is running, he brokered many of these abatements and didn't care what happened to the regular person. All for business and never for the little guy. Whom ever is supporting him should be ashamed.

sewer and water rates are rising this year, and the Reval will kill many homeowners. All abatements should be fought against with vigor.

What gimmicks did they use this year?

http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... y_city_council_adopt.html


Jersey City City Council adopts budget
Published: Wednesday, September 28, 2011, 3:00 AM
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal


With fewer than 100 days left in the year, Jersey City last night adopted a $490 million city budget, one that officials say comes with no tax increase.
The City Council unanimously adopted the spending plan last night, more than six months after it was introduced. The city administration delayed the process as it waited to close a $15 million land deal, and then delayed it again when the land deal fell through two weeks ago.
Until last year, the city worked under a fiscal year budget that ended in June. This year is the city?s first with a calendar-year plan.
Though city officials have been criticized by residents for taking so long to adopt the spending plan, Council President Peter Brennan said last night the delay did no harm.
The budget was mostly set in stone in March, when the council first approved it, Brennan said.
Brennan praised Business Administrator Jack Kelly for delivering the budget, and he lauded the city?s labor unions for accepting flat increases, work furloughs and other ?givebacks.?
?We made up $80 million,? he said, referring to the budget gap the city had been facing. ?There was a lot of work by a lot of people to close it.?
Councilman Steve Fulop, while voting to approve the spending plan, nonetheless expressed ?serious concerns? about it. One-time budget gimmicks, Fulop said, will only delay the pain.
?We?re set up for massive tax increases next year,? he said.
According to the budget adopted last night, the city will need to raise $215 million through taxes. City spokeswoman Jennifer Morrill said about $6.4 million of that is for the local school district, leaving about $208 million for city purposes.

Quote:


I've completed transcription of the 2011 proposed city budget to Google Docs spreadsheet format:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/cc ... SVEtUWG1iUWU4WWc&hl=en_US


Copy, paste, and analyze at will.

Every year its the same charade on the City budget.

I do notice that the activism that seemed to exist in previous months/years has waned. The recall was a failure. Everybody is just holding their collective breaths until 2013 hoping a white knight will ride in to rescue the City.

You may be right about pointless/toothless questions, but that in no way explains the chronic delays in the budgeting process. The council doesn't put the budget together, it merely votes on it once it's presented.

There really is no mystery as to why the budget late every year and getting later: it is a combination of amateurism, cronyism, patronage and the lack of consequences for any of it. If the state said to the city: next year, you will have a budget approved by March 31 or we will impose one on you (or we will cut state aid, or the business administrator will be fired), rest assured there would be a budget in place prior to March 31. No question. In the end, it's all theater.

This is just a thought... let me emphasize that first... but sometimes I think the huge delay in the city budget is at least partially due to those people who attend every city council meeting, and then ask the city council members usually toothless questions about EVERY resolution, and make a 2 hour council meeting turn into a 4 hour meeting.

I'm referring to these so-called "activists" that feel the need to criticize and put council members on the spot every chance they get, while not really contributing anything to the whole political process. I'm not going to name any of them because we know who they are and I'm sure some read this board. I think many of them are people who would like to be elected but just aren't sufficiently connected to become elected.

Please understand I am not defending the city council, at all, I think they are a bunch of corrupt, money-grubbing bureaucrats (Steve Fulop excepted) who care little about their constituents and largely just kowtow to what Healy wants. But I don't see how peppering them with pointless questions about every resolution and criticizing them so they can get a short applause from the audience really makes any difference. It only seems to contribute to this city's disfunction. There has to be a better way.

I've started transcribing the data into spreadsheet format available here.

I haven't finished yet, but it should be done within two weeks.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/cc ... SVEtUWG1iUWU4WWc&hl=en_US

This is the proposed 2011 municipal budget for Jersey City. I couldn't find it on the Jersey City official website anymore. If it's still there, let me know.

http://cl.ly/2w3i1c011F3J0K3L0p28

The Healy people would have liked us to believe that when they brought their new Business Administrator (Jack Kelly)on board, that he would find ways to get the City out of its fiscal mess.

After employee furloughs, layoffs, scaling back health insurance benefits for retirees and changing the City's fiscal year the City is in the same hole as before and can't pass a budget in a timely fashion.

Great job Mr. Kelly !

Plan B is calling Spectra and offering to stop fighting the pipeline if Spectra gives the city $15M.

It should be like the state if the budget isn't done, balanced and final by June 30th, a complete shut down of non essencial services should happen.

To make it more painful non-essencial services should include the GAS and Cars of council members.

Not sure if anyone else is following this issue of not yet having a 2011 budget for Jersey City. In-spite of the State's Aug 26 deadline (1) past wednesday's public hearing on the city budget accomplished nothing but more delay and frustration (2). Yea in Healy's words - Jersey City ... the economic engine of the State (3), really is this how my town proves itself to be the "economic engine".

What I don't get is how can a $15million deal hold up a $496million budget? How come a single developer has such clout over (in Healy's words) "the most diverse city in the county". In response to wednesday's affairs we are being told there is a plan B (4). Really so why was the Plan-B not brought forth when the budget was late in the first place?

However I'll tell you what, I give you City administrator the chance to bring forth your budget with the Plan B. However, as the Aug 26 went by in the rearview I just wonder if we are still working on the 2011 budget in 2011Q3 what's going to happen to the 2012 budget?

Don't know where the re-evaluation of property taxes fit into this entire picture. Yes the "Change" I believed in and voted for !!

Links:
(1) http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... ity-says-its-coming-soon/

(2) http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ing_on_jersey_city_2.html

(3) http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... ltural-affairs-and-jcedc/

(4) http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... ys-its-turning-to-plan-b/

Due to tight budgets and tough economic times, the City of Jersey City apparently did not have enough money to produce a professional-quality budget document.

If there is a enterprising high-school student that would like to earn some money, I will personally fund transcription of the Jersey City budget to Excel format. Feel free to make an offer on JC list.

Please find the 2011 Jersey City proposed budget here:

http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/pub-i ... 0&terms=transition+budget

$480 million annual budget.

Some of the largest outlays are:

Total Administration budget: $14 million
Total Public works budget: $14 million

Debt Service: $50 million
city contribution for group health insurance: $68 million

Fire Dept salaries: $62 million
Police Dept salaries: $92 million
Police / Fire retirement: #35 million

Incenerator authority: $25 million


There are something like 400+ line items on the appropriations list.

These 8 items account for 75% of our city budget.

Brewster: Well said. Sad but very well said. Any politician with an ounce of integrity must realize that this political system of self-serving patronage is municipal suicide. Any sensible taxpayer will either move to a suburb or even NYC. Property taxes in Brooklyn are far less than here. And then who will be left to pay the dole to the thieves.

Mayor Healey and members of city council: Is that what you want? Shame on you.

Quote:

Because city retirees, along with current municipal employees, city contractors, and developers, are the HCDO's REAL constituents. We have as much say as cows in the barn do over whether their milk is turned into cheese or yogurt. Our role is to just get milked.

Where is the budget at? Anyone know.

I know they passed a temporary 3 month spending bill... but at the amount they passed, they will top last year's spending dramatically.

I'm a little annoyed. I just read that City Council is going to keep retirees on the way too expensive. luxurious traditional Cadillac health plan.

Why isn't JC cutting costs like this. Crazy.

Hello Jersey City, where are the major cuts. I can't absorb another tax increase. Sorry. Fix the budget, CUT SPENDING.

Thanks

FG

@Tbird wow thanks for that breakdown. The news usually just reports the big number and never explains anything. So by taking the full year's debt service upfront what do they gain? More money to use to their liking? What I am understanding from this is that they are using up all of this money early and then at the end of the year they rush to fix their mismanagement of funds. So we are constantly forced to pay more taxes because city officials don't know how to balance the books. Am I somewhat right?

Quote:

The amount passed for the temporary budget was actually $99.9 million. The 26.25% cap applies to last year's budget, excluding debt service, capital improvements and public assistance. That cap equals $106 million. The other $70 million is for the full year's debt service, which they are allowed to do ... but it makes me wonder:

Last year's debt service was $59 million and now it's $70 million. Maybe there is some amortization in there, but if not - how did it jump that much? Debt outstanding couldn't have gone up almost 20%.

Why is the city taking the full year's debt service upfront? Seems like a wonderful opportunity for the administration to fund things that would otherwise be out of reach by tapping into the debt service money and then playing games with the final budget to cover it up. There is no accounting for how this interim money is spent. It certainly wouldn't be the first time the administration made a decision for immediate gain at the expense of the future.

We need state oversight of our BA's office.

26% of 511 million is 132 million, so why is the city passing $170 million?

Do anyone have details like who voted for and against this 3 month budget?