Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
 |
There seems to be a lot of reading comprehension issues here. I am not sure what the problem is or why anyone is so intent of forcing their opinion. I see both sides of the coin. I simply don?t believe that the argument of ?fairness? really is so cut and dry.
If the revaluation occurred every 5 years, this really wouldn?t be an issue. But a lot of things have changed since the last one. Quote:
You can go with the ad hominum attacks all you want. I think it speaks more to your inability to present an argument to what I?ve presented. Buying my house, I looked at taxes, interest rate, sales price, number of years on the mortgage, etc. I like knowing what my bills are. I didn?t buy saying, ?Hey, these taxes will go down and I?ll get a windfall property value increase!? If anything, I just expect taxes to go up every single year since nothing ever gets cheaper. Quote:
Obviously, I?m not in the ?free Sh*t for everyoneland? since I?m all for some people paying higher taxes. Additionally, if Starbucks decided that Jack should only pay $2 because he?s been a customer forever then who am I to argue? Total dollars that Jack has spent at Starbucks over the years compared to you would certainly be an argument Starbucks could make. Have you never had a friend own a deli or retail store? Have you never heard of family discounts? What about employee discounts? Heck, forget about employee discounts, have you ever used a coupon or purchased something from the sales rack? That is someone paying a different price for the exact same item. The concept that two people pay the same price everywhere is quite an odd point of argument. I also contend that you have no idea what socialism is. I?m arguing about as conservative a concept as it gets. It is about free market and the absence of government adjusting the market price of property. If you budgeted to pay the higher taxes then you were on board with those rates. Now you find out your neighbor is paying less. It seems to me that you are the one arguing to get something for nothing. Quote:
The higher the tax is, the lower the price of the property. That is usually how things go. Obviously, there are certain towns that have quite a high level of home and tax. It?s one of those basic economics covering supply and demand. Working within one area of a city, there is a flat price point. If you increase the taxes on one property, you?ve just decreased the value of that property. If you?ve decreased the taxes on another property, you have increased that property?s price. Those with higher taxes want to flatten the playing field, so to speak. What they are looking to do is increase their property value by having the state come in and decrease their bill while increasing the bill of someone else and thrusting their property value downward. This is all under the argument of ?fairness.? Quote:
You may not agree with the logic, but that doesn?t make it flawed. I also didn?t inherently state that making JC better is the only reason someone has purchased. Any home owner should know that making the area they?ve purchased better increases their home?s value. As for getting a reward? I recall buying the first iPhone and getting the unlimited data plan. A couple of years later, I picked up the iPhone 4. I was grandfathered into the unlimited data plan and paid a lot of money less than some friends of mine. Your argument seems to be that AT&T should have just raised my rates regardless of the understood agreement in place. Additionally, AT&T wanted to reward the customers that first purchased the iPhones by allowing them to maintain this lower rate for a longer period of time. I?m not even arguing a new concept. I?m talking about what?s been going on in every level of business since people first started trading. Quote:
It?s a nice strawman to claim I?m a renter but that would be quite far from the truth. Yes, your condo price is lower because the taxes are higher. That?s the price point. Let?s talk about the flip side. Would you be happy if the city doubled your taxes causing your condo value to drop a lot more? What about if your taxes doubled and someone else had their taxes drop in half? That?s what will happen to other home owners, maybe not to that extreme, but it will go up for quite a few people. Your current residence was priced as such because of the taxes, just as the condo you sold was. If you suddenly change the taxes on each property, the price of the homes will suddenly change. Someone that recently purchased could end up taking a massive hit to their property value. Someone else already living in a home might find that they can no longer live somewhere they?ve been for years. This isn?t as simple as saying that someone is paying too much. It?s an adjustment of every single resident?s finances.
Posted on: 2013/7/1 17:06
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Can't really speak to the Heights, I'm only speaking from my experience downtown. When I sold my condo, I had to price it lower than comparable properties in the same neighborhood because of the ridiculous tax on it - around $9000 at the time for 1,000 square feet. And this wasn't even new construction. This was a historic building that had been converted into condos, so Pebble's argument that only new construction gets higher taxes is flat-out wrong. I don't think Pebble is even a homeowner. He sounds like a renter talking out of his ass.
Posted on: 2013/6/29 3:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
What percentage of people do you really think said, "you know what? I'm gonna buy in JC because I want to fix it up."? Do you think maybe they said, " I'm gonna buy in JC because I think my property is going to appreciate like crazy and I'm gonna make a ton of money." Or they just bought cause it was cheap and convenient? You don't get rewarded for that. Your thought process is completely flawed.
Quote:
Posted on: 2013/6/29 2:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
So if someone bought a building (or buildings) in say the Heights over the past 5 years -- they got it cheaper than they would have if it had been taxed less -- so they stand to make a lot more profit if there is a reval and they then sell -- not to mention they will be saving a bundle on their taxes.
Posted on: 2013/6/29 2:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What planet do you live on? When I first moved to JC a decade ago, there were still a few old-timers left, but I know of only one pioneer, maybe, among my circle of friends and acquaintances who remains downtown. Most of them cashed out in the boom and sold their million-dollar brownstones to Wall Street types, doctors, etc. The one-percenters bid up these places knowing they were getting a bargain in property taxes. The problem with this kind of gaping inequality in tax distribution is it creates a distortion in the real-estate market - and the problem will only worsen the longer it's allowed to persist. People will pay more for a place if they know that they'll be underassessed in taxes in perpetuity. On the flip side, a home that's paying more than it's fair share in tax will see it's value depressed.
Posted on: 2013/6/29 2:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I would do this with any other service. If I go to Starbucks and pay $3 for a coffee but someone else comes in and pays $2 because he's been going to Starbucks for a few years longer than me and somehow contributed to the early development of the company, that's supposed to be ok?? What planet do you live on? Free Sh*t for everyoneland? The idea that I was responsible and originally budgeted to pay a certain amount of taxes and that should absolve me of any right or care to expect equal tax responsibility is complete garbage! I'm shocked at the socialist views that have been expressed in this thread. Wake up you live in the US not Cuba!
By the way, I'm also planning for my property value and my taxes to go up in the next twenty years. Maybe I'll get lucky and have a bunch of socialists running things then and be able to drink from the public teat. Yeah, my taxes won't go up because I helped build the city back in 2010. No sense.
Posted on: 2013/6/29 1:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Pebble, I very nearly speechless. Almost nothing you say makes any sense or has a basis in reality. You sound like someone who's water meter was broken complaining that's it's unfair to fix it because ti was that way when you bought the house.
Firstly, there's plenty of people with historic homes all over JC paying far more than their ratio 33 share. If you'd bother to do some homework like I have rather than just letting off an opinion you'd know this. My building paying a 43 share is over 100 years old. As I've pointed out upthread, new construction gets assessed at market/3.3, which is theoretically accurate. But it's high relative to the low tax older properties Downtown that have appreciated drastically, outstripping the 3.3 inflation formula. As for A, B & C, move along, nothing to see here. higher price SHOULD mean higher tax!! That's the basis of the whole system. Nothing complicated or mysterious. I repeat, property owners ALL OVER JC, including some newer construction, are subsiding the undertaxed properties. And that's simply wrong.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 21:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you know law then why bother posting on this? The reval is required by law.
As for the rest of it... Presenting an argument that three similar properties would be up for sale with the conviently correlated tax and sales prices is exactly the point every one else is trying g to make. Those correlations don't exist in the current market. Lastly, saying that more established buildings have lower taxes and that helps people who have lived here longer is all well an good if the housee has not changed hands, but lots of those houses have new owners paying the same low tax.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 21:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
I know the laws in regards to when a home is reassessed. What I?m pointing out is that the higher taxed homes are the ones that are built the most recent. The reason they are of a higher tax rate is because the most recent assessment on the property was at a time closer to now than that of the lower taxed homes. Inherently, the argument is that a building more established is owned by someone that lived in the area longer and thus pay less tax. Yes, people certainly can complain about whatever they want. It really isn?t limited to payments. What I point out is that there are three houses for sale on a block. The way I see it, there are three houses of the same size on a street for sale. Each is priced differently and each has a different tax. House A is $150k with $3k in tax. House B is $200k with $5k in tax. House C is $250k with $7k in tax. The differences between them are that A needs a lot of work. B needs some minor fixing. C needs nothing. Before you or I or anyone else here bought their home, we were presented with these exact options. Now that some people house C have lived in their home for a while and it?s no longer as new as when they first purchased it, they hear that Jane has the same size property as they do but is paying less taxes. They don?t care nor remember that House B was an option to them and they didn?t take it. Instead, it is now an argument about ?fairness.? Is it fair that Jill, who selected House A, will be stuck with a higher tax burden? If she could have afforded the higher tax rate, maybe she would have spent a little higher of a base to get House C if it had lower taxes when she was buying. Quote:
I have no interest in class warfare or the argument of it. I?m simply providing the argument that is likely in existence behind Fulop?s decision to stop the reval. I completely get it. While it is possible that there are hedge funds paying lower taxes, it is just as likely, even more so, that regular people that can?t afford the tax hit are going to face it. I put an example above of multiple homes. When you purchased your property, you knew what the tax bill was. Why, since you are complaining now, did you not purchase someplace else? Why do you get to stomp your feet complaining that Tommy has ice cream and you want half of his? Do you buy a sweater at Banana Republic, wear it all winter and then run back to the store in the summer demanding money back because the same sweater is on sale? Quote:
Yes, a new roof would be an improvement and could trigger a property tax increase. It doesn?t always happen, but it can. If you read the last sentence I wrote, I specifically state that it ?really is almost every time you pull a permit.? That doesn?t mean that they always do it. But if you pull a permit then they can.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 19:48
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If we had rolling reval, where taxes are normalized on sale, you'd at least have a semblance of a point. But we don't. So a hedge fund that buys 254 Montgomery St for $1,800,000 gets to pay an effective tax rate less than 1/3 of mine? Why? Your conception of "fair taxes" is bizarre. It's supposed to be based on real value, not something frozen in time. I repeat, when someone underpays, someone else is overpaying, and the reality in JC is that overpaying someone is likely less wealthy than the underpayer. Can you say "class warfare"? Quote:
I'm sorry, but you're incorrect. I've been told explicitly that a major repair like a new roof is a capitalized expense for tax purposes. It does not need to be an "addition" to the property, just a major repair. That said, I've never had a revision of an assessment of any kind, never mind a full reval, despite numerous permits for improvements.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 17:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There's nothing fishy about it, and it has almost nothing to do with how long you've owned a home (taxes don't reset upon purchase).
There are two issues. 1. By law the city has to do a reval every so often (I believe it may be 10 years) 2. Yes, people are entitled to complain when their neighbors tax bill is 1/2 theirs for the same value property. Just like you would complain if you found out your dry cleaner/auto mechanic or restaurant was charging you double they were someone else, for no discernible reason. I say this as someone whose taxes are likely to go up a lot after a reval.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 17:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
I'm a little confused by some on here regarding their taxes. While purchasing the home, did you not know what the tax bill would be?
It seems to me that a lot of what people are complaining about is that they agreed to pay a tax on their property at their closing, knowing that the tax would increase over the years. Now, those same people are angry because they find out that people are paying less for a similar size. While it is nice to believe that everything should be fair, I'd like to see those that bought in earlier to the area spend less. Those people helped pave the way for the new development. I don't know what the reval will do to me, if anything at all. I just know that for anyone that buys or is looking to buy, they make a budget for what it will cost them to live. Taxes should be part of that equation. I imagine there are a lot of people downtown that, if the reval goes through, the taxes could price them out. That seems terribly unfair to them. Those complaining that they are paying too much seem to be saying that while their budget originally allowed for this expense, they are mad because someone else is getting the same at a cheaper price. Do any of those complaining do this with any other service? The whole thing seems fishy to me. Quote:
Mostly, you are looking at someone that has an unfinished basement then finishes it. That would be an improvement. Adding a bathroom will improve it. Adding an extension onto the house will trigger a reval. If you put a pool in your yard, that will trigger a reval. It really is almost every time you pull a permit.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 16:29
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If you look at the tax info, there's separate lines for land and improvements. As I understand it, if you do major "capital improvements" they are added to the improvements line. What work needs to be capitalized has always been a mystery to me. The IRS says "anything that improves the value of the property", but any repair at all also improves the value of the property! dtjcview: Interesting. So if in a reval, they don't have the footage to comp to, what do they use? It seems crazy. But it can't apply to ALL the expensive properties Downtown that are undertaxed.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 15:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Here's how the scam works. They don't register the internal sq footage of the building on the master deed. That way it's impossible to do a proper comparison. You'll also find you couldn't use that sale as a comp if you decided to appeal for the same reason: you can't calculate price/sq ft. There is absolutely no reason this loophole cannot be closed by insisting on measuring internal sq footage, and registering it with the county, either on transfer or during the reval.
Posted on: 2013/6/28 10:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Quote:
What kind of construction permits triggers a revaluation of a property and how extensive is that revaluation? I can see how a gut reno, or a completely new kitchen might trigger a revaluation. But for repairs of things that are broken it would seem a bit excessive. E.g. if I get a permit for a new roof to stop an active leak, could that (in theory) trigger a revaluation? Does it actually? What construction permits would typically trigger a revaluation? If some construction does trigger a revaluation, how extensive is the revaluation - i.e. is it only the impact of the improvement for which the permit was pulled that is considered in revaluation, or is it a complete revaluation of all aspect of the property?
Posted on: 2013/6/28 6:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Firm performing canceled Jersey City reval has already been paid $1.9 million
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal June 26, 2013 at 5:58 PM The West New York firm performing Jersey City?s now-canceled tax revaluation has already been paid nearly $2 million and has inspected almost 100 percent of the city?s properties, Mayor-elect Steve Fulop said today. Fulop stunned officials yesterday when he said he was shutting down the reval and not paying Realty Appraisal Co., of West New York, any more money for their work, a move one Hudson County tax official said may be unprecedented. The mayor-elect, who takes office on Monday, said in an interview at City Hall today that he expects the firm will ?pursue whatever recourse they?re going to pursue,? including seeking damages. Still, he said, he won?t back down. ?I have enough information, I think, to demonstrate that the process was flawed ? and it would result in something very detrimental to the residents,? he said. The City Council in February 2011 hired Realty Appraisal for $3.2 million to perform the city?s first reval since 1988. Fulop voted against the move, and has said city property owners can't afford any possible increase in their taxes. A year later, city officials asked to postpone the reval, citing issues with tax maps and Realty Appraisal?s claim that many residents weren?t allowing them inside their homes to perform inspections. On the campaign trail this year, Fulop attacked outgoing Mayor Jerramiah Healy over the reval, which Fulop said would result in a ?back-door tax hike.? The mayor-elect also noted that Brian O?Reilly, the former city business administrator, worked for Realty Appraisal when it was awarded the bid, which came in more than $2 million lower than the next-lowest bid. ?This bid raises a red flag,? Fulop said today. ?It?s so out of whack from everybody else, so either they had access to information that no one else had or they?re not doing the same sort of services the others? would have done. Bob Schaible, assistant Hudson County tax administrator, said he?s not sure if Fulop has the authority to shut down the reval. The Board of Taxation ordered the reval back in 2011, and it was approved by state treasury officials. A spokesman for the Treasury referred questions to Schaible?s office. When told about Fulop?s order to halt the reval, Schaible said, ?Wow.? ?It?s so unusual that I really don?t know what the procedure is at this juncture,? he said. Steve Rubenstein, a partner at Realty Appraisal, declined to comment. Fulop said today that Realty Appraisal has measured 95 percent of residential properties and 93 percent of commercial lots. http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... been_paid_19_million.html
Posted on: 2013/6/28 3:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
While looking for comps for my building I stumbled on a really juicy ripoff of the rest of us.
254 Montgomery St, Sold on 10/25/12: $1,800,000 tax $17,601 That yields a ratio of 13.61, rather far from the ideal 33. Were they paying the 33 the city says we all should be, their tax would be $42,671. Just to repeat, I have a building paying at a ratio of 46, 3.38 times his. That's 3.38 dollars I pay for every dollar of his on a value basis. How F%#ked up is that Mr Fulop? How do you justify saying you can't raise taxes on the citizens of JC, when many of us are already being ripped off to the benefit of others? Status quo uber alles? That isn't what I donated money for and voted for.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 17:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm aboard if it comes to that, but the county has a say here too. It'll be interesting if he indeed tries to "cancel" rather than fix it. Heightsbrat: I wish I could tell you that a professional appraiser paid $600 and takes an hour looking everywhere and measuring everything gets it right, but I can't. I had 2 appraisals of a building that is a simple box with a simple extension. 4 numbers are needed to get the gross area correct. One came in 20% under, the other 15%. IMHO the whole industry is scam, they pick a value out of thin air and then fudge all the "calculations" to arrive at it. PEC0905: If you bought an old house Downtown, like the one on 8th I reference upthread, you're happy about this. It benefits and screws people all over this city.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 16:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I think it is a horrible idea, but he didn't lie about it. He's been upfront about wanting to stop the reval.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 15:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Fulop basically just jerked everyone that bought Downtown in the past 10 years.
Typical politics and empty promises. Lie to get in office and then turn on the people that came out in force to get you elected.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 14:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If this is true, then maybe a class-action lawsuit to force the city to conduct a reval might have to be considered. Are there any lawyers here who can give a quick answer as to whether such a lawsuit would be feasible and have merit?
Posted on: 2013/6/27 14:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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
|
If the reval is 98% done and partially paid for, I am not sure how stopping it will save money.
Once the reval is performed, does it have to be implemented with those numbers, or can the city throw out the data?
Posted on: 2013/6/27 14:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Fulop told me yesterday he has no intention of having a reval while he is mayor. He doesn't want it restarted with a different firm or the same one. He doesn't want it to happen, period.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 12:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm not certain he "cancelled" the revaluation and I think the Jersey Journal headline was misleading. I believe he ordered it "halted", meaning it will resume at some time in the future, after an independent audit, and evaluation of what the firm was doing. When the person from the firm came to my place, he might have been inside for 15 seconds, looked around the room quickly and marked something on a clipboard. How is that a meaningful way to value any kind of real estate?
Posted on: 2013/6/27 11:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2011/12/12 0:13 Last Login : 2018/7/28 23:29 From Right here!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
847
|
Quote:
It is my understannding that mayor-elect Fulop is going to court over the issue of stopping the reval. I don't know how the JJ can make the statement that 98% of the work is done. Heck, 98% of my neighborhood wasn't done. Therein lies a bigger problem. The SLUG, & that is just what he was, looked at my 1st floor & turned to leave. I asked about the 2nd floor & his answer was, "I put it down as the same". Well, my 2nd floor isn't the same! And what about the basement & attic? I made him go to each floor in the house. Now you talk about fairness, if the other people who worked for the this company did the same then guess what, I am willing to bet a lot of illegal apartments went unreported. (And yes, I know that these SLUGS are not there to to see if an apartment is legal or not. They are only to report what they see.) Three of my neighbors said the SLUG only looked at their 1st floor also. Another issue was how this company come to get the contract. Four companies put in a bid. Now one would expect these companies to all be in the same ballpark when it came to their bid. But the winning company came in ONE MILLION DOLLARS BELOW. And what a coincidence that the newly retired JC BA, who was looking for a job a lot closer to home, just so happened to be working there, at a place further from his home than the job he just retired from. And what a coincidence that not long after the contract was awarded, said BA left the company. Nothing funny there. That this reval has to take place is a given. But to have it done in the slipshod manner that is & soon will be was the hallmark of the Healy administration is unfair. And for the ethically challenged to state that there is no conflict of interest cause they can't find where the former BA was involved in this process while he was BA, well, I have some real estate to sell you on Saturn.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 10:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Well Fletch, if you want to continue with your political aspirations, you need to watch what you say more carefully. I can't know what you really feel, but what you essentially said was "tax cuts for everyone!!!" I'm sure I'm not the only veteran of the Bush years who gets suspicious when he hears those words.
And if all the people who get raises also get appeals granted, then we'll get a big hike of the RATE on everyone for sure to make up the lost revenue. At least until if and when we can cut spending, it's a zero sum game.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 3:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/29 18:19 Last Login : 2015/7/15 3:35 From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
289
|
Well that was my whole point of my post. Tax fairness. The reval would have been a step in the right direction. Those whose taxes would be going up, could appeal. Instead, those of us already paying the max in taxes like you are who should have seen rates fall automatically now have to fight the battle.
And with Fulop now on record in Crain's NY saying he is gong to give "steeper incentives" for developers - that is not fair. And I am all about cutting spending. So I am really eager to see the revised 2013 budget Fulop will be submitting because unless there are significant cuts, taxes will go up yet again. F Quote:
Posted on: 2013/6/27 2:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You know Fletch, I agree with most of what you said here. But then you go all "don't bother with math" in the statement I quote above. We're not GWB & the GOP congress here, we can't cut taxes without cutting spending, thankfully it's against the law for a city to borrow for operating costs (Schundler found a way around this, but that's another story). I'm all aboard for finding all the waste in our city, I'm sure it's astounding, but 1st things 1st. Lets get the taxes fair before we start cutting everyone's. Ras, I might get on thin ice, but I "think" I understand how they assess new construction. The city has a number called the "ratio", which in theory is the number you multiply your assessment by to arrive at the real market value, which is then taxed at the current rate. So to get your new construction condo assessment they simply divide your cost by the current ratio, about 33. One thing I've discovered perusing the tax records, is there's a field called "Ratio", which is not always occupied (I have not determined why). This field might as well be called the tax fairness quotient. It's (assessment/sale price)x100. If it's over 33, you're paying too much, if it's under 33, you're paying too little. My $295k property is at 46. $930k 294 8th is at 21. If they paid at 33, 3 houses like mine would drop to 33. And that's the point of the reval.
Posted on: 2013/6/27 1:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I see., so improvements or a citywide reval may be the most likely ways to be reassessed. My place was new in 2008 so I'm at full tilt. Seems that it should happen at time of sale as well but what do I know.
Quote:
Posted on: 2013/6/27 1:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/29 18:19 Last Login : 2015/7/15 3:35 From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
289
|
I have a lot of concerns with Fulop's so called "cancellation". Mainly because the reval is mandated by the State of NJ and was approved and signed off on both at the County and State level. So I am curious how he can just order it "stopped."
Curious as to the timing of the announcement as well. Making it while mayor-elect. Then when he becomes mayor, he will learn it can't be canceled and has to proceed. Also, I read today in the JJ like 98% of the work has been completed and the firm has already been paid significant money. JC has a bad habit of having to do things two, three times. Sidewalks, Paving roads, etc. Let's stop this nonsense. The work is basically done and paid for. What bothers me the most though is that all the "newcomers and interlopers" who Fulop courted in the election, you all just got denied meaningful tax relief - especially if you don't live in a luxury abated high-rise downtown. Basically instead of having the reval be automatic, with the top third of the highest payers getting reductions (if you bought in the past 10 years you most likely are in this group) you now have to go and individually appeal your taxes. This is not an equitable process and the city won't deal with you in a fair manner as I found out. (disclosure, I appealed year before last, only got a quarter of what I proved I was over paying). Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY. All I know is I am paying nearly double the amount of taxes that my next door neighbor is - and they have a bigger unit than mine. They bought their condo in the 80's and don't even live there - they rent it out. That is not tax fairness. Meanwhile Fulop interviewed in Crains NY magazine saying he is going to give now "steeper incentives" to developers. This is unfair. But who were Fulop's big doners? Big developers. So this will be interesting to follow and as I said when running for Ward E, this will probably wind up in the courts. Fletch
Posted on: 2013/6/27 1:23
|
|||
|
||||