Why is it the schools' problem?

Is there anything Republicans in NJ won't blame on teachers? Teachers in NJ are like the local Benghazi. Mention another problem, somehow it comes back to that.

Meanwhile, you have 565 municipalities, some not even a square mile big, with a few thousand people and their own police departments and municipal officials.

And this blowhard is the biggest supporter of the Port Authority. The Port Authority is spending millions in Union City- a city with no port, no bridge, no PA facility at all...and I guess it's a mere coincidence that Jersey City and Hoboken get nothing but shutdowns. Surely it has nothing to do with their mayor!

Republicans nationally just blame cities for everything just because cities have liberals, gays, immigrants, minorities, Muslims, and all the other scapegoats that distract from their agenda just being "say no to Obama", tax breaks for the rich, shoving religion down everyone's throats, guns for all, and other winners.

Frankly I find the whole debate somewhat stupid. Property tax is a tax on wealth, not a tax on income, on use or on consumption. Trying to tie a wealth tax to a specific use like schools misses the point of the taxation. Wealth-based taxes typically mean the wealthier end up paying more than their "fair" share compared to a consumption or "use" tax.

The argument around school funding - whether more PILOT/abatement tax income should be directed to schools, to drive down state income tax burden, conveniently ignores a number of other factors. The PILOT properties are generally high-value, and the wealth tax they generate more than covers most use of public services. What may not be covered in say contribution to schools, is more than made up for in contribution to state income taxes, affordable housing, infrastructure, public space, City taxes and directly attracting employers and employees to the City and NJ. By providing affordable housing, the City also supports low-income families and communities, that might otherwise burden other counties in the state.

Also if you look at the list of developers in JC, they're not simply profit taking from the PILOTs/abatements. They're continually re-investing in JC - more land improvement, more tenants/taxpayers, more affordable housing, more retail space, more public spaces, better infrastructure, more school facilities.

If you believe in a free and fair education system, public schools in NJ should probably be state-funded or even federally funded to address local anomalies and needs.

The problem with Abbott isn't in its goals, it's in the total inept management of those state funds, and their failure to reach the kids. And handing over a portion of PILOTs to that inept management solves nothing.

Billions and billions of dollars (doesn't take many years of 500 million dollar checks) have been given by suburban taxpayers to JC schools alone.

And, even though Abbott has been in place long enough for students to become parents of their own students, the JC graduation rate is abysmal.

It's no wonder the taxpayers paying the freight for JC schools are annoyed.

The negative part of an abatement, is the fact it is not part of the ratable base. Only the ratable base is used when the county strikes the budget. Abatements artificially keep the tax rate high. Every time the city says we are keeping the money, a statement from all previous mayors, our tax rate keeps increasing.

State Senator Doherty is the most vocal critic of the Supreme Court's decision in Abbott v. Burke. He wants to abolish any funding for poorer municipalities and have a flat rate of state aid per student. A couple of years ago he got into a war of words with Earl Kim, the former superintendent of the Montgomery school district, who declined to support his proposal.

http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/20 ... _schools_chief_stepp.html

?It stands to reason that a student with greater needs should get additional funding to support programs that would level the playing field for that child,? he wrote.

?Moreover ... the return on investment to a child who is lesser advantaged is far greater than the return on a dollar spent on an advantaged child,? he continued. ?From these two perspectives, your proposal does not make sense.?

(They make very few people like Earl Kim).

Anyway, back to Doherty. I disagree with him vehemently on school funding. But I have said before that I feel Jersey City has been abusing the Abbott decision through its abatement program, because it knows the state has to pick up the tab. So he has a point.

But in the end, the solution seems relatively straightforward, and it is within the State Senator's control. Amend the tax abatement law so that any PILOTs have to be distributed proportionately between city, county, and school district, as they are distributed with conventional taxes. That way, municipalities would have incentive to award abatements for the reasons they were supposed to be awarded (encouraging development of blighted areas) and not as a way for the city to grab more money.

The merits or demerits of abatements aside, where was this guy when the Healy administration was passing out abatements left and right, and in some cases, modifying and increasing abatements for some developers when they were having trouble selling their condo units?

One of the last conversations I had with former County Executive Bobby J, before his plea deal, he said I was right about abatements. He was an Assemblyman when the bill was proposed. He said tax abatement law was passed to develop land that has been abandoned not desired land that developers want. Several months later, Bobby J made his plea deal. I always wondered if that conversation was recorded since the paper said he was wearing a wire.

The State Senator is a moron.

There is a reason why Warren County, his homebase, is hemorrhaing population.

He has an axe to grind with Fulop because he is pro the corruption pit that is the Port Authority.

He is against abatements luring wealthy outsiders to NJ as a waste, but when it comes to time for the governor to make up a position at the Port Authority to which he can appoint his baseball team's statistician and then claim not know him, let's stop asking questions.

Nevermind that the PA has lost MILLIONS. Literally they don't know where the money went.

Without robust cities the rest of NJ will look like Warren County, a desolate, poor, rural area declining in population because it has no jobs.

Oh- and where is the dear State Senator on all of Christie's corporate giveaways to Panasonic, Goya, etc.?

Abbott is easy political points for the right wing rubes that don't know any better. Once NJ Republicans start going after actual graft- the Port Authority, the police union, the small Republican rural bergs with 3 people that have a municipal gov- we can talk.

Quote:

Problem is a lot of the teachers, cops, firefighters, and government workers who work for the city don't even live here. So the other towns are paying for their neighbors to have a job here so fair trade.

I still remember Dr. Scambio's plans to combine schools due to the dropping birth rates in the 1990s. The increase of school age children is a combination of affordable housing, new construction, and illegal immigration which really have increased.

Quote:

I agree, I think education should not be free, no one ever values what they don't pay for.

Down the road, these legislators will rewrite the laws and give equalize funding for education. Once you leave the urban areas, small towns pay 100% for education, Secaucus is doing that right now. If you can afford to give away your board of ed funding then you don't need state aid. It makes perfect sense. The local school funding has increased from $72 million to over $110 million since 2005 and will continue to rise.

the state senator has a valid point

"Jersey City wants everyone other than its own residents to pay the city's bills," Doherty told The Jersey Journal in November.

More here