dtjcview wrote:
The solution is pretty simple - fix what's broken with abatements, fix what's broken with Abbott and school funding, fix what's broken with Mount Laurel. Tying different objectives together - like tying abatements to school funding - is a recipe for failure.

Personally I think schools should be fully funded by state and federal, since that's really where policy is set - NCLB, Title I, Abbott, common core, NJEA...it's only because the state is on a fast-track to bankruptcy that this is an issue.

Sommerman wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
This is a fair assessment. DTJC would suffer more than say Greenville, but all would suffer none the less if Abbot funding disappears. Owners of long term tax abated properties would be the only ones unaffected.

It's better to do something now than let the problem compound itself by kicking the can down the road.

Just a guess based on small sample observation, but if 'suffer' means being unable to afford one's home, DTJC might suffer much less than poorer neighborhoods. Pulling a kid out of private school, day care instead of nanny, cutting back on vacations, making a lump sum mortgage payment and refinancing are options that free up money, should taxes go up. Just a guess...

JCGuys wrote:
This is a fair assessment. DTJC would suffer more than say Greenville, but all would suffer none the less if Abbot funding disappears. Owners of long term tax abated properties would be the only ones unaffected.

It's better to do something now than let the problem compound itself by kicking the can down the road.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Walters wrote:
The State is going to change it . The public sector pension fund is becoming " The Walking Dead " if they sniff money someplace in NJ they are going to want it . The public sector is not blue or red , it's all about funding pensions . And all this talk recently about JC , Hoboken and tax abatments has just shot a flare up.

We can only hope. 3.5% sales taxes, no property reval in 25+ years, and the rest of the state subsidizing 70% of our school costs thanks to Mr. Abbot. Sounds like a sweet deal and we'll see if anyone has the balls at the state to change it.

Until then, let the happy times in Jersey City roll. If Fulop does become governor, I wonder if he'll just leave the abatement policy in place.

Lots of prognosticating going on here... since we are guessing, I will add that despite what is being bandied about in other threads as to the biggest risks to DTJC real estate being the PATH issues and other infrastructure problems, I think the BIGGEST THREAT to all of that is the pending reval (lots of homeowners living on thin monthly margins will have some serious issues affording their new tax bills if their brownstones and other properties start to get assessed at their true value) and an even bigger risk to all of JC overall is the question of Abbott funding. That topic is getting lots of attention lately, and if the state starts to cut back on JC PS funding, and the city is forced to make up the difference, local taxes could see a serious increase, which would affect all residents, not just DTJC.

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Walters wrote:
The State is going to change it . The public sector pension fund is becoming " The Walking Dead " if they sniff money someplace in NJ they are going to want it . The public sector is not blue or red , it's all about funding pensions . And all this talk recently about JC , Hoboken and tax abatments has just shot a flare up.

We can only hope. 3.5% sales taxes, no property reval in 25+ years, and the rest of the state subsidizing 70% of our school costs thanks to Mr. Abbot. Sounds like a sweet deal and we'll see if anyone has the balls at the state to change it.

Until then, let the happy times in Jersey City roll. If Fulop does become governor, I wonder if he'll just leave the abatement policy in place.

Walters wrote:
The State is going to change it . The public sector pension fund is becoming " The Walking Dead " if they sniff money someplace in NJ they are going to want it . The public sector is not blue or red , it's all about funding pensions . And all this talk recently about JC , Hoboken and tax abatments has just shot a flare up.

Yvonne wrote:
When reval goes through and that one third goes up you will see city hall flooded with opposition to tax abatements.

dtjcview wrote:
Thanks Dan. There's zero incentive for JC to change. This change has to come from the state.

Yvonne wrote:
Or taxpayers could show up at council meetings to tell the council no when voting on tax abatements.

user1111 wrote:
"Jersey City wants everyone other than its own residents to pay the city's bills," Doherty told The Jersey Journal in November.

More here

Yvonne wrote:
I am not worried about the guy who as a GED diploma, I am worried about the guy with a Master's Degree and sits in City Hall handing out sweetheart tax abatements. The GOP has its eyes on Fulop not Sweeney. The Republicans will write legislation to take away school funding because JC feels it doesn't need to collect school taxes.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
It's the state's job to sort out the abatement mess. Christie has had a report on his desk for 5 years and nothing's happened. Do your job and stop blaming others. (Makes a change from blaming Obama).

http://www.nj.gov/comptroller/news/docs/tax_abatement_report.pdf

As if the GED guy Sweeney and double (or is it triple) dipper Hudson County pol Prieto would let this get anywhere . . .

dtjcview wrote:
It's the state's job to sort out the abatement mess. Christie has had a report on his desk for 5 years and nothing's happened. Do your job and stop blaming others. (Makes a change from blaming Obama).

http://www.nj.gov/comptroller/news/docs/tax_abatement_report.pdf

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Exactly- because abatements and PILOTs work.

Maybe if Phillipsburg lured developers, it wouldn't be such a craphole that Jersey City residents have to subsidize.

How can JC taxpayers subsidize Phillipsburg schools when you don't pay $500,000,000/year of your own school costs? And Phillipsburg gets less than 1/10th of that??

Can I assume you're a JC high school grad?

LOL um our NJ income taxes actually subsidize the whole system.

We are all paying for stupidity across the increasingly smaller poor, red parts of NJ.

What will you do once your boy is in jail? Presumably blame the media...

You need a better understanding of how schools are funded in NJ, seriously.

And while blue Hudson County taxes are going up again, red Morris County taxes haven't gone up a cent in the last two years, and county debt was reduced over $8 million this year with no reduction of services.

Jersey City's share of Hudson County taxes will rise 6% . . . as announced today.

Red vs Blue.

Monroe wrote:
Pebble, the tax paid by the well to do is different. If I'm buying pants at Brooks Brothers I'll be paying a lot more in tax than someone buying pants at KMart.

That said, I loooooove finding bargains at Red, White, and Blue in Paterson-got a great Brooks Brothers polo shirt for a few dollars, and a Ralph Lauren blazer (sold at Lord and Taylor) for $5.95.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Sorry, none of these figures show that:

Quote:

The tax system is designed to create a fair and equitable measure.

or that:

Quote:

Based on every metric available, the tax system is designed around the simple concept that every person end up paying out the same percentage.

Your words, not mine. And so far, you haven't backed up your claims.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Exactly- because abatements and PILOTs work.

Maybe if Phillipsburg lured developers, it wouldn't be such a craphole that Jersey City residents have to subsidize.

How can JC taxpayers subsidize Phillipsburg schools when you don't pay $500,000,000/year of your own school costs? And Phillipsburg gets less than 1/10th of that??

Can I assume you're a JC high school grad?

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Exactly- because abatements and PILOTs work.

Maybe if Phillipsburg lured developers, it wouldn't be such a craphole that Jersey City residents have to subsidize.

How can JC taxpayers subsidize Phillipsburg schools when you don't pay $500,000,000/year of your own school costs? And Phillipsburg gets less than 1/10th of that??

Can I assume you're a JC high school grad?

LOL um our NJ income taxes actually subsidize the whole system.

We are all paying for stupidity across the increasingly smaller poor, red parts of NJ.

What will you do once your boy is in jail? Presumably blame the media...

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
Exactly- because abatements and PILOTs work.

Maybe if Phillipsburg lured developers, it wouldn't be such a craphole that Jersey City residents have to subsidize.

How can JC taxpayers subsidize Phillipsburg schools when you don't pay $500,000,000/year of your own school costs? And Phillipsburg gets less than 1/10th of that??

Can I assume you're a JC high school grad?

Yvonne wrote:
Guess what? There are still "junk stores" downtown. Newark Avenue is not as nice as Bergenline Ave in North Hudson or even Broadway in Bayonne. New condos can be built but they don't deserve 20 and 30 years abatement.

Yvonne wrote:
Development will happen, but if you look at downtown it developed without a plan, the developers called the shots. There is a traffic nightmare that didn't exist before development, we are also running out of open space, which adds to the flooding problem, limited recreation space and schools. Downtown JC is a classic case of poor development and it did not stabilize the tax rate.