Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Ok. I called you out on this already but I guess you forgot, you deliberately misquoted someone to spin it your way. Certainly not a one time thing.
From 1/24 Yvonne wrote, "I got my robocall from mayor Fulop on the snow. One of the things he said is to remove your car from street. Well, where are the municipal garages and parking lots? I actually believe residents will do what he says but there are no places close by to place their cars. It doesn't help that new development does not have one to one parking for their units."
What Fulop actually wrote, "Residents are reminded to NOT PARK within 25 feet of an intersection and to not double park. Doing so only hampers the efforts of crews plowing and salting streets. All vehicles parked within 25 feet of an intersection will be ticketed or towed. If possible, residents are asked to not park on main thoroughfares, so plows can remove snow from curb-to-curb."
You use that? The point I was making there is no place to put cars during snow storms. Hoboken created a garage with reduced parking and tells citizens to place cars there when they clean the streets. This mayor is removing parking spaces. I was on Essex Street recently and saw parking spaces replaced by citibikes. Fulop should lead by example, let him give up his parking space behind city hall. The lack of parking in new development is a sore point. It is the reason Hamilton Park resident went to city hall and protest the cutting back on one to one parking. As I go around this city and tape the Town Hall meetings, different neighborhood groups have asked for municipal parking. Fulop says no. This is a serious issue by many people, not just me. By the way, where I live there is one public school, the mayor said people should place there cars there but what happens during the day? Where do you place them plus the fact that one small parking lot at the school. It cannot accommodate the area I live. You cannot tell people not to do things unless you give them a place to park their cars. Sorry, to inform you but cars are here to day. Your answer is laughable.
I did use, it was one example of many of how you misrepresented what someone said to spin things to your agenda.
The things that come out of your mouth are laughable.
You did not prove this one. When the mayor tells people to move their cars, he, like the mayor of Hoboken should have a place to place them. The small parking lot at the public school was not even shoveled. It is the equivalent of throwing someone in the water and telling them you better learn to swim.
You are making my point for me, you are misquoting what he said. I am done responding to you, you are a waste of energy.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Ok. I called you out on this already but I guess you forgot, you deliberately misquoted someone to spin it your way. Certainly not a one time thing.
From 1/24 Yvonne wrote, "I got my robocall from mayor Fulop on the snow. One of the things he said is to remove your car from street. Well, where are the municipal garages and parking lots? I actually believe residents will do what he says but there are no places close by to place their cars. It doesn't help that new development does not have one to one parking for their units."
What Fulop actually wrote, "Residents are reminded to NOT PARK within 25 feet of an intersection and to not double park. Doing so only hampers the efforts of crews plowing and salting streets. All vehicles parked within 25 feet of an intersection will be ticketed or towed. If possible, residents are asked to not park on main thoroughfares, so plows can remove snow from curb-to-curb."
You use that? The point I was making there is no place to put cars during snow storms. Hoboken created a garage with reduced parking and tells citizens to place cars there when they clean the streets. This mayor is removing parking spaces. I was on Essex Street recently and saw parking spaces replaced by citibikes. Fulop should lead by example, let him give up his parking space behind city hall. The lack of parking in new development is a sore point. It is the reason Hamilton Park resident went to city hall and protest the cutting back on one to one parking. As I go around this city and tape the Town Hall meetings, different neighborhood groups have asked for municipal parking. Fulop says no. This is a serious issue by many people, not just me. By the way, where I live there is one public school, the mayor said people should place there cars there but what happens during the day? Where do you place them plus the fact that one small parking lot at the school. It cannot accommodate the area I live. You cannot tell people not to do things unless you give them a place to park their cars. Sorry, to inform you but cars are here to day. Your answer is laughable.
I did use, it was one example of many of how you misrepresented what someone said to spin things to your agenda.
The things that come out of your mouth are laughable.
You did not prove this one. When the mayor tells people to move their cars, he, like the mayor of Hoboken should have a place to place them. The small parking lot at the public school was not even shoveled. It is the equivalent of throwing someone in the water and telling them you better learn to swim.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Ok. I called you out on this already but I guess you forgot, you deliberately misquoted someone to spin it your way. Certainly not a one time thing.
From 1/24 Yvonne wrote, "I got my robocall from mayor Fulop on the snow. One of the things he said is to remove your car from street. Well, where are the municipal garages and parking lots? I actually believe residents will do what he says but there are no places close by to place their cars. It doesn't help that new development does not have one to one parking for their units."
What Fulop actually wrote, "Residents are reminded to NOT PARK within 25 feet of an intersection and to not double park. Doing so only hampers the efforts of crews plowing and salting streets. All vehicles parked within 25 feet of an intersection will be ticketed or towed. If possible, residents are asked to not park on main thoroughfares, so plows can remove snow from curb-to-curb."
You use that? The point I was making there is no place to put cars during snow storms. Hoboken created a garage with reduced parking and tells citizens to place cars there when they clean the streets. This mayor is removing parking spaces. I was on Essex Street recently and saw parking spaces replaced by citibikes. Fulop should lead by example, let him give up his parking space behind city hall. The lack of parking in new development is a sore point. It is the reason Hamilton Park resident went to city hall and protest the cutting back on one to one parking. As I go around this city and tape the Town Hall meetings, different neighborhood groups have asked for municipal parking. Fulop says no. This is a serious issue by many people, not just me. By the way, where I live there is one public school, the mayor said people should place there cars there but what happens during the day? Where do you place them plus the fact that one small parking lot at the school. It cannot accommodate the area I live. You cannot tell people not to do things unless you give them a place to park their cars. Sorry, to inform you but cars are here to day. Your answer is laughable.
I did use, it was one example of many of how you misrepresented what someone said to spin things to your agenda.
The things that come out of your mouth are laughable.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Ok. I called you out on this already but I guess you forgot, you deliberately misquoted someone to spin it your way. Certainly not a one time thing.
From 1/24 Yvonne wrote, "I got my robocall from mayor Fulop on the snow. One of the things he said is to remove your car from street. Well, where are the municipal garages and parking lots? I actually believe residents will do what he says but there are no places close by to place their cars. It doesn't help that new development does not have one to one parking for their units."
What Fulop actually wrote, "Residents are reminded to NOT PARK within 25 feet of an intersection and to not double park. Doing so only hampers the efforts of crews plowing and salting streets. All vehicles parked within 25 feet of an intersection will be ticketed or towed. If possible, residents are asked to not park on main thoroughfares, so plows can remove snow from curb-to-curb."
You use that? The point I was making there is no place to put cars during snow storms. Hoboken created a garage with reduced parking and tells citizens to place cars there when they clean the streets. This mayor is removing parking spaces. I was on Essex Street recently and saw parking spaces replaced by citibikes. Fulop should lead by example, let him give up his parking space behind city hall. The lack of parking in new development is a sore point. It is the reason Hamilton Park resident went to city hall and protest the cutting back on one to one parking. As I go around this city and tape the Town Hall meetings, different neighborhood groups have asked for municipal parking. Fulop says no. This is a serious issue by many people, not just me. By the way, where I live there is one public school, the mayor said people should place there cars there but what happens during the day? Where do you place them plus the fact that one small parking lot at the school. It cannot accommodate the area I live. You cannot tell people not to do things unless you give them a place to park their cars. Sorry, to inform you but cars are here to day. Your answer is laughable.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Ok. I called you out on this already but I guess you forgot, you deliberately misquoted someone to spin it your way. Certainly not a one time thing.
From 1/24 Yvonne wrote, "I got my robocall from mayor Fulop on the snow. One of the things he said is to remove your car from street. Well, where are the municipal garages and parking lots? I actually believe residents will do what he says but there are no places close by to place their cars. It doesn't help that new development does not have one to one parking for their units."
What Fulop actually wrote, "Residents are reminded to NOT PARK within 25 feet of an intersection and to not double park. Doing so only hampers the efforts of crews plowing and salting streets. All vehicles parked within 25 feet of an intersection will be ticketed or towed. If possible, residents are asked to not park on main thoroughfares, so plows can remove snow from curb-to-curb."
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
How cute, you have no way of proving me wrong, if I was wrong you can easily point to it if there is history. So bring on the history. I am not afraid. My information comes form the budget, county tax assessor, tax collector, and some news articles. I also attend public meetings. Either those sources are wrong or you like to throw dirt.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Luckily there is a history of what you have written all over this board, you have no credibility.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Actually, you are wrong, I do give facts. Saying I don't is just slander. You must prove. The facts about 90 Hudson and 70 Hudson came from the 2016 budget. I did not make that up.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
You constantly make statements that are untrue, you quote things and leave out important information skewing it to your agenda. You have been called out on it multiple times by multiple people, with facts. Very few people believe your nonsense.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
You don't get off that easy, prove where I lied. I back up my statements with facts or tell people where the facts are located. You don't like my statements, that is your problem. But you are a hypocrite to call someone a liar while you hide behind a phony name.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
At least you have a sense of humor. Too bad you have lied about so many things that anything you say at this point can't be trusted.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Who cares about that? I will say Healy is a good singer, he knows how to belt a tune. Healy was mayor when the economy went south, Fulop is mayor when the economy is strong. The only thing I will say about Healy, his last tax abatement in Journal Square was 12 years, Fulop is giving 30 years.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Just to get a sense of what you consider reality, do you think Healy was a good mayor?
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Snowjob or not Fulop is spending, spending, spending...The irony, Fulop became mayor when many long term tax abatements expired. The ratable base under Healy was $5.4 billion, it is closed to $6 billion now. The rising ratable base means taxes should be cut, not stabilize.
Yvonne wrote: Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne, you KNOW that the last Healy budget was a snow job. A BS budget that EVERYONE knew was a low ball estimate that was going to require that a new budget be submitted, or additional allocations to plug the shortfalls. It was Healy's last FU to the citizens that rightfully voted him out.
Tell that to the 2,500 people who lost their homes to tax liens. By the way under Fulop, taxes increased by $66 million. Here is the Math - Healy's last budget $487 million, 2016 budget $553 million, an increase of $66 million. Also, 2012, there was 2,478 employees, now 2,794, an increase of 316. Sorry, I don't buy your logic or the administration's logic. You first take care of local taxpayers before you bring in new residents for affordable housing.
Yvonne wrote: This is problem I have, the city gives these tax abatement sometimes with the purpose of creating affordable housing, but the people who are being kicked to the curb, the small homeowner do not benefit from affordable housing. In fact, it makes their taxes worse. They now have to support the school taxes for affordable housing residents. The new residents who move into these affordable are not necessarily from JC or even American citizens. I did a voter registration one year and was surprise to find out who actually lived there, non-JC residents. Here is the analogy, JC is like a pregnant woman who aborts her baby (small homeowners) then adopts children (affordable housing residents). JC housing program does not make sense. Take care your JC residents first. The spending in JC is totally out of control.
You are really going off the deep end. Please, consult with a doctor. Your posts are becoming increasingly rambling, with little to no logic involved.
This is problem I have, the city gives these tax abatement sometimes with the purpose of creating affordable housing, but the people who are being kicked to the curb, the small homeowner do not benefit from affordable housing. In fact, it makes their taxes worse. They now have to support the school taxes for affordable housing residents. The new residents who move into these affordable are not necessarily from JC or even American citizens. I did a voter registration one year and was surprise to find out who actually lived there, non-JC residents. Here is the analogy, JC is like a pregnant woman who aborts her baby (small homeowners) then adopts children (affordable housing residents). JC housing program does not make sense. Take care your JC residents first. The spending in JC is totally out of control.
The city budget, and thus city taxes, increased from 2000 to 2016. That's inevitable, and - I would assume - we are all in agreement it's a property owner's responsibility to plan for rising taxes and costs, account for expected changes in their financial situation, and have some contingency plan for unexpected changes in their situation.
As I said, I never refuted Yvonne's points, but I am questioning using the inevitable delinquency of some homeowners to criticize the city's larger development plans. I did a little research myself about one of the properties up on the 1/7/16 City Owned Property Sale - 60 Virginia Avenue. It sold in 2005 for $230,000, in 2006 for $330,000, and in 2007 for $475,000.
Admittedly, looking at one property is hardly conclusive, but it seems to me this property was repeatedly flipped by people hoping to cash in. I imagine there are other situations, but my question stands - who is really being "taxed out"?
Wishful_Thinking wrote: It's not that I don't sympathize, Yvonne, it's more that I just don't understand. I'm a small home (well, condo) owner. My taxes are quite small - under $3,000/year which seems appropriate for my small home. From what I read here brownstones downtown are only $10,000/year in taxes. A whole house!
So I understand, what are we talking about? Who is really being taxed out? And if they can't afford $250 to $850 a month should they really own property in the first place?
You would have to prove what I said if false, not state it. I said the budget was $314 million in 2000. Find a copy of the Jersey City reporter - March 12, 2000 which states, "Budget passes...$314 M spending plan." Second, get a copy from the tax collector who published the tax lien for delinquent homeowners on Dec. 3, 2015 with the explanation that these liens will be sold December 17, 2015 at 10:00 AM in the city hall chambers, the number is around 2,500. Now get a copy of the budget for 2016 which has $553 million to be approved. Your name suits you well, you make claims stating I am false, well prove it.
It's not that I don't sympathize, Yvonne, it's more that I just don't understand. I'm a small home (well, condo) owner. My taxes are quite small - under $3,000/year which seems appropriate for my small home. From what I read here brownstones downtown are only $10,000/year in taxes. A whole house!
So I understand, what are we talking about? Who is really being taxed out? And if they can't afford $250 to $850 a month should they really own property in the first place?
Yvonne wrote: Affordable housing? Jersey City has a habit of selling the tax liens of small homeowners who cannot afford the rising tax rate. In 2000 the budget was $314 million, the budget proposed now is $553 million. When I went to my first budget hearing it was $90 million, no I was not a child, I was probably in my mid-twenties. All of this spending causes some homeowners to lose their homes. Developers buy these homes, foreclose on them then go to JC government and ask for a tax abatement to build affordable housing. This all immoral, we take form one group to give to another group and that is wrong. 2,500 basically small homeowners are not enjoying affordable housing in 2015, they lost their homes paying the board of ed and county taxes for others.
You have been discredited with so much of what you say why should anyone believe anything you say. You take things out of context and post that to spin it to your objective. It's really sad.
Affordable housing? Jersey City has a habit of selling the tax liens of small homeowners who cannot afford the rising tax rate. In 2000 the budget was $314 million, the budget proposed now is $553 million. When I went to my first budget hearing it was $90 million, no I was not a child, I was probably in my mid-twenties. All of this spending causes some homeowners to lose their homes. Developers buy these homes, foreclose on them then go to JC government and ask for a tax abatement to build affordable housing. This all immoral, we take form one group to give to another group and that is wrong. 2,500 basically small homeowners are not enjoying affordable housing in 2015, they lost their homes paying the board of ed and county taxes for others.
Yvonne wrote: Let me fully explain my statement. The city council was discussing not giving this 30 tax abatement after they turned down a 30 year tax abatement two weeks earlier. Coleman said she would ask the developer about give backs to the community for this abatement. At the caucus meeting she said the developer is giving a roof deck as a give back with green space. I asked how is that a give back when it is only for people who live. I am sure the previous developer who was turned down, now has grounds to sue JC. The council said his tax abatement was too long.
Could the inclusion of outdoor amenity space for the residents mitigate the lack of direct funding ("giveback") for public parks? I could see that as a way of justifying that scenario. I do think the affordable trust fund contribution is small - not even enough to build one unit.
My hope - expectation - as always, is that the city does something meaningful with the additional revenue (beyond what taxes would bring), e.g., build a new park. Has this ever been documented for other abatement properties?
I find Yun's assertion there will be only 4 students laughable, tho' I mean, he is from the Heights - if this building were in the Heights there would be at least 1 kid in each studio!
Let me fully explain my statement. The city council was discussing not giving this 30 tax abatement after they turned down a 30 year tax abatement two weeks earlier. Coleman said she would ask the developer about give backs to the community for this abatement. At the caucus meeting she said the developer is giving a roof deck as a give back with green space. I asked how is that a give back when it is only for people who live. I am sure the previous developer who was turned down, now has grounds to sue JC. The council said his tax abatement was too long.
The Jersey City Council voted 6-3 to approve a 30-year tax exemption for Bergen Avenue Urban Renewal LLC, expecting to realize $6 million in revenue, an additional $2 million compared to the city’s conventional taxes, over the same 30-year period.
Jersey City Council President Rolando Lavarro itemized the benefits of the tax abatement as “60 construction jobs, 8 permanent jobs, affordable trust fund of $106,563, and an annual service charge over 30 years of $6,486,000, as compared to conventional taxes for Jersey City’s portion of $4,577,000.”
“That’s $2 million more, more than $2 million that Jersey City will realize over 30 years as revenue for Jersey City,” he explained regarding the 280 Fairmount Ave. project.
Yvonne Balcer, a Journal Square resident and staunch Mayor Steven Fulop critic, however, saw it differently.
fat-ass-bike wrote: It's common knowledge that most of the silicon valley corporations don't pay any salary tax ... Are there any JC developers or corporations getting a similar deal (salary tax abatements) to operate out of JC ?
Of course they do. Feel free to provide a link that shows any corp doesn't pay payroll taxes. All companies do.
Generally, you must withhold income taxes, withhold and pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, and pay unemployment tax on wages paid to an employee. You do not generally have to withhold or pay any taxes on payments to independent contractors.
That was the original issue FAB is referencing. The IRS re-wrote the rules to stamp out the practice that was widespread in tech. Among other changes - the IRS introduced an effective 2-year term limit for an IC.
Alright. He should be accurate with his terminology though, as it can easily cause confusion. Employers always pay employer payroll taxes on their employees' compensation. This cannot be abated. And he said some tech companies don't pay ANY salary tax, which is terribly incorrect.
And even if companies shift from employees to independent contractors, the contractors themselves have to pay these taxes. So it is tax revenue neutral.
I might phrase it differently - but to FAB's original question - agreed - its not relevant. "Are there any JC developers or corporations getting a similar deal (salary tax abatements) to operate out of JC ?"
fat-ass-bike wrote: It's common knowledge that most of the silicon valley corporations don't pay any salary tax ... Are there any JC developers or corporations getting a similar deal (salary tax abatements) to operate out of JC ?
Of course they do. Feel free to provide a link that shows any corp doesn't pay payroll taxes. All companies do.
Generally, you must withhold income taxes, withhold and pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, and pay unemployment tax on wages paid to an employee. You do not generally have to withhold or pay any taxes on payments to independent contractors.
That was the original issue FAB is referencing. The IRS re-wrote the rules to stamp out the practice that was widespread in tech. Among other changes - the IRS introduced an effective 2-year term limit for an IC.
Alright. He should be accurate with his terminology though, as it can easily cause confusion. Employers always pay employer payroll taxes on their employees' compensation. This cannot be abated. And he said some tech companies don't pay ANY salary tax, which is terribly incorrect.
And even if companies shift from employees to independent contractors, the contractors themselves have to pay these taxes. So it is tax revenue neutral.
fat-ass-bike wrote: It's common knowledge that most of the silicon valley corporations don't pay any salary tax ... Are there any JC developers or corporations getting a similar deal (salary tax abatements) to operate out of JC ?
Of course they do. Feel free to provide a link that shows any corp doesn't pay payroll taxes. All companies do.
Generally, you must withhold income taxes, withhold and pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, and pay unemployment tax on wages paid to an employee. You do not generally have to withhold or pay any taxes on payments to independent contractors.
That was the original issue FAB is referencing. The IRS re-wrote the rules to stamp out the practice that was widespread in tech. Among other changes - the IRS introduced an effective 2-year term limit for an IC.
fat-ass-bike wrote: It's common knowledge that most of the silicon valley corporations don't pay any salary tax ... Are there any JC developers or corporations getting a similar deal (salary tax abatements) to operate out of JC ?
Of course they do. Feel free to provide a link that shows any corp doesn't pay payroll taxes. All companies do.
