JERSEY CITY LIST - Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval [Politics & Government]

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#722

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

mfadam wrote:
For 2.1% the city needs to figure out how to deliver way better service, quality of life and improve the schools.

If being forced to pay their fair share gets the attention of the wealthiest and best educated sector of JC citizens onto their government, great. It's about time. But what does your statement say to the people who have been paying 3-4% AND living in more decrepit, unsafe parts of town?

Posted on: 2016/4/18 23:51

mfadam

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#721

Home away from home

Joined:
2007/7/30 22:23
Last Login :
2019/3/8 17:09

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 711

People aren't stupid - high RE taxes are not building owner's equity in the equation.

For 2.1% the city needs to figure out how to deliver way better service, quality of life and improve the schools. The perception of JC schools is still quite bad (even when not always warranted)

Posted on: 2016/4/18 21:21

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#720

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
So homeowners will be paying property taxes based on market values now as opposed to assessed values ?

That's the way it is SUPPOSED TO BE. The reason they used assessed values now is because the city (and entire area) can't seem to be able to figure out how to do rolling revals that update those market values every year, this despite the fact that so many other cities and states across the country do exactly that.

Quote:

Isnt the concept of market value more subjective tho ?

Assessed values is the SAME as Market values just that they have had the market equalization rate applied. The issue is not a matter of assessed vs market, it is a matter of keeping real estate valuations updated continually. In a region so rich with data and technical know-how, somehow municipalities have not been able to figure out how to implement a system where property valuations are updated yearly based on market conditions, sales, crime data, etc. The contention that brought about the current system is that *manual* revals are labor intensive and therefore cost prohibitive. But, why would manual revals be needed to institute a system of rolling revals that update values yearly? Surely we could implement a computer model that updates values yearly and then have a manual reval every 10 years to ensure things are being taxed fairly.

I assume we all can agree it's more political than management or technology. IMO the situation is, and even if the technology were in place there might never be the political willpower to change things (here in JC, at least). I've thought about this; a few points:

- manual assessments performed by city employees affords owners and elected officials ample opportunities to intervene, and sway the results
- the administration would find itself under intense pressure to manage costs, and provide services, if assessments were regularly updated, as owners in previously under-taxed areas would insist on value commensurate with their higher taxes
- below market rate rental housing in prime areas could be impacted - affecting another voting block - as owners try to recoup the tax burden

I agree it's necessary and fair, but the people who benefit from the status quo have the most to lose and clearly have, and have had for many years, the right people's ears in City Hall:

- Income poor, house rich older, long-term residents, and "first wave" gentrifiers
- Moderate to affluent new comers, a cohort this administration encourages, who don't use a lot of city services (public schools, welfare, etc.) and see low taxes as a prerequisite for moving to JC

All valid points you highlight. Still, there is one demographic you leave out, and which (anecdotally) has been the prized one that all mayors claim to want: the young middle class family. In theory, this is the demographic most desired because, among other things, they are the ones that will grow roots here, push for better schools, and the one with the highest chance of upward mobility. Of course, as JC (particularly DTJC) continues its march towards becoming another high-tax NJ municipality, one is left to wonder: how can we attract (and, keep) that demographic? There is no way you can attract a young family if the available housing is overpriced, highly taxed, the schools are poor or average, and city services limited or lacking. And, imagine if NJ ever reworks the Abbott laws and changes the amount of money JC will have to pay for its school budget!! Imagine if we all of a sudden had to pay 30% of our school budgets, instead of the current rate that is half that. How do homeowners absorb THAT cost? At some point, I suspect more and more families will start to do the math and reach the conclusion that living elsewhere (Queens, BK, other NJ towns with better school) could be better and/or more affordable. That is (or, should be) the real concern in all of this.

Posted on: 2016/4/18 20:17

Wishful_Thinking

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#719

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/10/15 17:32
Last Login :
2017/5/17 13:40

From Heights

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 797

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
So homeowners will be paying property taxes based on market values now as opposed to assessed values ?

That's the way it is SUPPOSED TO BE. The reason they used assessed values now is because the city (and entire area) can't seem to be able to figure out how to do rolling revals that update those market values every year, this despite the fact that so many other cities and states across the country do exactly that.

Quote:

Isnt the concept of market value more subjective tho ?

Assessed values is the SAME as Market values just that they have had the market equalization rate applied. The issue is not a matter of assessed vs market, it is a matter of keeping real estate valuations updated continually. In a region so rich with data and technical know-how, somehow municipalities have not been able to figure out how to implement a system where property valuations are updated yearly based on market conditions, sales, crime data, etc. The contention that brought about the current system is that *manual* revals are labor intensive and therefore cost prohibitive. But, why would manual revals be needed to institute a system of rolling revals that update values yearly? Surely we could implement a computer model that updates values yearly and then have a manual reval every 10 years to ensure things are being taxed fairly.

I assume we all can agree it's more political than management or technology. IMO the situation is, and even if the technology were in place there might never be the political willpower to change things (here in JC, at least). I've thought about this; a few points:

- manual assessments performed by city employees affords owners and elected officials ample opportunities to intervene, and sway the results
- the administration would find itself under intense pressure to manage costs, and provide services, if assessments were regularly updated, as owners in previously under-taxed areas would insist on value commensurate with their higher taxes
- below market rate rental housing in prime areas could be impacted - affecting another voting block - as owners try to recoup the tax burden

I agree it's necessary and fair, but the people who benefit from the status quo have the most to lose and clearly have, and have had for many years, the right people's ears in City Hall:

- Income poor, house rich older, long-term residents, and "first wave" gentrifiers
- Moderate to affluent new comers, a cohort this administration encourages, who don't use a lot of city services (public schools, welfare, etc.) and see low taxes as a prerequisite for moving to JC

Posted on: 2016/4/18 19:12

jsqfunk

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#718

Just can't stay away

Joined:
2007/5/30 0:05
Last Login :
2018/11/7 2:57

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 124

Thank you that makes sense

There's a reason those buildings appraised differently: to be rent controlled you have to be a commercial class property, and commercial properties are NOT appraised by COMPS, they are appraised by INCOME! So a property with fixed low rents, or for that matter one with both residential and commercial tenants, is valued proportionally to those rents, and NOT to the value of the overpriced 4 unit brownstone next door.

The reason for this is that a bank would never lend on a commercial income property with not enough income to cover it's expenses, and that keeps prices down. If a homeowner wants to waste their income on overpriced residential property and has the cash, the bank is OK with that.[/quote]

Posted on: 2016/4/18 16:52

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#717

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

thor800 wrote:
So homeowners will be paying property taxes based on market values now as opposed to assessed values ?

That's the way it is SUPPOSED TO BE. The reason they used assessed values now is because the city (and entire area) can't seem to be able to figure out how to do rolling revals that update those market values every year, this despite the fact that so many other cities and states across the country do exactly that.

Quote:

Isnt the concept of market value more subjective tho ?

Assessed values is the SAME as Market values just that they have had the market equalization rate applied. The issue is not a matter of assessed vs market, it is a matter of keeping real estate valuations updated continually. In a region so rich with data and technical know-how, somehow municipalities have not been able to figure out how to implement a system where property valuations are updated yearly based on market conditions, sales, crime data, etc. The contention that brought about the current system is that *manual* revals are labor intensive and therefore cost prohibitive. But, why would manual revals be needed to institute a system of rolling revals that update values yearly? Surely we could implement a computer model that updates values yearly and then have a manual reval every 10 years to ensure things are being taxed fairly.

Quote:

Whats to say that next year the dtjc market wont see a correction ? It seems like some sort of 3 year average would make more sense.

See above.

Posted on: 2016/4/18 9:45

thor800

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#716

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 366

So homeowners will be paying property taxes based on market values now as opposed to assessed values ?

Isnt the concept of market value more subjective tho ? Prices especially downtown are the highest theyve ever been but thats somewhat indicative of several factors like even crazier prices in brooklyn.

Whats to say that next year the dtjc market wont see a correction ? It seems like some sort of 3 year average would make more sense.

Posted on: 2016/4/18 4:49

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#715

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

jsqfunk wrote:
If the real estate taxes on a rent controlled apartment goes up, what percentage of the tax increase can the owner pass On to the renters?

Many landlords went to tax court and sought tax relief. They could not pass on the tax increase. In fact, many one and two family homes had a higher assessment after reval compared to rent controlled properties. As an example, the rent controlled property paid $6,000 from $2,500 while the one or two family homes saw $10,000 from $2,500. This is a real problem with rent control which was changed in 1985 about tax pass alongs. The rent control board establishes how much a property can be raised. It is the reason many rent controlled properties in JC, especially downtown became condos. I was part of a group that collected data after the 1988 reval.

There's a reason those buildings appraised differently: to be rent controlled you have to be a commercial class property, and commercial properties are NOT appraised by COMPS, they are appraised by INCOME! So a property with fixed low rents, or for that matter one with both residential and commercial tenants, is valued proportionally to those rents, and NOT to the value of the overpriced 4 unit brownstone next door.

The reason for this is that a bank would never lend on a commercial income property with not enough income to cover it's expenses, and that keeps prices down. If a homeowner wants to waste their income on overpriced residential property and has the cash, the bank is OK with that.

Posted on: 2016/4/18 3:34

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#714

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 5375

Quote:

jsqfunk wrote:
If the real estate taxes on a rent controlled apartment goes up, what percentage of the tax increase can the owner pass On to the renters?

Many landlords went to tax court and sought tax relief. They could not pass on the tax increase. In fact, many one and two family homes had a higher assessment after reval compared to rent controlled properties. As an example, the rent controlled property paid $6,000 from $2,500 while the one or two family homes saw $10,000 from $2,500. This is a real problem with rent control which was changed in 1985 about tax pass alongs. The rent control board establishes how much a property can be raised. It is the reason many rent controlled properties in JC, especially downtown became condos. I was part of a group that collected data after the 1988 reval.

Posted on: 2016/4/18 2:38

jsqfunk

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#713

Just can't stay away

Joined:
2007/5/30 0:05
Last Login :
2018/11/7 2:57

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 124

If the real estate taxes on a rent controlled apartment goes up, what percentage of the tax increase can the owner pass On to the renters?

Posted on: 2016/4/18 2:12

JPhurst

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#712

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

Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
I know this article has been posted dozens of times throughout the vast reaches of JCList, but it seems like it would help to have it show up in this thread about every 100 posts or so. It's a NYT article about what happened in JC in 1988 during the last reval. Many interesting bits - people were upset about the shoddy appraisal process, people downtown got screwed, people elsewhere benefitted, Yvonne was against it... wait a minute; I thought Yvonne was for these things out of a sense of social justice?

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/03/nyr ... ng-anger-and-despair.html

"Relations between the city and Real Property Appraisers soured last year and the city is holding onto about $400,000 the company says it is still owed. The matter could end up in court."

Posted on: 2016/4/17 17:49

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#711

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
How funny and sad that all these "journalists" are now ganging up on the topic of inequality. Where were they before this topic got to this point? Easy to rake Fulop over the coals now that the tide has turned, but it would have been much more beneficial and altruistic if they had pursued this matter with greater zeal 10 years, or at least 3 years ago when the reval was cancelled. After all, isn't that the job of a journalist? To pursue the greater truth and report it without bias??

Ain't that the truth! One of our "local" reporters PM'd me about this 13 months ago confessing ignorance of the details, I gave the lowdown with number analysis etc, and......crickets. Where are the journalists, as opposed to these stenographers who will print whatever self serving blather someone will spout, whether that be Steve or Yvonne?

Posted on: 2016/4/17 16:43

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#710

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

Yvonne wrote: Tom Moran's column: http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... 2box_nj-homepage-featured

How funny and sad that all these "journalists" are now ganging up on the topic of inequality. Where were they before this topic got to this point? Easy to rake Fulop over the coals now that the tide has turned, but it would have been much more beneficial and altruistic if they had pursued this matter with greater zeal 10 years, or at least 3 years ago when the reval was cancelled. After all, isn't that the job of a journalist? To pursue the greater truth and report it without bias?? In any case, the optics of this is really bad, particularly now that community activists have joined forces to denounce the situation and to demand action. While I find the idea of making this into a racial matter to be distasteful and unnecessarily inflammatory (after all, not every person in DTJC is white, and not ever poor person is a minority) that's the angle that is guaranteed to get the most attention, particularly for a Dem politician. Those maps are pretty damning. If it is true that the deputy mayor begged for them not to be released or made public, that's disappointing and could explain why the sudden change in tactics and the decision to allow the reval to take place.

Posted on: 2016/4/17 15:06

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#709

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 5375

Tom Moran's column:
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... 2box_nj-homepage-featured

Posted on: 2016/4/17 13:25

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#708

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 5375

Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
process is made worse with the time delay. But the real problem with the reval process has to do with tax abatements.

And Yvonne ONCE AGAIN pees in the pool! No Yvonne, the reval and abatements have absolutely nothing at all to do with each other. Whatever the size of the tax base, we could have no abatements at all, it would still need to be assessed fairly.

I guess you spent so long underpaying your fair taxes that you had to tell yourself a narrative to justify doing so and at the same time crowing about high taxes and abatements.

Quote:
Fulop said in a statement. "This administration never has supported the idea of collateral damage with homeowners losing their homes in the name of social justice."

Wow. But he's perfectly OK with less wealthy homeowners paying 3 times the rate of those poor "house rich" people.

Might I suggest, Brewster, you seek professional health. You have serious problems with anger management.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 22:42

DanL

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#707

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
2021/7/30 1:08

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1225

and then the perfect storm hit jersey city -

Black Monday in October 1987 where the Dow lost over 20% of its value and then the housing bubble burst in 1988.

Mr. Nagel of Real Property Appraisers said the company was hired to provide true value figures as of Oct. 1, 1986 and had done so. The city amended the 1986 figures to serve as 1987 figures for the purpose of sending out the 1988 tax bills by studying a number of new property sales between January and June 1987, he said, and this created the gap between the assessments and true market value.

Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
I know this article has been posted dozens of times throughout the vast reaches of JCList, but it seems like it would help to have it show up in this thread about every 100 posts or so. It's a NYT article about what happened in JC in 1988 during the last reval. Many interesting bits - people were upset about the shoddy appraisal process, people downtown got screwed, people elsewhere benefitted, Yvonne was against it... wait a minute; I thought Yvonne was for these things out of a sense of social justice?

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/03/nyr ... ng-anger-and-despair.html

if you will not be able to afford you new level of taxes, do not wait or delay, cash out and take your profits to where you can afford the taxes. if you are 62 or over you may be able to obtain a reverse mortgage and use equity in your home to pay taxes if you wish to stay.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 22:40

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#706

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
process is made worse with the time delay. But the real problem with the reval process has to do with tax abatements.

And Yvonne ONCE AGAIN pees in the pool! No Yvonne, the reval and abatements have absolutely nothing at all to do with each other. Whatever the size of the tax base, we could have no abatements at all, it would still need to be assessed fairly.

I guess you spent so long underpaying your fair taxes that you had to tell yourself a narrative to justify doing so and at the same time crowing about high taxes and abatements.

Quote:

Fulop said in a statement. "This administration never has supported the idea of collateral damage with homeowners losing their homes in the name of social justice."

Wow. But he's perfectly OK with less wealthy homeowners paying 3 times the rate of those poor "house rich" people.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 21:42

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#705

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 5375

Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
I know this article has been posted dozens of times throughout the vast reaches of JCList, but it seems like it would help to have it show up in this thread about every 100 posts or so. It's a NYT article about what happened in JC in 1988 during the last reval. Many interesting bits - people were upset about the shoddy appraisal process, people downtown got screwed, people elsewhere benefitted, Yvonne was against it... wait a minute; I thought Yvonne was for these things out of a sense of social justice?

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/03/nyr ... ng-anger-and-despair.html

Since you quote me, let me address this. This is something I have said even to the Wall Street Journal recently. No one can stop a reval. The only way to have a fair reval is to do one every five years. You cannot have 28 to 30 years go back and expect a fair reval. I also said this at the public hearing comments. I told how I was impacted by a reval and the process is made worse with the time delay. But the real problem with the reval process has to do with tax abatements. $2.8 Billion will not be affected by a revaluation that is an one-third of the city's non-ratable base. I also said this in 1988 but now there are more tax abatements. Property has nothing to do with someone's ability to pay taxes. I did see my neighbors in the 1988 revaluation lose their homes. I also said this in the public hearing held in Journal Square. NYC has it right, the majority of their income comes from an income and sales tax. Our tax base is property, so if that is your base then stop destroying that base with tax abatements.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 18:19

T-Bird

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#704

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40

From somewhere else

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1609

I know this article has been posted dozens of times throughout the vast reaches of JCList, but it seems like it would help to have it show up in this thread about every 100 posts or so. It's a NYT article about what happened in JC in 1988 during the last reval. Many interesting bits - people were upset about the shoddy appraisal process, people downtown got screwed, people elsewhere benefitted, Yvonne was against it... wait a minute; I thought Yvonne was for these things out of a sense of social justice?

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/03/nyr ... ng-anger-and-despair.html

Posted on: 2016/4/16 17:54

mfadam

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#703

Home away from home

Joined:
2007/7/30 22:23
Last Login :
2019/3/8 17:09

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 711

Families are gonna have to think a lot more as to whether DTJC is worth it. Million dollar plus row house pand 20 some thousand in taxes doesn't seem so appealing given the lackluster services, iffy schools and quality of life issues.

Will urban lifestyle and shorter commute be enough to compensate for the shortcomings noted above? I dunno...

Posted on: 2016/4/16 17:10

GrovePath

Jersey City, here comes the reval.

#702

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/9/15 19:03
Last Login :
2023/8/15 18:42

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 9302

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... r.html#incart_2box_hudson

Jersey City, here comes the reval.

One day after the city lost a breach-of-contract case related to the long-stalled property revaluation, and nearly two weeks after New Jersey tax officials ordered the city to get a reval done by November 2017, the city announced it is moving ahead with the process.

It will be the first citywide revaluation of properties since 1988. The city said it will soon begin the search for a firm to perform the work and expects to have chosen a company by the fall.

The move comes as Fulop has faced increased pressure to complete reval, both from state officials who say the citywide ratio of assessed to true value is so low it violates the New Jersey Constitution, and, most recently, from a group of pastors and community activists who say stalling a reval protects wealthy residents at the expense of people living in the city's less affluent neighborhoods.

Fulop also announced today that his administration will appeal yesterday's ruling in the breach-of-contract case Realty Appraisal Co. filed after Fulop in 2013 halted the citywide reval the firm was hired in 2011 to oversee. A judge yesterday sided with the West New York company, saying Fulop had acted in bad faith when he stopped all reval work and refused to pay the company nearly $1 million it was owed.

"The decision to do a revaluation now after the contrary statements of the last few weeks seems political," Phil Elberg, Realty Appraisal's attorney, told The Jersey Journal. "It is too bad that my clients and the taxpayers have been punished by the time it took to get to this point."

The mayor also said today that he will seek changes to state laws governing property revaluations. He suggested assessing properties only when they are sold so that longtime residents are protected from abrupt changes brought on by revals, a change not likely to be approved by state officials who say taxes must be uniform.

"The state law for revaluations is fundamentally flawed and compounds the issues of gentrification by squeezing out long-term residents," Fulop said in a statement. "This administration never has supported the idea of collateral damage with homeowners losing their homes in the name of social justice."

Revaluations square the assessed value of each property in a municipality with that property's true value. Since Jersey City has gone 28 years since its last reval, its ratio of assessed to true properties is just 27.6 percent, the worst in Hudson County.

Jersey City Together, the new group of congregations and nonprofits that confronted Fulop over the reval at an often tense meeting at Old Bergen Church, issued a statement today saying Fulop has made a "right and just decision."

"If done well, a revaluation will end the unfairness of our current property tax system," the statement reads. "We look forward to working to ensure this revaluation is done well for our city."

When New Jersey tax officials ordered Jersey City, Dunellen and Elizabeth last week to get their revals done by next year, they said Harrison and East Newark would likely be next. This week, Hudson County's taxation board ordered Bayonne to finish a reval by 2019. Its last was in 1991.

State Treasury spokesman Joseph Perone said the state is "pleased that Mayor Fulop has finally agreed to cooperate and join hundreds of other towns in complying with the law, which requires uniform taxation."

"We are hopeful that the other mayors also will abide by the state constitution, which they swore an oath to uphold," Perone said.

Fulop critics have alleged he halted the reval in 2013 so he could escape the political consequences ? it is widely believed that many Downtown property owners would see their assessments and tax bills rise dramatically. Fulop has denied this accusation, saying the contract given to Realty Appraisal in 2011 was illegal and that the city shouldn't move forward with a reval until his administration exhausted all efforts to get back the $2 million paid to the company.

The city will not be able to use any of the data Realty Appraisal collected during the aborted reval. New Jersey requires reval firms use data from the previous three years.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 16:36

http://topics.nj.com/tag/jersey-city/posts.html
http://www.hudsonreporter.com

jerseymom

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#701

Home away from home

Joined:
2007/7/9 19:50
Last Login :
2022/1/29 1:10

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 2302

By Agustin C. Torres | The Jersey Journal
Follow on Twitter
on April 16, 2016 at 7:07 AM, updated April 16, 2016 at 7:11 AM
POLITICAL INSIDER

The reason for property tax revaluation is to equalize the burden of providing a major government and public education revenue source. So if the idea is to fairly share the cost of these services, why do politicians get nervous about reassessment?

Auggie Torres Talks Reval - JJ

Posted on: 2016/4/16 15:53

JCGuys

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#700

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The city must follow up every 5 years to stop the effects of long revaluations. It will also stop tax abated properties from running to tax court when their abatements expire.

Wow. Yvonne is finally on mark with at least one small thing. 100% agreed! Well, at least on the first point.

It won't stop tax abated properties from running to court when their abatements expire, but will probably reduce the number.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 14:59

DanL

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#699

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
2021/7/30 1:08

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1225

regardless about Yvonne's need to say something about everything (and misleading people) and while there is good analyses on this discussion here, homeowners should not rely upon mostly anonymous posters for serious financial information of this magnitude.

Jersey City Together has a series of briefings coming up across the city and has an open offer for other groups to host their workshop here -

https://www.facebook.com/JerseyTogethe ... 283269076/?type=3&theater

Civic JC held and has a video of their reval and tax appeal worship here -

https://vimeo.com/161877027

And likely other local groups and neighborhood associations will put together and host other informational events.

Lastly, I would hope that the city (mayor and council) would finally get in front of this and provide information and potential options for dealing with the ramifications.

My advise - start looking at your scenario NOW, learn and look at your options NOW, and be proactive.

Quote:

Voyeur wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reverend Perry at Jersey City Together took two properties at $90,000 assessment and using what I said earlier, he also said these properties are paying $6,733.80. Yes, I did round off the tax rate to $75.00. So a home assessed at $100,000 is paying $7,500 in taxes. Reverend Perry talks at 27:54 on the video https://vimeo.com/162619076

You just keep proving that you have a complete and total lack of understanding of the intricacies of this topic. Assessed values are NOT market values. Those are the theoretical values in 1988, which is why the rate is ~7.5% of those values. The effective rate, which is what everyone else is talking about, is ~2.2% of today's market value.

Please, seriously, stay out of the conversation. You are only confusing yourself and others.

Seconded. There are too many confused people coming to this page looking for accurate information (myself included) to allow the Troll to spread her malicious misinformation here.

Her malign influence is all the more unconscionable because there are people on this page who have admitted that they are concerned and even anxious over what the reval might mean for them financially. These people are looking for reliable information from reliable sources - not your friend the priest who saw Muslims celebrating on 9/11, or something that Schundler or Cunningham or some other person from the ancient past allegedly told you in 1993.

Given the sensitivity of this issue and the necessity for accurate information I think the webmaster should seriously consider preventing this individual from posting on this particular thread. She is not a well person and while her disturbed delusions can occasionally be amusing on other pages, they are inflaming an already confused matter on this one.

She seems to derive some sort of twisted pleasure by being routinely told she is spouting complete nonsense and I suspect she writes these things for her personal gratification rather than to enrich the debate. Her concerted effort to misinform people trying to learn about the process is despicable and should be stopped.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 14:56

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#698

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 5375

Quote:

Voyeur wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reverend Perry at Jersey City Together took two properties at $90,000 assessment and using what I said earlier, he also said these properties are paying $6,733.80. Yes, I did round off the tax rate to $75.00. So a home assessed at $100,000 is paying $7,500 in taxes. Reverend Perry talks at 27:54 on the video https://vimeo.com/162619076

You just keep proving that you have a complete and total lack of understanding of the intricacies of this topic. Assessed values are NOT market values. Those are the theoretical values in 1988, which is why the rate is ~7.5% of those values. The effective rate, which is what everyone else is talking about, is ~2.2% of today's market value.

Please, seriously, stay out of the conversation. You are only confusing yourself and others.

Seconded. There are too many confused people coming to this page looking for accurate information (myself included) to allow the Troll to spread her malicious misinformation here.

Her malign influence is all the more unconscionable because there are people on this page who have admitted that they are concerned and even anxious over what the reval might mean for them financially. These people are looking for reliable information from reliable sources - not your friend the priest who saw Muslims celebrating on 9/11, or something that Schundler or Cunningham or some other person from the ancient past allegedly told you in 1993.

Given the sensitivity of this issue and the necessity for accurate information I think the webmaster should seriously consider preventing this individual from posting on this particular thread. She is not a well person and while her disturbed delusions can occasionally be amusing on other pages, they are inflaming an already confused matter on this one.

She seems to derive some sort of twisted pleasure by being routinely told she is spouting complete nonsense and I suspect she writes these things for her personal gratification rather than to enrich the debate. Her concerted effort to misinform people trying to learn about the process is despicable and should be stopped.

It is amazing how people use vicious language to get their point across. You are an example of this. It is what people pay that matters. Those are the real numbers. Just today, in Auggie Torres' column he write there will be an increase of $10.6 million to Jersey City taxpayers. That is an extra $200 dollars to the taxpayer who is assessed at $100,000. By the way, no one here attacking me attended last Wednesday Budget Hearing. I was the only speaker. I know more about budget matters and have been attending budget hearing for over 40 years. I can hold my own. My information comes from the Business Administrator and Hudson County Tax Assessor mainly. I don't make things up.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 14:32

Voyeur

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#697

Home away from home

Joined:
2014/9/19 1:29
Last Login :
2020/3/12 17:59

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 200

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reverend Perry at Jersey City Together took two properties at $90,000 assessment and using what I said earlier, he also said these properties are paying $6,733.80. Yes, I did round off the tax rate to $75.00. So a home assessed at $100,000 is paying $7,500 in taxes. Reverend Perry talks at 27:54 on the video https://vimeo.com/162619076

You just keep proving that you have a complete and total lack of understanding of the intricacies of this topic. Assessed values are NOT market values. Those are the theoretical values in 1988, which is why the rate is ~7.5% of those values. The effective rate, which is what everyone else is talking about, is ~2.2% of today's market value.

Please, seriously, stay out of the conversation. You are only confusing yourself and others.

Seconded. There are too many confused people coming to this page looking for accurate information (myself included) to allow the Troll to spread her malicious misinformation here.

Her malign influence is all the more unconscionable because there are people on this page who have admitted that they are concerned and even anxious over what the reval might mean for them financially. These people are looking for reliable information from reliable sources - not your friend the priest who saw Muslims celebrating on 9/11, or something that Schundler or Cunningham or some other person from the ancient past allegedly told you in 1993.

Given the sensitivity of this issue and the necessity for accurate information I think the webmaster should seriously consider preventing this individual from posting on this particular thread. She is not a well person and while her disturbed delusions can occasionally be amusing on other pages, they are inflaming an already confused matter on this one.

She seems to derive some sort of twisted pleasure by being routinely told she is spouting complete nonsense and I suspect she writes these things for her personal gratification rather than to enrich the debate. Her concerted effort to misinform people trying to learn about the process is despicable and should be stopped.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 13:55

Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval

#696

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reverend Perry at Jersey City Together took two properties at $90,000 assessment and using what I said earlier, he also said these properties are paying $6,733.80. Yes, I did round off the tax rate to $75.00. So a home assessed at $100,000 is paying $7,500 in taxes. Reverend Perry talks at 27:54 on the video https://vimeo.com/162619076

You just keep proving that you have a complete and total lack of understanding of the intricacies of this topic. Assessed values are NOT market values. Those are the theoretical values in 1988, which is why the rate is ~7.5% of those values. The effective rate, which is what everyone else is talking about, is ~2.2% of today's market value.

Please, seriously, stay out of the conversation. You are only confusing yourself and others.

Posted on: 2016/4/16 13:36