dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

mrspigglewiggle wrote:
Quote:

hudson57 wrote:
the next 4 quarterly bills are already online. find yours here:
http://taxes.cityofjerseycity.com/

i checked and mine went up 2.85% (sum of last 4 quarters vs. sum of next 4 quarters). not sure why the headline is "no increase", can someone enlighten us (municipal vs. county/school)???

Just checked mine and went up almost 4.16%!!! What gives?! Grrrr.

This happened: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ike_taxes_in_seven_t.html

Only around 50% of your taxes are City taxes. The rest is Hudson County and school tax.

The County tax bill went up 4.2%. And given the numbers game played with equalization - Jersey City's portion of the County tax bill went up 10.15%. (It's actually down to the fact that JC property values increased more relative to other munis within Hudson County). IMO It's also down to the fact that we've too many layers of government in NJ - and the public doesn't hold them fully accountable for spending.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

mrspigglewiggle wrote:
Quote:

hudson57 wrote:
the next 4 quarterly bills are already online. find yours here:
http://taxes.cityofjerseycity.com/

i checked and mine went up 2.85% (sum of last 4 quarters vs. sum of next 4 quarters). not sure why the headline is "no increase", can someone enlighten us (municipal vs. county/school)???

Just checked mine and went up almost 4.16%!!! What gives?! Grrrr.

This happened: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ike_taxes_in_seven_t.html

Only around 50% of your taxes are City taxes. The rest is Hudson County and school tax.

The County tax bill went up 4.2%. And given the numbers game played with equalization - Jersey City's portion of the County tax bill went up 10.15%. (It's actually down to the fact that JC property values increased more relative to other munis within Hudson County). IMO It's also down to the fact that we've too many layers of government in NJ - and the public doesn't hold them fully accountable for spending.

JCMan8 wrote:
You'll have to vote Republican if you want lower taxes.

mrspigglewiggle wrote:
Quote:

hudson57 wrote:
the next 4 quarterly bills are already online. find yours here:
http://taxes.cityofjerseycity.com/

i checked and mine went up 2.85% (sum of last 4 quarters vs. sum of next 4 quarters). not sure why the headline is "no increase", can someone enlighten us (municipal vs. county/school)???

Just checked mine and went up almost 4.16%!!! What gives?! Grrrr.

hudson57 wrote:
the next 4 quarterly bills are already online. find yours here:
http://taxes.cityofjerseycity.com/

i checked and mine went up 2.85% (sum of last 4 quarters vs. sum of next 4 quarters). not sure why the headline is "no increase", can someone enlighten us (municipal vs. county/school)???

hudson57 wrote:
i checked and mine went up 2.85% (sum of last 4 quarters vs. sum of next 4 quarters). not sure why the headline is "no increase", can someone enlighten us (municipal vs. county/school)???

Yvonne wrote:
I attended the budget hearing. First, the ratable base has now increased to the point we should have a tax decrease, not a stabilized budget. On top of that, the county and school is going up. JC does impact those budget. Only 5% of tax abatements go there and that budget went up over 8% and the school board bonding cost went up nearly 40%. The schools receive nothing from tax abatements. As an example, 25 Senate Place a new tax abated building is only paying $130,000 to the budget this year. It has 266 units. My building, with less units, several blocks away pays over $2 million in taxes.

Yvonne wrote:
Now that Fulop is giving $15.00 to low wage earners, perhaps he can return our MUA overpayment, which is $31.5 million and stop the 3.75 increase in water and 3.75 increase in sewer rates for the following years. These are annual perpetual increases. If he is going to be generous, then remember the people who pay into the MUA.


Posted on: Today 11:05

DanL wrote:

well the 2016 budget has been proposed and can be found here - http://www.jerseycitynj.gov/officialdocuments/

the budget continues to grow. yes, revenue is growing, though not through ratables as claimed (the increasing ratables are due to expiring tax abatements,) and the new growth is fueled by long term tax abatements.

there are no signs of rolling back the alleged bloated budgets of the prior administration, i guess they were valid. cost savings and modernizing are non-existant. budget and fiscal reforms have continued to be ignored, and where after much foot dragging, services that have been consolidated with the Parking Authority and Incinerator Authority, the savings has been less than projected and squandered on political machinations. were they done in name only? insurance procurement reforms that would also put insurance under pay to play protection (best price insurance) were dropped like a hot potato two years ago, why?

JCMUA over payments, instead of being returned to those who paid it, were taken by the city to fund the bloated budget and were a back door tax increase.

city maintenance remains dismal outside of the park renovations that started with the prior administration and have now been rolled out throughout the city.

my pet interest - our libraries which impact education and are a place for homework and internet access continue having very limited evening and weekend hours (Sunday is non-existent.)

city services are not being delivered to residents via the internet. social media is not a substitute for a robust city website. its no easier to access information and the city is more tight lipped than ever.

now the city is increasing the base pay for city workers to $15 per hour. sounds good, maybe something that should be done in steps, but when the city continues to not be able to provide basic services and maintenance, is that where our money should be going?

the administration finally acknowledged that the property tax revaluation must done, but now throws a red herring into the mix to further delay the inevitable and necessary.

is jersey city just a paper tiger?

jerseymom wrote:
I wonder if there are any unintended consequences of raising these worker's salaries by such a high percentage. Let's say they are on public assistance/food stamps, NJFamily Care, receive an earned income tax credit, or live in low-income housing. Their income has almost been doubled. While it's still a low income, I wonder if this increase will forfeit other entitlements they receive?

This may be a good thing - but sometimes the margin is so slight between eligibility and non-eligibility that the individual may be paying more out of pocket than when they were making minimum wage.

jerseymom wrote:
I wonder if there are any unintended consequences of raising these worker's salaries by such a high percentage. Let's say they are on public assistance/food stamps, NJFamily Care, receive an earned income tax credit, or live in low-income housing. Their income has almost been doubled. While it's still a low income, I wonder if this increase will forfeit other entitlements they receive?

This may be a good thing - but sometimes the margin is so slight between eligibility and non-eligibility that the individual may be paying more out of pocket than when they were making minimum wage.

Yvonne wrote:
The statement, "The budget will include $95 million in additional tax ratables," means some tax abatements given out in the past must have expired because current tax abatements are contracts not ratables. The only thing that will stabilize our taxes are the expiration of tax abatements. These were probably the tax abatements that Schundler gave out which were usually 20 years in length.