|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Posted on: 2017/3/16 19:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
Joined:
2015/10/21 0:40 Last Login : 2019/5/15 18:48 From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
138
 |
The protesters are right, the abatements do harm other Jersey City taxpayers. Even disregarding the costs of services for new residents/workers/students, unless the PILOT fee exceeds 86% of normal taxation, Jersey City taxpayers get less of a tax offset than they would from new development brought in under normal taxation. The only time a PILOT deal would be net-positive fiscally if if the abatement truly is a but-for factor in construction. http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/20 ... atements-hurt-jersey.html The only area I disagree with the protesters with is in who the victim is. PILOTs are tax fairness problem, not a school budget problem. If Jersey City PILOTed nothing what would happen is that other Jersey City taxpayers would pay less in taxes. Unless the BOE passed a larger tax levy, the schools wouldn't have a cent more.
Posted on: 2017/3/10 17:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Kudos to the protestors for doing this respectfully, in a good-spirited way that draws attention to their cause.
Posted on: 2017/3/10 15:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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
|
About half of these 70 abatements are the short term 5 year abatements that all new development gets.
Posted on: 2017/3/10 14:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
wouldn't you party if you just saved $3 million? [it says as it wiggles its head in incredulity]
Posted on: 2017/3/10 0:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I can't wait until the inevitable change in the school funding formula and these losers will have to face the reality of tens of millions in budget cuts.
They should take their party down to Trenton if their beef is with abatements.
Quote:
Stringer wrote:
Posted on: 2017/3/9 21:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Jersey City abatement vote met with mock party
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Jersey City abatement vote met with mock partyBy JERSEY CITY -- A group of about two dozen people wearing party hats, clutching invitations and bearing a cake descended on the City Council meeting yesterday to commemorate a special milestone. No, it wasn't a council member's birthday. Last night saw the council voting on what the protesters/partygoers said was the 70th tax abatement of Mayor Steve Fulop's administration (it may have been the 71st). The surprise party, the brainchild of ex-school board member and former Fulop ally Ellen Simon, was an effort to convince the council to vote down the abatement, a 20-year deal for a 63-unit building planned for Bennett Street. http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... atements_with_surpri.html
Posted on: 2017/3/9 19:40
|
|||
|
||||