Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
49 user(s) are online (36 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 2
Guests: 47

SammyTheT, caj11, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 ... 4 5 6 (7) 8 9 10 »


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#96
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 826
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If Tommy was sharper about real estate, he could have appealed his taxes, but only down to the effective rate of 2.1%.

What's the mechanism / reason for the limit on the effect of the appeal?

Posted on: 5/20 19:21
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#95
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 826
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Everyone says people should pay their 'fair share', until they're the ones who need to pay their fair share.

My taxes will go up.

People need to pay their fair share. That includes me.

I'm not thrilled about it, but fair is fair.

Posted on: 5/20 19:06
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#94
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4111
Offline
Quote:

greenville wrote:
Yvonne, do you have the rest of the video or is that parts that you need to know? Thank you for this, helps answer most of my questions.


The speech with comments went on for approximately one hour and 20 minutes. I edited for my show on Comast which is a 30 minute time frame. Duda repeated himself and some of the questions raised by the audience were questions he already answer. The only thing I did exclude was his answers on commercial properties. Commercial properties have lawyers to take care of them, I was concerned with the average homeowner.

Posted on: 5/20 10:03
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#93
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/20 ... esource-districts-in.html

This puts funding in a better perspective, and after the reval we'll see what the numbers are for JC.

But yes, I'd love to see better performance from JC students, since they spend OPM (other peoples money) to the tune of 20% over the state average per student, and graduate at more than 15% worse than the state average.

Posted on: 5/20 7:01
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#92
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Not to pick arguments, but aren't all those DTJC brownstones also "million dollar homes"? And, look how much of a stink they are raising over having to pay their fair share after 10 - 20 years of underpaying... I am sure in five years time, the city will be expected to shoulder a larger portion of the local BOE budget, and shit *will* hit the fan.


Was there an argument there? The issue of redistributing taxes to make school funding fair is not going away, but I believe sending JC taxes into the stratosphere to raise another $200m, like over 3.5%, won't happen. The economic damage would be catastrophic, dwarfing the reval because it would effect every unabated property, not just the older DT ones.

I find it telling that Monroe always ties the high budget to poor performance, like he'd be OK with it if it got results. That's unlikely. BTW Monroe, your portrayal of Millburn as a tax victim is nonsense. They're not far above JC in the list of Tax Levy as percentage of Local Fair Share for schools. JC:32.75% Milburn: 41.3%. There's plenty of towns underaided, neighboring W Orange is at 128.38%.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d ... 1GBqhMuPDKDMTk/edit#gid=0
Linked from http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/

Does JC BOE need to be pulled apart and put back together? Absolutely. Every district in the state should be held accountable for where it's money goes, by outside auditors, every year. Maybe if we cut off the sweet juice the 599 districts will see the light of consolidating. The smoke and mirrors to make public money vanish pisses me off. Oh, and no district living on the state tit should get to make it's own worker contracts, including Millburn.

Posted on: 5/19 23:56
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#91
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/4/10 22:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 440
Offline
Yvonne, do you have the rest of the video or is that parts that you need to know? Thank you for this, helps answer most of my questions.

Posted on: 5/19 22:19
ಠ_ಠ
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#90
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3224
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Millburn pays the highest real estate taxes in NJ, with the exception of a town in South Jersey with 6 houses. Highest percentage? No. Highest dollar? Yup.


People with million dollar homes being asked to support education in less wealthy communities by paying the same tax percentage as everyone else? OUTRAGEOUS!!



Not to pick arguments, but aren't all those DTJC brownstones also "million dollar homes"? And, look how much of a stink they are raising over having to pay their fair share after 10 - 20 years of underpaying... I am sure in five years time, the city will be expected to shoulder a larger portion of the local BOE budget, and shit *will* hit the fan.

Posted on: 5/19 17:55
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#89
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
They do, silly. That's why Millburn's taxes are the highest in the state. Of course, Millburn spends about 20% less per student than JC, doesn't have free PreK, and is usually rated one of the best general admission public high schools in the country. On top of the Abbott funding it also pays a lot of the freight supporting Essex County. So if it offends you that it does that and pays less than 2% you're nuts.


What offend me is the whining that your taxes are too high when your rate is low to average. And you want to whine about the actual dollars, rather than the rate, because million dollar houses pay more. Boo hoo hoo. People with million dollar incomes pay more too, and don't get back more in services. That's just the way the system works, but I'm sure you hate paying your income tax too.


Let's hear you cry when the Adjustment Aid goes away . . . and JC has to pay it's fair share rather than the 17% of its school costs it currently does. Taxation without representation-sound familiar? That's what taxpayers across NJ are saying, as the Abbott's spend money like drunken sailors with terrible results. First the reval (for those complaining about the county taxes going up, wait till the reval is done), the Legislature is determined to repair Adjustment Aid-the changes are ahead.

Posted on: 5/19 17:45
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#88
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
They do, silly. That's why Millburn's taxes are the highest in the state. Of course, Millburn spends about 20% less per student than JC, doesn't have free PreK, and is usually rated one of the best general admission public high schools in the country. On top of the Abbott funding it also pays a lot of the freight supporting Essex County. So if it offends you that it does that and pays less than 2% you're nuts.


What offend me is the whining that your taxes are too high when your rate is low to average. And you want to whine about the actual dollars, rather than the rate, because million dollar houses pay more. Boo hoo hoo. People with million dollar incomes pay more too, and don't get back more in services. That's just the way the system works, but I'm sure you hate paying your income tax too.

Posted on: 5/19 17:40
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#87
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Millburn pays the highest real estate taxes in NJ, with the exception of a town in South Jersey with 6 houses. Highest percentage? No. Highest dollar? Yup.


People with million dollar homes being asked to support education in less wealthy communities by paying the same tax percentage as everyone else? OUTRAGEOUS!!



They do, silly. That's why Millburn's taxes are the highest in the state. Of course, Millburn spends about 20% less per student than JC, doesn't have free PreK, and is usually rated one of the best general admission public high schools in the country. On top of the Abbott funding it also pays a lot of the freight supporting Essex County. So if it offends you that it does that and pays less than 2% you're nuts.

Posted on: 5/19 17:29
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#86
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Millburn pays the highest real estate taxes in NJ, with the exception of a town in South Jersey with 6 houses. Highest percentage? No. Highest dollar? Yup.


People with million dollar homes being asked to support education in less wealthy communities by paying the same tax percentage as everyone else? OUTRAGEOUS!!


Posted on: 5/19 16:42
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#85
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I know in Millburn the taxes are high (even with some nice ratables, like the billion dollar Mall at Short Hills, pays almost 90% of its school costs through taxes.


As I say to Yvonne every time, define what you mean by "high". High relative to other North Jersey towns? It's not, it's average to low, go to the page of all the town rates in the state and compare. Too high for your taste or sense of fairness? Whatever.


Millburn pays the highest real estate taxes in NJ, with the exception of a town in South Jersey with 6 houses. Highest percentage? No. Highest dollar? Yup.

http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/201 ... operty_taxes_from_lo.html

Getting back almost nothing for schools (to support Abbott's like JC/Hoboken/Newark) causes a lot of this, as more than half the Millburn budget is for its schools. I think now it's over 22K for the average home.

Posted on: 5/19 15:51
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#84
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
City/township real estate taxes aren't wealth taxes, they are used to pay for the service and needs of your towns. If one town is lower it may be that they don't provide much, or that the level of waste and corruption is low.

Posted on: 5/19 15:41
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#83
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3224
Offline
QFT...

So much resolve to fight the inevitable, and yet not a peep about demanding more accountability from our local government.

Quote:

mfadam wrote:
The percentages don't lie brother. No amount of "it's not fair" changes this fact.

If you want to yell about something - how about demanding some accountability on where your tax dollars are going. I guarantee the JC schools could be run much better with far less budget if managed better. Yell at every poltiician who green lit some of the ludicrous pension deals for public servants without any regard to who/how it would be paid...

Posted on: 5/19 15:05
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#82
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I know in Millburn the taxes are high (even with some nice ratables, like the billion dollar Mall at Short Hills, pays almost 90% of its school costs through taxes.


As I say to Yvonne every time, define what you mean by "high". High relative to other North Jersey towns? It's not, it's average to low, go to the page of all the town rates in the state and compare. Too high for your taste or sense of fairness? Whatever.

Posted on: 5/19 15:02
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#81
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/30 18:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 681
Offline
The percentages don't lie brother. No amount of "it's not fair" changes this fact.

If you want to yell about something - how about demanding some accountability on where your tax dollars are going. I guarantee the JC schools could be run much better with far less budget if managed better. Yell at every poltiician who green lit some of the ludicrous pension deals for public servants without any regard to who/how it would be paid...

Posted on: 5/19 14:22
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#80
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
Quote:

yorkster wrote:
As a DTJC homeowner, I don't have an issue with paying my fair of taxes, but for me, there is a clear line between fair and ridiculous. When I bought 10 years ago, I had accepted that my taxes would be eventually raised to $24K-$25K, but now that I'm hearing that it would be more like mid-$30K then that's when it gets into absurdness. I've done some comp in other parts of NJ (e.g., Chatham, Milburn, Tenafly, etc.) and their taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close. Mind you, these municipalities have the best school systems in the state.


Had many of those suburban towns you mention been getting even a whiff of fair school funding their taxes would be better. I know in Millburn the taxes are high (even with some nice ratables, like the billion dollar Mall at Short Hills, pays almost 90% of its school costs through taxes.

Posted on: 5/19 14:03
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#79
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
Quote:

yorkster wrote:
As a DTJC homeowner, I don't have an issue with paying my fair of taxes, but for me, there is a clear line between fair and ridiculous. When I bought 10 years ago, I had accepted that my taxes would be eventually raised to $24K-$25K, but now that I'm hearing that it would be more like mid-$30K then that's when it gets into absurdness. I've done some comp in other parts of NJ (e.g., Chatham, Milburn, Tenafly, etc.) and their taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close. Mind you, these municipalities have the best school systems in the state.

Chatham 1.665%
Millburn 1.854%
Tenafly 2.182

You're right by only 13% on #1, 2.5% on #2, and wrong by 15% on #3. This does not support "taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close". For the record, you can't even appeal your taxes until they're 15% out of wack.


http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml

Posted on: 5/19 14:02
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#78
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/3/23 12:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 140
Offline
As a DTJC homeowner, I don't have an issue with paying my fair of taxes, but for me, there is a clear line between fair and ridiculous. When I bought 10 years ago, I had accepted that my taxes would be eventually raised to $24K-$25K, but now that I'm hearing that it would be more like mid-$30K then that's when it gets into absurdness. I've done some comp in other parts of NJ (e.g., Chatham, Milburn, Tenafly, etc.) and their taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close. Mind you, these municipalities have the best school systems in the state.

Posted on: 5/19 12:38
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#77
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4868
Offline
I think a link between the reval and school aid is tenuous at best. The state stepped in because JC's taxes are fucked up. The state law says to do a reval when the ratio falls below 80%, and we're at 23%. A reval was nearly 20 years overdue. Nothing to do with schools.

It will be a mess when they do cut aid. Will the residents of JC actually demand accountability in the school system once we're paying the tab? Ever look at the "User friendly" budget. Holy crap is it impenetrable. I was once wondering how much is spent on special ed. Nope, it appeared to be spread over at least a dozen line items. There were category names that had no definitions when I googled them. "User friendly"?

Posted on: 5/19 12:14
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#76
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3224
Offline
Quote:

Erica wrote:
I don't disagree, I just think that it's useful to understand the anti-reval perspective and not simply dismiss it as "people can't do math, and also they're entitled jerks." (I am strongly pro-reval, if that matters.)


But, we *do* understand what they are saying, and not just dismissing it out of hand. But, in the end, it is just a lot of whining and rationalizations to try and preserve the status quo which is an untenable situation.

It doesn't matter what people "believe"...! Lots of people believe they are paying just enough, and no amount of explaining will disabuse them of that notion. For those people, a conversation is an exercise in futility and a waste of time.

As for the other point about joining forces in fighting losing Abbott designation (unlikely to happen anytime soon) or an increase in school funding from local coffers (very likely) well... if they want to cut off their nose to spite their face, that's their choice. It would seem rather silly and self-destructive (not to mention highly unlikely) for DTJC homeowners to collectively decide to sit out opposition to increased local taxation to fund local schools because the state decreases funding.

Posted on: 5/19 11:29
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/28 21:47
From DT JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 169
Offline
Quote:

Erica wrote:
My deeper concern is that dismissing the reval opponents misses the opportunity to engage them on more important issues - like, for example, planning for the day when the Abbot designation goes away or the funding formula changes or NJ simply runs out of money to do anything but pay pensions (I hope I'm joking about that last one) and we need to come up with a way to replace lost state revenue. Making enemies on the reval seems short-sighted when we have a much broader and deeper discussion about property taxes and other sources of city revenue coming down the pipeline.


Completely agree, and therein is the reason the State forced JC to move forward with this long overdue reval. The State wants to shift as much spending as it can back to JC (and a few other municipalities). Obviously they can't proceed until the reval is completed. Doing otherwise would inflict undue economic harm and probably be illegal (disparate impact), if the present wide variations in tax rates across neighborhoods isn't fixed first.

Yes, the reval will be overall revenue neutral for JC, but the actions of the State shortly thereafter wont be. Think for a minute what happens if the State shifts even 10% of the roughly $500 million they provide, about $50 million, for schools back to the JC taxpayer.... And all those arguments about fairness and equity across JC neighborhoods, those arguments sound just as compelling when applied across other school districts and towns as well. Of course it should be fair and that means JC is going to pay more of it's own bills.

No doubt you'll remember the tax hike Fulop implemented when he was elected mayor, well get ready for another one following the next mayoral election. This time it won't be Healy getting the blame, it will be the State.

Posted on: 5/19 10:55
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/30 18:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 681
Offline
I don't think it's right to engage a group who is using specious arguments to convince people that they are getting screwed when it is quite the opposite. As for hardship, is it a hardship that their property is worth 2X or 5X what they paid for it? Yes cash flow may be tricky, but as you noted there are possible solutions.

It would do JC a huge disservice to back down to a vocal minority whose entire argument defies simple math and any sense of fairness. You are absolutely correct that JC has a serious problem if you get the combo of Reval plus declining state aid for schools. JC is a school welfare queen and is very much in the state's crosshairs for a cut.

Bottom line is JC's financial position could get pretty ugly in the next couple years. I too hope that revenues are put to better use than paying out bloated pensions, but if the state cuts aid that is gonna be a huge gut check.

Posted on: 5/19 10:54
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#73
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/14 23:56
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 710
Offline
Just thinking about how many tax appeals are going to be filed after the revaluations of those purty DTJC brownstones come in.

Guess you can have your Raval and eat it too :)


#Pay Up Suckers


Posted on: 5/19 10:49
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/11/25 11:31
From Village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 170
Offline
Quote:

mfadam wrote:
I get his argument but it is irrelevant to the reval conversation. The Reval is revenue neutral to JC. JC won't get anymore money post reval.

Property tax is nothing more than a fixed percentage of the fair market value of one's home. Plain and simple: Home value x .019 = property tax.

Do you think Paulus Hook can make the case that they pay more than Van Vorst park and that is unfair? It is irrelevant.

It blows me away that such a simple concept like percentage is being made into such an existential argument.

DTJC owners- count your lucky stars that you have had a massive run up in value all the while enjoying an unfair tax advantage...


I don't disagree, I just think that it's useful to understand the anti-reval perspective and not simply dismiss it as "people can't do math, and also they're entitled jerks." (I am strongly pro-reval, if that matters.)

There are homeowners who believe that the property taxes collected from the neighborhood they live in already constitute the lion's share of the City's property tax revenues, so asking them to pay more strikes them as very unfair. (And, hyperbole aside, some of them, particularly older residents living on fixed incomes, will suffer real hardship when their tax bills increase.)

Again, I disagree with the anti-reval perspective and think there are both private (reverse mortgages, selling and using increased value to fund retirement in a cheaper area) and public (phasing in increases for seniors, legislating a better system for ongoing reval) solutions to alleviate any actual hardship caused by allowing the situation to get this bad in the first place.

But trying to understand that perspective makes it easier to understand why the opposition to such a simple and logical procedure is so vehemently felt. I think that understanding is important b/c without it we aren't as able to craft compelling arguments in our favor and run the risk of a vocal anti-reval group swinging the political pendulum back in the direction of ignoring revals for decades.

My deeper concern is that dismissing the reval opponents misses the opportunity to engage them on more important issues - like, for example, planning for the day when the Abbot designation goes away or the funding formula changes or NJ simply runs out of money to do anything but pay pensions (I hope I'm joking about that last one) and we need to come up with a way to replace lost state revenue. Making enemies on the reval seems short-sighted when we have a much broader and deeper discussion about property taxes and other sources of city revenue coming down the pipeline.

Posted on: 5/19 10:05
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/30 18:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 681
Offline
I get his argument but it is irrelevant to the reval conversation. The Reval is revenue neutral to JC. JC won't get anymore money post reval.

Property tax is nothing more than a fixed percentage of the fair market value of one's home. Plain and simple: Home value x .019 = property tax.

Do you think Paulus Hook can make the case that they pay more than Van Vorst park and that is unfair? It is irrelevant.

It blows me away that such a simple concept like percentage is being made into such an existential argument.

DTJC owners- count your lucky stars that you have had a massive run up in value all the while enjoying an unfair tax advantage...

Posted on: 5/19 9:22
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/11/25 11:31
From Village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 170
Offline
In fairness to 135jc, his/her logic is correct even though Brewster and others are also correct that (for example) Greenville residents are overpaying while Downtown residents are underpaying as a percentage of their homes' values (generally speaking).

I think what got lost is that 135jc was making a different point about the total value of all homes in the different neighborhoods and the total value of taxes paid - not as a percentage but simply as a whole number.

Basically, Downtown homes can be paying less than their fair share of taxes and Greenville homes can be paying more than their fair share of taxes in percentage terms, yet the absolute amount of money collected Downtown can still be greater than that collected in Greenville. (Both can be simultaneously true.)

I have no idea if 135jc's point is backed up by numbers b/c I don't know the total property taxes paid by non-Downtown residents vs Downtown residents. But, to use completely made-up numbers just to clarify the point, if Greenville property taxes total $400,000 (all homes in Greenville are really worth a total of $10M and are paying effective tax rates of 4%) and Downtown property taxes total $1M (all homes in Downtown are really worth $100M and are paying effective tax rates of 1%) then Downtown homes contribute more to the tax base than Greenville homes do *in absolute terms* since $1M > $400,000. Again, this doesn't negate the point that Greenville residents in this scenario are [unfairly] paying 4x more than Downtown residents, *as a share of home value*.

Posted on: 5/19 9:05
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3224
Offline
Quote:

mfadam wrote:
the amount of nonsense I have heard from seemingly intelligent people regarding the inevitable DTJC RE property tax increases is staggering. Everything from, it's not fair...that's too much...why can't they phase it in...how is this legal?...etc. How about you were majorly subsidized for the past 20 years and you really need to STFU?

City Hall is completely to blame as the longer DTJC owners got away with a ridiculously low tax rate the more "anchored" owners became to those numbers. Now they're fighting and clawing as if they are the victim. Please.

I'm surprised a class action lawsuit hasn't been filed by every non-DTJC owner who has been overpaying for the past 20 years. I'd be willing to bet the average Greenville owner has overpaid to the tune of 60K per home since the last reval in '88. That ain't chump change...


100% correct.

You also you left out the various little bombshells statements from Fulop trying to justify and rationalize his decision to cancel the reval as something other than a politically motivated move. Among them:

- people arguing for the reval are disingenuous and are simply motivated by "hatred" of him

- the reval is not worth it because those overpaying were doing so by so little, so what is the big deal of saving a couple of hundred dollars per year, when DTJC could get crushed by the resulting increased taxes?

There have been other brilliant soundbites, of course. This whole charade is almost impossible to believe.

Posted on: 5/19 8:52
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/30 18:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 681
Offline
the amount of nonsense I have heard from seemingly intelligent people regarding the inevitable DTJC RE property tax increases is staggering. Everything from, it's not fair...that's too much...why can't they phase it in...how is this legal?...etc. How about you were majorly subsidized for the past 20 years and you really need to STFU?

City Hall is completely to blame as the longer DTJC owners got away with a ridiculously low tax rate the more "anchored" owners became to those numbers. Now they're fighting and clawing as if they are the victim. Please.

I'm surprised a class action lawsuit hasn't been filed by every non-DTJC owner who has been overpaying for the past 20 years. I'd be willing to bet the average Greenville owner has overpaid to the tune of 60K per home since the last reval in '88. That ain't chump change...

Posted on: 5/19 8:17
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4100
Offline
Everyone says people should pay their 'fair share', until they're the ones who need to pay their fair share.

Posted on: 5/19 6:46
Print Top




« 1 ... 4 5 6 (7) 8 9 10 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017