Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
36 user(s) are online (20 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 36

more...




Browsing this Thread:   2 Anonymous Users




« 1 (2) 3 4 5 »


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 797
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
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?


You can only win an appeal if you prove your FMV is more than 15% off your assessment/ratio (what they say it's worth). And even if you win, the effective rate only goes down to FMV/ratio, effectively around that 2.2% mark. That's still more than double what the legacy DT properties are paying.

According to Bamb00zle he was paying 0.7% before he sold. Well played sir. Maybe. I know if Yvonne had held on instead of bailing she and Mr Yvonne could have made another 1/2 million at least. That surely would have been more than the hit it would take for the taxes doubling.

Hmmm

So, I used the ArcGIS reval, and picked a house with a recent sale date.

2016 purchase: $1.3m
2004 purchase: $700k
1997 purchase: $280k
2016 property taxes: $11k (or 0.85%)
Current assmt: $146k

I presume that after the reval, assuming the house is still worth $1.3m, their taxes will go up to $24,700.

If so, then what is the likely basis for their current property tax? It seems too high to be based off the "current assmt" figure in the database.

Posted on: 5/22 11:30
Print Top


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4714
Offline
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
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?


You can only win an appeal if you prove your FMV is more than 15% off your assessment/ratio (what they say it's worth). And even if you win, the effective rate only goes down to FMV/ratio, effectively around that 2.2% mark. That's still more than double what the legacy DT properties are paying.

According to Bamb00zle he was paying 0.7% before he sold. Well played sir. Maybe. I know if Yvonne had held on instead of bailing she and Mr Yvonne could have made another 1/2 million at least. That surely would have been more than the hit it would take for the taxes doubling.

Posted on: 5/21 23:37
Print Top


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 797
Offline
Oh, I forgot to mention. If you rent in JC, and your landlord's property taxes go up, do you think that will have any effect on your rent...?

Posted on: 5/21 20:17
Print Top


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 797
Offline
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
All this makes me even happier that I recently sold and moved to a rental. A tax rate of 2.1% on my former property would triple my taxes, and the impact on the property value would be severe, much more than the capital gains tax I'll pay.

Property taxes need to be adjusted to be fair. However, because of irresponsible actions by successive JC Administrations in avoiding a reval for 28 years it will be very painful. And when the State shifts more school costs to JC it will be worse. Even if that takes a couple of years, people will see it coming so it will hit property values.

The idea of a reverse mortgage to pay more tax to this dysfunctional City, particularly in view of a likely substantial hit to property values in the near future, has no appeal to me. The way I see it I've taken my gains and will wait.

Other factors are important to me as well. Transportation woes on NJT and PATH are only going to get a lot worse when all the over-development is completed. And with all those apartments becoming available and a softening NYC rental market the DT JC property market is going to look a whole lot different when those new assessment notices go out in about 12 months IMHO.

Uh huh fascinating

Hoboken completed its reval some time in 2013. Property values have gained 65% since January 2013. While JC RE prices are hardly guaranteed to increase under any circumstances, it's unlikely that the reval will seriously undermine property values in the long run.

Plus, the reval will be painful for some people -- and beneficial to others, namely the people who were carrying your water while you owned your place.

Thus, it seems highly unlikely that you can take the proceeds of your old apartment, and subtract the cost of rent (which is likely to increase next year), and buy back into the market in early 2019 without paying more. And properties that might be cheap? Those will have, wait for it... bigger tax bills, probably too big for you to want to pay.

We keep hearing people bitch about PATH, and problems keep not getting worse. Not to mention that by 2019 or so, at least some of the signal improvements will be phased in. And let's get real, it's going to be a lot easier to commute to NYC via the PATH train in 2019 than by driving or NJ Transit, and cheaper than taking a ferry (which will only benefit you if you live and work close to the ferry terminals) or a bus from the suburbs.

I.e. even if PATH sucks, everything else is probably gonna be worse.

Renting has some advantages. There are many viable reasons to sell a home and rent. Saving money by dodging a property tax increase that won't hit for about a year? It what may still be a hot market in the interim? Not sure that's one of them.

Posted on: 5/21 19:55
Print Top


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/28 21:47
From DT JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 139
Offline
All this makes me even happier that I recently sold and moved to a rental. A tax rate of 2.1% on my former property would triple my taxes, and the impact on the property value would be severe, much more than the capital gains tax I'll pay.

Property taxes need to be adjusted to be fair. However, because of irresponsible actions by successive JC Administrations in avoiding a reval for 28 years it will be very painful. And when the State shifts more school costs to JC it will be worse. Even if that takes a couple of years, people will see it coming so it will hit property values.

The idea of a reverse mortgage to pay more tax to this dysfunctional City, particularly in view of a likely substantial hit to property values in the near future, has no appeal to me. The way I see it I've taken my gains and will wait.

Other factors are important to me as well. Transportation woes on NJT and PATH are only going to get a lot worse when all the over-development is completed. And with all those apartments becoming available and a softening NYC rental market the DT JC property market is going to look a whole lot different when those new assessment notices go out in about 12 months IMHO.

Posted on: 5/21 13:58
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#99
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3975
Offline
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
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?


2/3 of homeowners will pay their fair share, but 1/3 will not be affected - tax abated properties. So therefore, there will never be a fair share of taxes.

1) I was asking why brewster is asserting that there is some type of limit on the effectiveness or reductions via an appeal.

2) I call BS on the idea that 1/3 of Jersey City housing units are abated.

3) Regardless of anything with with abatements, the reval makes property taxes more fair. And contrary to Monroe's claim, despite the fact that it's going to negatively impact me personally, I still advocate not just for this reval, but for more frequent revaluations.


I don't make up these figure. I quote established figures. There was a time when it was 1/4 but all of the new development has pushed up these numbers. The ratable base of around $6 billion and nearly 3 billion is tax exempted. That figure excludes churches, schools, cemeteries, and public buildings.

Posted on: 5/21 13:16
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#98
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 18:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 797
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
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?


2/3 of homeowners will pay their fair share, but 1/3 will not be affected - tax abated properties. So therefore, there will never be a fair share of taxes.

1) I was asking why brewster is asserting that there is some type of limit on the effectiveness or reductions via an appeal.

2) I call BS on the idea that 1/3 of Jersey City housing units are abated.

3) Regardless of anything with with abatements, the reval makes property taxes more fair. And contrary to Monroe's claim, despite the fact that it's going to negatively impact me personally, I still advocate not just for this reval, but for more frequent revaluations.

Posted on: 5/21 12:55
Print Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#97
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3975
Offline
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
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?


2/3 of homeowners will pay their fair share, but 1/3 will not be affected - tax abated properties. So therefore, there will never be a fair share of taxes.

Posted on: 5/20 19:27
Print Top


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: 797
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: 797
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: 3975
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: 3948
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: 4714
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: 430
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: 3115
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: 3948
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: 4714
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: 3948
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: 4714
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: 3948
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: 3948
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: 3115
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: 4714
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: 673
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: 3948
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: 4714
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: 130
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: 4714
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: 3115
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
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/28 21:47
From DT JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 139
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




« 1 (2) 3 4 5 »




[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