HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

lecxe wrote:

Your tax bill went up? Well cry me a river. Life ain't fare. No one cares.

Yes, except the reval is actually the epitome of fairness. They're upset that everything is fair now lol.

lecxe wrote:

Your tax bill went up? Well cry me a river. Life ain't fare. No one cares.

JadedJC wrote:

And there's a special place for those who lie repeatedly.

Yvonne wrote:
It is evident on the blog who are involved in real estate, you are just protecting your deals and do not want to see changes. You do not want fairness, just continue with your deals. There is a special place for you in the afterlife.

Yvonne wrote:
Here is an article from the newspaper that states the average homeowner in Hudson County pays $8,500 so those downtown folks who are paying $14,000 to $16,000 in taxes are paying much more than their neighbors. The new assessments of $20,000 to $40,000 do not make sense. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... 2box_nj-homepage-featured

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

papadage wrote:
Please compare to comparable values. Homes downtown are not worth the "average" in the state.

Baloney, the people I know paid for their homes in the 1970s and 1980s at costs less than $100,000 and should not have taxes based on $2 to $3 million. That is just a way to legally steal someone's property. Taxes should be based on someone's income, it is the wealthy who do projects and avoid full taxes with their tax abatements that get away with not paying their fair share.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Jesus Christ, it's like talking to a wall. You just don't get it. I try to stay respectful, but you make it very, very difficult.

Have you watched Westworld? She actually sounds just like a robot "host", caught in her endless loop and when presented with evidence from outside the "park" (in her mind ) simply replies "that doesn't look like anything to me".

Oh God, now I'm picturing Yvonne sidling up to a cowpoke at the bar and saying "You must be new, not much of a rind on you".

HeightsNative wrote:
Jesus Christ, it's like talking to a wall. You just don't get it. I try to stay respectful, but you make it very, very difficult.

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is amazing how the truth creates this reaction, however, it is not my truth, but the truth from the Hudson County Tax Board. I do not create the numbers on the ratable base, they do. The board is waiting for the numbers to be file and expects to get the complete list in maybe six weeks. I stand by what I said until the Hudson County Tax Boards says something different.

Jesus Christ, it's like talking to a wall. You just don't get it. I try to stay respectful, but you make it very, very difficult.

Yvonne wrote:
It is amazing how the truth creates this reaction, however, it is not my truth, but the truth from the Hudson County Tax Board. I do not create the numbers on the ratable base, they do. The board is waiting for the numbers to be file and expects to get the complete list in maybe six weeks. I stand by what I said until the Hudson County Tax Boards says something different.

Yvonne wrote:
Here is an article from the newspaper that states the average homeowner in Hudson County pays $8,500 so those downtown folks who are paying $14,000 to $16,000 in taxes are paying much more than their neighbors. The new assessments of $20,000 to $40,000 do not make sense. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... 2box_nj-homepage-featured

HeightsNative wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.

Let's assume, for argument's sake, that you are right (a huge leap of faith, given your proven history of incorrect assertions) and let's assume that abated properties in JC amount to $10 billion. The taxes on that, based on 1.62%, would be $162 MM. About half of that would go to the city, so 81 MM. Now, let's look at the *data* (freely available online, but here is a link to the 2016 budget: https://public.tableau.com/profile/jer ... 11-2016/2016TotalRevenues) and we easily find out that (surprise!) PILOTs contribute ~128 MM to the city budget. Wow. Those evil interlopers are getting a free ride and the city is doing worse because they are paying an extra 47 MM to the city coffers. Wait. What? The city is better off because PILOTs are contributing an extra $47 MM to the budget than they would otherwise? That's crazy...

Put simply, the data once again shows you are full of it. The city is doing just fine with abatements. In fact, if you could magically waive a wand and do away with all abatements today, and moved everyone to regular taxes, the city would have to find almost $50 MM somewhere to plug the hole left behind from the difference in tax revenue. Stop spreading falsehoods.

The only flaw here is if anything changed with Abbott funding. Then the city would be up the creek.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.

Let's assume, for argument's sake, that you are right (a huge leap of faith, given your proven history of incorrect assertions) and let's assume that abated properties in JC amount to $10 billion. The taxes on that, based on 1.62%, would be $162 MM. About half of that would go to the city, so 81 MM. Now, let's look at the *data* (freely available online, but here is a link to the 2016 budget: https://public.tableau.com/profile/jer ... 11-2016/2016TotalRevenues) and we easily find out that (surprise!) PILOTs contribute ~128 MM to the city budget. Wow. Those evil interlopers are getting a free ride and the city is doing worse because they are paying an extra 47 MM to the city coffers. Wait. What? The city is better off because PILOTs are contributing an extra $47 MM to the budget than they would otherwise? That's crazy...

Put simply, the data once again shows you are full of it. The city is doing just fine with abatements. In fact, if you could magically waive a wand and do away with all abatements today, and moved everyone to regular taxes, the city would have to find almost $50 MM somewhere to plug the hole left behind from the difference in tax revenue. Stop spreading falsehoods.

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.

Monroe wrote:
The only way income is used to determine real estate taxes in NJ benefits JC. To determine local school funding Trenton takes into account how affluent towns are, then gives them very little $ back in school support. This benefits Abbott district schools, like JC. That leads to towns like Millburn/Short Hills paying 90% of its school costs, vs JC taxpayers spending 17%.

So Yvonne wants even more tax relief?

Tell your cash poor, property rich friends to tap their equity and shut up. Living in JC for years doesn't entitle you to special treatment.

Yvonne wrote:
I just called up the county tax assessor and asked for the tax abated ratables which is not part of the $28 billion from the new reval. He agreed with me those tax abatements are not included but he does not have those numbers until the papers are filed. I am guessing that protected tax abated ratable base is around $10 billion, but it is only a guess since some do expire and new ones are added each year. Just to think, if those abatements were ratables, then everyone taxes would be lowered. But let's ignore the truth as usual.