Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
24 user(s) are online (17 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 23

meltedopsicle, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 4 5 »


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 14:02
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 913
Offline
Businesses should vote with their feet if this is upheld.

Posted on: 3/17 21:35
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
Today 19:04
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3744
Offline
Quote:

Frinjc wrote:
Payroll tax upheld. The judge also upheld the non-resident clause though he could only link it to general use of city resources, not to the schools - and that tax is specifically going to the schools, not to the city general budget. I read part of the ruling and this is the only debatable argument I could find, the rest seems on firm legal footing based on what the state has carved.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/03/judg ... ax-is-constitutional.html


This ruling will (obviously) be appealed. The judge rationale is faulty. He had already made up his mind by the time the case was argued (he indicated so himself) and the ruling is based on the idea that not upholding the law as written would lead to teacher layoffs and other fiscal-crisis responses, but that has no bearing on whether something is constitutional, or not. This case will make it all the way to the State Supreme Court.

Posted on: 3/17 17:21
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/7/4 16:37
Last Login :
7/26 9:34
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 532
Offline
Payroll tax upheld. The judge also upheld the non-resident clause though he could only link it to general use of city resources, not to the schools - and that tax is specifically going to the schools, not to the city general budget. I read part of the ruling and this is the only debatable argument I could find, the rest seems on firm legal footing based on what the state has carved.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/03/judg ... ax-is-constitutional.html

Posted on: 3/16 11:01
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 14:02
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 913
Offline
What's needed is a good recession to stop the sillyness.

I hope MackCali and company appeal this all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Posted on: 3/9 18:01
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
Escape while you can.

It'll never get better.

Posted on: 3/9 15:27
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/7/4 16:37
Last Login :
7/26 9:34
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 532
Offline
The latest on the likelihood for the tax to be upheld and the likelihood for all residents to be subject to it.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/03/judg ... sey-city-payroll-tax.html

Posted on: 3/9 11:52
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/16 21:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5542
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education


Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!


it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.

I don't blame the teachers for the outcomes (in general) but they are part of the budget problem. JC makes huge amounts of money vanish without a trace. One way to get underprivileged and immigrant kids to engage in school is to provide them with a non-classroom reason, like sports, drama, music etc. We fund these in the 13th percentile of comparable NJ schools. We pay our janitors in the 97th percentile. Perhaps the students should unionize?

I pick on the Janitors not because of any special animus but because it's easy. If you try an look at the larger picture you can get bogged down in special ed, teacher seniority and qualifications, the claimed harm of charters, old crappy buildings, etc and all the reasons JC is "unique". But cleaning a damn school is pretty simple, no? In actual dollars we pay nearly twice the state average for maintenance staff and less than half on extracurricular. This is simply indefensible.

Quote:
Indicator 13: Extracurricular Costs (Definition)
Per Pupil Amount (2015-16 actual costs): $144
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2015-16 actual costs): 13|101
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2015-16): 0.8%
Per Pupil Amount (2016-17 actual costs): $152
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2016-17 actual costs): 14|98
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2016-17): 0.9%
Per Pupil Amount (2017-18 budget): $137
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2017-18 budget): 11|98
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2017-18): 0.7%


Quote:
Indicator 11: Salaries and Benefits for Operations and Maintenance of Plant (Definition)
Per Pupil Amount (2015-16 actual costs): $1,736
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2015-16 actual costs): 98|101
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2015-16): 10%
to % of Salaries and Benefits for Operations to Total Operations and Maintenance of Plant Costs (2015-16): 66.16%
Per Pupil Amount (2016-17 actual costs): $1,424
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2016-17 actual costs): 90|98
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2016-17): 8%
to % of Salaries and Benefits for Operations to Total Operations and Maintenance of Plant Costs (2016-17): 60.75%
Per Pupil Amount (2017-18 budget): 1856
Per Pupil Ranking Within Group (2017-18 budget): 97|98
% of Budgetary Cost Per Pupil (2017-18): 10%
to % of Salaries and Benefits for Operations to Total Operations and Maintenance of Plant Costs (2017-18): 65.38%


https://www.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/education/csg/18/csg.pl
https://www.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/educat ... ng=L.%20ALL&maxhits=10000

Posted on: 2/4 22:58
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
Today 13:28
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education


Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!
it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.


It's a cycle of poverty. Lousy children become lousy parents and raise lousy children. The only thing to break the cycle is good education and economic opportunities. I'm all for gentrification if it helps break the cycle. Unfortunately this leads to the displacement of a lot of people, but just having a concentrating poverty in a particular neighborhood or building will never bring about positive change.

Bring in more charters in areas of failing schools and starve out the old ineffective and racist ways.
I don't necessarily have anything against charters, but the fact is that the public schools are left with the lousy students. those students with motivated parents end up at the better public schools, suburban schools, charter schools or private schools for the most part.

Posted on: 2/4 20:28
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 14:02
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 913
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education


Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!
it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.


It's a cycle of poverty. Lousy children become lousy parents and raise lousy children. The only thing to break the cycle is good education and economic opportunities. I'm all for gentrification if it helps break the cycle. Unfortunately this leads to the displacement of a lot of people, but just having a concentrating poverty in a particular neighborhood or building will never bring about positive change.

Bring in more charters in areas of failing schools and starve out the old ineffective and racist ways.

Posted on: 2/4 15:54
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
Today 13:28
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education


Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!
it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.

Posted on: 2/4 7:17
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 14:02
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 913
Offline
Quote:

JSleeze wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The ones suffering in all this is the students and the shitty education they receive.


Case in point.


Keep in mind that this illegal tax does nothing to improve student education. It merely sustains that status quo.

Sometimes the only way to fix the system is to break it. I'm not even close to Republican but these tax and spend policies are a shame. Last in the state in extra circular activities and music, bottom of the barrel for performance. Top 10 in per capita spending. Something is wrong with this situation.

Give the $25,000 per capita to a charter.

Posted on: 2/3 23:57
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/16 21:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5542
Offline
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education


Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!

Posted on: 2/3 23:26
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/8/27 22:16
Last Login :
4/26 20:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 344
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The ones suffering in all this is the students and the shitty education they receive.


Case in point.

Posted on: 2/3 18:17
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 14:02
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 913
Offline
This tax is illegal, and JC schools are so poorly run that I wish we could import the school trustees from Lakeland so they would defund the school board.

The ones suffering in all this is the students and the shitty education they receive.


Posted on: 2/3 16:32
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2012/2/20 18:20
Last Login :
8/7 3:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2561
Offline

Payroll tax is the best option to fund Jersey City schools | Opinion

According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education, because we want to ensure the best possible outcomes for every child. The district spending is not extravagant or careless. Still, over the course of the next seven years the school system will be weaned off of $175 million in state aid. This will give the city three options going forward.

We could’ve left the school district to fend for itself. Force them make due with a third of their current budget, and leave them to cut programs and stagnate their technology adoption. We could’ve raised property taxes to replace the lost state aid with local funding, which would have added another anchor to an already overburdened tax. Instead, we chose the third option – to take advantage of statewide legislation which allowed the city to establish a payroll tax. It was the only option that would not hurt our schools or burden the citizens of Jersey City.

The payroll tax is designed to benefit the people of Jersey City. Its revenue will go strictly to our schools, investing in our future and allowing us to continue offering a quality education to the children of our city. It is a minimal one percent tax so the impact on individual businesses is miniscule but in total, it will bring in enough money to offset the lost state aid. Lastly, and possibly most importantly, the tax would not apply to the payrolls of Jersey City residents. This is huge for our city, as it will essentially incentivize hiring from within the city.

Jersey City has become an extension of New York City. We are home to countless large corporations with people traveling to the city from all over North Jersey and Southern New York to work here. Over 90,000 people commute into Hudson County every day. Unfortunately, none of those people are contributing to our tax base. While they spend their days in Jersey City, their property taxes are going to their hometowns. The payroll tax allows corporations to contribute to our community and invest in our children, our future.

The tax does not apply to residents of Jersey City, it is not simply a one percent tax on a company’s entire payroll, but rather a one percent tax on the salaries of people not living in the city. The benefit to residents is two-fold, the money will fund the school district without raising taxes, and it encourages companies to hire from our community. These companies offer high wage jobs and encouraging them to hire more people from Jersey City will continue to bolster our local economy. When more people live and work in Jersey City, more money gets reinvested into local shops and businesses, keeping the money here is good for all of us.

When I first saw the numbers for the new school funding formula my mind was reeling. I was determined, however, to find a way to continue offering our district a sufficient budget without penalizing the people of Jersey City. Raising taxes was never an option, it would only make the area less affordable and hurt the children and families I was looking to help. Cutting the budget was not a viable option either, as that, again, would hurt the public and make the city a less desirable place to live.

The payroll tax was then and still is, our best option. It is estimated to generate roughly $80 million a year which will soften the blow of the state funding cut and allow us to continue offering high quality education to all of our children. This is a long term, sustainable solution, with multifaceted benefits for our community. A one percent tax on a portion of companies’ payrolls is not going to drive business out of our city. For corporations, the additional tax is a drop in the bucket, but for the school district, the revenue will be the water that keeps it afloat.

Sandra Cunningham is a New Jersey State Senator serving the 31st Legislative District. She resides is Jersey City.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/01/payr ... city-schools-opinion.html


Posted on: 2/3 16:23
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2012/2/20 18:20
Last Login :
8/7 3:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2561
Offline

Surprise in Jersey City at biz district suing over new tax

JERSEY CITY — When the lawsuit aimed at stopping Jersey City’s new business tax dropped last week, the name of one of the 14 plaintiffs raised some eyebrows.

The Exchange Place Alliance – a partially tax-funded business district created by the City Council in 2016 – joined with Mack-Cali and others in suing the city, the state of New Jersey, the council and two city officials over the tax, saying it violates the state constitution.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2018/12/surp ... t-suing-over-new-tax.html


Posted on: 12/23 3:35
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reading about the payroll tax which might be doomed reminds me of the late Councilman Jamie Vazquez, he wrote his own ordinances actually right in front of everyone at the council meetings. If he was able to do it, then the council must get their hands dirty and start writing their own ordinances.


If this is so doomed, why did you not circulate your petitions to try and waste the council's time and more taxpayer money? Could it be because most people don't really care?


Were you around when Vazquez sat on the City Council? If not, then why comment? If the one percent payroll tax is dismissed because it was not written by a member of the city council, it could affect the pocketbooks of those without tax abatements or under rent control. If the city does not fix this, then the state can come in and raise taxes on homeowners. That happened to Hoboken under the administration of Mayor Roberts.


Posted on: 12/14 0:58
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/11/21 22:12
Last Login :
Today 20:00
From DTJC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 369
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Reading about the payroll tax which might be doomed reminds me of the late Councilman Jamie Vazquez, he wrote his own ordinances actually right in front of everyone at the council meetings. If he was able to do it, then the council must get their hands dirty and start writing their own ordinances.


If this is so doomed, why did you not circulate your petitions to try and waste the council's time and more taxpayer money? Could it be because most people don't really care?

Posted on: 12/13 22:17
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
I am just wondering if those tax abatements are legal, they did not come from the city council.

Posted on: 12/13 19:30
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 16:21
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2358
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I’ll bet Fulop can’t wait to see 2018 in the rear view mirror, especially given how incompetent Murphy has been in Trenton, let alone the HCDO embarrassment. And the statue.


I suspect Fulop still has ambitions to be governor. Whomever is the next gov will be facing the complete insolvency of the state employee and public teachers pensions.

I am not sure anyone would want to be in charge with the SS NJ slams into that iceberg.

Posted on: 12/13 19:14
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
Reading about the payroll tax which might be doomed reminds me of the late Councilman Jamie Vazquez, he wrote his own ordinances actually right in front of everyone at the council meetings. If he was able to do it, then the council must get their hands dirty and start writing their own ordinances.

Posted on: 12/13 14:23
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
Today 17:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
I’ll bet Fulop can’t wait to see 2018 in the rear view mirror, especially given how incompetent Murphy has been in Trenton, let alone the HCDO embarrassment. And the statue.

Posted on: 12/13 4:23
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/7/9 19:50
Last Login :
Today 18:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2087
Offline
Things that make you go hmmm....

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal tmcdonald@jjournal.com
The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY — Whether a Jersey City administrator can legally sponsor ordinances is up for debate and the city has two different opinions depending on its audience.

The city’s legal team told council members that yes, Business Administrator Brian Platt can sponsor legislation. But when in front of Hudson County Superior Court Judge Peter Bariso, Jersey City’s legal eagles conceded that no, Platt cannot.

What a tangled web we weave...

Posted on: 12/13 3:38
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
It is not my opinion, development happened in the 1980s, here are 3 examples, Newport (the first 4 buildings and the mall), Dixon, and Society Hills. The law was changed in 1990 and tax abatements happened to market rate buildings which was illegal before. Newport got a tax abatement after the first four building were up. The assemblyman who represented the 31st district and worked as a lawyer for developers introduced the change in Trenton.

Posted on: 12/12 22:57
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
Today 19:04
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3744
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If the city did not give out sweetheart tax abatements, then there would be no need for a payroll tax.


This is just your opinion, not a proven fact.

Posted on: 12/12 22:15
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
If the city did not give out sweetheart tax abatements, then there would be no need for a payroll tax. In fact, there should have been a lawsuit against tax abatements from day one. Development did not just happen in JC in happened in other parts of Hudson County which did not give out tax abatements.

Posted on: 12/12 21:50
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
Today 19:04
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3744
Offline
I hope they succeed. The payroll tax is a terrible measure that does not even solve the BOE deficit.

Posted on: 12/12 0:39
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/7/9 19:50
Last Login :
Today 18:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2087
Offline
By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal tmcdonald@jjournal.com
The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY — Real-estate developer Mack-Cali and some of its subsidiaries are suing the state of New Jersey and Jersey City over the city’s new payroll tax, one the plaintiffs call a vague, slapdash and unconstitutional “house of cards” that must be invalidated.

More

Posted on: 12/11 22:38
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2012/2/20 18:20
Last Login :
8/7 3:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2561
Offline

What you should know about Jersey City's new business tax

Jersey City's council adopted the new payroll tax on Nov. 20. Here's what you should know about the plan.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... sey_citys_new_busine.html


Posted on: 2018/11/28 23:02
Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 19:59
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4817
Offline
My source, well, I did the work of collecting signatures but if you want another source, check the state budget where money goes to non-profits for immigration then go on the USCCB website and they have a list of funds by years that the Catholic Church received from the federal government for immigration. In 2016, it was 96.1 million. Trump cut the money to $79 million in 2017. Google the information, I did. In case you did not know the list of who receives affordable housing comes from the federal government, not Jersey City. This is actually brought up at a caucus meeting because too many JC people were bypassed.

Posted on: 2018/11/28 22:18
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