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

Members: 1
Guests: 44

Webmaster, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 ... 34 35 36 (37) 38 »


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/10/23 14:47
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 839
Offline
Quote:

terrencemcd wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
I'm not certain he "cancelled" the revaluation and I think the Jersey Journal headline was misleading. I believe he ordered it "halted", meaning it will resume at some time in the future, after an independent audit, and evaluation of what the firm was doing.


Fulop told me yesterday he has no intention of having a reval while he is mayor. He doesn't want it restarted with a different firm or the same one. He doesn't want it to happen, period.


If this is true, then maybe a class-action lawsuit to force the city to conduct a reval might have to be considered. Are there any lawyers here who can give a quick answer as to whether such a lawsuit would be feasible and have merit?

Posted on: 2013/6/27 10:26
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/7 23:24
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1156
Offline
If the reval is 98% done and partially paid for, I am not sure how stopping it will save money.

Once the reval is performed, does it have to be implemented with those numbers, or can the city throw out the data?

Posted on: 2013/6/27 10:14
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/9 15:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 262
Offline
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
I'm not certain he "cancelled" the revaluation and I think the Jersey Journal headline was misleading. I believe he ordered it "halted", meaning it will resume at some time in the future, after an independent audit, and evaluation of what the firm was doing.


Fulop told me yesterday he has no intention of having a reval while he is mayor. He doesn't want it restarted with a different firm or the same one. He doesn't want it to happen, period.

Posted on: 2013/6/27 8:04
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/9/30 21:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1087
Offline
Quote:

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:
I have a lot of concerns with Fulop's so called "cancellation". Mainly because the reval is mandated by the State of NJ and was approved and signed off on both at the County and State level. So I am curious how he can just order it "stopped."

Curious as to the timing of the announcement as well. Making it while mayor-elect. Then when he becomes mayor, he will learn it can't be canceled and has to proceed.

Also, I read today in the JJ like 98% of the work has been completed and the firm has already been paid significant money. JC has a bad habit of having to do things two, three times. Sidewalks, Paving roads, etc. Let's stop this nonsense. The work is basically done and paid for.

What bothers me the most though is that all the "newcomers and interlopers" who Fulop courted in the election, you all just got denied meaningful tax relief - especially if you don't live in a luxury abated high-rise downtown.

Basically instead of having the reval be automatic, with the top third of the highest payers getting reductions (if you bought in the past 10 years you most likely are in this group) you now have to go and individually appeal your taxes. This is not an equitable process and the city won't deal with you in a fair manner as I found out. (disclosure, I appealed year before last, only got a quarter of what I proved I was over paying).

Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY. All I know is I am paying nearly double the amount of taxes that my next door neighbor is - and they have a bigger unit than mine. They bought their condo in the 80's and don't even live there - they rent it out. That is not tax fairness.

Meanwhile Fulop interviewed in Crains NY magazine saying he is going to give now "steeper incentives" to developers. This is unfair. But who were Fulop's big doners? Big developers.

So this will be interesting to follow and as I said when running for Ward E, this will probably wind up in the courts.

Fletch


I'm not certain he "cancelled" the revaluation and I think the Jersey Journal headline was misleading. I believe he ordered it "halted", meaning it will resume at some time in the future, after an independent audit, and evaluation of what the firm was doing. When the person from the firm came to my place, he might have been inside for 15 seconds, looked around the room quickly and marked something on a clipboard. How is that a meaningful way to value any kind of real estate?

Posted on: 2013/6/27 7:50
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/12/11 19:13
From Right here!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 758
Offline
Quote:

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:
I have a lot of concerns with Fulop's so called "cancellation". Mainly because the reval is mandated by the State of NJ and was approved and signed off on both at the County and State level. So I am curious how he can just order it "stopped."

Curious as to the timing of the announcement as well. Making it while mayor-elect. Then when he becomes mayor, he will learn it can't be canceled and has to proceed.

Also, I read today in the JJ like 98% of the work has been completed and the firm has already been paid significant money. JC has a bad habit of having to do things two, three times. Sidewalks, Paving roads, etc. Let's stop this nonsense. The work is basically done and paid for.

What bothers me the most though is that all the "newcomers and interlopers" who Fulop courted in the election, you all just got denied meaningful tax relief - especially if you don't live in a luxury abated high-rise downtown.

Basically instead of having the reval be automatic, with the top third of the highest payers getting reductions (if you bought in the past 10 years you most likely are in this group) you now have to go and individually appeal your taxes. This is not an equitable process and the city won't deal with you in a fair manner as I found out. (disclosure, I appealed year before last, only got a quarter of what I proved I was over paying).

Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY. All I know is I am paying nearly double the amount of taxes that my next door neighbor is - and they have a bigger unit than mine. They bought their condo in the 80's and don't even live there - they rent it out. That is not tax fairness.

Meanwhile Fulop interviewed in Crains NY magazine saying he is going to give now "steeper incentives" to developers. This is unfair. But who were Fulop's big doners? Big developers.

So this will be interesting to follow and as I said when running for Ward E, this will probably wind up in the courts.

Fletch


It is my understannding that mayor-elect Fulop is going to court over the issue of stopping the reval.

I don't know how the JJ can make the statement that 98% of the work is done. Heck, 98% of my neighborhood wasn't done. Therein lies a bigger problem. The SLUG, & that is just what he was, looked at my 1st floor & turned to leave. I asked about the 2nd floor & his answer was, "I put it down as the same". Well, my 2nd floor isn't the same! And what about the basement & attic? I made him go to each floor in the house. Now you talk about fairness, if the other people who worked for the this company did the same then guess what, I am willing to bet a lot of illegal apartments went unreported. (And yes, I know that these SLUGS are not there to to see if an apartment is legal or not. They are only to report what they see.) Three of my neighbors said the SLUG only looked at their 1st floor also.

Another issue was how this company come to get the contract.

Four companies put in a bid. Now one would expect these companies to all be in the same ballpark when it came to their bid. But the winning company came in ONE MILLION DOLLARS BELOW. And what a coincidence that the newly retired JC BA, who was looking for a job a lot closer to home, just so happened to be working there, at a place further from his home than the job he just retired from. And what a coincidence that not long after the contract was awarded, said BA left the company. Nothing funny there.

That this reval has to take place is a given. But to have it done in the slipshod manner that is & soon will be was the hallmark of the Healy administration is unfair. And for the ethically challenged to state that there is no conflict of interest cause they can't find where the former BA was involved in this process while he was BA, well, I have some real estate to sell you on Saturn.

Posted on: 2013/6/27 6:43
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Well Fletch, if you want to continue with your political aspirations, you need to watch what you say more carefully. I can't know what you really feel, but what you essentially said was "tax cuts for everyone!!!" I'm sure I'm not the only veteran of the Bush years who gets suspicious when he hears those words.

And if all the people who get raises also get appeals granted, then we'll get a big hike of the RATE on everyone for sure to make up the lost revenue. At least until if and when we can cut spending, it's a zero sum game.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 23:35
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/11/29 13:19
From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 279
Offline
Well that was my whole point of my post. Tax fairness. The reval would have been a step in the right direction. Those whose taxes would be going up, could appeal. Instead, those of us already paying the max in taxes like you are who should have seen rates fall automatically now have to fight the battle.

And with Fulop now on record in Crain's NY saying he is gong to give "steeper incentives" for developers - that is not fair.

And I am all about cutting spending. So I am really eager to see the revised 2013 budget Fulop will be submitting because unless there are significant cuts, taxes will go up yet again.

F

Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:
Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY.
Fletch


You know Fletch, I agree with most of what you said here. But then you go all "don't bother with math" in the statement I quote above. We're not GWB & the GOP congress here, we can't cut taxes without cutting spending, thankfully it's against the law for a city to borrow for operating costs (Schundler found a way around this, but that's another story). I'm all aboard for finding all the waste in our city, I'm sure it's astounding, but 1st things 1st. Lets get the taxes fair before we start cutting everyone's.

Ras, I might get on thin ice, but I "think" I understand how they assess new construction. The city has a number called the "ratio", which in theory is the number you multiply your assessment by to arrive at the real market value, which is then taxed at the current rate. So to get your new construction condo assessment they simply divide your cost by the current ratio, about 33.

One thing I've discovered perusing the tax records, is there's a field called "Ratio", which is not always occupied (I have not determined why). This field might as well be called the tax fairness quotient. It's (assessment/sale price)x100. If it's over 33, you're paying too much, if it's under 33, you're paying too little. My $295k property is at 46. $930k 294 8th is at 21. If they paid at 33, 3 houses like mine would drop to 33. And that's the point of the reval.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 22:15
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Quote:

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:
Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY.
Fletch


You know Fletch, I agree with most of what you said here. But then you go all "don't bother with math" in the statement I quote above. We're not GWB & the GOP congress here, we can't cut taxes without cutting spending, thankfully it's against the law for a city to borrow for operating costs (Schundler found a way around this, but that's another story). I'm all aboard for finding all the waste in our city, I'm sure it's astounding, but 1st things 1st. Lets get the taxes fair before we start cutting everyone's.

Ras, I might get on thin ice, but I "think" I understand how they assess new construction. The city has a number called the "ratio", which in theory is the number you multiply your assessment by to arrive at the real market value, which is then taxed at the current rate. So to get your new construction condo assessment they simply divide your cost by the current ratio, about 33.

One thing I've discovered perusing the tax records, is there's a field called "Ratio", which is not always occupied (I have not determined why). This field might as well be called the tax fairness quotient. It's (assessment/sale price)x100. If it's over 33, you're paying too much, if it's under 33, you're paying too little. My $295k property is at 46. $930k 294 8th is at 21. If they paid at 33, 3 houses like mine would drop to 33. And that's the point of the reval.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 21:51
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/23 12:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 442
Offline
I see., so improvements or a citywide reval may be the most likely ways to be reassessed. My place was new in 2008 so I'm at full tilt. Seems that it should happen at time of sale as well but what do I know.



Quote:

rasoszynski wrote:
My understanding is that it's not how long you've owned the property that creates the discrepancy since a sale in JC doesn't trigger an assessment/reval (that's called a rolling reval and it exists in other states, mostly on the west coast).

If we use the example of 2 adjacent "identical" townhouses: One purchased and held since 1985 and the other in 2007, but both in the same condition - meaning there were no improvements in either property that triggered a reassessment via legal permitting - then their assessed value has stayed the same since the last reval, that's the whole problem.

My condo didn't exist during the last reval. The JC Tax assessor can assess a value on new housing stock - seemingly out of whole cloth, a process which should also seriously by examined since no one can explain what goes into the formula. Why is it so hard to figure out a rational assessment for existing housing stock?

We bought in 2007. These are what the numbers looks like:
sold: $590K
size: 2b/2b, 1000 sq ft
tax: 2012 $13K in taxes until I filed an appeal which brought them down to $10K

On a related note, hasn't Hoboken just ordered a reval? Their last one was in 1988. http://hoboken411.com/archives/93292 Dawn Zimmer is getting heat from her constituents for not taking action on the reval sooner.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 21:27
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/11/29 13:19
From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 279
Offline
I have a lot of concerns with Fulop's so called "cancellation". Mainly because the reval is mandated by the State of NJ and was approved and signed off on both at the County and State level. So I am curious how he can just order it "stopped."

Curious as to the timing of the announcement as well. Making it while mayor-elect. Then when he becomes mayor, he will learn it can't be canceled and has to proceed.

Also, I read today in the JJ like 98% of the work has been completed and the firm has already been paid significant money. JC has a bad habit of having to do things two, three times. Sidewalks, Paving roads, etc. Let's stop this nonsense. The work is basically done and paid for.

What bothers me the most though is that all the "newcomers and interlopers" who Fulop courted in the election, you all just got denied meaningful tax relief - especially if you don't live in a luxury abated high-rise downtown.

Basically instead of having the reval be automatic, with the top third of the highest payers getting reductions (if you bought in the past 10 years you most likely are in this group) you now have to go and individually appeal your taxes. This is not an equitable process and the city won't deal with you in a fair manner as I found out. (disclosure, I appealed year before last, only got a quarter of what I proved I was over paying).

Jersey City needs significant tax relief and it needs to be automatic and apply to EVERYBODY. All I know is I am paying nearly double the amount of taxes that my next door neighbor is - and they have a bigger unit than mine. They bought their condo in the 80's and don't even live there - they rent it out. That is not tax fairness.

Meanwhile Fulop interviewed in Crains NY magazine saying he is going to give now "steeper incentives" to developers. This is unfair. But who were Fulop's big doners? Big developers.

So this will be interesting to follow and as I said when running for Ward E, this will probably wind up in the courts.

Fletch

Posted on: 2013/6/26 21:23
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#34
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/14 15:24
From jersey city
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 14
Offline
My understanding is that it's not how long you've owned the property that creates the discrepancy since a sale in JC doesn't trigger an assessment/reval (that's called a rolling reval and it exists in other states, mostly on the west coast).

If we use the example of 2 adjacent "identical" townhouses: One purchased and held since 1985 and the other in 2007, but both in the same condition - meaning there were no improvements in either property that triggered a reassessment via legal permitting - then their assessed value has stayed the same since the last reval, that's the whole problem.

My condo didn't exist during the last reval. The JC Tax assessor can assess a value on new housing stock - seemingly out of whole cloth, a process which should also seriously by examined since no one can explain what goes into the formula. Why is it so hard to figure out a rational assessment for existing housing stock?

We bought in 2007. These are what the numbers looks like:
sold: $590K
size: 2b/2b, 1000 sq ft
tax: 2012 $13K in taxes until I filed an appeal which brought them down to $10K

On a related note, hasn't Hoboken just ordered a reval? Their last one was in 1988. http://hoboken411.com/archives/93292 Dawn Zimmer is getting heat from her constituents for not taking action on the reval sooner.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 21:06
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/23 12:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 442
Offline
That's really beside the point isn't it? When does a tax assessment change then? Only when the city does a reval? What about for construction permits and improvements? In the burbs you build a pool and wack! Your taxes are higher!
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

mwa7368 wrote:
The freeloaders aren't the downtowners or non-downtowners in this case. They are the homeowners that for whatever reason have owned for 20 or so years and never been reassessed. They are paying taxes on the value of their home as determined 20 years ago.


You're not correct on this score. the assessment does not appear to change with a sale, no matter what the price. Go to a search site and look at the records. What has created the disparity are new construction, varying rates of appreciating value, and tax appeals. Yvonne said that she and all her neighbors on York assessed at 1/3 of many other residents appealed right after the 88 reval.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 20:46
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Quote:

mwa7368 wrote:
The freeloaders aren't the downtowners or non-downtowners in this case. They are the homeowners that for whatever reason have owned for 20 or so years and never been reassessed. They are paying taxes on the value of their home as determined 20 years ago.


You're not correct on this score. the assessment does not appear to change with a sale, no matter what the price. Go to a search site and look at the records. What has created the disparity are new construction, varying rates of appreciating value, and tax appeals. Yvonne said that she and all her neighbors on York assessed at 1/3 of many other residents appealed right after the 88 reval.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 20:42
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/23 12:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 442
Offline
The freeloaders aren't the downtowners or non-downtowners in this case. They are the homeowners that for whatever reason have owned for 20 or so years and never been reassessed. They are paying taxes on the value of their home as determined 20 years ago. For example: Say I bought a property in JC worth 500k in the past 5-7 years. I am most likely paying taxes on a value of the full amount of 500k value which would amount to approx $8000 a year. My neighbor bought his place 20 years ago for 250k and has paid approx $4000 a year in taxes on that 250K value for the past 20 years.
Both properties today would sell for 500k. How is that fair that he still pays $4000 while I pay $8000?
If the reval were to go through the city total property tax collected would, in theory, stay the same. I don't know what it is but say it's 15 million. Since that number won't change barring a percentage increase by the city, his taxes will go up to 6000K and my taxes will go down to $6000 as the percent rate will be lowered overall. Same original amount collected by the city but instead it's evenly spread out over the current value of all the properties.
I understand that people who haven't been revalued in a long time are dreading this but believe me I can't afford to pay your bills anymore and it's unfair, un-American and flatly selfish that anyone really thinks this is ok. I hope the county and the state step in to make this happen. I think some letters to the right people may be in order.





Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
This is actually pretty fair. He has a good point- prices in Sandy effected places- which is most of downtown and lots of other places including Port Liberte, Society Hill, and Country Village are not going to be the same.

Further, as to the "free-loader" comment, I live in a newer building where my taxes are abated but still too high (even according to the assessor) based on the price I paid. However, with the recent resurge in prices they are more in line with the value.

So basically, we all know freeloader is code for downtown, particularly those who are long time owners or those who got short sales or those with abatements or whatever the logic du jour is, and only those people who were effected by Sandy (if them, because prices have been going up in buildings that had problems too) will get a break.

Instead of griping about who is paying what, how about asking why we ALL pay higher taxes than people in suburbs who aren't afraid to send their kids to school.


Many great points -- and we agree that Fulop is doing the right thing!

Posted on: 2013/6/26 20:14
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
While you're throwing around numbers, try these:
2012 sale $295k-tax $9910.
2004 sale $385k, (now worth $330 or so)- tax $8580.
296 8th St Sold on 5/21/13: $999,999- tax $7,946

See why I'm all for the reval?

Posted on: 2013/6/26 17:41
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 15:28
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 734
Offline

Here's what I found in Manalapan:

259 Shinnecock (Sold in 2010 for 372k) Taxes 6,378
19 Deerfield (2012 399k) Taxes 7,814

Montclair:
307 N Fullerton (6/7/12 430k) Taxes $18,291

I don't feel like doing too many so ... JC

333 7th sold 6/4/2013 for $499k - Taxes $5,028
339 Eight Sold 5/2/13 for $637k Taxes $6,824

The problem with JC isn't universally high taxes is that it hasn't been revealed in forever so lots of places are paying less than they should, which means new places that have real valuations wind up paying more than they should.

Sounds like you're getting screwed.

I checked out Hoboken (first place I clicked) with a reasonabl-ish price

626 Grand (5/15/12 - $410k) $6555 taxes.



Posted on: 2013/6/26 17:03
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/7/11 15:25
From Soho West
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 359
Offline
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:


Instead of griping about who is paying what, how about asking why we ALL pay higher taxes than people in suburbs who aren't afraid to send their kids to school.


Because my taxes are lower than they would be in a lot of suburbs with a home of a similar value or even lesser value? I could have a house in South Orange or Maplewood that costs less than my current place and my taxes would be way, way more.


You are picking two of the most notoriously highly taxed towns in NJ.

I picked some random NJ towns with better schools than JC (quite easy). In my search I included properties about 15k more and less than what I paid for my condo. My taxes are about $6200.

In:

Manalapan $4677
East Brunswick $6000
Clark $5267
Roseland $4743
Parsippany $4100


OK. So those places aren't in Hudson County. Granted, one place I had a lot of trouble was Bergen County. So let's take a look at some Hudson towns.

Secaucus $5024
Union City $4494
Bayonne $4743

And yet, I'm in a PILOT building so I'm supposedly living the high life? In my talks with the assessor I could exit PILOT...and my taxes would STILL be higher than every town I listed besides East Brunswick.

Bayonne and Secaucus are not Manalapan and East Brunswick but they still have better schools than JC.

And I won't get into how much less people in Hoboken pay.

While I am cogniscent of the amenities of JC over these places, a big fat ZERO of them have anything to do with town services...proximity to the city, walkability, PATH access....no

BUT we do get the JCPA and countless other "authorities"...and who can forget the six figure parachutes for all of our public employees? That's something we can hang our hats on!

I do understand the sacrifice you'd be making by moving to some of these other places.

No hip places like Montclair on the list, you say. My sneering friends will be loathe to see me and my mini van and the chirping crickets in Manalapan, you protest.

Montclair: $4892
Red Bank $4371
Princeton $4903

....

I love JC and I'm not leaving. But I'm staying in spite of the city's functioning, and not accepting it.

We ALL pay too much. Just because people in Essex and Bergen pay more, doesn't mean that one day if any of us decamps for the burbs full of kids that we won't get better schools for much lower taxes.

And I'd submit that you could get better NYC access in other counties.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 16:18
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#27
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/6/25 15:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 90
Offline
The lawyer I contacted about an appeal advised me not to do it this year.

I agree with the poster who said it's unlikely that a reval would lower my taxes...but one can hope.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 14:14
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
I have heard reports of people paying markedly different rates with similar properties right next to each other...but I would hope there is a common sense way to approach this by raising everyone's taxes a little bit more and drastically scaling back the tex the outliers pay


Sorry, but just so people don't get even more confused than they already are, I'm going to nitpick. No one pays a different "rate". They pay the same rate on their assessment x multiplier. It's the assessments that vary wildly, not the rate.

The common sense approach IS the reval! Get the values right and fairness follows. But right now, often the wealthiest residents pay the least tax on the real value of their properties. Don't leave it at what you've heard, take a few minutes and look at the taxes of any properties you're familiar with both nearby and across town, you'll see for yourself.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 13:50
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3106
Offline
I have heard reports of people paying markedly different rates with similar properties right next to each other...but I would hope there is a common sense way to approach this by raising everyone's taxes a little bit more and drastically scaling back the tex the outliers pay


Posted on: 2013/6/26 13:21
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Costs go up...When is the last tiem you went to your boss and told him not to raise your salary? When did you tell your boss that he could make your job more efficient by making you do more work and firing somebody else?


This is exactly the reason why the whole reval system is broken. If properties were revalued at transfer or at least every 10 years, the taxable base would rise with inflation, and the "rate" would stay the same to bring in the same inflation adjusted dollars. But most properties are assessed at roughly a 1/3 of their market value, this varying wildly, creating the whole messy voodoo of the "multiplier" used to try and adjust the actual taxes. So this whole thing gets so broken that the actual rate is raised to fix budget holes, and we know that rates never go down.

Don't trust me that it's all broken, look at the taxes of any building or condo yourself. Lots of modest houses worth $3-400K all over JC are paying similar $9-12k taxes to $1m houses downtown. This is a govt site to search http://tax1.co.monmouth.nj.us/cgi-bin ... istrict=0906&ms_user=monm, or just use zillow or trulia. Any property in zillow's database has the current taxes that they scrape from the public database, and all the sites show the last sale price, unless it wasn't an arms length deal.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 11:48
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 13:21
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4874
Offline
This is just a song a dance, I don't believe the hype.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 11:20
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3106
Offline
Costs go up...When is the last tiem you went to your boss and told him not to raise your salary? When did you tell your boss that he could make your job more efficient by making you do more work and firing somebody else?

Posted on: 2013/6/26 9:32
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/10 22:53
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 370
Offline
Its a brave move for Fulop. He could have sat back and allowed it to run its course and if people felt the process was flawed, he could have said it was a holdover from the last administration. Which it was. Now he is going to "own" it and be responsible regardless of the political fallout and I think this shows a lot of character since he must know some people will blame him personally when the taxes go up.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 9:19
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/9 6:28
Group:
Banned
Posts: 411
Offline
Why would you want taxes to go up?

Quote:
I think that taxes need to go up, although I agree they are high already relative to NYC which has abnormally low taxes thanks to corporations.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 9:18
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3106
Offline
I think that taxes need to go up, although I agree they are high already relative to NYC which has abnormally low taxes thanks to corporations.

I think the reval should proceed with some type of cap put on the maximum increase...

Posted on: 2013/6/26 8:59
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 15:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8813
Offline
Quote:

RUinHamiltonPark wrote:
This is actually pretty fair. He has a good point- prices in Sandy effected places- which is most of downtown and lots of other places including Port Liberte, Society Hill, and Country Village are not going to be the same.

Further, as to the "free-loader" comment, I live in a newer building where my taxes are abated but still too high (even according to the assessor) based on the price I paid. However, with the recent resurge in prices they are more in line with the value.

So basically, we all know freeloader is code for downtown, particularly those who are long time owners or those who got short sales or those with abatements or whatever the logic du jour is, and only those people who were effected by Sandy (if them, because prices have been going up in buildings that had problems too) will get a break.

Instead of griping about who is paying what, how about asking why we ALL pay higher taxes than people in suburbs who aren't afraid to send their kids to school.


Many great points -- and we agree that Fulop is doing the right thing!

Posted on: 2013/6/26 8:51
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/10/23 14:47
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 839
Offline
This is was the one issue that nearly kept me from voting at all on election day. I really wish Fulop would clarify whether he believes in the principle of a reval and whether the reval would resume once the kinks in methodology are worked out.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 8:17
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/23 12:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 442
Offline
This is total BS. I agree with Fulop on 99% of issues. In fact, this is really the only one a can remember not agreeing with him on but it's a biggie. This is a kick in the face to people who have bought property in the city during the last 6-7 years. (Exception for PILOT properties, you made a deal and your stuck with that agreement.)
This is completely unfair to people who pay on the full value of their property. You know what Fulop? I can't afford to pay the taxes either, do I get a deal? Are you going to lower my assessment based on the % of the total value the average property owner is actually assessed at? That would be more fair.
I am a Democrat through and through but this really helps me understand why Republicans think Democrats are a bunch of Communist wealth redistributors.

Posted on: 2013/6/26 7:55
Print Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4538
Offline
Quote:

blanquiita wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
I would very much like to see these differences ironed out--and perhaps pay less in taxes as a result.



I doubt that many people's taxes will go down. If anything, people who are underpaying will have their taxes raised to "equalize" the disparity. That was my impression of the reval.


I don't know where you get that impression, but the LAW says that's not the way it's done. The final take of taxes has to be the same as before. I've heard that many people thought what you said is so because they raised the rate at the same time as the reval, so fewer people saw an actual decrease than should have even though their "relative" taxes went down. But rate increase is a separate issue from reval even as it muddies the waters.

Posted on: 2013/6/25 18:40
Print Top




« 1 ... 34 35 36 (37) 38 »




[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