Mao wrote:
To DTJCer et alii:

To those of the "get a bike get a life" vien, the point here as most other posters noted is coordination. It is one thing to have detours and delays, another thing to completely shut a city down to the point that the JCPD intervenes to prevent a public safety emergency. And sure, we'd all like an urban utopia where we can walk to everything. JC is walkable but most of Jersey City is not entirely car free no matter what the youngsters in the City Planning Bureau think. Also those with old people and children in their care should be excused the reliance on the automobile.

Mao

CandiceOsborne wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Hey, you know where people actually stopped, where there were traffic cameras!! How about creating a new class of "public safety" officers armed with a cheap hi-def camera. Let them stand in plainclothes at intersections and video cars for "no-points" traffic fines, including failure to stop, illegal use of turn lanes and gridlocking. Paying someone $30/hr to write at least 10-20 $100 tickets an hour seems like a no brainer. Yes there's the back office work, but it still should be cost effective.

Why insist law enforcement use only eyeballs and 1970's technology unless you like the status quo?

Yes, this! I have been brainstorming something similar: an app that solicits resident sourced video/image for parking that gives rewards of some type to residents who submit actionable stuff. Then the work from people like @jccrap on twitter who is already taking the pics could be utilized.

brewster wrote:
Hey, you know where people actually stopped, where there were traffic cameras!! How about creating a new class of "public safety" officers armed with a cheap hi-def camera. Let them stand in plainclothes at intersections and video cars for "no-points" traffic fines, including failure to stop, illegal use of turn lanes and gridlocking. Paying someone $30/hr to write at least 10-20 $100 tickets an hour seems like a no brainer. Yes there's the back office work, but it still should be cost effective.

Why insist law enforcement use only eyeballs and 1970's technology unless you like the status quo?

K-Lo wrote:
I watched 6 cars go through the Stop sign on Jersey at York this morning.

Mao wrote:
...
The only place where the f word seems playful to me is in Ireland where the populace is ridiculously and pathetically addicted to say feck this and that.
...
Mao

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

Mao wrote:
Dear MDM:

Home schooling and the catacombs might be one solution. Talking honestly and reasonably and in a civil matter to preserve the public square so that private values can be cultivated is my tactic now. But its probably a losing battle. Two vignettes: a junior boy, academically talented and heading to an Ivy who is also an athlete, posts on his Facebook, a down with gay marriage message. As a result, the all the girls in the junior class band together to denounce the "hater" and to shun him. So much for dialogue! Vignette number two: a Muslim hajiib wearing girl who is a senior is accepted into a Ivy League school with a full scholarship for next year. One of her teachers says to her: "Don't you love this country?" The girl stares at the teacher and says: "No, I despise this country."

Mao

Sounds like everyone is exercising their free speech... Not such a terrible thing...

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Anti-LGBT and anti-Islamic rhetoric unhinged this mentally disturbed individual.

More like he watched the anti-US and pro-Taliban tv shows his father stars in.

And what is more anti-LGBT than Islam?

thor800 wrote:
...
If this whole mess starts november 2017 (?) wouldn't it take at least a year or two to appraise every single property in the city and figure out changes in taxes ?

...

jcneighbor wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
[quote]

You must have bought young if you're not 62 yet and can't qualify for a reverse mortgage.

5 months to go until I hit 62. And yes, it's one of my options-

Part of the decision is my estimate/guess of to what extent DTJC properties will DECLINE in value as hundreds(?) of homeowners sell before or after the reval. When my taxes go up by $20k or so it's a safe bet the value of my home will decline accordingly.

Selling now and taking the one-time capital gains exemption for real estate is another option. Feedback welcome; my crystal ball is a little foggy on this one...

borisp wrote:
...
I'm confused. Could someone enlighten me - why some of you here believe that somebody else should pay for your convenience? Do you really think that people in the NJ area who want to commute to the NYC are the most downtrodden in the USA so much so that the whole country must subsidize their transportation needs?

If not, - then let some private firm build it, and let them charge those who uses it.

Monroe wrote:
Fulop's problem with the reval will get worse if JC is forced to pay for 25% of its school costs, as per this bi-partisan push for equality in school funding.

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/ ... la-must-changed/85343328/

Cincinnatus wrote:
Hi,

First time poster who just recently was considering buying and moving to Jersey City. Just recently had a baby. Obviously have been following this thread and the tax re-evaluation is definitely making me reconsider my plan and maybe pursue buying and staying in Brooklyn instead. Shorter commute for me since my wife and I work in downtown Brooklyn and I'm not sure it makes sense to pay those higher taxes for inferior public schools...unless i'm buying in the Cornelia Bradford district, which is obviously pricier. But then i fear flooding, which may not be warranted? Will probably just hold buying for another year to see how everything shakes out.

brewster wrote:
...
But the inaccuracy of citywide equalization rates are the heart of the current inequality.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
...
I have yet to hear a good argument against the assessment being reset at sale. At least that would reduce the proportion of properties out of wack.

Why shouldn't under-assessments act the same way as under-declarations on other tax returns? The seller is liable for x years back taxes on transfer. One big advantage is that it removes any local incentive to delay a reval.

And you think the howling is loud now....

In reality it wouldn't even work since you have no idea what the value was at any given point on the timeline. You'd have a generate an appraisal for each and every year from contemporary comps.

brewster wrote:
...
I have yet to hear a good argument against the assessment being reset at sale. At least that would reduce the proportion of properties out of wack.