Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
59 user(s) are online (55 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 59

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 ... 31 32 33 (34) 35 36 37 ... 43 »


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
Quote:

papadage wrote:
Then don't bother making up unsubstantiated claims.

Why should I believe a thing you say, given your problem with the truth?


Then do the work and prove it is unsubstantiated claim, but lazy people like you like to hide behind phony names and claim they know things. This story was so big, the selling of liens, that I conclude you are a newbie who did not live here during that period of time. Fulop's supporters are such phonies.

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:51
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/12/30 16:56
Last Login :
6/7 18:22
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 649
Offline
Then don't bother making up unsubstantiated claims.

Why should I believe a thing you say, given your problem with the truth?

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:41
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
Quote:

papadage wrote:
Some one does not know how burden of proof works.

You made an affirmative statement that is not supported. You need to prove these delinquencies were due to revals and affected long term homeowners. Anyone can tell stories.

Go support it. It's bullshit otherwise.

__

You can also dig up proof about the celebrating Muslims while you're at it.


Baloney, you are just too lazy to do the work. I told you where to find it, now look! This happened before the internet and I am not doing your work. I know what happened and was generous enough to point you in the right direction.

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:31
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
A recession started in the late 1980s into the early 1990s. Homeowners could not sell their properties even downtown.


Complete Bullshit. I could delve into the tax rolls and show the many sales that took place during the period you cite. Homes can always be sold for the right price. In the recent even deeper recession properties were being snapped up by those who hadn't been foolish in the boom, including yours truly.


Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:29
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/12/30 16:56
Last Login :
6/7 18:22
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 649
Offline
Some one does not know how burden of proof works.

You made an affirmative statement that is not supported. You need to prove these delinquencies were due to revals and affected long term homeowners. Anyone can tell stories.

Go support it. It's bullshit otherwise.

__

You can also dig up proof about the celebrating Muslims while you're at it.

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:25
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
Quote:

papadage wrote:
Quote:
Those bulk lien sales were basically homeowners who could not pay their taxes after reval. A recession started in the late 1980s into the early 1990s. Homeowners could not sell their properties even downtown. When I say I know people who lost their homes


You have a burden of proof to justify that malarkey.

Back in those days many people in JC did not pay taxes and other city fees and fines, mostly because enforcement was non-existent. Only later, when automated systems were put in place that sent out notices and then automated collections did many people actually pay.

There is no indication people did not pay taxes merely out of selfishness, with no reval having any contribution.

Truthiness is not adequate support when you made specific statements.


I won't do your work, but get old copies of the JJ and read stories on the subject. Then OPRA 1989 to 1993 budgets, you will see taxpayers had to put in extra money to make up the difference. Then compare the amount of money today for delinquent taxes. When the tax liens were sold, the money came from the sales. Those liens were properties not paying their taxes, allowing for a small cut in taxes. I suggest you, not, me do the homework. I have pointed you in the right direction.

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:24
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/12/30 16:56
Last Login :
6/7 18:22
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 649
Offline
Quote:
Those bulk lien sales were basically homeowners who could not pay their taxes after reval. A recession started in the late 1980s into the early 1990s. Homeowners could not sell their properties even downtown. When I say I know people who lost their homes


You have a burden of proof to justify that malarkey.

Back in those days many people in JC did not pay taxes and other city fees and fines, mostly because enforcement was non-existent. Only later, when automated systems were put in place that sent out notices and then automated collections did many people actually pay.

There is no indication people did not pay taxes merely out of selfishness, with no reval having any contribution.

Truthiness is not adequate support when you made specific statements.

Posted on: 2015/11/24 19:06
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
I have to hand it to you Brewster, you are good at making up tales but your tales do no check with the facts. In 1992, Bret Schundler won the special election. The city was not collecting 100% of the revenue, it was down to around 84% to 85%. The law required then that taxpayers had to make up the difference to 100%. Bret had the legislation change in Florio term to allow the cities to sell tax liens in bulk form. Those bulk lien sales were basically homeowners who could not pay their taxes after reval. A recession started in the late 1980s into the early 1990s. Homeowners could not sell their properties even downtown. When I say I know people who lost their homes, I realize I don't play into your fantasy world of so-called truth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1990s_recession

Posted on: 2015/11/24 18:58
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The abated properties were not impacted by reval, brewster. That is the difference. Some of my neighbors lost their homes but people in tax abated buildings were protected.


Again not answering the question. And those neighbors did not "lose their homes", they chose to sell at great profit rather than pay the tax on their greatly appreciated property, no different than you recently did in anticipation of the reval.

"Losing your home" means you walk away with nothing. Unlikely unless they mortgaged that increased value to the max and had no assets to show for it.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 16:37
 Top 


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/10/10 22:00
Last Login :
2020/6/4 14:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 54
Offline
Sorry -- why not have people in more valuable homes pay more taxes?

I understand the abatements will amplify any impact of the reassessment, but not revaluing also has an impact: you're asking people in properties that haven't increased as much to continue paying the same taxes as people in properties that have increased more.
By not revaluing, you're placing a disproportionate burden on people in poorer parts of the city.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 15:08
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
In case you haven't seen it, the question of whether or not there should be a reval is today's Jersey Journal poll:

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... l.html#incart_2box_hudson

Vote early! Vote often!

Posted on: 2015/11/20 14:51
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
The abated properties were not impacted by reval, brewster. That is the difference. Some of my neighbors lost their homes but people in tax abated buildings were protected.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 14:14
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The exact amount for the city was the same, brewster, but not the exact amount for individual homeowners. I still have a copy of my old tax bill as a memento. Actually commercial properties including the Jersey Journal building went down. The tax shift basically went from commercial to homeowners with downtown getting the brunt of the taxes.


Utterly irrelevant as far as your statement connecting the reval to abatements.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 6:13
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
The exact amount for the city was the same, brewster, but not the exact amount for individual homeowners. I still have a copy of my old tax bill as a memento. Actually commercial properties including the Jersey Journal building went down. The tax shift basically went from commercial to homeowners with downtown getting the brunt of the taxes.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 3:16
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
When Hoboken's reval went through, it did not have the upheavals of the JC's 1988 reval. The reason? Hoboken does not grant tax abatements as graciously as JC so more of the property is in the ratable base. Our reval will be rough because nearly one fourth to third of JC is tax abated in some form. I read on some web site, it could be Hoboken 411 that properties after their recent reval were paying $6,000 for assessment at $350,000.


This is pure nonsense, and demonstrates once again you're either incapable of understanding of the reval process or deliberately spreading misinformation in your abatement jihad. Probably both.

The reval is conducted entirely within the ratable base, abated properties play no part, because the reval is revenue neutral. The city will take in THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT OF TAX AFTER IT!! It is simply adjusting the properties closer to their real values after 27 years of drift. We need the reval and abatement have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with it. They might have something to to do with the tax rate, but not the valuations.

As for Hoboken, many properties went down, because THAT'S THE WAY REVALS WORK!!

CatDog: don't despair, I think she made it up. They may have won an appeal but not on that argument. It's completely contrary to what the tax lawyers said at the appeal information session Yvonne herself set up. They specifically said you could show that 10 of your neighbors in identical properties were paying less, and it would make no difference at all if your assessment is at current market x multiplier +-15%.

Posted on: 2015/11/20 2:28
 Top 


Re: N.J. looking into whether to FORCE Jersey City reval
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/17 1:11
Last Login :
3/30 23:24
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1182
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The first thing a developer does when the abatement has expired, he goes to tax court, file an appeal based on the fact they are at 100% and other properties are not. So then JC floats bonds to pay their winning tax appeals. The small homeowner is being hurt with the winning tax appeals by developers and their tax abatements.
I think this is the first time I have seen you say something that makes sense and that I agree with. I need to go lay down.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 19:23
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
My information on tax abatements came from the tax assessor in Hoboken, not from a number in the air. I did not give an exact figure because I contacted the tax assessor in Hoboken about 5 years ago and I know that figure is somewhat old. But please feel free to contact the tax assessor and get the breakdown of the percentage of ratables and tax abatements, it is not anywhere near JC.


That.

Is.

Not.

What.

You.

Said,

Yvonne.

(Did I speak slowly enough?)

This is what you said: When Hoboken's reval went through, it did not have the upheavals of the JC's 1988 reval

You are comparing current (or recent) Hoboken with 1988 Jersey City. To say that the 1988 revaluation in Jersey City was rougher than the recent Hoboken revaluation because "Hoboken doesn't have as many abatements" is false. Hoboken circa 2010 has a higher percentage of abatements than 1988 Jersey City.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 17:52
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
My information on tax abatements came from the tax assessor in Hoboken, not from a number in the air. I did not give an exact figure because I contacted the tax assessor in Hoboken about 5 years ago and I know that figure is somewhat old. But please feel free to contact the tax assessor and get the breakdown of the percentage of ratables and tax abatements, it is not anywhere near JC.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 17:45
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
When Hoboken's reval went through, it did not have the upheavals of the JC's 1988 reval. The reason? Hoboken does not grant tax abatements as graciously as JC so more of the property is in the ratable base.


There were far, far fewer abatements in JC in 1988 than today. In fact, I'd wager there are considerably more in Hoboken today than there were in JC in 1988 (to directly address your comparison.)

Posted on: 2015/11/19 17:39
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 18:21
Last Login :
2019/12/26 15:30
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4966
Offline
Samantha Marcus | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

Three New Jersey municipalities in Union, Hudson and Middlesex counties are under investigation by the state for stalling property reassessments for decades and could be forced to conduct revaluations.

The investigation of Jersey City, Elizabeth and Dunellen is a shot across the bow to municipalities in the three counties the state says have neglected their legal duty to ensure fair property assessments, key in determining the real estate taxes home and business owners owe.

Tax boards in these three counties have "consistently failed to require towns to uniformly and fairly assess properties," Treasury Department officials said Wednesday.

Over time, properties' assessed values grow increasingly out of line with their market values, and some owners wind up paying too much, while others pay too little. Jersey City hasn't reassessed in 27 years, Elizabeth in 39 years and Dunellen in 33 years, according to the state.

ALSO: Christie vetoes bill forcing state to post 'nonsensical' property tax data

"The Division of Taxation is reluctantly taking this action because the Hudson, Middlesex and Union county tax boards have failed to do what they are supposed to do," Treasury spokesman Joe Perone said. "The state has been more than patient in trying to convince the county tax boards to meet obligations, but they have been lax in enforcement because revaluations are unpopular."

In a news release, the state also calls out Westfield, South River, East Newark, Harrison, Roselle and Winfield. They are among 32 municipalities that have not reassessed in at least 25 years, Perone said.

This would be the first time in four decades that the division is invoking its authority to force a municipality to reassess its property "because it's clear that the county tax boards and the three municipalities have no interest in complying with the law," he said.

More

Posted on: 2015/11/19 16:03
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
When Hoboken's reval went through, it did not have the upheavals of the JC's 1988 reval. The reason? Hoboken does not grant tax abatements as graciously as JC so more of the property is in the ratable base. Our reval will be rough because nearly one fourth to third of JC is tax abated in some form. I read on some web site, it could be Hoboken 411 that properties after their recent reval were paying $6,000 for assessment at $350,000.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 15:47
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Brewster - Yes, I have appealed after the 1988 reval, but I never had a tax abatement. As far as proof, the attorney McCann, not the former mayor did the appeals in tax court after an abated expired especially for Newport. I remember when McCann won the tax appeals for Newport Garage. When the city does the bond ordinances, the major developer might be listed. If you really want to know ask the city's business administration for the list.


While it would not surprise me at all there are different rules for those who pay to play, I'm still not buying that this is all there is to the story. There are people paying 100% (full market value x multiplier) all over, it's not unusual at all.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 15:39
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3792
Offline
Quote:

jcwalkingman wrote:
Is it true that a reval will not affect tax-abated properties? Or will they be affected by this?


Of course. Abatements are contracts. It is also precisely the reason why, if you are looking to buy right now, new construction with long term abatements are a much safer investment: you are guaranteed a fixed tax payment for a lengthy period of time. When the reval finally happen, all those brownstones paying under 10K on valuations of 1+ MM will see their tax bill double. Heck, some may see their tax bill triple.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 14:16
 Top 


Re: N.J. looking into whether to FORCE Jersey City reval
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3792
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
The impending, and inevitable, tax revaluation is the main reason why savvy sellers are sitting out the DTJC market. I predict a flush of FOR SALE properties in the next year or two by smart sellers looking to get out before they get assessed the proper tax levy. Those who fail to prepare, or sell, will find themselves in a huge bind. I wonder if smart builders will factor this into the pricing of their abated properties.


Did you mean savvy buyers in your first sentence? Because then I'd agree.


Oops! Yes, of course. Savvy buyers. ;)

In fact, I am personally sitting it out waiting for the reval to hit. I'm sure it is a matter of time. Until then, I will continue saving my money and wait for the bloodbath.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 14:04
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Yesterday 14:11
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 965
Offline
Yvonne is spot on for this one. We need a change in state laws to prevent the gaming of the system.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 4:49
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
To answer two questions, yes a reval will not affect a tax abatement because tax abatements are contracts not ratables. It affects ratables. Now to answer Joshua, I stated earlier, the trick developers use after abatements have expired is to rush into tax court and have their assessment lowered because they are now at 100% and the city is not. So, the small homeowner is now paying a refund bond after paying the tax abated property owner fair share of school and county taxes for 15, 20 or more years. In the early 1990s, JC was paying $20 million a year in debt, we are now paying $60 million a year in debt. Some of the debt is basically refunding bonds on tax appeals.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 4:19
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
6/4 20:32
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1397
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Yes, I have appealed after the 1988 reval, but I never had a tax abatement.


So what?

Posted on: 2015/11/19 4:10
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/7/22 3:08
Last Login :
2017/4/14 0:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 199
Offline
Is it true that a reval will not affect tax-abated properties? Or will they be affected by this?

Posted on: 2015/11/19 4:09
 Top 


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


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:33
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5009
Offline
Brewster - Yes, I have appealed after the 1988 reval, but I never had a tax abatement. As far as proof, the attorney McCann, not the former mayor did the appeals in tax court after an abated expired especially for Newport. I remember when McCann won the tax appeals for Newport Garage. When the city does the bond ordinances, the major developer might be listed. If you really want to know ask the city's business administration for the list.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 4:07
 Top 


Re: N.J. looking into whether to FORCE Jersey City reval
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5598
Offline
Quote:

user1111 wrote:
I am all for it, a lot of you mofo's are not paying your fair share. I pay 6k a year, I know a few that are paying less than than that down on the waterfront in PH.


It's not the amount, it's the effective tax rate that matters. Even if they're paying $12k, if it's on a $1.2m property they're paying 1%. If your property is worth $300k, then you're paying twice the rate they are ( and are still slightly under your proper tax). There are people in Greenville paying 3 and 4%.

Posted on: 2015/11/19 2:36
 Top 




« 1 ... 31 32 33 (34) 35 36 37 ... 43 »




[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