So Asbury Park loses all around is what I'm getting. Or does the City win?
Sharon Boone
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please note: message attached
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
JJ: See below. I thought LB was tax abated. Did this change?
People use tax abatements and exemptions interchangeably, however,
they are not the same thing. An exemption is calculated by exempting a
portion of the
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan,
Good point. That article I posted seemed to use all three
interchangeably. Can you tell by the article which one Long
Branch
is? Could it be a combination of all 3?
I suspect that it is an EXEMPTION and the
I'm trying to figure this stuff out for myself. Take a look at this
quote from the article:
In the first full tax year after completion of the Project, no pay
ment in lieu of taxes shall be required; in the second tax year, 20
percent of taxes otherwise due shall be paid by the Redeveloper; in
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to figure this stuff out for myself.
PILOT says it all, which again is an acronym (payment in lieu of
taxes), and I guess some use it too freely to suggest when full
taxes are not being paid. Maybe NJ, but
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, dfsavgny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is certainly not a PILOT (although I think the
underlying law calls it that), because the property is subject to
taxes.
Reading the NJ law, I guess I am being a hard ass. But it is clear the
law calls for EXEMPTION and
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, jerseyjohn99 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Well, it's a good thing we have all anticipated school tax revenue
coming in from the new construction, since we can't trust the State
to
hold up to their end of the bargain of subsidizing Asbury Park with
Title: [AsburyPark] Re: State Aid to Construct AP
Schools...
Let's see... that same article says...
Among Abbott
districts, which split $6 billion, the money has completed 30
projects, with 43 others under
way.
That's an average of $82.1 million per project. I'm no
construction specialist
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Joe D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's an average of $82.1 million per project. I'm no construction
specialist, but I'd bet there was a little waste in the process. Had
the SCC trimmed their own waste by a measly 10%, they would have $584
million
At 2:54 PM + 7/29/05, dfsavgny wrote:
...All of this is another reason why AP should
certainly get the excess profits due to it by law and put something
away for the future.
Of course we'll get the excess profits... that's the law. In your experience
how many projects like this end up with
Joe said:
Oh wait... I'm pointing out that maybe someone else besides the City
Council and Larry Fishman might be at fault. Sorry.. I forgot what
list I was posting to. Please forgive me.
You know Joe, I often wonder how a number of different people around
her think they could have
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You know Joe, I often wonder how a number of different people around
her think they could have handled redevelopment in AP if they were
here say in 2000. I don't think they will ever get it.
Tom, if you don't know,
Tax abatements are a normal part of the quid pro quo in deals like
this.
Do you think anyone could have gotten a deal done without tax
incentives?
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, dfsavgny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Don't know where you were in the 70's, but I was here. The City was being run
by a worse bunch of crooks, called Kramer and Mattia. No wonder Weldon wrote
his own pension. The town was over 50% Black then and they owned nothing. I
was living in Neptune and whites would ask me, why the blacks
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tax abatements are a normal part of the quid pro quo in deals like
this.
Do you think anyone could have gotten a deal done without tax
incentives?
It depends what else is in the deal. If you sell the assets for
I don't disagree with much of what you say, in particular the need
to plan should Abbott money dry up. It is becoming politically more
unpopular, and with the threat of a constitutional convention
looming, it could go away sooner than later.
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, dfsavgny
So whose back do we have to rub to get what we need/want? Why a quid pro quo
from the so-called honest Council, we now have? The Fix-its! Not you JK,
you're new and not jaded yet! I find the Coucil very disrespectful to some
citizens. Stopped coming for that reason! If the books were opened on
Absolutely true!
Sharon Boone
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please note: message attached
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups
BB, (good to see you back here, btw)
Can you explain how it was possible for Long Branch to get a
redevelopment deal done without giving tax abatements to the
residential units? Who was Long Branch's attorney that negotiated
this kneecracker deal that now has the new residents paying their
JJ: See below. I thought LB was tax abated. Did this change?
City makes tax break for Pier Village official
Tax abatements were offered as enticement
to attract developers
BY CHRISTINE VARNO
Staff Writer
LONG BRANCH An agreement for a tax abatement, made four years ago,
between the
If I recall correctly, when Hovnanian signed their deal, only the
commercial portions were abated, the residential is paying full
boat. Maybe that was what was meant by giving the best deal to the
first major developer?
Unfortunately, the link to the story is dead, and I can't find it on
21 matches
Mail list logo
