I believe Hoboken also has the lowest percentage of tax going to the municipality in Hudson county. We're getting leaner even if the County is still bloated.

Good news.

It's a Zimmer lie, a Zimmer conspiracy to cut taxes, I mean it's Zimmer's fault.
No, I meant, I hate Zimmer.. I'm choking. It's the hatred rising in the throat,make it stop.......ARGGHHHHHHHHH

Prosbus/HQ, Cassandra, outofcontrol and a thousand screen names on patch have died.

News at 11:00.

No I haven't died yet . Here are my rounded taxes for calender years 2007 through 2011.

2007 16000
2008 20000
2009 21000
2010 22000
2011 21000

The state took over in 2008. Zimmer took over early in 2010. Still waiting for that promised 25% reduction. I did a lot better under the crooks.

I couldn't care less. I was promised a 25% reduction in my taxes - the amount I write my checks for. the rest is sophistry.

That's right Cassandra. You tell them we are far better. We never promise you a tax cut because we have to pay our people. What did Zimmer do with the $27 million dollar surplus?

Mikie Squared and I will never promise you a 25% tax reduction. We promise to be consistent and to pay city workers as much as we can, every chance we get. Some of us need a few extra dollars or quarters from time to time.

That's the price you pay us for efficient corruption.

P.S We also will never promise that the Feds will not one day get us.
Thank you Cassandra. Vote Old Guard All the Way!

So Cassandra, let me ask you this. Were you fine when taxes were going up double digit percentages year after year under previous administrations and your tax bill stayed flat b/c all the increase was paid by new construction? Were you happy then even though we were wasting money like crazy, hiring tons of people, passing out raises to everyone & the budget doubled in just a handful of years? Did that out of control spending seem okay w/ you b/c your personal tax bill barely budged? Is that what you are saying? Are you telling us that you are so short sighted that all you care about is how much you personally pay and you completely ignore the big picture? I think that is what you are saying.

One word, Cassandra:
Hee-lah-ree-yus.

Hi everyone - I've been pretty busy due to our impending move but spent some time this morning catching up on my hoboken blog fix. I'm truly going to miss it. I hope you guys don't mind if I check in from time to time from the left coast!!

Cassandra - based on the tax figures you gave your house was likely worth over $1,600,000 at the market's height - still over $1,300,000 in today's market, so I hope you'll forgive us for not crying over your taxes, especially since you seem to have chosen not to appeal your taxes despite being fixated on the issue online.

Also, your figures indicate that your taxes went down only 5% in 2011 when the JJ says everyone else's went down 10%. Any explanation other than either the JJ's mistake or your lack of veracity.

Great news for Hoboken taxpayers. Keep up the good work, Mayor Zimmer.

Cassandra, you are happy with the 80% municipal increase in your tax bill to make up for the underfunde/overexpended budget of the crooks? Personally, I prefer not having my taxes rasied 80% but to each his own.

Such vehemence! Must have have struck a chord. The main effect of reassessment will not be on me - a single family homeowner - but on tenants living in rent controlled apartments in older buildings. Since raises in taxes can be directly passed onto the tenants and the Hoboken rental market is red hot the rent payers will be the one to suffer under a reevaluation.My Taxes paid in calendar year 2011 were exactly 3.8% less then were paid in calendar year 2010. There were no changes in assessment, no interest - just 4 vanilla payments each year. Anyone else who wishes to consult their tax bills - and has the same four vanilla payments each year will have the same result. Check for yourselves.

As for Greenhaven i believe my house is fairly assessed . My argument is not with the assessment but with the size of the municipal, school and county budgets - filled with cronyism, lawyer friends and incompetence - the primary cause of high taxes

I may not have beaten Zimmer again but I still am better than that horse guy and graphic sidekick.

Prosbus and Perry, please report for duty. I'm going to release the hellfire of my information on all of Hoboken. All you Zimmertinis are going to pay for this. Remember, I'm noted on the list for my endless ability to spend money.

I'm going to spend it and get all of you. Well if the FBI doesn't get me first.
They wouldn't dare.

Cassandra - you are toooooo funny! it seems either the Star Ledger and the Jersey Journal are flat out wrong or you are either wrong or fibbing.

Their analysis is based on tax rate (total RE taxes on an "average" assessment) not levy so even your usual faux confusion about the meaning of the word "levy" cannot explain the discrepancy. Perhaps you should send copies of your tax bills to the Star Ledger and Jersey Journal so that they can make the requisite corrections - LOL!!!!!!!

For the benefit of Cassandra and his/her fictional tax universe, here are the actual Hoboken municipal tax rates:

2010: 2.022%
2011: 1.824% (including library tax)
% cut: 9.8%

Sorry Cassandra - the facts make you appear pretty foolish.

Was the Star Ledger wrong when it reported that Scrinci went to the Justice Department. People now singing praises of the Ledger were blasting it but now something favorable and it is primo. But I go on. It is a fact that the State increased Hoboken's tax rate 47%, we all remember that, right. Well the rate didn't change until August when last year's budget was adopted. That means that for three years, after all bills were paid, Hoboken Taxpayers were overtaxed creating a $20,000,000.00 budget surplus. Last years, we got a tax rebate, the infusion of $10,000,000.00 of surplus into the budget not a tax cut. We are now awaiting the 2012 budget and the only surplus expected will be from the over taxation from 1/1/11-8/1/11. I am hoping for a tax reduction but I can't see how when we spend $2,000,000.00 a year on lawyers.
Perry

Remember folks that Mason, Russo & Co. need to always try to find away to paint everything with mud, doom and gloom even if the have to twist, bend, touture and edit the truth until it is a lie.

There is a simple way to determine who is spinning and who is not. Using your bank checking statements or your mortgage escrow bank payments to the city just add up the 2010 and the 2011 payments and compare.

FAP,
I know you are deft at Lottery Tickets so let me ask,that $20,000,000.00 in cash the Audited Financial Statement reported, was that from winning the lottery or the systematic overtaxation of Hoboken Taxpayers. And when one is overcharged and monies returned, don't we usually refer to a rebate or refund? Sorrow if I don't take on face value the words from those who contributed to Zimmer's campaign or individuals Zimmer has supported in Ward races or appointed to Municipal Boards. The Taxpayers of Hoboken got back their own money. No gimmicks indeed, LOL!
Perry

Perhaps someone who is so closely tied Peter Cammerano and the vote harvesting done for Timothy Occhipinti..... is not the best person to be trying throwing mud. :-)

Lottery tickets lol! Perry first of all you are the king of all kettles with that line, I'll be you $40 you have no credibility on this topic. And second, do you realize how tired that schtick is at this point? You guys are all so transparent when you fall back on lottery tickets when you have nowhere else to go. You're like the cat backed into a corner, flailing your paw in the form of tired, pathetic talking points. What're you gonna do next, ask for Dawn's birth certificate? Ugh. Why are you even wasting your time? Don't you have some checks to help Raia distribute for the upcoming BOE race?

Bob,
You miss the point. We had $20,000,000.00 in the bank and the delta on the budget is deminus, so if the taxpayers of Hoboken weren't overtaxed then we must have won the lottery. A question, if I might? Do you think Hobbs should trot out Cammerano as a defense to all attacks on Zimmer or is that schtick also old. Be fair,now. See the problem is when psudo reformers can't argue the facts they argue personalities. But Bob, let me ask you. Do you know how, other than over taxing the taxpayers of Hoboken, The Zimmer Administration amassed a $20,000,000.00 surplus?
Perry

Perry care to link to the financial statement where there is an unencumbered 20 Million just sitting around that the city is free to spend. I know specifics are where you break out into a cold sweat but I think it's only fair.

.
Here I'll give you the link and you can tell me which year to look at.

.

http://www.hobokennj.org/government-finances/

Forde,
Isn't the fact that we got back $10,000,000.00 after the arguement to give back $15,000,000.00 failed, proof or are you trying to agree with me that the surplus was function of the systemic overtaxation of Hoboken Taxpayers. It what taxpayers received was a Tax rebate not a Tax cut.

Perry

Bob,
Peter will always be someone I care for but as I tell him I care for you but now I don't like you.We should never judge people by the actions of others. Guilt by association is cheap and used to denigrate and marginalize. We had $20,000,000.00 in the bank, the fallacious arguement arose as to whether cash equal to the orginal underfunded budget was encumbered. I argued it a contrivence, a depreciation of an already paid expense. But in reality that's point is moot. The 10% reduction in taxes comes from the one time infusion of three years of overtaxation. Period!
Nice talking to you.
Perry

Perry - you are so cool using words like "delta" and "de-minimus." Maybe they would let you into that municipal accounting course after all!!

FYI - the city did not have $20 million in the bank - you'll probably learn that on the first day in class but only if you listen and pay attention, something that does not seem to match you skill set.

I love this entertainment. For the record at the end of the dec. 31, 2010 (6 month transition fiscal year) the city had according to it's annual financial statement a surplus of 25 million dollars. A surplus created due to one time "shots" associated with the transition from a state fiscal year to a calendar year. City received a full years of state aid for only a six month period in conjunction with one time "shots".
I ask this question. Who cares how we got it' if it isn't one mayor doing it, it will be another? HOWEVER, those gimmicks will create a problem yet to show it's face. My opinion of course.

Thank you John for explaining to Perry that the "surplus" is largely due to the timing in which state aid was recognized for accounting purposes due to the shift to a calendar fiscal. It is not due to any actual increase in the City's revenues and therefore "returning it" to taxpayers as a "rebate" would be a dishonest fiscal gimmick. Much of the non-restricted portion of it resulted from a one-shot infusion due to the change in accounting principles as applied to an existing revenue flow and its only proper use is to finance "one shot" expenditures like salary retro, litigation costs, hurricane costs, etc as the mayor is doing. The restricted portion is even more problematic since it represents the accounting treatment of the old overexpenditure, funds that were paid out years ago and no longer exist in the real world in the form of actual money, existing only in the form of a bookkeeping entry that disappears over time.

You have demonstrated an understanding of municipal finance far superior to the ignorant rantings of Mr. Belfiore. If you know him, perhaps it would be helpful for you to contact him directly and explain it to him so he can stop making such a fool of himself.

now I'm off to continue packing.

Green:

Both arguments have substance so for now, I will say both are correct!!!!