Realtor.com had an article on cities that have the most renters per capita and and Jersey City (and Newark) were on that list, in fact very high on the list. Both top five cities. While it's great people want to live in these cities (and let's not kid ourselves here bout why JC and Newark have so many people willing to rent, proximity to NYC) there are drawbacks when that high of a percentage of a city is rental units. First off renters don't pay property tax and nor in any big way help schools and infrastructure they are often using. Voting becomes yet another issue. Renters vote, you bet they do as well anyone should but perhaps their votes aren't the vote of someone looking to invest or look at a city's long-term financial health. The incentive to look at the long game just isn't there for a myriad of reasons. The fact remains the infrastructure use is really only being paid for by homeowners.
Johnny has a pretty good idea why Jersey City will continue to stay on this list if not own it one day -- The Healy and on steroids abatements of the Fulop administrations have invested very little in the way of abatements for buildings one can buy into and left hundreds of millions of dollars off the tax rolls for buildings made exclusively for renters. In just the past five years the Columbus towers, The One, The Toll Brothers The Morgan, the new Jared Tower on Bay St., M2, the Urby and now old Pep Boys parking lot Vyv (Just an awful name for such an ass looking building), JSQ1, et all have gotten huge abatements, more are on the way for....you guessed it, rental units.
It really is a self-fulfilling prophecy of fail when you do look long-term. The first abatements given to downtown are about to run out. There was a huge reval that hit downtown like a bomb (as Fulop knew it would which is why he spent so much time and effort to protect his base) and there will be questions if ownership buildings will be able to withstand the impact. Will people move out because of higher taxes? Hey, there's a pattern of that. Once they do that's less money for road fixes, storm cleanup, getting electricity back online, cops, DPW, Parking, who all lose when there is less ownership.
Ask yourself this about Fulop (and Healy) bending over for every developer they could, when the money starts to get tight downtown do The Heights or Greenville or India Square think anything is going to get built or fixed in their neighborhoods? They have to pull teeth now to get development and city help and supposedly this is the Jersey City gilded age. Once the tax base shrinks (and there's nothing really being done to actively grow it) they can kiss the big promises goodbye...again.
While it's great people want to live in Jersey City this is where "city planning" under Bob Cotter should have been far more engaged than, "Hey, there's a good spot on the waterfront for a developer" during his reign of awfulness. Cotter, "city planning" and the city councils should have insisted on far more ownership buildings in the downtown land rush.
Like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren was waving her arms and telling everyone in no uncertain terms the 2008 crash was coming, Johnny is telling you now, get in but also know when to get out of the Jersey City real estate game, the timer on the bomb has been set and is ticking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment