The Jersey City Council approved the first reading of an ordinance that would grant a 30-year tax abatement for the KRE Group at 808 Pavonia Ave. as a part of the new Centre Pompidou project after a motion to withdraw failed.
By John Heinis/Hudson County View
” … This is not even an itemized budget, I almost feel disrespected that they [the administration] would even hand us something like this that’s lacking so much detail and then come to find out that’s there’s no definite that the Pompidou Centre is going to occupy this white box,” began Ward F Councilman Frank “Educational” Gilmore.
“There’s no financial mechanism to fund the complete build out of the box once the developer turns it over to the city. Furthermore, I want to explore options where maybe they only get an abatement where a tower for the Pompidou Centre is going.”
Gilmore reiterated other points that he made during caucus, including calling for affordable housing on site and expressing disdain over the fact that the administration could not project how much revenue the city would get with a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) vs. conventional taxes.
He emphasized this point by noting that the KRE Group was able to project their earnings on a neighboring project, but the administration cannot with this one.
“It tells me one of two things: either they didn’t do their due diligence as it relates to get the proper financial information or they’re dismissive of the financial information and they’re withholding it from the council.”
Gilmore than suggested pulling the ordinance until a public meeting takes place, again repeating a point he made during caucus.
Business Administrator John Metro asked be heard prior to the motion going forward, urging the governing body to introduce the ordinance, noting that it is standard operating procedure to approve projects on first reading and then vote as they see fit on second reading.
Metro also committed to a public hearing on the Pompidou in the immediate future at Hudson County Community College, with the details coming to light in the next 24 to 48 hours.
Ward D Councilman Yousef Saleh asked if he was correct in his understanding that the financial analysis was not possible unless both towers are completed, allowing their tax revenue to be established.
“You can’t tax them as a full tower if it’s just vacant land or they just built the base. Is that correct?” he asked, to which Metro said that was accurate.
“And just to add to that, we do have NW, our financial experts, third party independent advisors, that go through those numbers with us,” Metro added.
Ward C Councilman Rich Boggiano said he wanted to see more than one meeting prior to first reading and therefore was in full support of withdrawing the ordinance from the agenda.
Metro reiterated that ordinance introduction was a courtesy that has been granted for years.
“It’s just an introduction,” Saleh chimed in.
“Let him voice his concern!,” Gilmore interjected.
“Parliamentary procedure: can we follow it?” Saleh asked.
City Clerk Sean Gallagher interjected that everyone can’t be talking at the same time because it makes it impossible to keep meeting minutes.
Boggiano seconded Gilmore’s motion to withdraw before Ward A Councilwoman Denise Ridley and Ward B Councilwoman Mira Prinz-Arey both voted no, stating the introduction is customary and there could not be any discussion if it was pulled.
“Having one meeting is nothing, it’s not gonna work, you gotta go out and speak to the people in the communities. They are absolutely ticked off about this whole thing. It was brought out improperly to the people and people are tired of it,” Boggiano said before voting yes.
Saleh said he had “Pompi-overdose” at this point, so the notion that there had not been a robust discussion, which will continue, is incorrect. He also said he has a lot of respect for Boggiano and Gilmore, but sometimes reasonable people can disagree.
Ward E Councilman James Solomon, who said on Saturday he would be voting no on the abatement less than 24 hours after Mayor Steven Fulop unveiled it in an editorial, noted that the project has stalled several times.
” … I think everyone wants world class arts that’s accessible to all and I’ve been public with my opposition to the proposal before the council. At the end of the day, we’ve seen difficulty in moving this project forward. We’re three years in from the original announcement and have had a number of serious pitfalls,” he recalled.
“The city is making an extraordinary financial commitment … Given the rise in taxes, the extraordinary needs before the city when it comes to affordable homes, better schools, youth opportunities, I just don’t think this is the right direction to go.”
Gilmore expressed that the community meeting would be nothing more than lip service if they voted to introduce the project first before frustratedly voting no.
“This isn’t about just granting the abatement, it’s about the centre itself, so if a consultant from Pompidou can be present [at the public meeting], I think that would be important for the community,” noted Councilwoman-at-Large Amy DeGise.
Metro said he believed the administration could honor that request before DeGise voted no, as did Councilman-at-Large Daniel Rivera and Council President Joyce Watterman.
Ultimately, the measure passed 6-2(1), with Solomon and Gilmore voting no and Boggiano abstaining.
During public comment at the tail end of the four-hour meeting, a few residents spoke out against the endeavor.
” … This project is simply not needed, nor wanted, by the community. Our neighborhood is facing much more pressing issues: our streets are in desperate need of paving, there’s a severe lack of parking, and the resources that could go toward improving the quality of life for residents are instead being funneled into tax abatements for developers,” said lifelong Ward C resident Danielle Dadamo.
” … To present the new Jersey City Pompidou concept as part of a tax abated real estate development project, something that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, a generational investment for years to come with one week of notice to deliberate on, a couple of weeks to decide upon, is the most irresponsible aspect of arts planning I’ve ever heard of,” declared Nimbus Dance Founding Artist Director Samuel Pott.
It is no surprise that this cleared the Fulop City Council with little or no actual costs.
Experience shows that cost for these kinds of vanity projects greatly exceeds the estimate.
We, the people of jersey city, do not want or need this pompous dudu, we should not be giving investors like kre pilot tax abatements for 30 years. Our taxes in jersey city have nearly doubled in the last few years, and is projected to increase again. We can not afford such a project.
I am thinking Fulop got prepaid to deliver and he is determined to do so. I can’t help but wonder if there are financial and legal personal consequences if he doesn’t push this through.
This is nonsense. Your typical JC resident doesn’t care about something like the Pompidou and the residents of the new hi-rises are just fly by nights. Our property taxes are too high!