Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Teachers and nurses in NJ are not poor. They make good money if they stay longer and go to a good town or hospital. Register nurses are always in demand and good teachers can easily get hired in a good town with recent education funding. Many towns are adding staff.
In 2017, the median salary for a teacher in NJ is $67,812. As I noted in my original post, "
In 2017, a family of four in New Jersey earning $68,000 a year or less is considered low-income, according to HUD." That means plenty of teachers with a family of four are considered low-income in NJ.
I assume you make more than $68,000 in spite of having free time to troll random message boards?
It's more about overcrowding, reduced quality of life, and higher property taxes than about people obsessing about the income of the tenants. These giant developments being forced onto towns have a very small percentage of "affordable" units. I don't think it will tank real estate entirely, but it will lower values and raise taxes in all but the richest of towns.
I used to love driving through areas that had open farm land, now all I see is future row houses and apartment buildings that will one day rise in their place. I'd like to move from our town, but I will be very cautious about moving and will research every town's AH mandates and open spaces when looking for a new place.
So where are people supposed to live? We can either build up in the cities or out in the country. Or should we just stop building?
I understand the impulse that no one wants to see a giant condo complex go up in their town. But this is NJ. If you don't like high-density living, time to find another state.
In 2017, the median salary for a teacher in NJ is $67,812. As I noted in my original post, "
In 2017, a family of four in New Jersey earning $68,000 a year or less is considered low-income, according to HUD." That means plenty of teachers with a family of four are considered low-income in NJ.
I assume you make more than $68,000 in spite of having free time to troll random message boards?
Assuming they are single parent household. More than likely a teacher is married in a household of 4+ which means their total household income should be greater than $100k Most NJ teachers that I know, live in pretty good neighborhoods unless they are just starting out. Consider most teachers only work 70% of the year compare to office workers. That's pretty good salary usually with good benefits too compare to nurses that gets paid around the same but has to work longer with less vacation than teachers.
Assuming they are single parent household. More than likely a teacher is married in a household of 4+ which means their total household income should be greater than $100k Most NJ teachers that I know, live in pretty good neighborhoods unless they are just starting out. Consider most teachers only work 70% of the year compare to office workers. That's pretty good salary usually with good benefits too compare to nurses that gets paid around the same but has to work longer with less vacation than teachers.
Why is it more than likely they are married? My niece is a teacher who was married to a man who made $10-15 an hour during their marriage. Now they’re getting divorced and he is asking for alimony. You can’t just assume every teacher with kids has a two income household, or that the second income is over $40,000.
I’ve worked in both schools and healthcare facilities as a therapist. Nurses make more than teachers do. Under a teachers contract a full 50%% of my salary was taken out for various things, union dues, pension, savings for summer (we did not get paychecks in summer) and other things. My salary almost doubled when I went back to healthcare from schools. When I worked for the school district, I always had to have a part-time job that I could do after school, and in the summer too.
Teacher salaries don’t start getting up past $50,000 for multi years. Starting salary is often in $30’s or 40’s. In the New Jersey District I was in, the people making over $60,000 had been there for 15+ years.
So where are people supposed to live? We can either build up in the cities or out in the country. Or should we just stop building?
Here is a current example of the problem. There is a 30 acre site in Park Ridge, NJ. It used to be a Sony corp site so it is zoned commercial. Park Ridge has a population of about 8900 in 3400 households over 2.6 sq miles of land (density of 3423/sq mile).
The builder wants to build 900+ units on the 30 acres. That is insane. The builder is using the hammer of building low income housing (10%) in an effort to profit from building too many units in an area that is not equipped to support 900 housing units. The area is right on the border of 2 other towns, including one town with a neighborhood of houses that looks to be zoned 3 or 4 units per acre. If this gets built, the value of their homes would immediately drop.
Trying to increase the housing units in Park Ridge by 900+ units (27%+ increase) on a 30 acre site with no regard to local zoning, roads, schools, water, sewage, mass transit, fire, police is an unconscionable use of the Fair Share directives.
Here is a current example of the problem. There is a 30 acre site in Park Ridge, NJ. It used to be a Sony corp site so it is zoned commercial. Park Ridge has a population of about 8900 in 3400 households over 2.6 sq miles of land (density of 3423/sq mile).
The builder wants to build 900+ units on the 30 acres. That is insane. The builder is using the hammer of building low income housing (10%) in an effort to profit from building too many units in an area that is not equipped to support 900 housing units. The area is right on the border of 2 other towns, including one town with a neighborhood of houses that looks to be zoned 3 or 4 units per acre. If this gets built, the value of their homes would immediately drop.
Trying to increase the housing units in Park Ridge by 900+ units (27%+ increase) on a 30 acre site with no regard to local zoning, roads, schools, water, sewage, mass transit, fire, police is an unconscionable use of the Fair Share directives.
I agree. The fact of the matter is that a good chunk of towns in North jersey are built out. Shoe horning in development just for the sake of it isn’t right. If there is a viable spot for condos/apts, then the affordable housing percentages should be followed. Forcing construction just to get additional affordable housing g in a built out town doesn’t make sense
That is one of the major problems with NJ zoning and town planning. This isn't like NYC where you have centralized services. Each town has to coordinate and finance their own services like schools, snow and sewage. If a builder drops 200 units it has to be zoned correctly or people will complain about traffic and utility service issues such as water pressure problems.
I used to live in Brooklyn and the water pressure keeps dropping because of over building.
NJ needs to start merging towns and upgrade infrastructure before they approve these mega size apt complexes.
Here is a current example of the problem. There is a 30 acre site in Park Ridge, NJ. It used to be a Sony corp site so it is zoned commercial. Park Ridge has a population of about 8900 in 3400 households over 2.6 sq miles of land (density of 3423/sq mile).
The builder wants to build 900+ units on the 30 acres. That is insane. The builder is using the hammer of building low income housing (10%) in an effort to profit from building too many units in an area that is not equipped to support 900 housing units. The area is right on the border of 2 other towns, including one town with a neighborhood of houses that looks to be zoned 3 or 4 units per acre. If this gets built, the value of their homes would immediately drop.
Trying to increase the housing units in Park Ridge by 900+ units (27%+ increase) on a 30 acre site with no regard to local zoning, roads, schools, water, sewage, mass transit, fire, police is an unconscionable use of the Fair Share directives.
Maybe I’ve been living in cities too long, but none of this sounds too bad to me. You’re talking about having a little over 11,000 people in 2.6 sq miles of land. My town has 70,000 people in 1.24 sq miles. I know that’s an extreme example but there are plenty of suburban towns in NJ with much higher population density than what you’re describing and they seem to function just fine.
Why is it more than likely they are married? My niece is a teacher who was married to a man who made $10-15 an hour during their marriage. Now they’re getting divorced and he is asking for alimony. You can’t just assume every teacher with kids has a two income household, or that the second income is over $40,000.
I’ve worked in both schools and healthcare facilities as a therapist. Nurses make more than teachers do. Under a teachers contract a full 50%% of my salary was taken out for various things, union dues, pension, savings for summer (we did not get paychecks in summer) and other things. My salary almost doubled when I went back to healthcare from schools. When I worked for the school district, I always had to have a part-time job that I could do after school, and in the summer too.
Teacher salaries don’t start getting up past $50,000 for multi years. Starting salary is often in $30’s or 40’s. In the New Jersey District I was in, the people making over $60,000 had been there for 15+ years.
I'm sure not every teacher makes a lot but it's better than office jobs that may start in the low $30k and crap benefits. I know people who make $40k as office admins and have to work almost 10 hours a day with no overtime and crap benefits.
But what you are complaining about... Pension and union dues, these are your benefits. Pension is like 401k you get that back when you retire and why are you complaining? Majority of private sector jobs today have no pension. Union dues are optional, you don't have to pay. The supreme court already strike down the law that requires unionize jobs to force other workers to pay union dues.
If you're making $40k and have more than 2 kids. The recent tax changes should give you a lot of money back and you're hardly paying any income taxes. Just your medicare, SS, and other dues.
People that make upwards of $70k has to pay a lot more taxes than you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
