City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC

CourtNew Jersey Tax Court
DecidedMay 13, 2024
Docket008833-2023 008834-2023 008836-2023 008837-2023 008838-2023 008840-2023
StatusUnpublished

This text of City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC (City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC, (N.J. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE TAX COURT COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS

TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY Essex County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Justice Building 495 Martin Luther King Blvd. - Fourth Floor MARY SIOBHAN BRENNAN Newark, New Jersey 07102-0690 JUDGE (609) 815-2922 Ext. 54600 Fax: (973) 424-2424

May 10, 2024

William Maslo, Attorney at Law City of Jersey City Law Department 364 MLK Drive 3rd Floor Jersey City, NJ 07305

James J. Burke, Attorney at Law 86 Hudson Street Hoboken, New Jersey 07030

Re: City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC Docket Nos.: 008833-2023; 008834-2023; 008836-2023; 008837-2023; 008838-2023; 008840-2023 Block 4504, Lot 1, Units C0201, C0202, C0302, C0401, C0402 and C0501

Dear Mr. Maslo and Mr. Burke:

This shall constitute the court’s opinion with respect to plaintiff, City of Jersey City’s

(“Jersey City”), motion for summary judgment, and defendant, Hudson Street Investment, LLC’s

(“Taxpayer”) cross motion for summary judgment. At issue is the requisite procedure to obtain a

five-year property tax exemption for a five story nine (9) unit new construction condominium

project. Jersey City’s position is that a tax agreement must have been applied for and approved by

the Jersey City Municipal Council prior to construction. Taxpayer’s position is that Jersey City’s

controlling ordinance allows condominium owners the right to apply to the Tax Assessor for a

five-year exemption under its definition of “Dwelling” within 30 days after construction is

completed without the need for a preapproved tax agreement. For the reasons stated more fully below, the court finds that a nine unit newly constructed

condominium building constitutes a “Multiple Dwelling.” As such, the Jersey City controlling

ordinance requires that a taxpayer seeking a tax exemption must apply for and receive a tax agreement

from the Jersey City Municipal Council, prior to the commencement of construction.

Accordingly, the court grants Jersey City’s motion, and denies Taxpayer’s cross-motion.

In accordance with R. 1:7-4(a), the court makes the following factual findings based on the

submissions of the parties.

I. Findings of Fact and Procedural History

On September 8, 1999, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40A:21-1 to -21, also known as the Five-Year

Exemption and Abatement Law, Jersey City adopted ordinances to their municipal code to allow

for abatements and exemptions 1 to qualified properties.

On June 18, 2019, Taxpayer purchased vacant land located at 122 New York Avenue,

identified as Block 4504, Lot 1 on Jersey City’s tax map (“Subject Property”). 2 On December 15,

2020, Jersey City issued Construction Permit No. 20202456+A for construction of a new building

at the Subject Property. On June 8, 2022, Taxpayer recorded a Master Deed with the Hudson

1 An “exemption” is when the full value of an improvement is not regarded as increasing a property’s taxable value. See N.J.S.A. 40A:21-3(l). An “abatement” is when part of the property is assessed as it existed before the improvement, which is then exempt from taxation. See N.J.S.A., 40A:21-3(a). Because the Subject Property had been vacant land previously and now has a newly constructed improvement, the application is for exemption and not abatement. 2 Taxpayer’s moving papers contained exhibits purporting to be a July 2020 email exchange between Taxpayer’s counsel and Jersey City’s tax assessor’s office. The documents are incomplete and out of context. To the extent that the purpose is to establish that the tax assessor’s office was clarifying that an exemption/abatement application is to be submitted within thirty (30) days of the completion of a condominium and not from the date of closing, the assessor’s purported response is accurate. The statutorily required application for the exemption is to be filed within thirty (30) days of completion. This is true whether it is a “Dwelling” or a “Multiple Dwelling.” The legal issue in the case is whether the statute and ordinance required an approved tax agreement from the Jersey City Municipal Council prior to construction for an exemption application to be approved.

2 County Register, establishing a five (5) story, nine (9) unit condominium complex at the Subject

Property. On October 7, 2022, Jersey City issued Temporary Certificate of Occupancy No.

2020456+A for the Subject Property, identifying only the block and lot and not the individual

units. 3

On October 14, 2022, Taxpayer completed a E/A-1 Application for Five-Year Exemption

and/or Abatement pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40A:21-1 to -21. The E/A-1 application is a form

prescribed by the Director, Division of Taxation, as required by law. At the top of the form, it

reads: “Applications must be filed with municipal assessors within 30 days (including Saturdays

& Sundays) of completion of construction, improvements, conversion, conversion alteration. Late

applications will be denied.” The reverse side of the form reads as follows:

GENERAL INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. Availability: The Five-Year Exemption and/or Abatement is discretionary on the part of the municipal government. For Exemption/Abatement to apply, there must first be an area in the municipality designated by the local government as “in need of rehabilitation.” Then, there must be an enabling ordinance enacted by the local governing body. The ordinance may identify various rehabilitation areas in the municipality, the types of structures and rehabilitation/redevelopment efforts which may be eligible, as well as the availability of exemption or abatement or both. 2. Filing Deadline: EA-1 Applications must be filed with the municipal assessor within 30 days (including Saturdays & Sundays) of completion of the construction, improvement, conversion, or conversion alteration. Late applications will be denied. No applications can be filed or take effect unless a valid timely ordinance is in force. Completion means substantially ready for the intended use for which a building/structure is constructed, improved, or converted.

3 Although discussed at oral argument, the issue of whether the 30 day time frame begins upon the issuance of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy, or the Final Certificate of Occupancy is irrelevant for purpose of this motion.

3 3. Terms Defined per N.J.S.A. 40A:21-3: Abatement—that portion of a property’s assessed value as it existed prior to construction, improvement, conversion of a tax exempted building/structure thereon. Exemption—that portion of an assessor’s full and true value of any construction, improvement or conversion alteration not increasing the property’s taxable value. Construction—providing new dwellings, multiple dwellings or commercial/industrial structures. Or enlarging existing multiple dwellings or commercial/industrial structures by more than 30% but not changing the existing use. Conversion/Conversion Alteration—altering or renovating a nonresidential building, structure, hotel, motel, motor hotel, or guesthouse to convert it from its previous use to a dwelling/multiple dwelling. Improvement—modernizing, rehabilitating, renovating, altering, repairing which produces a physical change in an existing building or structure…. but does not change its permitted use. It does not include repairs for fire or other property damage for which insurance payments were received within three years of applying for the Five- Year Exemption/ Abatement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Princeton University Press v. Borough of Princeton
172 A.2d 420 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1961)
Brill v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America
666 A.2d 146 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1995)
Rossi v. Upper Pittsgrove Township
12 N.J. Tax 235 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1992)
Fields v. Trustees of Princeton University
28 N.J. Tax 574 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2015)
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. City of Perth Amboy
9 N.J. Tax 571 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
City of Jersey City v. Hudson Street Investment, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-jersey-city-v-hudson-street-investment-llc-njtaxct-2024.