I have to admit, that really didn't understand what the fuss over Bayonne PA deal was about -- until I read this next article. (H/T to rexxnyc for putting the illuminating link on my radar screen.)
Basically, the Port Authority (PA) was like a that fabled "Rich Uncle" who would bail you out of a jam, by floating you a loan. Without ever really ever expecting repayment from you ... I guess in New Jersey he really does exist -- that benefactor with very deep pockets.
Port Authority Land Purchase Is Boon to Bayonne, and Christie
by Russ Buettner, NYTimes.com -- June 8, 2014
When the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey announced in June 2010 that it had purchased a 131-acre tract of land on the waterfront in the city of Bayonne for $235 million, the deal seemed like an auspicious one for the agency.
[...]
A takeover could have forced the state to pour millions into Bayonne to stabilize it. That would have been problematic for Mr. Christie, who was confronting a huge deficit in New Jersey’s budget, while trying to keep a campaign promise to not raise taxes. The Port Authority’s purchase of the land, orchestrated by Bill Baroni, Mr. Christie’s top staff appointee at the agency at the time, spared Mr. Christie from having to confront this dilemma [to take over the city’s finances, on verge of bankruptcy]. The agency wound up spending far more for the land than an independent appraisal showed it was worth.
[...]
And 4 years later, that $235 million charity purchase of the once-Bayonne water-front land,
remains fallow ...
undeveloped with an unknown future. The New Jersey city Bayonne got bailed out by the purchase -- sparing the New Jersey Governor the embarrassment of "having to raise taxes on his watch."
But not sparing the citizens of NY-NJ -- who fund the Port Authority with their fares, fees, and taxes -- from having to bear the brunt of buying this $235 million "public asset" ... in waiting.
Here's another case of this "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" shell game that leveraged the "deep pockets" of the Port Authority (and their rate-payers) -- to protect the sterling Tax-hawk reputation of Christie, as he was angling to grab that top perch into the up-coming GOP Presidential Primaries.
Different public project; same private reputation-boosting result ...
[continuing from previous link ...]
A closer parallel to Bayonne might have been when Mr. Christie canceled construction of a commuter railroad tunnel under the Hudson River, and his Port Authority appointees channeled the $1.8 billion the agency planned to spend on it toward the repair of crumbling New Jersey bridges that have historically been the responsibility of the state. That let Mr. Christie avoid raising his state’s low gas tax to pay for the work.
[...]
Why raise
your State's Taxes -- and
put THAT on your Political Resume -- when you can cancel a much needed Port Authority commuter project,
and divert those funds to meet your own interior infrastructure needs?
Long as No New public services are created, and NO NEW Taxes were used to fund them -- then you'd still be A-OKay in GOP land: "Mr Tough on Taxes."
Long as you have a "Rich Uncle" benefactor ready to juggle some multi-million dollar funds, it's a Win-Win ... for the politically-connected and for the real-estate-connected.
back2theroot.com
But perhaps the citizens of New Jersey may not be so OK with what their ever-rising commuter fees have really been going to pay for?
Especially when they find out it's been a Lose-Lose for them. An increase in Commuter Fees, accompanied by a decrease in Commuter Services.
What a Deal! ... for someone, once on the fast-track to "No New Taxes" GOP-land.