| Author |
Message |
    
Jur050
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 3:15 pm: |     |
Please post your suggestions of how a compromise might be worked out to prevent further stress form impacting our community. What actions might be considered by the TC to work this situation out? |
Wilbur
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 3:30 pm: | |
This might sound silly, but what about "curbs" on the percentages of increase or decrease, much like the stock market has curbs on the amount it can fall in one day before trading stops? The stock market's curbs are designed to slow down trading and prevent a crash similar to that of 1987. Could we implement some analogous type of curb that essentially slows down (phases in) any tax increase (or decrease, to be fair) of a certain percentage or more -- say, 20 percent? I don't know if this is legal, but it's just an idea. |
Citizen
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 4:42 pm: | |
Although I favor throwing out the current reval overall due to a number of factors, I believe Mr. Ryan hinted generally at an interesting alternative remedy focused on incrementally phasing in any tax increase.
Carrying his thought further, and notwithstanding legality and funding mechanisms existing to support it, for those whose taxes are increasing by -- for the sake of argument more than 35% -- a proratable portion of the increase could be apportioned annually to one's tax bill say over a three-year period. Twelve-month reviews of the phase-in could be conducted to determine whether the increase continues to be valid based on ongoing housing sales and general economic conditions. The converse can be conducted for those whose taxes decreased by a certain percentage. Annual curbs would have to be established, however, to ensure protection against crashing economic conditions.
The benefits include lower initial cash-flow hit to homeowners and less of a negative effect on the marketability of homes -- good for folks like me who most likely will be moving out of Maplewood because of this debacle. This will give homeowners time to assess their own situations and perhaps meter the eventual flight of young families who stretched to live in Maplewood and those living on fixed incomes.
It needs refining by many others, but it presents an interesting opportunity to soften the situation. |
Pcg
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 4:54 pm: | |
How about leaving taxes exactly as they are? |
Musicme
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 5:12 pm: | |
Pcg
Unfortunatly, I believe the town is in a $4mil hole right now.
Raise taxes and cut services. Let's see at the meeting tomorrow. |
Citizen
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 5:17 pm: | |
Musicme...
I am very interested in learning more about where budget shortfalls may exist, and why. Could you provide any additional information?
Thanks. |
Nakaille
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 6:33 pm: | |
Pcg - if we leave things as they stand now, those of us who have been paying more than our share will simply continue to do so. NOT A VIABLE OPTION. Over the past 9 years I've paid approximately $10,000 more than I should have. I think I have a right to stop doing so now that this has been exposed.
After all, I'm never going to recoup my lost revenues/investments/interest on that money or even get a fraction of the principle back.
We need suggestions that take into account the fact that some of us have overpaid over many years. This is not all one-sided, people. Please try to remember that.
Bacata |
Thomas
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 6:33 pm: | |
How about getting acurate appraisals out of Certified. values are out of wack. DaLuca's House is assessed at 130K? come on! What can you buy in the Hilton section for 130K. It pays to be Mayor.
There is no rime or reason for the Certified Values. Don't pay them. |
Overtaxdalready
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 6:59 pm: | |
Citizen, I'm thinking along the same lines as you. The thought of an 80% tax hike, even phased in over a couple of years, is too much to bear. And you know it won't stop there. There will be general level increases in taxes for ALL to pay as more kids get put into the public school system since parents will no longer be able to afford private, and as new tax appeals come through because of depressed market values due to these asinine valuations. We've lived in Maplewood for 14 plus years, but I think the time has come to bid farewell. |
Buddy
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 7:21 pm: | |
Nakaille:
If the assessments were based on current market value, how can you claim that you were overpaying for NINE years? Was a similar assessment performed in 1991,92,93...? (NO)
The recent market boom which has resulted in faster price appreciation on the "west side" (supposedly) does not necessarily mean that it has held true for x years.
Also, as a person formerly on the "east side", I can tell you that my home nearly doubled in price from 1989. My taxes did not. So was I underpaying? |
Bak
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 8:41 pm: | |
Take Wilbur and Citizen's plans, shuffle them together, have the details worked out by a committee other than the town council and present it to the town. |
Mlj
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 8:44 pm: | |
Back to the original post - I think any and all forms of compromise should be listened to with an open mind. Unfortunately, some good ideas may not be acceptable under the law.
As to the future, instead of waiting 20 years and then playing catch-up by hiring an independent contractor to the tune of close to $400,000 to produce a revaluation in which many of the residents have no confidence... perhaps the town tax assessor should be a full time position responsible for ongoing adjustments to assessments based on real estate sales. |
Jur050
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 9:43 pm: | |
My thanks to some of you. The others, oh well, they aren't interested in helping to find a solution, they like to inflict more damage. Our community needs leadership on this issue. Let's help our "Proven Leaders," by providing them with viable solutions to the reval issue that confronts our town.
So far a few good ideas, but let's not stop Keep those ideas, however crazy they might seem coming! |
Dave
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:16 pm: | |
Jur050,
I think that the remedy lies in how the revals were calculated. According to Jerry Ryan Certified used a 3 year average for fair market value, *with special weight given to 2000 market values*. My response would be, what was that special weight and why? If you have such a small window of data (3 yrs.) why would you have to weight the last year's data? In fact, to keep things fair and stable, why not have revals take a 5- or 7-year moving average of home values based on sales price???
Dave |
Papa
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:24 pm: | |
I think cirtified should not be paid, thay have come up with a plan that is insidious...... |
Dave
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:27 pm: | |
Most likely Certified followed their models correctly. However, how could they predict tomorrow's news:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/16/nyregion/16RENT.html
The real estate market did peak and we're about to have a change. It was the wrong time for a reval.
Dave
Bringing you tomorrow's news today |
Lseltzer
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:45 pm: | |
Dave,
That story is about Manhattan. Maybe we have peaked, but Manhattan is it's own market and what happens there could easily be unrelated to what happens here. |
Kap
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:46 pm: | |
"Wrong", Dave? I don't think so. As you imply, noone has a crystal ball. Not the best time in light of the market? More accurate a statement, I believe. |
Dave
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:50 pm: | |
Lseltzer: You are correct. However, I think we're somehow tied into the same market forces as nyc.
Kap: I agree with your correction. Thanks. |
Gerardryan
| | Posted on Monday, January 15, 2001 - 10:54 pm: | |
Yes but that article says something interesting:
"In the commuter neighborhoods of New Jersey, rents may be even cheaper. While prices may be starting to stabilize in these outlying areas, they have not started to drop, brokers say."
This statement conflicts with assertions made on this board and in other fora. All this shows is that nobody can predict the future. |
|