| Author |
Message |
    
Malone
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 10:27 am: |     |
This may be a completely stupid question, so excuse me in advance. But, I am a little confused on how this revaluation effects the rate of taxes we pay to the county. Isn't a goodly portion of our property taxes going to the county now? |
Nilmiester
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 10:49 am: | |
It is only around 10%, I think. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 10:57 am: | |
10% of what?
BTW, I don't have it in front of me, but doesn't our tax statement from the town show how the tax is apportioned? |
Malone
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 12:27 pm: | |
If its 10%, 20%, whatever. Does the amount that we pay to the county proportionately change due to our higher valuations? Since the town, in the aggregate, has a higher valuation, does the town pay a proportionately higher share of the total county budget? Or is the town responsible for funding a certain amount which is fixed, only to be spit among our home owners based on the new valuations? |
Mfpark
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 1:28 pm: | |
Ditto with Malone's comments.
Should we be trying to force the rest of the county to reval? Will this shift more of the burden to Livingston and Caldwell, where values are even higher than here? I know there is an equalization factor, but how accurate is that for making up the difference? |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 1:34 pm: | |
Mfpark -- maybe you can elaborate on your Livingston/Caldwell statement. I have friends in the Caldwells who pay significantly less taxes than they would a comparable house in Maplewood. What values are you referring to? |
Mfpark
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 2:10 pm: | |
Njjoseph--Please let me know if I am misinformed. I am told that Caldwell has not revaled in years, and so they will be paying much less in taxes for the county, relative to us.
I know for sure that Newark has not been revaled, and I am sure this will impact us too. I am not sure how. |
Karenatha
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 2:23 pm: | |
If there is any truth to the previous suspicions that the reval bumps up our contribution to the county's coffers, then I too support pushing for revals throughout the county. Other communities with higher property values should certainly be paying their fair and current share of the pie. I also wonder why Newark hasn't had a revaluation in (I think I read 40?) years?? |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 2:29 pm: | |
Mark -- I don't know if Caldwell has been revalued in recent years or not. I was just asking you to clarify what 'values' you were referring to so that I could better understand your post.
However, another poster asked how towns are required to pay county tax. Maybe you have some insight on this, based on your education and experience as described in another posting.
One of my friends pays about $6K/year in taxes on a modest 3 bedroom house (1950's split level) that would probably sell for about $300K. However, that $6K in taxes doesn't translate into $6K of taxes for Maplewood, as the towns' populations and cost of services are different. So how do I know what the owner of $300K Maplewood house is paying to the county, and shouldn't the owner of a $300K Caldwell house pay the same to the county? |
Eliz
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 3:03 pm: | |
Perhaps the Caldwells have commercial income which would keep their property taxes low. Therefore while individually they don't pay as much as we do as a town they may. I don't know but just a thought. |
Mfpark
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 4:27 pm: | |
njjoseph and eliz--good points and questions all. I do not have expertise in NJ taxation or values, merely general knowledge of appraisal process. I wonder about these questions also.
If Caldwell does have more commercial property, then that would skew the tax burden. That seems like an inequity based on false borders. For example, Millburn has the Short Hills Mall and the Hilton to pay large taxes, lowering the burden on residential units. But the ability of the mall and hotel to survive and generate taxes is dependent on people who live all around the area--Summit, Chatham, Maplewood, South Orange. All of our dollars support these commercial entities, so why should only Millburn benefit.
I am trying to understand more of these issues because the problem is not really the assessment, which only apportions the tax burden. The problem seems to be the entire tax system that relies on property values so heavily, rather than other means. There are some interesting postings on this topic to day, but I really do not understand the issues in great enough detail. |
|