| Author |
Message |
    
Mtierney
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2001 - 4:40 pm: |     |
Went to the library this morning and my reval numbers haven't changed. If the hill folks are getting "adjustments" and the eastenders getting reductions, can anyone confirm how the middle is going to cope with the same assessments and the tax rate of perhaps 2.75% or higher? Does anyone out there care about us? Love to hear from you. |
Overtaxdalready
| | Posted on Friday, January 26, 2001 - 4:48 pm: | |
Mtierney, the best thing for you to do is get a copy of your property's data card and make sure it's accurate. We got a copy of ours and found a couple of flaws that resulted in an overstatement in our square footage. If you find similar problems, or if you are aware of problems with your property that you feel would result in a lower fair market value, you'll have to follow the process of sending a letter or the assessment form to the Tax Assessor by 2/15. That may result in a reduction to your assessment. After reading some of the other notes you've posted here, however, I have a feeling that you're still going to be socked with a pretty big increase (speaking personally, mine will be over 60%). That's going to mean some difficult soul searching to figure out if this is the town you want to continue to live in (I think we've decided it isn't, and it's not a decision made lightly. We've lived here 15 years). |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Sunday, February 4, 2001 - 3:51 pm: | |
When I entered this thread back on Jan. 26, I though someone from the great, overtaxed middle of Maplewood (definitely EAST of Maplewood Avenue), just might respond. Well, with the exception of Overtaxdalready, there has been none!
May I share my concerns? In 1990, my tax bill was about $7500. This figure grew about $400 each and every year through 2000, ending up at the almost $12G I have waxed so often about on this board. I most certainly FELT that I was paying major tax bucks at that rate. I BELIEVED that the yearly increases for the ever more needy school district were being carried by all of us overtaxed Maplewoodians. I had an idiotic belief that when the reval came to pass, I would see some relief. No, I did not think to appeal by taxes since I thought the system was FAIR!
Now, in one year, my taxes are fated to rise $4000 more! I think this is UNFAIR.
Don't tell me as someone on another thread wrote that it's "life," - that line of thinking sounds like social engineering at its lowest point!
The reval was flawed. Some got bandaids. The middle got nothing but higher taxes. All of Maplewood will lose. We need to postpone this reval and watch the market as our neighbor Millburn has wisely chosen to do. |
Lseltzer
| | Posted on Sunday, February 4, 2001 - 4:14 pm: | |
MTierney,
>>The middle got nothing but higher taxes.
Looking at the spreadsheet I must disagree. There are lots of tax increased in the middle of town (Park Ave, Oakland, Prospect, etc.; is this what you mean by middle?), but there are lots of decreases too.
As for your annual $400 increases, I don't remember things this way from my own bills. I wonder why yours are different. |
Joancrystal
| | Posted on Sunday, February 4, 2001 - 5:09 pm: | |
The way in which tax adjustments were handled in the "Middle of Town" is very confusing. My block (27.01, if you want to check the data base) was placed in three different neighborhoods! There is a difference of more than $50,000 in land value between the property on one side of mine and the property on the other. Guess which rate my property was assessed at? Does this make sense to anyone? Why so many neighborhoods in so small a town (3.5 sq miles)? Who came up with the neighborhoods anyway and how were their land values determined?
Note: mine was not the only block this happened to. Check the data base! |
Overtaxdalready
| | Posted on Sunday, February 4, 2001 - 7:36 pm: | |
$300 to $400 annual increases in the past seem about right. |
Lseltzer
| | Posted on Sunday, February 4, 2001 - 8:13 pm: | |
On second thought, 300-400/year does sound about right. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Monday, February 5, 2001 - 11:16 am: | |
Mtierney, I'm a frequent poster, and consider myself living in middle Maplewood (between Prospect and Springfield). My taxes are going up a few hundred dollars. My valuation is similar to my recent purchase (Aug, 2000). And I think it's fair. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Monday, February 5, 2001 - 11:17 am: | |
Joancrystal -- did I miss something? I didn't see land values in the database. Maybe there's a newer version I didn't get yet? |
Lseltzer
| | Posted on Monday, February 5, 2001 - 3:48 pm: | |
Njjoseph: Land values aren't in the database. She must have been looking at property record cards. |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Monday, February 5, 2001 - 6:05 pm: | |
I don't think anyone has truly defined "middle." But if you look at a town map, the railroad creates one delineation (othere side of the tracks), so I have viewed the middle as east of Maplewood Avenue, and from Parker to Tuscan, and perhaps up to Maplecrest Park. Oh, happy day, I am attending a middletowners meeting tonight (snow won't halt it) and for the first time we will try to get our heads together. Not too many folks seemed to respond online to my constant harping over the fact that my taxes went from $7500 in 1990 to $12,000 by 2000, with another $4000 hike coming with this reval. It has slowly dawned on me and several of my neighbors that the middle has been carrying the load for a number of years now. I'll report tomorrow. |
Joancrystal
| | Posted on Monday, February 5, 2001 - 6:58 pm: | |
You're right. The on-line database doesn't give land values. The computer run at the libraries and town hall does have this information. It breaks the assessed value of each property down by land value and improvement value. It wasn't until I saw these figures that I discovered why my revaluation was so high. A quarter acre property across the street from me (which is in the lower priced neighborhood) has a land value of $170,800. My property, which is of similar size, has a land value of $227,000. Thus the difference in neighborhood land values. These neighborhood differences can seriously affect your final assessment. Do the math. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 9:11 am: | |
Joancrystal -- you've actually proved a lot of points here: it's all about location. Individual houses all across Maplewood are probably being assessed based on the same, tangible, consistent methods. The differences are in the land. |
Melidere
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 9:22 am: | |
joan,
just wondering...is the lot across the street from you districted for the same school?
all lines are drawn somewhere. |
Njjoseph
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 9:51 am: | |
It's amazing how lines are drawn in this town: my VCS is different from my neighbors across the street, but those on my side are in the same VCS as I am. It can get confusing when you compare houses on the street vs. houses in your neighborhood (i.e. streets behind you).
Although not quite the same:
For trash pickup, those on my side are on one day, but those across the street another.
For recycling, I'm on the same schedule as my neighbors across the street and to the right, but different from my neighbors on the left. |
Johnt
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 11:46 am: | |
In the board "More Sales Data" (which was data which I'm all for), it appears that west of Maplewood Avenue is the diving line between zones. In the posts here, I see someone refer to east of Maplewood Avenue as dividing the "middle" of town. As someone who lives on Maplewood Avenue, we really appear caught in the middle. With the across the board reductions is some areas, our taxes may only go up 30% as opposed to 40 or 50%. Does anyone know if there was consideration given in land values to traffic? We have noise of train behind us, commuters parking in front of us making it dangerous to get out of driveway. Cars racing down Maplewood venue at nights and on weekends. Do communters pay for all day parking permits and what do they cost? It seems there was just a general land value reduction and not a thoughtful one that adresses these considerations? One question, are these considerations valid based on other property tax experience in other communities in NJ? |
Joancrystal
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 6:47 pm: | |
Melidere:
Both blocks are in the Tuscan School District but I believe they may be in different Assembly Districts. I know that the Election Districts are different. |
|