| Author | Message | ||
     John |
FACTS - - Most people whose property taxes will be going down have been overpaying for years. - Anyone getting an increase (especially over 30%) is going to feel the pain. - No one should exposed to such increases in taxes. - No one should be expected to continue to make up the difference for someone else. - Taxes have gotten out of hand. So I ask - - If you are getting an increase what do you think is fair to those who have been overpaying for years? - If you are getting a decrease, what do you think can be done to relieve the burden on those that will see a drastic jump? What you want now may come back to haunt you. GIVE AND TAKE | ||
| Dave23 |
I don't have a magical answer, but I know doing reval in the middle of one of the hottest, most overvalued markets is not the answer. Maybe we could base the rate on home sales of each neighborhood over the 3 (I'm just grabbing a number) years or something. I have no idea if this has any basis in law, however. And maybe we can phase in large hikes (greater than 20%?) over a certain number of years. In the long run this would be fair, but in the short term it would be unfair to people overtaxed. Maybe Trenton can actually help fill in the gaps somehow. | ||
| John |
Sorry, the third fact should read - No one should be exposed to such increases in taxes. Thanks Dave23. Lets all try to keep this thread for suggestions only and not complaints or criticisms. I hope we can get as many ideas on here as possible since we know Mr. Ryan and Mr. DeLuca read this board. Maybe all the township committee members will read the posts and be aided in the decision-making process | ||
| Tom |
I suggested on another thread, and Jerry Ryan seems to see merit in it based on what he wrote in still another thread, that increases be phased in. They should be phased in in conjunction with annual revals, so that the market impact of the higher tax rates can be taken into account. | ||
| Dave23 |
Unfortunately, yesterday Trenton rejected the idea that Maplewood phase the increases in based on the 1993 law that's on the books but has never been used. Strike one. | ||
| John |
I think the state also mandates a reassessment every 10 yrs. and, in lieu of THEIR FAILURE to enforce that, we may be able to work this problem out as we please. So, here is a thought· If the increases are phased in, the burden in those facing a jump will be less. But knowing that taxes are going up in that area, property values will decrease slightly. The burden on those whose taxes should go down will still be there, but gradually subside. The values of their houses should go up with the anticipation of a lower tax burden. Since the majority of houses that will carry the burden are in the Hilton area (is that right?) spend a higher proportion of taxes in that area to bring it up. Another plus to alleviate the feeling of "why should I pay". This will further bring up values in that area. By the time the next reassessment comes around, hopefully, the result will be that the Hilton area is underpaying, gets to gradually increase their taxes, can afford to see less spending of funds in their area, and enjoy the jump in property values. To the Township Committee I say no matter what you decide to do, the total tax burden on Maplewood residents is getting to (or probably at) the top of the curve. I have heard you state that there are two ways to resolve a budget. Bring in Business or raise Property taxes. I would suggest there is a third, tell the county and the schools we can no longer support their spending. Property owners are telling you this because you are our elected officials. You are our representation in these arenas. Go back to the top and tell the schools and the county to figure out a way to change things. The schools may then have to go back and say - "we can't support what you require us to do" - but maybe they can get that changed. The county may go back and tell the state what is happening and· ·maybe change will come. WE WANT OUR TOTAL TAX BURDEN DECREASED, NOT SHIFTED!!!! When the total tax burden is decreased, the Township as a whole will see relative property values go up. In the long run the distribution of the burden will be less important (and hopefully equal). | ||
| Deadwhitemale |
Damn the State torpedoes! What can they do, disown us -- not a bad idea. DWM | ||
| Corvair |
I like picking up an old thread.... * The only way we'll maintain quality of life in Maplewood AND reduce taxes is to increase ratables. * The only way we can increase ratables is to develop Springfield Avenue. * Proper tax assessments on the east side of town will increase those values, stabilizing neighborhoods, and improving the attractiveness of Springfield Ave to businesses. Reduce taxes? Increase ratables! Valuations based on the high market of 2000 are a lot better than those based on the market of 1981. High or low, it's the relativity that counts. The updated valuation corrects the awful relativity from 1981. | ||
| Bobk |
Corvair: Revitalizing Springfield Avenue is probably a dream. In another thread someone talked about Starbucks and Richard Roberts moving to that main street. If something is going to be done along Springfield some out of the box thinking is needed. Urban renewal? This is a little like the development of the old Olympic Park site into an industrial park. It just didn't increase rateables enough to make any difference. We would have been better off building ball fields. I agree that the 1981 reval was unfair. Even at that time the relative values of various sections of town were out of line with the assessments. When I questioned the reval at that time the Assessor made no bones that neighborhood wasn't the main criteria for the assessments since "everyone enjoys the same services". There is a thread of truth in that as well. | ||
| Melidere |
i bought my house in 82 within a few grand of the assessment. I just don't believe that is true. What affects the relative value of houses in the two areas? It is the perception of 1.safety 2.schools Big steps have been taken in the last decade on both these fronts. The people who claim the gates were only put in to discourage speeders could well be right about intent, but the effect of those gates was a dramatic decrease in the number of stolen cars, and consequently a dramatic decrease in the number of 'car-stealers' walking around our neighborhoods. It has also dramatically reduced the number of petty thefts. In the late eighties EVERY single one of four houses (three touching my lot and mine) adjacent to me were robbed. Nothing really important, but i was ready to move out of fear. It's horrible to think that filthy hands have been combing through your dressers. I haven't heard of a robbery in so long i can't remember. We need to extend some of that creative thinking eastward to the other side of springfield avenue. I have no idea when we instituted walk-around cops in the village, but we could use a few on springfield. The PERCEPTION of safety may be more important than the reality. The reality is that i've shopped springfield day and night for 2 decades without fear. 2. Schools. The perception for an extended period was that seth boyden was getting the short end of the stick. The current boe has taken aggressive steps to turn that around. The same steps need to be applied to Clinton school and to South Orange Middle School. A revitalized Springfield avenue, perceived as safe, would be a huge value-added to this town. The avenue has printers, and a post office, and tire places, and a great italian deli and a florist and a wide variety of good services that many of the people in this town travel a long way and pay more for. We need to encourage, guide, invite and welcome the people of this town to utilize their services within our own borders by providing the physically attractive, safe environment that we enjoy throughout the rest of this town. And that will make a big difference in ratables. That's the carrot. If we don't do it...this town is too small to withstand the economic shock of abandoning such a large portion of our tax base. Witness the current tax war. That's the stick. There are those on this board who have wondered why some people are so sure that the imbalance in our tax base goes back further than the last three years. Those people are the people who witnessed the 87 bubble. Houses soared on the west side during that bubble, and tho they went up in the east, the imbalance was created then. It wasn't the perception of crime that created the discrepency, it was the reality of crime. One neighbor of mine had two cars stolen in the space of 6 months, out of his driveway, and one of them was stolen on thanksgiving day. We had that nutcase spraying racial epithets on houses all over the 'middle' area from prospect to boyden for what seemed like eternity before he was caught. That seriously created a very real fear in many people's minds, wondering who it was stalking their neighborhoods with such hate in his heart. LOTS of people moved from east to west during that period and they pushed up prices on the west side as they moved to SMALLER homes for MORE money. The reality is that we've made great strides on the safety issues, but we need to work harder on the aesthetics. We all look for cues in our environment, and right now the 'look and feel' of springfield avenue isn't passing the test. The reality is that we have gained valuable experience in what works as witnessed by our downtown village area. The times compared the thriving business district of downtown maplewood very favorable to milburn. Milburn has mid-town direct, so what's up with that? | ||
| Aruba18 |
JERRY AND MAYOR DELUCA, Just thought I would bring you up to speed on what we are being told now in the tax assessor's office; I stopped by there today, only to find out that, of course, Mr. Galante wasn't in. I spoke to one of the secretaries, Pat,and asked if I could make an appointment with Mr.Galante. The answer was NO, he is too busy. So what are the other three or four assessors doing? Well, it seems that they are also doing the work here part-time, so they are strictly looking at the requests for assessment reviews.She did mention that Mr.Galante will be in his office on Wed.from 4-7pm, but if anyone gets to speak with him (which she said is highly unlikely),it will be for just a moment and he will not give you an answer as to whether or not your assessment will change. We have to wait until around March 1st to receive the bad news in the mail.Then,at that point,if we still disagree with the assessment,we have until April 15th to file an appeal with the Essex County Tax Board. I do not feel that it is fair to continue to overtax certain resident's homes that have been that way for years, but it is also grossly unfair to now overtax others to make up for it. It's not as though we haven't been paying our fair share all along (our taxes in 2000 were $13,153.14, which isn't exactly low), and with the reval we are scheduled to pay an increase of OVER 50%!!!!! I don't think that those who paid more than they should have are getting a 50% decrease! Jerry-you mentioned in another thread that my home had gone from being the third highest on our street in assessment to now being the highest. How did we get this dubious honor? We didn't do anything, other than some interior redecorating and a new paint job on the exterior in the past few years,so I can't imagine what bumped us up. Do you have any idea? Thanks. | ||
| Nilmiester |
Melidere: I am pro-Springfield Avenue but how do you see that increasing ratables? They are what they are, whether vacant or rented. Are you advocating more buildings or that in the next reval their taxes will increase? | ||
| Melidere |
If you can make more money there you will pay more in rent. If landlords can get more in rent, they will pay more for the buildings. rents on maplewood avenue are sky-high. Why? Because there is business. Take a look at the taxes on maplewood avenue's commercial properties. They are up, too. | ||
| Nilmiester |
There is rent control in Maplewood and if a landlord sells his building for a big profit, that does nothing for our tax base. The taxes are what the taxes are, regardless. | ||
| Melidere |
I'm looking at the ordinance and i don't see a word about commercial property. It's about "Housing Space in Multiple Dwellings" and it defines "housing space" as "the portion of a building rented or offered for rent for the home, residence or sleeping place of an individual or family..." If he sells his building for a big profit, then the building gets assessed at a higher value and we tax it higher. What is so complicated about this? What do you think happened to the 5&10? They just didn't like it here anymore? | ||
| Melidere |
We've put a lot of effort into the village and the total assessed value of all the commercial properties in the village was somewhere around 20 million. The total assessed value of all the properties on springfield avenue (at these depressed prices, and most of them were adjust UPWARD from 2000 sales) was 44 million. It doesn't take a very big increase in the value of that property to make a big increase in their pro-rata tax contribution. That's not even including the increased value in surrounding housing. They are taxed on the value of their property just like all the rest of us. Investing in springfield avenue isn't something we need to do cuz it's NICE...if land value is where the money is, the land is on springfield. | ||
| Nilmiester |
How often do these buildings get "assessed"? Five and Dime couldn't or didn't want to pay the rent increase. | ||
| Gerardryan |
Aruba: how often do I need to say that I am not an assessor? All I posted was facts that you (and anyone else) could have gotten off the spreadsheet. I raised the 3rd-to-1st point because of this: if your house doesn't belong in the top 5 assessments on your street after reval, then it didn't belong in the top 5 assessments before reval. It seems to me that if your reval appraisal is wrong, then your pre-reval appraisal was also wrong. Your own personal taxes stick out like a sore thumb when compared to your neighbors. $2-3K more than everyone around you. Did you ever appeal under the old assessment? Or is your house a whole lot bigger than everyone's around you? It is interesting to note that the sale price for your house back in 1998 was the lowest sale on the street from 1994-2000 inclusive. It looks to me like you got your house at an excellent price that was grossly below the market for the block: a house across the street and up a bit from you sold for over 120K more than yours did just one month later in 1998. By the way, did you get your property record card from town hall when you visited? Did you check the data and were they correct? I understand that you talked to people at the counter. Did you fill out the form asking for your assessment to be reviewed? Jerry Ryan | ||
| Melidere |
Nil, i think maybe the miscommunication between us is that you are relying on the data that jerry has posted here and not looking at the actual database. All the commercial properties are being valued and assessed at the same time as the residential properties. I presume, that for brevity's sake, and since this board has mostly been discussing residential assessments, jerry only posted the residential numbers. You actually pointed out a $1.6 million discrepancy in the totals, and that was explained by the commercial valuations. In some ways, it's misleading to talk about one without the other since commercial properties are where a lot of the money is. Our commercial properties are largely on Boyden (way down) Springfield (way down) Irvington Avenue (way down) and Maplewood Avenue (moderately up). | ||
| Nilmiester |
Melidere- My point is that if Springfield Avenue businesses get a tax reduction, which I think 50% are, and we re-vitilize the avenue and it is successful, it will take another 10 years to do another reval (and don't hold your breath) and increase the taxes there. You may be looking at the long term approach? |
