| Author | Message | ||
     Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 7 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro,a re-assessment or re-evaluation is classified as neutral in pure tax terms because the total value of all properties in a town rises, rather than an individual property, say for an assessed improvement made by the homeowner. It is not "neutral" in effect unless the town can bring in the tax rate at a point where it, taken with the assessed value, is equal to, or less than your current taxes. Your assessment is higher but the tax rate is sufficiently lower. Very hard to do today, given increased operating costs and municipal employees entitlements. Some areas in South Orange also may have been assessed or valued too low in the past (Montrose?) so that the act of reval by itself can bring your taxes up, even if it is viewed as tax neutral ( yes, some other properties will go down in value). All you need to do is look at MSH and Maplewood as examples. Taxes went up with reval and so far they are not going down. Maplewood seems to be in no rush for a re-assessment, and MSH has put one off until 2007 due to the Short Hills Mall tax appeal fiasco. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2927 Registered: 5-2004  |
This is New Jersey. Taxes don't go down. It is not the reval that made the taxes go up. It is the increase in the budget. A reval, by definition, does not increase the amount of taxes brought in. Politicians taking advantage of the timing to increaes a budget is what causes taxes to go up when a reval is done. The reval itself has no direct effect on total taxes collected. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 9 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro, the real issue is how much properties in South Orange have appreciated. The tax rate X assessment = actual taxes paid. The tax rate should decrease after a reval or re-assessment, due to appreciation in property value reflected by a new assessment. For example in Millburn the tax rate is now at 2.06, if re-assessed it could come in at say 1.30. Say a property was previously assessed at $450,000 so the taxes at 2.06 are $ 9,270 a year. Given comparable sales it is now re-assessed for $725,00, at a new rate of 1.30 .The new taxes are $ 9,425, or $155 more a year. Don't kid yourself, revals and re-assessments do increase the amount of taxes brought in, otherwise towns would not do them. Look how Newark had to be sued in order to do a new reval. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2930 Registered: 5-2004 |
But you are using arbitrary numbers. I could come up with some numbers as well... Let's say the town has a municipal rate of 1.75%. And let's say the total value of all (taxable) property in South Orange is $1 billion. That puts the budget at around $17,500,000. Now let's say that your house is assessed at $300k. Your municipal taxes should be around $5,250. But in reality, it is worth $750k. Now lets say that the value of all (taxable) property in the town increased to 2.5 billion during the same time period. With a budget (from taxes) of $17.5 million, that would put the new municipal rate at 0.7%. And your taxes would be $750k x 0.7% = $5,250. So your taxes will only increase if your house appreciated more than the average house in town. And your taxes will go down if it has appreciated less than the average house in town. The reason people fight a reval is because of two main things. One, they are afraid. Everything thinks their taxes will go up. And two, revals cost money. And the longer you wait, the more expensive they can be. Spitz has often explained the reval process in Monmouth county, and how they do revals much more frequently, with much less drama than here in Essex county. By your own logic, if a reval brought more money into the town, various town administrations would be doing everything they could to do revals. After all, it would increase their revenue. The fallacy in your logic is that it assumes the budget is derived from the rate times the assessed value. When in fact, the rate is derived from the budget divided by the assessed values. Or more succinctly, it is not that B = R x A, but that R = B / A Where B = town budget, R = tax rate, and A = assessed values. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2931 Registered: 5-2004 |
And as to why towns do revals, the cynical answer is becausee the law says they have to. But hte reason they are mandated is maintain an "equitable" tax system. If taxes are based on the value of real estate, then it is only equitable to preiodically adjust the assessments as certain property values increase or decrease. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 15 Registered: 4-2006 |
Nope, no fallacy. I considered and agree with much you are saying, we are just approaching it from different points. Of course the tax rate comes from the budget, where else would it come from? My example figures factored in prospective budget increases here of which you are probably unaware (in an ideal world you could perhaps half the old rate upon re-val). You have to factor in municipal, school, and county taxes and specifically required/desired expenditures. There are examples of even where a town budget has had zero growth specific property taxes go up with a reval. Yes we do have state laws regarding municipal valuation of property. Many towns don't re-assess or re-val or delay them due to political considerations and the fact that they recognize it generally results in increased taxes to residents. It can be a chicken and the egg argument that towns do it because they need/want to increase their budgets or have to spend for certain items. However if you might survey town revals in New Jersey over the years you may find that upon reval, property taxes rose. Your premise that re-eval is basically tax benign is in effect, in error, although you are correct in assuming it is tax neutral in the general sense of all property values rising via newly determined appreciation. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2933 Registered: 5-2004 |
FvF, please explain the specific increases in a budget that are directly related to a reval (other than the cost of the reval itself), as opposed to the normal tax increases that we see every year. You are implying that performing a reval will inherently raise taxes. Your example was fallacious. You chose a random change in the rate, as opposed to basing it on the change in the budget. So if there is some specific budget increase that will take place because of a reval, please explain it. No more innuendo, no more hinting at it. What specifically about the reval will make our taxes go up? Property taxes rise because it's stupid way to pay for school systems. Property taxes rise because no one wants to give up home rule or share meaningful services. So all government entities increase their budgets every year. But you are saying that there is something inherent in a reval. Explain what it is. Anecdotes are meaningless. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3977 Registered: 5-2001  |
I watched in amazement today as a huge truck came down South Orange Avenue, backed into the street next to Bunny's and then went into the Beifus lot by going around the Gaslight that is directly in front of the entrance. This is simply an accident waiting to happen. Who is responsibile for moving the Gaslight in front of the entrance? | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 246 Registered: 5-2005 |
I saw similar to this happen a while back (It was a Monday, either last week or the week before). it was about 1pm. I went into the Village Hall and reported it happened. They said it was totally wrong, took all the details, made me fill in a form and said they would follow it up.... I tried to do the right thing - either the town acted and have been ignored, or my complaint/observation was.... I know which one I think it was. | ||
| Two Senses Citizen Username: Twosense Post Number: 443 Registered: 7-2004 |
It looks like Beifus located his sidewalk bridge underpass directly BEHIND a street light, placing his truck entrance to the right of the curb cut that aligns with Trenchard Place. He's also cut down a mature shade tree along the curb. Drum roll, please. Right now masons are installing curbing for parking at the rear (northeast corner) of the property, adjacent to the town pool and NJ Transit embankment. Hardly the momentous start re-re-re-re-re-promised a year ago. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 617 Registered: 6-2005 |
Did anyone notice how annoyed Calabrese got at Rosen at Monday's BOT meeting for asking when the real project construction would begin at the Beifus site, not just the earth moving being done at the pool facing side of the lot? I would like to know how Calabrese can even be discussing the Beifus project? Hasn't he recused himself at times in the past for his "conflict?" So what is this? He discusses when he feels like it. Recuses when he feels like it? Clearly he has something going with Saiyd, since he left for that part of the discussion. But he has denied involvement with Saiyd at times in the past. Its time for him to come clean. Actually, its far past the time. | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 249 Registered: 5-2005 |
He is never going to come clean. Scratch that, he will only come clean when he is no longer VP, will let a "respectful" length of time pass and then say that "things went incredibly quickly after I was no longer VP" and that he is now in partnership with XYZ... It will amaze all and sundry that things "can go quickly" for him when it suits... In the meantime he is happy living in a hole along with the rest of us. The difference is, it suits him. Yes, I saw what you are referring to jayjay... it seems recusing himself on some things and not on others is a "perk' of the job. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 55 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro, I have explained quite clearly, you don't get it. You are obsessing over the "budget" part of the equation. A re-val always raises the value of the assessed properties in a town, and thereby available collectable taxes. By your theory taxes should stand pat or decline, never increase, as there is no taxible effect of a re-val due to greater overall appreciation unless the budget is increased, and very significantly. If you saying that after a re-val increased taxes only come from heightened budgets, please give me examples of how much a budget has to rise in order to actually collectively increase taxes paid after a re-val and supply me with examples of towns in which there were tax increases just on that basis.Re-val cost? Could be 50-60k, subject to tax appeals. Just look at your tax bill after the re-val dude. Bet it does not go down. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3978 Registered: 5-2001 |
jayjay, I think this clip shows exactly what you are referring to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k32XC9bV-Hs You are absolutely right, that Calabrese is clearly annoyed to be asked why Beifus is ONLY improving the buffer with the pool & not starting actual construction. What is he hiding? | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2947 Registered: 5-2004 |
FvF, you still have not explained these phantom increases in taxes due to a reval. They have to come from some specific factor. After all, we're talking about numbers here, not concepts. The bottom line is that the tax rate is determined by two numbers - the overall value of all land in the town, and the town's budget. If your home's value increased more than the average home in your town, your taxes will increase. If it has increased less than the average home, your taxes will decrease. There is no magic to it, no fancy calculations. It's pretty straightforward math once the assessments are done. If a budget rises at all, the overall tax collections will go up, and therefore the average tax bill will go up. But the AVERAGE tax bill does not go up simply because of a reval (other than to cover the cost of the reval itself). Towns that have increased their collective taxes have done so because of increases int he budget. I'll ask again, more slowly this time. What specifically about the reval will make our taxes go up? You have not given any examples of towns that have had tax increases BECAUSE OF a reval. Or what specifically caused the dollar increase. There is a difference between correlation and causation. BTW, you are so far of regarding a reval it's not even funny. Our reval is estimated in the half million dollar range. 50-60k? I'd be in favor of one every single year if it was that cheap. And why are you so concerned about a reval in a town that does not even border the town you live in? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 418 Registered: 1-2006 |
Hire a conflict counsel, to review the facts, and report. jd | ||
| Stirling Silver, AG Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 410 Registered: 6-2005  |
Sentence structure, conveying knowledge, furthering understanding is completely non-existent on an intellectual level in observing that clip. Could someone tell him he should have the village administrator or an assigned trustee give updates. BC is a total waste of time. Beifus is now overdue in starting a full scale construction on the property as promised by counsel to the Planning Board. What is the delay? The lack of information is intolerable at this point. Where are our trustees to open the public dialogue concerning this project status - the lack of informative public updates underlies the public malfeasance of the village president and planning board commadant. Shame to the trustees for allowing this to persist as a malady upon our community. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 496 Registered: 3-2005 |
Rastro, Could it be that "factvsfiction" is a long time MOL poster/SO resident under a new name who is both longwinded and usually posting authoritative "sounding" nonsense but whose facts are always prove fiction when closely examined by people who are sophisticated about data, and real world cause-and-effect? I'll think you'll discover as discussions of the South Orange reval intensify, facts will be furiously denied by those determined to whip up local political anger. Otherwise, that anger might be directed toward property tax reform, and they have a different agenda from you. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2963 Registered: 5-2004 |
Kathleen, looking at his posts in the Millburn-Short Hills section of MOL, it's pretty evident he's a resident there. He has pretty strong opinions of their politics and school budget in particular. Doesn't seem to like outsiders either. Which I find ironic, given that he feels the need to "intrude" into South Orange politics. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 427 Registered: 1-2006 |
MHD: I watched the film clips. Bill should be held to account, in a court of law, or by a board of trustees that does not fear the truth. Attorney Matthews thinks he is Bill's consigliere, not the town's attorney. Will anyone on the Board remind BC and EM that they work for the public, and are vested with the public trust, a trust sorely worn. jd | ||
| Dan Shelffo Citizen Username: Openspacer Post Number: 182 Registered: 6-2001  |
I just watched the clip as well. It served to jogged my memory. I remember the BOT voting to giving Beifus permission to encroach upon the buffer between the pool and the new construction. In light of that, it makes sense to me that landscaping is the priority. What incumbent up for re-election would want pool goers to be looking at the pit that is so close to the pool all summer? This is the last summer before the next local election and while voters have short memories, why take a chance? Maybe Pulte had it wrong. They chopped down every thing even remotely green and then started building. Maybe this way is better. Landscape first, and then build. Besides, putting bushes up might allow them to show the voters that they are both the preservation choice and progress choice. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 92 Registered: 4-2006 |
Kathleen- Keep thinking happy thoughts, and of course wish for lower taxes. You can call me longwinded but you offer little commentary in the way of the specific process of appraising properties for tax purposes that shows you have any gravitas or knowledge on the subject. I think SO is a great town and my posts are not with any intent to bring it down. I believe if Pulte desired to build in your town you have many quantifiable positives and a good future, subject to really developing some serious commercial ratables. I have to say both you and some posters in the Maplewood section have a paranoia about outsiders making comments, where the reality is what happens in neighboring towns is all inter-related. We can all build on our positives and suport one another. You should care about what is going on in Millburn/Short Hills the same way I care about Maplewood/SO. They are super towns that I appreciate more and more every day. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 93 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro- I have enjoyed our forum dialogue but I find you more lawyer-like than an IT guy.Maybe, no offense, you should consider a career change? In any town the politicos will say a re-val or re-assessment is the best thing since sliced bread since it is fairly apportioning the tax responsibilities based on more current appreciation. Ok. We agree more than we disagree but again, the re-val company's job is to appraise the appreciation of individual properties and their end result is a total value on the properties in town. They are not seeking to create equality with past tax responsibilities. Some are better at getting a handle on residential values and some are better on commercial properties. They are allowed to go within a certain range. Some properties may end up being over-assessed, and some under-assessed. But appreciation throughout a town will not be equal, and this will result in potentially higher taxes on certain properties. The budget, which results in the tax rate, becomes subject to %. Even with zero change, the taxes may not remain the same. In NJ the problem is that the health care costs and negotiated benefits of municipal employees cause an automatic rise, irrespective of a town deciding to do more spending as you may think your Trustees will seek next year. I would like to hear more from you as your process in SO continues. The one thing I enjoyed doing in our last town was seeing what our politicos were assessed at for their homes, high end or low end of the differential, you might want to do that as well. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 623 Registered: 6-2005 |
How did the Beifus fiasco turn into a discussion of the reval? How about starting a reval thread, those of you who want to discuss this further. As for me, I still am counting the days for Beifus to actually build something. Its been just about one year since the expiration deadline on the development agreement. But as I think about it, I would actually NOT want Beifus, or Sterling for that matter, to build anything. Those projects create far too much density and height for the town. We would have another Gaslight Commons. Actually, another two Gaslight Commons. So the challenge is, how to take over these projects and find developers who will work to create a viable retail area, possibly with SOME residential units, with some character and architectural interest. They should be consistent with the look and feel of what the town stands for. No vinyl or aluminum siding or whatever that is on the Gaslight Commons buildings, and a maximum of two stories high. So maybe we should cheer the inactivity at both sites and wait for new blood at the next election to take hold and do the right thing. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 428 Registered: 1-2006 |
We have to work, not wait, for new blood at the next election. jd | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 349 Registered: 2-2006 |
Will you run, Joel? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 430 Registered: 1-2006 |
I believe we are owed a complete public accounting of Calabrese's financial interests in town. I want candidates who will not swallow the BOT party line that things are getting better every day - and will question our local administrator/public relations shills about finances, deadlines, penalties for failure to honor agreements. I want someone who will tell Bill and the Billettes to stop the dissembling. jd | ||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 583 Registered: 1-2004  |
Joel, I have an open OPRA request for the annual financial statements. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2967 Registered: 5-2004 |
<sigh> The problem, FvF, is that YOU said that a reval will increase taxes across the board. That a reval in and of itself, results in a tax increase. I don't dispute that there will be drastic changes, and very different changes, for people across the town. However as I have maintained, and you have yet to actually provide evidence against, a reval is tax-neutral. I have asked many times for you to explain where the increase in tax revenue comes from,. You continue to repeat the same thing over and over. Stop talking about me, stop talking in generalities. Explain where these tax increases specific to a reval comes from, or admit you were wrong or misspoke. The overall amount of tax that the town collects has nothing to do with the value of the property in town. It has to do with the budget, and people's willingness to accept the tax increases. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 497 Registered: 3-2005 |
Rastro, You'd be surprised the lengths some people go to on MOL create new personas for themseves when they want a new anonymous screen name. I wouldn't waste your time arguing. The moniker is apparently mean to describe the problem going on in FvsF's own head. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 149 Registered: 4-2006 |
Rastro- <argh!> You misquote/misunderstand me. Read the posts. The best time to discuss your re-val is after you get your new assessment/tax rate and the town has appraised a total and new value on the properties in it! That is when we can dissect your claims and discuss the vagaries of it. You have failed to supply me with the information that I have asked for that support your contention, i.e. re-val always tax-neutral in effect not theory, no rise in taxes EXCEPT if the budget is increased. You have never given me a figure as the anticipated new % of the S.O. budget with a zero increase, or anticipated increase, coming with the re-val. As I understand it from an appraiser, the likelihood that an individual property will have the same taxes after a re-val as it had before is just somewhat better than winning the lottery. Let's see, shall we? Kathleen- don't bother your head with this stuff, just get someone to help you with your tax appeal.  Peace, out. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 625 Registered: 6-2005 |
Can we please bring this back to the topic....days elapsed since Beifus shovel in the dirt day? Afterall, we are reaching the one year anniversary, and that deserves recognition. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2999 Registered: 5-2004 |
FvF, I will not continue this in the Soapbox. If you want to discuss it, keep it where it belongs. You wrote: I have repeatedly asked you to explain how a reval, ikn and of itself, has increased the amount of taxes brought in. That is a quote directly from you. You have yet to back it up, or exp[lain what it is about a Reval that increases the amount of taxes brought in, Yo obviously understand how the tax rate is determined, yet you still say that the reval itself causes revenue to go up. Please, for once and for all, explain where that increase comes from. No obfuscation, no redirection. I'll even start yout post for you. "The increase in revenue due to a revaluation is because..." | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3002 Registered: 5-2004 |
My bad. That should not be in this thread, thereby making me hypocritical. Dave, any chance you could move this to the reval thread? | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4016 Registered: 5-2001 |
Back to Beifus...looks like they are pushing around the dirt on the Beifus site today. Does anyone know if this is just landscaping or real construction? Shovel-in-the-dirt day is May 9, right? Who knew they meant 2006!! | ||
| Politicalmon Citizen Username: Politicalmon Post Number: 143 Registered: 9-2005  |
Looks like real constuction there are a couple crews out this morning 7:45AM with a large digger which was operational as I drove west on SO Avenue. I typically pass the location M-F and this is the 1st time I noticed the gates open with a number of small trucks, a large dump truck and a digger with actual people working. Hopefully this will be part of a continious process and not 1 small step with alot of window dressing. | ||
| red_alert Citizen Username: Red_alert Post Number: 243 Registered: 3-2005 |
Is there an election coming up? Why else are the trucks there? I thought the SOPAC was the only show in town. | ||
| Walker Citizen Username: Fester Post Number: 256 Registered: 4-2003  |
I walked past the site this morning, the covered walkway is no longer accessible and the lamp post that was in the middle of their site opening has been snapped off its base leaving the bottom few inches attached to the pavement. Why was no effort made to remove this so that it could be returned after the construction is complete? especially after I believe it was brought up at one of the Town meetings! | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2756 Registered: 4-2002 |
Walker: I did bring up the gas lamp. I did see a PSE & G truck at the site the day the lamp came down so I am hoping that they took it down and that they will be putting it back up. Either way, Beifus is responsible for the gaslamp. | ||
| Walker Citizen Username: Fester Post Number: 257 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mark; Thanks for the quick responce, it is nice to see activity at the site! |
