Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
45 user(s) are online (28 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 44

elsquid, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (brewster)




Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Reverse mortgage is an option, and not a terrible one either, but I do have some concerns about it.

The first is that with very few exceptions (notably cars), I am not a fan of borrowing to pay expenses. Borrowing to enhance the value of a home makes a lot of sense to me; borrowing to cover a tax bill, less so.

Good issue you raise that spooks a lot of people, but I think you're on the wrong side of it. It seems you're conflating secured borrowing with unsecured borrowing. Unsecured borrowing is credit cards and student loans, you get money but have nothing that could be liquidated to pay it back if need be. Secured borrowing is to buy an asset, or improve it. I know some pretty sharp people who can't stand the idea of any debt, even if it's to buy a secured asset like a house that has tremendous tax and leverage advantages.

In the case of a reverse mortgage, it's secured, by your home. It's a far cry from putting your rent on a credit card. You're not really borrowing money from a bank, you're borrowing it from yourself, with the bank making money by acting as intermediary to make a non liquid asset partially liquid until you sell it and pay them back. I do not believe borrowing 2-3% per year of an asset like a house would be financially risk, especially as the likelihood of a DTJC house not rising by at least that 2-3% yearly over the 10-20 year term seems pretty small.

Posted on: 5/26 18:00
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:

So you hate the idea that abated properties pay less property tax, but you're fine with people underpaying property taxes because the city can't be bothered to update the valuations?
Not to mention that during much of the time she has railed against the abatements she was paying less tax per dollar value of her property than many of the abated homes. She has no shame nor compassion.

Posted on: 5/26 16:21
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

tern wrote:
I think that the overall tax base is higher than many people realise, and therefore tax rate will be lower than 2%.
Robin.

You could be right and I hope you are, I'm expecting at least a $10,000 hit. Do the people who set the ratio each year, the guess of how the total value of all the ratables has risen, know their business or not? How close they were determines how much of a rate change to expect.

Either way this needs to be done. I hope all of us that are here nine years from now keep a vigilant eye out and don't let a delay happen again.

Posted on: 5/26 14:34
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Let's say she sells her current place for $1.3m after taxes and loss in value, and buys a place for $750k. That's $550k left over, and will cover 110 years of the higher property taxes.

Or, she buys a $1m home. The $300k left over covers 33 years of higher property taxes.

You left out the reverse mortgage option where she extracts 2% of value every year to pay taxes plus whatever interest fees and gets to stay in her home. Reverse mortgages are not intrinsically bad. However they can be abused by the unscrupulous just like any financial product.

But lump sum reverse mortgages, one of the products pushed hardest back in the mess, are an awful idea that puts seniors at risk rather than making them more secure.

Posted on: 5/26 13:18
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mfadam wrote:
how is there not more noise from every overtaxed owner? You'd think class action lawyers would be all over this one.


Great question. My only theory is we have been so beaten into submission by these government systems it never occurs to us that we're being ripped off. It doesn't help that the system is so opaque with seeming nonsense numbers like assessments and rates that appear to have no bearing to reality unless you dive deep in.

I wonder if a lawsuit would get any traction, they'll just say "if you thought you were overtaxed why didn't you just appeal?" It took me over a decade to think to appeal the tax on my Heights property, and I'm relatively sophisticated about these things compared to a lot of non-DT owners.

But the realtors had to know. Why wouldn't they tell buyers of overtaxed property to appeal? If you bought a really overtaxed one you'd get lawyer letters offering to appeal for you, but if you'd had it for decades no one would ever know or tell you.

Yvonne, STOP THE BULLSHIT ALREADY!! The revaluation has never included abated property, and never should. They're not in this game!! They are 2 separate revenue streams. It's ONLY about making the tax AMONG THE RATABLES fair. Its comparable to 2 contractors getting paid, how one divides their money up among the employees has NOTHING to do with the way the other does. If every abated property were made ratable tomorrow, IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE REVAL, only the rate that would be struck afterwards. STOP THE BULLSHIT!!

Posted on: 5/25 22:36
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Let me repeat, JC will never have a fair revaluation as long as $2.7 billion worth of property is excluded from the process. After the revaluation that $2.7 billion will probably be close to $11 billion. So what is the $11 billion? It is tax abated properties. This $11 billion does not include schools, churches, cemeteries, or public property. It includes commerical and housing that has a tax abatement. I can understand 5 year tax abatements. But anything longer is cheating the public.


The revaluation of ratable properties has NOTHING to do with abatements. It's about fairness between taxpayers on those ratable properties. You once again blow smoke to obscure the issues, and pointedly ignore Dolomiti's request for the slightest bit of compassion for the people who have overpaid while you and others underpaid.

And don't start with that same stupid bullshit "I paid the taxes I was billed". You didn't. You stated that you appealed them 5 times in a row, pleading that you had no walls. But it doesn't seem that you ever got reassessed after completing the renovation, like you should have. Did you? So you paid taxes for another 20 odd years as if your fabulous brownstone were gutted out. Nicely done.

Posted on: 5/25 22:08
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Only someone who was a complete moron, or underwater on a loan with no equity to lose, would ever let their home go into lien sale or not redeem it afterwards.

As for your role Yvonne, you have spent decades loudmouthing at Council meetings and other public hearings as well as writing endless letters to editors. You have nursed this monster. You're like an arsonist hanging around watching the fire saying "terrible fire, eh. People should be more careful".

But you can't hear any of this, it just doesn't process. You're like one of the Androids on Westworld that are programmed to not comprehend talk of or artifacts from beyond the park. With a black hat.

Posted on: 5/25 16:45

Edited by brewster on 2017/5/25 17:00:42
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


The main reason we have this traumatic reval now is you and people like you who created such terror around revals that revals became the 3rd rail of local politics. No one dared do one when they should have in 1998 and for 15 years after. And you're doing it again. You have no alternative to offer, you just want people scared. I have no idea why, except maybe it makes you feel powerful.

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is not fearmongering, it is what happened after the 1988 revaluation. Some of these liens resulted in lawsuits. I mention earlier Judge Velasquez ruled on this, that story was in the Jersey Journal pre-online edition but I am sure you can find it in the archives. By the way, Newark was forced to do a reval some years later. They put in a 5 year step program based on the problems with JC.

Posted on: 5/25 14:20
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Real information, not fearmongering. You have to really screw up to actually lose your home. It's designed to give you many opportunities to straighten the situation out. Bottom line, pay your taxes or sell your house, don't screw around.

http://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/dlgs/ ... ments_of_tax_sales_nj.pdf

Elements of Tax Sales in New Jersey
New Jersey law requires all 566 municipalities to hold at least one tax sale per year, if the municipality has delinquent
property taxes and/or municipal charges. You can obtain information on upcoming tax sales by contacting the tax
collector in the municipality in question, or from the web site of the Tax Collectors & Treasurers Association of New
Jersey: www.tctanj.org/taxsale.html. More detailed information on the tax sale process in New Jersey can be found at
www.njtaxlieninvestor.com*.

In New Jersey, property taxes are a continuous lien on the real estate. Property taxes are due in four installments
during the year: February 1, May 1, August 1, and November 1. Delinquency on a property may accrue interest at up
to 8 per cent for the first $1,500 due, and 18 per cent for any amount over $1,500. If the amount of delinquency on a
property exceeds $10,000 at the end of the municipal fiscal year, the municipality may charge up to a 6 per cent yearend
penalty.

At the tax sale, title to the delinquent property itself is not sold. What is sold is a tax sale certificate, a lien on the
property. Tax sale certificates can earn interest of up to 18 per cent, depending on the winning percentage bid at the
auction. At the auction, bidders bid down the interest rate that will be paid by the owner for continuing interest on the
certificate amount. If the interest is bid down to one per cent, then a “premium,” is bid starting at $0 to whenever the
bidding stops to obtain the tax sale certificate. The premium is kept on deposit with the municipality for up to five
years. If the tax sale certificate is not redeemed, or the property foreclosed upon within the five year period, then the
premium escheats to the municipality. No interest accrues on the premium to the benefit of the buyer of the tax sale
certificate.

The winning bidder is the one who bids the lowest percentage of interest or bids the highest premium. Bidders are
urged to contact the Tax Collector for local payment restrictions before the sale) At the close of the sale, the winning
bidder must immediately pay (pursuant to the local restrictions) the municipality the taxes and interest to date; in
exchange the municipality will provide the bidder the tax sale certificate. In order for the winning lien holder to protect
their interest in the tax sale certificate, it should be recorded in the Deed Room at the County Clerk’s Office within 90
days of the sale.

Taxes continue to accrue on the property after the sale of the certificate. Bidders have the option to pay these
subsequent taxes; if they are not paid, a tax sale certificate will be sold at the next tax sale. Any subsequent certificate
issued will be paramount to any prior certificate. Subsequent taxes paid by the lien holder earn interest at the rate set
by the municipality.

If the certificate is redeemed by the property owner prior to foreclosure, the certificate earns a redemption penalty at
the rate of 2, 4, or 6 percent, depending on the amount of the original tax sale certificate, in addition to any interest
rate on the certificate.

After two years, a lien holder can begin proceedings in Superior Court to foreclose on the property. If foreclosure is
perfected, then the name on the deed is changed to that of the lien holder who can then take possession of the
property.

This information is intended only as a short introduction to the tax sale process in New Jersey, and not as investment
advice. There is no substitute for learning as much about investing in tax sale certificates from the many sources
available, both online and in print. As with all investments, the investor must do his or her due diligence when
investing in tax sale certificates. Unlike more “passive” investments, like certificates of deposit, or stocks and bonds,
tax sale certificates require “active” follow up and management by the investor. By posting this notice, the State of
New Jersey neither recommends nor discourages investment in tax sale certificates, and makes no guarantee of profit
or positive result from such investment.

Posted on: 5/25 13:52
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
brewster, I do not speak to anyone that way you speak to me.


Believe it or not you are the only person on earth I speak to this way, because you are the pinnacle of loudmouthed, fearmongering, hatemongering, pious, self righteous hypocrisy. At least in JC. Your man in the White House may have you beat.

Posted on: 5/24 16:55
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Yvonne, you are impenetrably dense. You lie to scare people and then try and cover it with meaningless anecdotes.

What's outrageous is that you've been doing this for 30 years. Mayors come and go but Yvonne is always there to terrify them out of ordering a reval. You might be as responsible as any politician for the current mess, and you've benefitted from it by hundreds of thousands of dollars between tax savings on your under assessed property and selling it for way more than it would be worth with an accurate assessment.


Posted on: 5/24 11:38
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Yvonne, none of that anecdote substatiates your statement:

"former Mayor Schundler started his 'bunk lien' sale and sold homes assessed for $200,000 to $300,00 for the price of back taxes."

It's simply not true, and inflammatory. Homes under a tax liens are NOT sold for just the outstanding tax. Not now, not ever.

That's a LIE!!!

You're fearmongering as you've done for 30 years. A homeowner under lien can simply sell their home and walk away after paying their taxes. Only a fool, or someone with no equity anyway, will take the reduced sale price associated with the lien sale process.

Posted on: 5/23 23:10
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mfadam wrote:
Let's say the typical DTJC rowhouse goes from about 12K in taxes to 24K - a simple double. What do you think that does to post-Reval valuations?

Maybe 15% haircut?


Depends on rates, if you assume your buyer is borrowing and has a fixed monthly nut in mind. $12k more in tax means $1k less in borrowing power. At 4.5% on a 30 yr, $1000 gets you $200k. So assuming the buyer has the extra downpayment, they're budget is $200k less than it was pre-reval.

Yvonne, prove what you're saying, otherwise it's more lies. Tax liens are sold at auction and the residual after taxes and loans are paid is returned to the owner.

Posted on: 5/23 18:57
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

tictaktoe wrote:
Those who are in DTJC and have been sitting on their property since last reval are the ones who are REALLY GETTING AWAY WITH IT so far.


Just want to point out it's anyone who owns one of those undertaxed properties, especially in the last 10 to 20 years when the undertaxing has been most extreme. The assessment does NOT get reset upon sale like it does in some places.

Posted on: 5/23 11:01
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Actually, I don't understand the mechanisms that they used to calculate current property tax rates in between the revals. Hence the question.


Ok, I covered this in the Ballad of Billy & Tommy, but I'll try again. The actual assessments never changes between revals unless you do significant renovations. So the city raises the tax rate to match the rise in value otherwise they'd never account for inflation. That's how the actual rate is 7.7% not ~2%.

So the way they come up with that 7.7% number is they create a number for the difference between the assessed value and FMV of THE ENTIRE CITY. That's the "ratio", currently 23.66%. The assessment is supposedly 23.66% of FMV, but that's a guesstimate of the average for the whole city. And because that tax raise is for everyone, it's not accurate, and it gets less accurate over time.

If your ratio is less you're paying too little, if it's more you're paying too much. So when DT rose so much faster than anyone else they ended up radically undertaxed because the only mechanism to steer this ship off the rocks is the reval.

And for those really interested, new properties have their assessment set by taking the sale price and dividing by the ratio to get a number in line with everyone else. So newer ratable properties and heavily renovated ones (supposedly) will not see dramatic tax raises. The "supposedly" is that a certain amount of permits like a gut job should trigger a spot reval, but anecdotes are that some do not.

Posted on: 5/22 20:53
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


stateaidguy's website http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/

He's partisan and wants to cut our aid, but he's been very informative and fair in my experience of reading his posts and blog. Is the SFRA aid formula fair? No idea.

Posted on: 5/22 18:51
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ProdigalSon wrote:
What percentage on this list is optimal(I think it's 100%)? Additionally is it determining local fair share based on total value of homes in that town/district? Is that why so many beach towns with small populations, and even less school age students have virtually zero tax levy? It would be interesting to see the actual school budgets on this list as well.

Also one thing this list reinforces to me is that their are way to many municipalities in NJ.


If you want to know more about this go to stateaidguy's website. It's linked up thread. There is a complicated formula involving incomes demographics and real estate prices to determine local share.

Posted on: 5/22 16:23
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
So, I used the ArcGIS reval, and picked a house with a recent sale date.

2016 purchase: $1.3m
2004 purchase: $700k
1997 purchase: $280k
2016 property taxes: $11k (or 0.85%)
Current assmt: $146k

I presume that after the reval, assuming the house is still worth $1.3m, their taxes will go up to $24,700.

If so, then what is the likely basis for their current property tax? It seems too high to be based off the "current assmt" figure in the database.


The actual tax rate on the assessed value is 7.7% (as opposed to an effective rate applied to FMV), thus my calculator turns up $11,242 when you multiply $146k x 0.077.

Rithmatic, man. Do you get it that between revals they raise the rate not the assessments?

Posted on: 5/22 12:43
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
If Tommy was sharper about real estate, he could have appealed his taxes, but only down to the effective rate of 2.1%.

What's the mechanism / reason for the limit on the effect of the appeal?


You can only win an appeal if you prove your FMV is more than 15% off your assessment/ratio (what they say it's worth). And even if you win, the effective rate only goes down to FMV/ratio, effectively around that 2.2% mark. That's still more than double what the legacy DT properties are paying.

According to Bamb00zle he was paying 0.7% before he sold. Well played sir. Maybe. I know if Yvonne had held on instead of bailing she and Mr Yvonne could have made another 1/2 million at least. That surely would have been more than the hit it would take for the taxes doubling.

Posted on: 5/21 23:37
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Not to pick arguments, but aren't all those DTJC brownstones also "million dollar homes"? And, look how much of a stink they are raising over having to pay their fair share after 10 - 20 years of underpaying... I am sure in five years time, the city will be expected to shoulder a larger portion of the local BOE budget, and shit *will* hit the fan.


Was there an argument there? The issue of redistributing taxes to make school funding fair is not going away, but I believe sending JC taxes into the stratosphere to raise another $200m, like over 3.5%, won't happen. The economic damage would be catastrophic, dwarfing the reval because it would effect every unabated property, not just the older DT ones.

I find it telling that Monroe always ties the high budget to poor performance, like he'd be OK with it if it got results. That's unlikely. BTW Monroe, your portrayal of Millburn as a tax victim is nonsense. They're not far above JC in the list of Tax Levy as percentage of Local Fair Share for schools. JC:32.75% Milburn: 41.3%. There's plenty of towns underaided, neighboring W Orange is at 128.38%.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d ... 1GBqhMuPDKDMTk/edit#gid=0
Linked from http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/

Does JC BOE need to be pulled apart and put back together? Absolutely. Every district in the state should be held accountable for where it's money goes, by outside auditors, every year. Maybe if we cut off the sweet juice the 599 districts will see the light of consolidating. The smoke and mirrors to make public money vanish pisses me off. Oh, and no district living on the state tit should get to make it's own worker contracts, including Millburn.

Posted on: 5/19 23:56
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
They do, silly. That's why Millburn's taxes are the highest in the state. Of course, Millburn spends about 20% less per student than JC, doesn't have free PreK, and is usually rated one of the best general admission public high schools in the country. On top of the Abbott funding it also pays a lot of the freight supporting Essex County. So if it offends you that it does that and pays less than 2% you're nuts.


What offend me is the whining that your taxes are too high when your rate is low to average. And you want to whine about the actual dollars, rather than the rate, because million dollar houses pay more. Boo hoo hoo. People with million dollar incomes pay more too, and don't get back more in services. That's just the way the system works, but I'm sure you hate paying your income tax too.

Posted on: 5/19 17:40
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Millburn pays the highest real estate taxes in NJ, with the exception of a town in South Jersey with 6 houses. Highest percentage? No. Highest dollar? Yup.


People with million dollar homes being asked to support education in less wealthy communities by paying the same tax percentage as everyone else? OUTRAGEOUS!!


Posted on: 5/19 16:42
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I know in Millburn the taxes are high (even with some nice ratables, like the billion dollar Mall at Short Hills, pays almost 90% of its school costs through taxes.


As I say to Yvonne every time, define what you mean by "high". High relative to other North Jersey towns? It's not, it's average to low, go to the page of all the town rates in the state and compare. Too high for your taste or sense of fairness? Whatever.

Posted on: 5/19 15:02
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

yorkster wrote:
As a DTJC homeowner, I don't have an issue with paying my fair of taxes, but for me, there is a clear line between fair and ridiculous. When I bought 10 years ago, I had accepted that my taxes would be eventually raised to $24K-$25K, but now that I'm hearing that it would be more like mid-$30K then that's when it gets into absurdness. I've done some comp in other parts of NJ (e.g., Chatham, Milburn, Tenafly, etc.) and their taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close. Mind you, these municipalities have the best school systems in the state.

Chatham 1.665%
Millburn 1.854%
Tenafly 2.182

You're right by only 13% on #1, 2.5% on #2, and wrong by 15% on #3. This does not support "taxes on a property similar in value don't even come close". For the record, you can't even appeal your taxes until they're 15% out of wack.


http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml

Posted on: 5/19 14:02
Top


Re: HC proposes $538 million budget with tax increases for 6 towns
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It will be cheaper to get rid of municipal government and just have county government. The county population is around 600,000.


Hey, I agree!! Neither will ever happen however, there's just way too much money and power in both venues for politicians to ever give either up. HC has not been able to consolidate the police, and only partially the FD.

FWIW, if HC were a single city, it would be both bigger in population and denser than Boston, Denver or Portland.

Posted on: 5/19 13:41
Top


Re: HC proposes $538 million budget with tax increases for 6 towns
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

MDM wrote:
Maybe NJ should do like CT and get rid of county government?

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... _nj_bergen_county_la.html

How many are on the County payroll? 20,000?


And every one a patronage party hack. It's considered currency in HC, the County is like the Fed printing money. Once you're a "made man" in the HCDO you're taken care of for life, just look at Steve Lipski. After drunkenly pissing on people and resigning from the city council in disgrace, he turns up head of the city Economic Development Corporation, and then an assistant principal at Harrison HS for $122,532/yr. Anyone remember the guy with 2 full time government jobs, a teacher at County Prep and full time supervisor at JCPA? He must be well connected to get 2 plums!

Posted on: 5/19 12:24
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


I think a link between the reval and school aid is tenuous at best. The state stepped in because JC's taxes are fucked up. The state law says to do a reval when the ratio falls below 80%, and we're at 23%. A reval was nearly 20 years overdue. Nothing to do with schools.

It will be a mess when they do cut aid. Will the residents of JC actually demand accountability in the school system once we're paying the tab? Ever look at the "User friendly" budget. Holy crap is it impenetrable. I was once wondering how much is spent on special ed. Nope, it appeared to be spread over at least a dozen line items. There were category names that had no definitions when I googled them. "User friendly"?

Posted on: 5/19 12:14
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:
You guys don't get it. What Brewster is saying is correct in that most dtjc will see higher increases but to say they are being carried by Greenville is not accurate. It is downtown that supports the city


Lets see if you understand in 3rd grade speak, then I'm done.

Bobby and Tommy each buy houses for $100k in 1988 right after the reval. Bobby's is DT and Tommy's is in GV. 30 years later Bobby's is worth $1m and Tommy's is worth $300k. The city, trying to guess how much the average property values have risen says the ratio of assessment to fmv is 23.66% , so both their properties are taxed like they are worth $420k, $7,700 (7.7% on their identical $100k assessments). But Bobby's is actually worth $1m! So he's paying an effective tax rate of only 0.77%. And Tommy is paying an effective rate of 2.56%!

The sad part of the story is no one was telling Bobby that he really needs to be paying his fair share because loudmouths like Yvonne have terrified the politicians, so they just kick the can down the road. So for years Tommy and several of his neighbors have had to pay a rate 3x Bobby's to make up for the shortfall, because the books have to balance. If Tommy was sharper about real estate, he could have appealed his taxes, but only down to the effective rate of 2.1%. And Bobby would still be paying only a fraction of that rate.

Now in the reval, if Bobby's taxes go up to his fair share, Tommy and his neighbors will see a reduction because they no longer have to carry the load. Our Mayor once said fuck em, their individually smaller reduction was not nearly as important as Bobby keeping his tremendous tax savings. Perhaps Tommy and his neighbors will remember on election day.

All the number I used are here.
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxat ... df/lptval/2016/Hudson.pdf
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/lpt/gtrHudson16.pdf

Posted on: 5/18 23:00
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:
That's fine.however you are simply stating that Greenville due to lower property values might be paying a larger percentage of its property value to property tax. That hardly equates to Greenville subsdizing the downtown taxpayer. Over the last 10-15 yrs downtown has exploded it's is paying the lions share of Jersey City taxes . Without it Greenville would have a much higher rate.


Nope. That is not what I said. Greenville's property values appreciated at a slower rate than DT, resulting in them paying a far higher effective tax rate in the absence of a reval, which is supposed to correct this error every ten years. That rate is often 2x to 3x, meaning they are subsidizing DT, because tax is zero sum, if someone is underpaying, someone else is overpaying.

Many DT properties are paying <1% of their FMV when the effective rate is supposed to be 2.2%. Many Greenville properties are paying >3%, subsidizing those underpaying DT. Got it?

Posted on: 5/18 20:45
Top


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

135jc wrote:
Brewster,. The tax payers of Greenville are not subsidizing the downtowner tax payer. That statement is just absurd


I've proven this here with numbers more times than I can count. Do you just have a feeling?

Here, just for you I'll repost something I wrote a few years ago. The various tax numbers have changed:

Here's a quick primer on JC property tax. In theory all JC property tax should be based on the actual property value equaling assessed value times a "ratio" the city updates according to it best guess of property appreciation, currently about 3.3. The actual tax rate of 7.184 is applied to the assessment, that rate being the effective tax rate (~2.2%) times the adjustment ratio (http://www.hudsoncountytax.com/html/RatesRatios.aspx). But in the 25 years since the last reval (when the assessments were set to market value and the Ratio was reset to 0), many properties values have drifted away from this theoretical value. One thing I've discovered perusing the official tax records, (http://tax1.co.monmouth.nj.us/cgi-bin ... istrict=0906&ms_user=monm) is there's a data field for each property called "Ratio", which is not always occupied (I have not determined why). This field might as well be called the "tax fairness quotient". This Ratio = (assessment/sale price) x 100. If it's over 33, you're paying too much, if it's under 33, you're paying too little. In a tax appeal, up to 15% variance from the 33 Ratio is considered normal, but in a reval, everyone get set at the new Ratio using their appraisal.

While looking at recent sales I stumbled on a really juicy one. A magnificent townhouse on Montgomery sold to a hedge fund last October for $1,800,000; assessment $245,000; tax $17,601. That's a real rate of 0.98% versus the "theoretical" rate of 2.2% (7.184% / 3.272%) with a ratio of 13.61, rather far from the city's ideal 33. Were they paying the 2.2% that city says we all should be, their tax would be $39,600! Clicking at random on Zillow among the recent sales in 07304 it was hard not to find places well over a 40 ratio, 3rd try got one in Bergen-Lafayette with a 51.5! That makes a real tax rate of 3.7% per year. That owner pays $3.77 for every dollar the hedge fund owner on Montgomery does on the value of their respective properties. THIS IS THE STORY HERE!!!!! 6 owners of property worth $300,000 have to overpay as much as this one underpays to make up for this under assessment. There are real people on the other side of the equation paying the taxes owed by the undertaxed properties!

The research to substantiate what I say is easy. Go to Zillow.com, Trulia.com or any other real estate site, search a zip code for recently sold properties, pick one at random. Divide the assessment by the sale price, and multiply by 100. If it's over 33, they're paying too much, under, they're not paying enough. In general, Downtown historic properties are dramatically underpaying, and other wards are overpaying. This is not a intended to be a divisive argument, but why should the family who struggles to afford their little $250,000 house in the Heights or Greenville be paying the taxes of someone who can afford a million dollar Downtown home? If you're a property owner, find your tax card, divide your assessment by your best guess of your property value, and multiply by 100. If you're much over 33, this cancellation is going to cost you money. And if you're only moderately over, between 33 and 38, you don't even qualify for an appeal because of the 15% allowed deviation.

Whatever problems there may be with the reval contract, the answer is to fix it, not to perpetuate this injustice on the people who are often the least sophisticated about these tax issues.

Posted on: 5/18 18:45

Edited by brewster on 2017/5/18 19:06:54
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 151 »






Login
Username:

Password:

remember me

Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017