Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Currently, isn't **everyone's** property value considered to be "un reassessed"? If the "spot assessments" done on refurbished units/houses are illegal, those assessments don't count.
EVERYONE will be affected. Taxes, btw, will increase/decrease as budget "needs" dictate, regardless of, (or in spite of) a re-eval. Dieselpowerd: I'm not sure what the other options are unless you really do want to rent forever. Buying a place and flipping it in a few years is no longer a way to make $$. I really do believe that property is a long term investment. What's happening in Hudson County is not isolated to only Hudson County. There are tea parties and tax crises going on all over the U.S. right now. yes, the thought of this re-eval is spine chilling. But we'll just have to see what happens. Life goes on.
Posted on: 2010/4/28 20:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
+1. We'll probably get hurt by it, but it's needed. If you want to see what your neighbor pays, here's some timekillers https://www.cityofjerseycity.com/WebTaxInquiry/AccountSearch.aspx http://www.hudsoncountytax.com/
Posted on: 2010/4/28 19:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/6/27 22:27 Last Login : 2012/4/20 14:33 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
235
 |
Quote:
A reval is essential for JC. The big problem is that the people who own un-reassessed properties think high property taxes are other people's problem and therefore are either happy with the political machine, or apathetic about local politics. This keeps the machine going. Not until more people realize that the machine's corruption and incompetence are a problem will there be any chance for change for the better.
Posted on: 2010/4/28 17:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
Isn't this is why Developers demand abatements? They know that because the city is so poorly managed there will be huge fluctuations in tax rates. They want to be able to better predict their revenue. No one is going to invest massive amounts of money not knowing what one of their major costs (property taxes) will be in the future.
This is the same kind of thing multi-national corporations do when they set up shop in 'Free Trade Zones.' They decrease the risk of investing in a potentially unstable environment by signing agreements determining their tax rate long into the future...
Posted on: 2010/4/28 16:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Dieselpowered:
Hoboken has not had a recent re-eval, only repeated tax hikes, including the 40% across the board hike of 2008. This goes to show you, that re-eval or not, if you own a piece of property, taxes in Hudson County will never be a fixed quantity secondary to corruption and misspending. (Howevs, the situation is even worse in Essex County). If you truly want to live someplace without price fluctations, rent an apt in a large building of all rental apts. Those are the ones that are rent controlled. Also bear in mind that property taxes are tax deductible if you own your residence. I lived and owned in Hoboken for a long time. Most property owners there are of the mind that a re-eval is a good thing and will happily anticipate their own after hearing that JC will be doing this. The reason they feel this way is because the construction boom in Hoboken has had a bigger impact than the one in JC, as Hoboken is a much smaller city. Owners of new construction feel that they are unfairly paying a larger proportion of taxes in that city compaired to long time owners of brownstones. Of note, I thought only the state could order a re-eval. Truth is that Hudson County as a whole has been long overdue for this. It was coming sooner or later. I suspect that refurbed pre-war buildings by JSQ and new construction by light rail stations will see the biggest % hike. Hamilton Park probably won't fare that well either even though owners there think they are over taxes. Bear in mind, whatever happens will take years to be completed and take effect. And, in some cases, it will make certain real estate more desirable.
Posted on: 2010/4/28 15:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/28 3:26 Last Login : 2014/10/27 13:13 From The fog.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1013
|
Posted on: 2010/4/28 15:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
Thanks. I would assume the reassessment happened at that time, but I was hoping to determine this for sure. Are there accessible public records that contain this information?
Posted on: 2010/4/28 15:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/28 3:26 Last Login : 2014/10/27 13:13 From The fog.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1013
|
Quote:
From the JC website: The second exception is if a property has been renovated or has undergone substantial repairs. If you improved or enlarged a dwelling since the last assessment, inspectors have been in to inspect the property for repairs and improvements. Then, and only then, can the property be reassessed according to its full and fair value, which is a reflection of the then current real estate market rates.
Posted on: 2010/4/28 14:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Does anyone know how to determine when the last assessment was made on a property?
I recently bought a condo downtown. It is a 100+ year-old building, but the kitchen and other parts of the interior were completely renovated within the past 5 years. I would assume it was reassessed when those modifications were made, but is there any way to check this and know for sure?
Posted on: 2010/4/28 14:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
I guess my visits to open houses in JC these past few weekends have been in vain. I was already hesitant to buy since we probably haven't seen the end of the real estate decline. Now I'll also have to worry about property taxes possibly going up significantly after a reval. The whole point of owning is that you can have mostly fixed costs and save equity, whereas rental costs vary more. For instance, my rental costs for the same apartment went up 25% between 2005 and 2008 and the rent is now lower than my original rent in 2005.
Has Hoboken had a reval recently? I know they had a 40% property tax increase recently but I don't think that was a reval, just an adjustment forced by the state. Anyone know?
Posted on: 2010/4/28 14:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2009/5/15 4:26 Last Login : 2017/12/25 1:59 From here to eternity
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
512
|
even though i am expecting to see a significantly increased tax burden, i cannot but welcome healey's attempts to face reality ... scheduling the revaluation in his early years of the administration shows some degree of political savvy ... bravo, mayor! bravo!
we should expect two things for sure: (i) taxes will increase for most of us, and (ii) on average, people will be unhappy ... thus, there may be a significant number of appeals ... and appeals tend to raise a number of questions ... fairness ... market value ... objectivity ... valuation ... etc ... you name it moreover, comparing the litigation climate of the late 1980s with ours, there may be added incentives to vigorously challenge the assessments ... so, this will not be an 18-month long process ... we are looking for a few years before the new tax levels are set ... invariably, you start wondering how this would affect existing and future PILOT programs? can they be revoked or renegotiated if and when there is a revaluation? now that i wonder whether our politically savvy mayor has considered ... 
Posted on: 2010/4/28 3:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Thank you Chakotay for posting that newspaper article as it explains exactly what happened last time. I was living in my parents home at the time, pretty much all of the houses on our street were overvalued due to incompetent people doing a bad job. They assumed that the woman across the street from us had put in a finished basement complete with an extra bathroom because she had curtains in her basement windows.
And I have to say that this reevaluation scares me very much. It was very damaging to my neighborhood at the time. A lot of nice neighbors chose to sell their houses rather than get a huge spike in taxes. They had to sell at a loss, and many of their homes were bought up by investors who turned them into section 8 rentals. It was very, very bad for the neighborhoods and the city. Those of you who are in newly refurbished houses who pay higher taxes and think it's a good thing that your neighbors will get a tax hike, had better think again. When people are forced to sell at a loss, the neighborhood loses and everybody living in them loses. A lot of people I know want to stay here, but are finding it increasingly difficult to do so due to bad schools, lack of services, etc. A big tax hike for some might be the last straw for middle-class people in this city. I hope this does not play out the same as it did in 1988.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 21:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Not really. Under 5 units appraisal is based primarily on comps, with adjustments for sq footage and other physical factors rather than # of units. If you look at the MLS the price difference between similar sq footage 2 & 3 families is not great if present at all. Where people really get messed up in this discussion is when they compare their "4 or under" residential to commercial property, those either over 4 units or with a store. The primary means of appraisal for the latter is income, and combined with the fact that financing for them requires larger down payments and higher rates, their prices are typically lower per sq ft or unit. Some people who don't understand this have pointed them out examples of unfair appraisals. Keep in mind in this discussion to use the right terms. An appraisal is what an appraiser says your property is worth on the market. An assessed value is what the city says your property is worth for taxation. The tax rate is how much per $ of assessment you pay. A great explanation from JSHEP http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewt ... p?topic_id=20050&start=75 Quote: When you purchase new construction the tax assessor finds a fair market value for the unit. This is may or may not be your purchase price, it is what he thinks is fair market value. Take that fair market value and multiply by the ratio for that year and you get your assessed value. You carry that assessed value forward, it does not change until a revaluation or appeal or an added assessment. Every year the tax assessor changes the ratio or ?equalization rate? to adjust for market value changes across the city. To find out your current market value divide your assessed value (on your tax card) by the current ratio or ?equalization rate?. If you can prove through comparables that your current market value as calculated above is 15% higher than comparables, you have a case. Comparables have to be arms length sales (short sales, distressed sales and auctions do NOT count). Comparables are not just similar units such as 2brs with 1200 sqr feet in the same area. Square footage, home type (brownstone vs highrise), lot acreage, parking, proximity to transportation, proximity to shopping, traffic, proximity to commercial properties, views, upgrades, amenities vs no amenities, etc, etc all matter. For a traffic example if you have a house on a highway your property is less valuable than nearby comparables on a residential street. This is why there are appraisers, they know how to make adjustments.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 21:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Quote:
Could be, ....however, even the current administration can count and after last week's school board election when the current old guard got trounced and Fulop was the big winner, if many owners leave JC as a result of the reval (what happened in the last reval)and those who leave constitute a larger group pre-disposed towards change, Healy will have pulled off a major shrinkage in owners, many who support change in JC. I'm just sayin, you know. 
Posted on: 2010/4/27 19:23
|
|||
 Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Based on the history of this administration, do you really think they can think that far ahead and to that level of detail?
Posted on: 2010/4/27 19:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/28 3:26 Last Login : 2014/10/27 13:13 From The fog.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1013
|
Quote:
Those luxury condos are paying the same rate you are, abatement or not. And, if anything, assessments should drop on condos built within the last few years.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 19:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Quote:
I answered this in another topic thread but here goes again: Rent stabilized units may ONLY be increased per annum based on the rate of inflation, to a maximum of 4% irrespective of inflation rate. Higher property taxes may only be passed on to those same tenants as % of total units owned at each address and as a result of landlords filing an "economic hardship" basis before the rent leveling board who votes on same.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 19:06
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I think the city will be cautious in raising taxes for some simple reasons. If property taxes suddenly spiked then many homeowners would be unable to pay and there would be another spike in foreclosures, if demand tanked because taxes spiked then the city would have to rasie taxes on remaining property owners even more.... and then the Democrats would definitely get voted out of office. Of course, there would still be a contingent of renters who are immune. I don't think landlords can pass higher property taxes along to rent stabilized tenants or can they?
Posted on: 2010/4/27 19:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
My condo is assessed WAY below what I paid in 2007. However, even though my condo is worth less than it was worth in 2007, it is STILL worth way more than its assessed value. This is great for me, but it really isn't fair. Any comparable place that has been built or for any other reason, reassessed since 1988, will have a higher assessed value.
Take this example: Person1 has a house assessed at 100k from 1988 and their neighbor, Person2 is assessed at 200k because for whatever reason it was reassessed in 1998. They pay the same tax rate, so Person2 pays double taxes to Person1. Based on market value, their houses would probably sell for let's say $500k and $550k. So how come the guy whose house is only worth 10% more, is paying double taxes? Here is my guess as to what will happen: 1) nearly everyone's assessed value will go WAY, WAY up (that's just what happens after 20 years) 2) the actual tax rate will go down 3) everyone will pay a lower tax rate on a higher valued home. the total dollar amount will go up for some people and go down for others. But it will be more fair. And yes, there should be some protection for the elderly living on fixed income...
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Multi-unit rowhouses are assessed higher the more units there are?
For example: for a given rowhouse, all other things being equal, would a 3 family will be assessed higher than a 2 family? This is assuming they are rental units, not a condo building.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2006/9/7 20:59 Last Login : 2017/3/15 17:02 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
134
|
Heights,
So we should continue with the disproportionate payment instead of true market value? I am tired of being penalized because I have made improvements to my home and was reassessed at the top of the market while similar homes a few doors down pay a fraction of taxes. I am talking about 60% LESS in taxes. That my friend is not fair! This makes me happy!
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If this occurs then usually the tax rate drops because it would be too much of a hardship to bring this burden upon the home owners in one shot. Granted the tax rate would rise but not at the rate of market value. Just think some homes are values at under $100k and now it would triple the tax rate. So we would have to pay two thirds more than what we are paying now. For instance a $100k house is paying $6000 with the market rate reval that same house would pay $9000 a year. You would be better off razing the existing property get a bunch of variences and build a new place. At least it will have property and market value which we know the older houses don't have now. I doubt a 75 year old house is worth $300k because the owner put in a new bathroom or light fixture. Compare other townships and do the math.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Quote:
The "official" link is on the home page of http://www.cityofjerseycity.com site. Here is the most extensive link for more info: http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/tax_assessment.aspx?id=6312
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:17
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/11/29 18:19 Last Login : 2015/7/15 3:35 From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
289
|
Any chance we can have the pilots and abated properties included in this "REVAL".
How will all these luxury condos on the waterfront affect this and will THEY have to pay more too? Not thrilled with this, but at least the neighbor who has a bigger place than mine, and pays half the taxes I do will now get to pay their fair share. But the fact of the matter is the city has not done enough to cut costs and is doing this REVAL to just grab/steal more money. NOT YOUR ATM. NOT YOUR ATM. FG 
Posted on: 2010/4/27 18:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
Some historical perspective.
New York Times Revaluations Anger Homeowners By JEFFREY HOFF Published: October 16, 1988 JERSEY CITY? AS Trenton, Camden and Newark face their first revaluations of property in more than 25 years, the troubled experience of Jersey City offers an example of the confusion that revaluations can cause when they are postponed during years of rapidly rising real-estate values, tax experts and officials say. Numerous Jersey City homeowners were shocked last spring to find that their assessments rose tenfold, but more dismayed to learn that nearly identical houses down the block got only sevenfold increases. The purpose of a revaluation is to insure that property owners pay their fair share of property taxes by bringing assessments up to 100 percent of market value. But thousands of Jersey City homeowners have joined a group that filed suit against the city charging that the revaluation was not conducted properly, resulting in exaggerated bills. In dozens of protest meetings around the city this year, property owners argued that the revaluation completed for 1988 is unacceptable because field inspectors failed to enter the majority of homes, were poorly trained and assessed many properties far above or below market value. Nearly 5,000 property owners appealed their valuations before the Hudson County Board of Taxation last month, and thousands have contributed to hire Saul Wolfe, a Livingston lawyer and president of the State Bar Association, to file suit against the city challenging the results. It is not uncommon for city governments to appeal the revaluations, which are conducted by independent companies. But residents say it seems curious that the Jersey City administration would take the politically unpopular position of supporting the revaluation, especially since the Mayor plans to run again next year. Disputes have arisen, however, between the City Assessor and the revaluation company, and the assessor says he has changed thousands of the assessments. http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/16/nyr ... wners.html?pagewanted=all
Posted on: 2010/4/27 17:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
City To Conduct First Property Revaluation Since 1988
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
It's gonna happen people. This is crazy. I hope we put in a system so that this happens more frequently so there are not the huge disruptions that this will potentially cause.
Reval Notices and Brochures To Go Out With Tax Bills & Tax Advice Notices The City of Jersey City is about to begin the process of revaluing all properties within the City. Property owners will receive a letter from Mayor Healy and the brochure, ?Understanding Property Revaluations: Frequently Asked Questions? in the mail along with their quarterly tax bill or tax advice notice. For more in-depth information on the Reval, property owners are encouraged to contact the City?s Reval Hotline at 201-547-4538 or visit the City Tax Assessor?s page,?Property Revaluation:An Overview and Frequently Asked Questions?.
Posted on: 2010/4/27 15:01
|
|||
|
||||