Posted on 01/06/2012 5:06:49 AM PST by tioga
I am making Buffalo Chicken Dip for a party tonight. YUM!
****************************************
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Maybe I need more coffee but I couldn’t quite follow what was going on in that article - does Fitzgerald want to use the 2002 assessments or the 2011 assessments? And why would allegheny county be different than other counties?
Your property is still assessed from 1972 prices? What if the house next door sells, do they then assess it at value based on the selling price?
She was always unattractive on the outside and now she shows she is the same on the inside.
It’s a long, involved story and I’m not even sure what he wants to use, nor are all the taxing bodies involved.
Basic story is that people sued about how “unfair” the assessment system was since a countywide assessment was not done for decades. Properties in once booming mill towns were overvalued while newer suburbans developments were undervalued.
I’m sure there is a good deal of truth to that. But rather than having a rational appeals process, a judge ordered a countywide reassessment years ago. That was a fiasco. At one point it was even ordered to do a new assessment every year, which is insanity. People would get their new assessments, scream, file appeals, get the value adjusted just in time to get their new overvalued assessment for next year.
So they eventually stuck with the 2002 values. Until now, when the judge has ordered a new assessment. They apparently did this one even worse than the previous ones. You had a guy whose parking spot in his condo was valued higher than the condo itself. Another who bought a crack house to renovate and had it assessed like it was already repaired.
All from lawsuits against the one county.
Now, the kicker to the whole thing is that any reassessment is supposed to be revenue neutral (within some wiggle room) for taxing bodies. So if values go up by 5%, millages should go down to make the revenue brought in stay the same. So when people get a new high assessment, they freak out, but they really need to know what the tax bill is supposed to be. But they don’t have that information yet.
But if you reassess frequently, the wiggle room amounts to tax increases that no politician ever has to vote on.
I thought that was Snopes, the fusty “investigator service”.
Nope. I bought it in 2000 and the assessment did not changed.
What do they do with new construction?
I assume they deflate the present value to 1972 dollars.
But I don't think Texas is much better about a system. In a smaller town we saw a very haphazard system that only seemed to update if you sold or had to obtain a permit to remodel your home. But here we get yearly evaluations just based on the economy (up or down) and we can protest.
LOL I suspect both are found there.
I can’t swear to it but think our home was valued at the purchase price in 1999 in PA.
This is an area where the counties have authority, so it maybe that where you lived they did assess when a purchase was made. That doesn’t seem fair though if the neighbors’ values are decades old.
We had an assessment problem. We put in an above ground pool and our assessment went up. We tried to get it lowered, as it was not legal. We failed. A new asscessor took over and upped everyone’s assessments. We placed another grievance pointing out what had happened to us. We were the only ones to get lowered. They said we had been unfairly treated and they wanted to make it up to us.
I hate raising taxes as much as anyone but allowing values to stay at 1970's rates seems absurd to me. (although great for you!)
Glad they worked it out for you - that does seem convoluted!
They raise taxes. The property base number remains the same. The tax rate (millage) goes up.
That's why I said re-assessments are by law to be revenue neutral. If property values go up 10% the gov't doesn't automatically just get 10% more revenue. That would give the gov't an incentive to over-estimate.
Since it must be revenue neutral, any reassessment is about the relative value of my property to yours, not about finding a windfall for politicians to spend.
Ok that makes sense - sorry to be so dense. the Millage thing always threw me because we just have it listed as dollars and cents in Texas. We do have percentage limits that taxes can be raised in any year but even with that we had a school district raise taxes well over the limit and we did a recall election to reign them in. Lord they whined like 4 year olds but as with most liberal rants, their predictions of hungry students roaming the streets naked, unable to read didn’t come true.
Yes, there is a limit here on tax increases as well, but a judge can approve higher raises for certain causes.
Well of course, those political appointees must earn their position!
We elect judges.
So, nobody got my Rob Corddry/Richard Cordray joke from yesterday?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.