Originally Posted by
Lee Chowaniec
Comment
I know Jack Beilman well enough to know he is no fool and his reasoning for advocating basing property assessment on income. If this was a perfect world where everyone was employed, where there was no fear of job loss and where every property owner acted fiscally responsible, then this method might make sense. We live in no such world.
Mr. Beilman holds that market value can never be determined until such time the property is sold. That may be theoretically true; however, in all honesty we all have a good sense of what our properties are worth.
I agree with gorja who wrote me: “Assessment by income isn't as equitable as assessment based on 100% market value. Too many variables, situations and circumstances exist in today’s world of financial crisis.”
“You could have a couple with children with a good income purchase a $300,000 home and maybe pay a $1200 a month mortgage payment and have to sock away $825 a month for property taxes and unable to save a dime. Then have the lady next door die and leave her $300,000 home to her nephew with a lower income and no mortgage payment and not have to sock away the full $825 per month for his taxes.”
“Income based assessments would eventually end up like the welfare - food stamp system. The ones that work tirelessly eat hamburger helper and the entitlement people eat porterhouse steak. Assess at 100% market value and increase the exemption amount a little more for the seniors on fixed incomes.”
As stated before by this writer, municipalities’ oft-times use the reval system as a money- grab. Real tax rate increases are obfuscated by the increase in total town valuation. Assessment based on 100% market value, if done honestly and credibly, is still the best process.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks