Quoted from bumblethru

The city is going to dig themselves even a deeper hole!!!!!! They are barely  making ends meet with the high taxes/fees they are charging now. Between the non-profits and all of the businesses that pay little to no taxes/fees, coupled with the folks getting their taxes lowered via grievances/court............they will clearly be broke in no time at all!!!

Now that is what I call WORKING TOGETHER!!!

Keep the DEM implosion going! But don't fret this is happening in every Northeast City- lol. Got renaissance? Wait until McMayor dumps 700 eyesores on the imploded City resale market. Hello-Camden New Jersey North.

Quoted Text

CAPITAL REGION
Deadline approaches to file tax grievances
BY BETHANY BUMP Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Bethany Bump at 395-3107 or bbump@dailygazette.net.

The local rolls list each property’s assessed value, estimated market value and exemptions. But if a property owner believes the market value estimation on their property is significantly higher than the price they can sell it at, the Tax Department urges them to take the following steps (as noted in a news release):
    Determine the market value of the property: The best sources for estimating the market value of a home are recent sales of similar properties. Property owners can find information on local property sales at assessors’ offices, in the paper and on the Internet. More information is available in the department’s online pubilcation, “How to Estimate the Market Value of Your Home.”
    Talk with the assessor: Once the property owner has evidence to support a reduction in the assessment, he or she should schedule an appointment with the assessor. Often, an informal discussion between a property owner and an assessor can result in a sharing of information beneficial to both parties.
    File an assessment grievance: The deadline for submitting a grievance application in most communities is Tuesday. Property owners should confi rm the deadline with their assessors’ offices. To assist with filing a grievance, the department publishes “Contesting Your Assessment in New York State” on its website.
    For more information, visit http://www. tax.ny.gov.

http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01402&AppName=1

Leave it to McC and the gazette to wait until two days before grievance day to put something in the paper providing some information about HOW to grieve.

I mean, check this quote from the news clip:

Quoted Text

Determine the market value of the property: The best sources for estimating the market value of a home are recent sales of similar properties. Property owners can find information on local property sales at assessors’ offices

If you are reading this clip and are not well versed in it, then you read this today, go to the assessor's office tomorrow or Tuesday to find information on sales and what are you going to do?   Leave and go back home.   Why?   Because if everyone else is doing it too, which they WILL be, the place is going to be packed with people and do you want to stand in line for hours?

Unless you have some real estate background, it may be difficult to find the right places to look to find sale information.


Then do you just love this one from the same story:

Quoted Text

Talk with the assessor: Once the property owner has evidence to support a reduction in the assessment, he or she should schedule an appointment with the assessor. Often, an informal discussion between a property owner and an assessor can result in a sharing of information beneficial to both parties.

Why bother putting that sentence in the story?   It's moo at this point.   The gazette's instruction about informal discussion time is about three months' overdue.


What the Gazette should do, is have a big first section, front page headline in the last week of December when the city property tax bills arrive in the mail, an eye catching headline that will make people want to read the story and then the story needs to really inform people of the connection between their tax bill, their assessment value, and that they should spend January and February gathering info and making an appointment with the assessor for this 'informal discussion."

However, I don't think the city abides by that required practice for the "informal discussion."   And that is a problem because no back and forth conversation, just go to the BAR to grieve and then the BAR just tells them "insufficient data" so the homeowners, i.e, taxpayers are not provided the services the city should be providing.   Of course, instead of McC spending money on services to the homeowners, he spends the money by exempting the wealthy downtown from paying taxes, which means the homeowners must make up that difference which in turn causes unafforably high taxes which causes people to not want to buy in the city which in turn causes property values to plummet, which, all combined with having almost the highest taxes in the whole country results in people losing their homes.


.

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
City to reduce property values
Assessments 4% above the market
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter

    The city’s assessments are so out of whack that the city is reducing every property’s value in the tentative assessment roll.
    The new city assessor has reported to the state that Schenectady’s properties are assessed 4 percent higher than market value. The state has agreed to give the city a 104 percent equalization rate.
    That means, in essence, that every property is valued at 4 percent less than its current assessment. Under that calculation, a house assessed at $100,000 would sell for $96,000.
    Those who believe their house is over-assessed by 4 percent do not need to grieve to get that reduction; the city automatically adjusted all properties.
    Raising the equalization rate allows the city to adjust assessments without a costly — and time-consuming — reassessment. It also might put an end to the dozens of lawsuits from property owners who claim their assessments are too high. The city has paid thousands of dollars in tax refunds in response to those complaints.
    Mayor Gary McCarthy said the rate change should solve the city’s assessment problem for now.
    “This gives us interim relief,” he said. “What you don’t want to do is have your reassessment happen during a dynamic market.”
    Councilman Vince Riggi, the only non-Democrat in city government, said he wants a full reassessment. But, he said, the city clearly can’t afford to do it yet. So he was hoping assessments could be adjusted internally.
    “It’s certainly askew, our assessment roll. There’s no question about it,” Riggi said.
    McCarthy is hoping to wait until the real estate market settles. It was booming when the city did its last reassessment.
    “What we seem to see here is the market is stabilizing,” he said. “Houses that were sitting on the market are moving. I think Key to the City has played a role.”
    City officials, real estate agents and bankers run a monthly open house to sell privately owned property in the city. McCarthy has sent his department heads to talk about the benefits of living in a city, as well as frankly answering questions about the city’s problems. School offi cials have also participated. Dozens of houses have been sold.
    As the supply of houses for sale falls, McCarthy says he believes houses will sell for higher prices. He’s hopeful the city’s total assessed value will eventually rise.
    But for 2013, the assessed value of the city is falling. The roll shows that the city’s total assessed value has fallen by $44.1 million.
    That means that even if the city’s expenses stay the same, taxes will rise.
    McCarthy acknowledged that, but said he has not yet determined the full impact of the assessment changes. ......................>>>>.........................>>>>..............................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00101&AppName=1

Another misleading gazetto headline and a 'revolving door story' by Moore..................

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
City to reduce property values
Assessments 4% above the market
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter

FIRST..............
The city’s assessments are so out of whack that the city is reducing every property’s value in the tentative assessment roll.
    The new city assessor has reported to the state that Schenectady’s properties are assessed 4 percent higher than market value. The state has agreed to give the city a 104 percent equalization rate.
    That means, in essence, that every property is valued at 4 percent less than its current assessment. Under that calculation, a house assessed at $100,000 would sell for $96,000.

................then the door revolves......................

  

Quoted Text

  But for 2013, the assessed value of the city is falling. The roll shows that the city’s total assessed value has fallen by $44.1 million.
    That means that even if the city’s expenses stay the same, taxes will rise.

Yes bumble:

Quoted Text

  But for 2013, the assessed value of the city is falling. The roll shows that the city’s total assessed value has fallen by $44.1 million.
    That means that even if the city’s expenses stay the same, taxes will rise.

And in a message that I posted myself, actually posted a couple times over the past few months, what did I say???????    

The original, complete post can be found at:          http://www.rotterdamny.info/m-1325764667/s-60/

But here is an excerpt  it is "Reply No. 73," here it is:

Quoted Text

Quoted from mikechristine1 on February 18, 2012 at 2:27 pm

Even without any increase in the budget, without any increae in the tax LEVY i.e., the tax LEVY stays the same at $35,000, see what happens.
12 TAXABLE properties at $5,600 each means a total TAXABLE value of  $67,200
So now, the city needs to determine the tax RATE for the coming year.   Once again, the math.   Tax LEVY / Total TAXABLE VALUE = tax RATE
$35,000 x $67,200 = 0.520833

Now to determine the tax BILLS resulting from the SAME LEVY but 30% assessment reduction

$5,600 x 0.520833 = $2,916.67

You follow that, right?

You see what happens, right?   Property values go DOWN, and the tax BILLS stay the same!!!!!!!!!!!!     That's assuming the city budget results in no increase in the tax LEVY

And even certain "persons" (singular) cannot find anything incorrect about what I have written


.

Congratulations, Rotterdam and the rest of Schenectady County.  The houses in the city are now worth 4% less.  While their CITY tax will stay the same, everybody who lives in the county, but not in the city, will be seeing a HIGHER "State and Federal Mandate" bill this coming year.

ATTENTION EVERYONE!!!!!!            

Understand this!   Share it

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
City to reduce property values
Assessments 4% above the market

DON'T let this fool you!!!!    (this and the rest of the story)

The city is NOT, and I repeat NOT, reducing your assessment by 4%.   The city is NOT, and I repeat NOT, reducing your tax BILLS nor the tax RATE by 4% !!!

If you the assessment value of your house has been $100,000 (since the last citywide re-val), your tax bill has been calculated based on an assessment value of $100,000.   Since homeowners pay a tax "rate per thousand of assessed value," that means your tax bill is calculated as follows:

              Tax RATE x 100 = your tax BILL.

That headline and the story (particularly for those without a real estate background or knowledge) is deceiving.   Most average people would read that and think that since their home is now worth $96,000 and that their taxes would be calculated by:   Tax RATE x 96 = their tax BILL.   However, this is wrong.

Come the end of this year, when the city sends out the tax BILLS for 2013, the tax BILL will be calculated as follows:

             Tax RATE x 100 = your tax BILL.


(It's worth noting that different minds think differently.  The phrase "rate per thousand" can be calculated in two ways.   If the rate is $9.52 per thousand, then the math is either of the following:
             9.52 x 100 = 952        OR      0.00952 x 100,000 = 952  
You see, same thing.   Newspaper stories at budget time will usually say "....has set the tax rate at $9.52......"       But your tax bill will reflect the second manner)    

With this "four percent" story, be aware, there will be NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER to the ASSESSMENT VALUE of your house.   The Assessment Value will remain at $100,000 and you will be taxed at based on an assessed value of $100,000.

Based on this news story, wouldn't it then seem logical that the city could save the money on a citywide reassessment and simply reduce the assessed values by 4 percent?    It would seem so, however, the FACT is that the equalization rate is set by the state,( i.s., remember the Savage woman who got a cushy job in the state real property tax office.).

How Suzie Savage arrived that the conclusion that property values in the city of Schenectady have gone down only 4% is beyond me.   Did she/her office ever bother to look at what houses are really selling for?  

The equalization rate is totally false.   It's should be at least 130%   But it's not, so Since houses have plummeted in value so very much, then if your house is assessed for $100,000 and you could only sell it for $70,000 you should grieve your assessment and get the assessment value down to about $75,000 or actually a big less.


.

Another point.   The story alleges that property values have gone down "only 4%."

Remember in another thread recently where we posted what houses sold for in the city, a list from the paper compared to the assessed value.   I  didn't revise the assessed values on the 2012 roll but I'm sure if I did they would show that nothing has changed.   I or my better half might look it up later to see if the city assessor did make changes, e.g., increase the assessments of those that sold high for example.

But for now, while the story claims values have gone down by 4%, does this look like they have gone down by ONLY 4%?






.

MC1, stop being the nattering nayboo of reality.

Quoted from CICERO

MC1, stop being the nattering nayboo of reality.

Oh my.  Perhaps I should respond with one of the same OBSCENITY responses that Ron would respond with!

But nice that we have a new "title" to use

Rioting rayboob of reality

No comment from the CHEERLEADER on this?


Can't understand it.   No comprehension, no understanding whatsoever.   "there's a renaissance, the city is getting better"

Quoted from mikechristine1

Another point.   The story alleges that property values have gone down "only 4%."

Remember in another thread recently where we posted what houses sold for in the city, a list from the paper compared to the assessed value.   I  didn't revise the assessed values on the 2012 roll but I'm sure if I did they would show that nothing has changed.   I or my better half might look it up later to see if the city assessor did make changes, e.g., increase the assessments of those that sold high for example. But for now, while the story claims values have gone down by 4%, does this look like they have gone down by ONLY 4%?.

Everyone who owns ANY property in the imploding City needs to file TODAY at the City Assessment office. As MC has documented EVERY property is over assessed by at least 40% by the DEM implosion team. Maybe when hundreds demand a fair reassessment these DEM morons will be forced to cut something, budget and stop the ostrich impersonation. Other NE Cities have fiscal problems but they layoff, end City vehicles giveaways ans show some leadership.

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Grievance Day quiet, but many file papers
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter

City Hall was eerily quiet Tuesday morning. It was Grievance Day so workers hung signs, unlocked doors and turned on the lights at 7 a.m., expecting a flood of people. But by 8 a.m., not a single person had showed up to challenge their tax assessment.
    When the Board of Assessment Review began hearing cases, only a few residents were waiting. By the end of the day, the board had heard just 77 cases. In recent years, they heard anywhere from 200 to 500 cases.
    It’s not that people didn’t grieve their assessments. This year, 673 tax challenges were filed. But few of the owners bothered to personally present their case to the board.
    In recent years, 30 percent to 45 percent of the grievers wanted a face-to-face meeting. This time, just 12 percent talked to the board, although the board will hear more cases today from 1 to 6 p.m. if the owners filed their grievance by Tuesday’s deadline.
    Some residents who fi led their paperwork Tuesday told The Ga- zette they simply didn’t need to make a speech to enhance their case.
    Unlike past years, only a few asked for a reduction simply because they felt their taxes were too high. Many grievers came with solid data.
    Assessment board members have encouraged that, saying repeatedly that they generally base their decision on the owner’s paperwork, not an oral presentation.
    Grievers who spoke to The Gazette were also more confi dent that the facts are in their favor this year. Property values have fallen, and every property was reduced by 4 percent this year in the assessment roll that was being challenged Tuesday. But some owners said their property values had fallen by at least 25 percent.
    Landlord Robert Sponable brought in sales data showing that the house next door to his on Carrie Street sold for $30,000 last year. It was assessed at $47,800.
    That’s a 37 percent difference from the assessment, which is supposed to be the market value of the property.
    Likewise, Sponable says his house is assessed about 30 percent too high. He wants his house assessed at $55,000 instead of $79,000. He bought it for $32,000 so that his children could live there while they attended Ellis School of Nursing.
    “I think that’s fair. I’m not asking for the world,” he said.
    Others also said their property value has fallen by far more than 4 percent.
    Jeanne Ertel bought her Lexington Avenue house in 2005, when the prices were peaking. When her house was reassessed, it wound up about $50,000 higher than her neighbors’ houses.
    “I know the real estate bubble hit me at the wrong time,” she said.
    Getting a 4 percent reduction lowers her assessment from $181,000 to $173,760. But she hired an appraiser who said her house should be reduced about 25 percent, to $135,000.
    “Four percent is something,” she said. “But it’s still too high. I hope they are sensible and come down.”
    In the city’s most deteriorated neighborhoods, owners asked for large reductions. ................................>>>>..........................>>>>......................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00903&AppName=1