Reps reject reval phase-in

As a resident of Stamford for 3 years now, my taxes have went up at least 15% in each of the previous years and stand to increase by 35% this year. These increases are not sustainable and in a year where the overall economy is doing as poorly as it has in decades, this would be a good year to keep spending level or even cut it. A compromise in the budget of an overall increase of over 8% is ridiculous. Bloomberg has managed to keep NYC's budget level, so should Stamford. But, what can you expect, more tax and spend measures by a city government that cannot control its appetite for spending. In this type of economy the city should be scaling back and if it means cutting employees and services so be it.

time for a tax revolt

with real estate declining in all area's for the past 2yrs people should be fighting to get the property reassed at todays market prices, surely they sould be lower then when they were assesed during the peak of the RE bubble.

Bravo!

This was a good decision.

I hope we will implement frequent reassessments -- every year or every two years -- and that emphasis will be put on valuing the land first. Use the teardowns to make those values realistic. Treat the existing buildings as the difference between the land value and the total value of the property.

I hope also that more people will familiarize themselves with the assessments, and that our assessor will provide land value maps so that we can see clearly what is going on in Stamford. Our downtown sites are like gold, and should be valued accordingly, whether the owner chooses to keep the "hole in the ground" (which employs no one and houses no one), a downtown diner (which employs a few and houses no one) or a high rise (which may employ many and/or house many).

By doing so, we will share the costs of providing the services which make Stamford a desirable place to live, justly among us. And we will nudge those who choose to underuse their prime sites to reconsider that decision -- which will benefit the community.

I hope that we will undertake a program under which those who find their property tax unaffordable can defer, with interest, some portion of their tax as a lien against the property, to be satisfied upon the sale or transfer of the property. See http://www.wealthandwant.com/docs/unindexed/B...
for more about why this is superior to other solutions to that problem.

Stamford's Board of Reps made a good step. Let's keep going! Let's keep our assessments current from now on.

And if you have a problem with the total budget, please make the case for which services we should cut. Get your neighbors' agreement, and tell the Board of Reps!

The board of reps dont care and I DEMAND all the off budget money the City Of Stamford has to be returned to the TAX PAYERS.

LVTfan, your comments are misguided. The recent reval included residential prices at the peak of the past 5 years, while commercial prices continue to rise in Stamford. As always, it is big business that gets the break. Essentially taking out a tax lien against your property makes no sense as a permanent solution. Bottom line is spending needs to come down. And I have contacted my local rep and it does not seem to do much at all. All of these motions are set on track and it becomes very difficult to change the path once it is set in motion. For many people it will come down to moving to a more affordable area or having a tax lien equal to the property value. Hopefully there will be enough equity left for you to pay your conveyance tax when you are kicked out!

It really doesnt matter what your property is valued at because if it drops down in value they will just raise the mill rate.

Scumbags.
Welcome to the new Bridgeport and Waterbury.

Okay, then, dirtbags.

Mike,

I maintain a 6000 line spreadsheet to follow transactions and assessments. The residential assessments are generally improving -- getting closer to what the neighborhood transactions would suggest.(An exception: some of the new luxury condos are seriously underassessed.)

And, at long last, the commercial assessments are beginning to be pretty good. I think we're still underassessing the land, and perhaps overvaluing the buildings -- which results in lower taxes for those who are underusing or not using their land, like the "hole in the ground" and the chainlinked lots on Broad Street.

Getting the property tax right is far superior to using a conveyance tax, but in the meantime, the conveyance tax at least captures back a tiny fraction of the value the community creates.(THe seller didn't create that value, unless he made a major renovation or a major addition to his property: buildings depreciate, just like cars What rises is land value.(The conveyance tax is only 1/24th as much as the real estate broker gets ... and the brokers begrudge the community that tiny tax! The community created that value.)

If Stamford maintains its schools and its transportation system, its residential values will continue upward after this mortgage crisis settles down. And if we don't, we'll watch our values fall relative to the trends in neighboring towns and other towns of similar distance and commuting time from NYC.

I appreciate your post. My problem doesnt lie in what the property is worth. My problem lies in how the government spends my money. The Government figures it needs X$ ammount of money to run things and squander money. If your property is worth This much $ or this Much $ it doesnt matter because they will either raise or lower the mill rate to compensate how much $$ they need to extract from the good people of Stamford.
Is there any reason why we need a half billion $ Government? Thats my question.