The Letters Are Coming, The Letters Are Coming

How will they know that you have a winter view since they haven't seen the property in winter

1) Get a copy of your new property card ASAP
2) Monitor home sales of comparible homes
3)save the data and photo's on your computer
4)visit open houses
5) Select your comparible home sales properties and get a copy their property card (public information)
6) In December 2007 file for a tax appeal.

With the housing market slowing and sell prices dropping, the tax department will be bussy granting appeals based on new home values.

...it's not going to be pretty.

Anyone on Highland and Upper Mountain Ave can collectively bend over b/c you are about to get f#%@&!

Houses appraised at $250,000 are not selling for $500,000 as the article implies.

Houses appraised at $250,000 are selling for more like $700,000.

The data is public. Ask a realtor.

Thus, your taxes could be going up 50% on a house that's selling for $700,000.

If houses selling in the $700,000 range start having taxes of $20,000 plus, it's not going to take long before the values of the houses begin to plummet.

Yes .... it's not going to be pretty.

ach! so many people don't get the math of how this works.

If your assessed value doubles, but the average assessed value in town goes up 2.5 times, your taxes will go down (until the politicians sop up the "excess").

If your assessed value only goes up 2 times, but increases generally are 1.75 times, your taxes will go up. It's not your piece of pie that matters, so much as how your pie slice compares to the others.

If houses in the $700K range start paying $20K taxes, that means that less valuable houses have been paying more than their share for over a decade. But don't worry, slimy politicians can always raise sales taxes to send rebates to wealthy Montclair landowners.

You want the views you gotta pay the dues!

If you want the Vista, Don't start complaining on Barista !

All our home values will plummet when our taxes are raised. A 4 bedroom Montclair house isnt worth as much with a $20k a year tax burdon as a comparable 4 bedroom Summit house with a $12k tax bill. I bet the taxes wont reflect this real world value.

Enjoy the nifty panorama, but
Save tax complaints for yo' mama!

if you

see

a majestic

sweep, then make sure

that your pockets

are deep

The housing assesments have gotten out of wack because there was so much time between re-assesments. Isn't there some way that it could be done on a more frequently?

Everyone prays
Their taxes won't raise
But when it comes time to vote
They think marriage and gays...
Or stem cells and immigrants,
Or abortion and War --
But lowering taxes is what good votes are for!

Since I pay $34 per thousand of market value in taxes on my house. I expect my taxes to come down, and can't wait for the letter!

They will find a way
To make you pay
For the political project of the day
(They'll take credit for wayfinding and
Kill your hopes of wallet-minding).

OW...OW....OW....

Roses are red

Violets are blue

I'm paying through the nose

Because I wanted a view.

Well, folks, I've been going over hundreds of listings of houses that have sold in the past few years.

Using the numbers in today's Star Ledger against those listings, houses in the fourth ward, as well as the $700,000 and up houses, will see taxes dramatically rise.

Yes, other houses that have been paying too much will see their taxes go down.

But, you know what? when someone who has taxes of $22,000 is suddenly hit with $32,000 worth of taxes, you're not going to be able to say "Gee, you're lucky to have gotten away with paying less than your fair share all these years!"

'Cause the fact of the matter is there is a $1.2MM house in Chatham right now that has taxes of $15,000. And a $2MM house in Short Hills that has taxes of less than $20,000.

So while these homes may cost 40% MORE than Montclair, their taxes are LESS than HALF of Montclair's.

And, you know what? At 8% a year increases Montclair's taxes will DOUBLE in less than nine years, while the mortgage payment on that $1.7 MM house in Short Hills, Millburn, Chatham, or Madison will still be the same.

And, in case you didn't notice it, some of these towns (especially Millburn) have some of the finest school districts in the State.

Land ONLY question from an over taxed working stiff??

IF,

Land (with a house on it) that is on a "high profile street" with a lot size of 200' x 350' (or 60,000 sq. ft.) has a land assessment of "only" $57,300 which I calculate as .955 per square foot ($57,300 divided by 60,000 sq. ft = .955 per square foot)

then why?

Does a small lot (with a house on it) that is not on a "high profile street" with a lot size of 40' x 100' (or 4000 sq. ft.) have a land assessment of $17,000 which I calculate as $4.25 per square foot ($17,000 divided by 4,000 sq. ft. = $4.25 per square foot).

There must be a reason for this, anyone with an answer?

Racism, obviously. Geeze, where have you been?

I find this whole topic very unfunny. How can people make light of such a serious subject, with such serious repurcussions to real people who live in Montclair? With such serious repurcussions to me. (My taxes are going up, I can just feel it...)

Also, I think it's an outrage that ROC, who must live in one of those mansions on Upper Mountain, should have his taxes lowered.

I'll name the new poolhouse I'll build with the savings in your honor if it'll make you feel better, walleroo.

A place where people are constantly changing their clothing and appearance while wet behind the ears, sort of makes sense, no?

re land:
is the smaller lot in a zone that would allow development of multiple luxury townhouses, while the bigger lot won't allow any additional units or subdivision? is the smaller lot closer to a train station? are marsupials infesting the bigger lot?

Any or all of the above could be a factor.

appletony,

Both houses are in the R-1 zone.

Both houses are within 2 miles of the train station (although the big one is closer).

Neither can be sub-divided (but ya never know about the bigger one). Obviously the smaller one cannot be sub-divided and is actually non-conforming because its "too small".

No marsupials, although the owner of the bigger lot kinda looks like a Wombat.

any thoughts

my other thought is that land is not priced by the square foot, like fabric, but by the piece, like an article of clothing. A lot with the capability to have only one house has a maximum possible value as a lot. The bigger lot is valued at 3.3 times the value of the small lot, which is a lot for a lot!

appletony,

The bigger lot has a carriage house on it that is only 300 sq. ft. smaller than the smaller lot's whole house. The bigger house recently sold for over 3 mil (within the year) and the smaller was recently appraised at 400k.

I thought we were talking land only? The house assessments will be greatly affected by recent sales prices, as that's the ultimate proof of fair market value at any given time.

If the bigger lots value is at 3.3 times that of the smaller lot (which it is not, or did I misunderstand), than why is its sq. footage assesment more than 4 times lower than the smaller?

The bigger lot's location is certainly more deirable that the smaller (IMHO).

Yes, that would make me feel better, ROC. I await the invitation to the housewarming pool party.

Wow, you're right, ROC, it does!

Guess I haven't checked lately.

I must be special, too.

Oops, wrong thread.

(I wondered where that post went.)

When your property is reassessed you can only protest the TOTAL increase--not the assessment of your land or house alone. So it doesn't really matter how the reval metes out your value between land and house.

there must be a formula as to how they arrive at this land figure,

Does anyone know?

Formula:

(25% Licked finger In the wind)+(25% embedded Muni waste variable)+
(25% Abbott District allocation)+(25% Union Pension/Healthcare premium) = 100% chance of you getting hosed....