Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-13-2013, 10:05 AM
 
48 posts, read 65,775 times
Reputation: 87

Advertisements

A glimpse at AVI's impact: Areas on the up & up should prepare for taxes to go up, too

So, I'm getting a little worried about the impact this will have on the rapidly developing and gentrifying neighborhoods. The good news is it seems the City Controller is well aware of the potential adverse effects this will have on continuing the influx of young adults into the core of the city. However, at the same time he does not seem optimistic about Council staying with their current 1.25% millage rate.

Does anyone have faith in City Council to minimize the effects of new homeowners? I'm really hoping that the growth in these neighborhoods does not slow considerably.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2013, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,567 posts, read 3,100,739 times
Reputation: 1664
I'd be willing to give some consideration to retirees on fixed incomes for a limited time period, but giving somebody a break just because they've owned their home for years, at the expense of everyone else, is unjust.

Get ready for the poopstorm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 01:10 PM
 
802 posts, read 1,315,426 times
Reputation: 509
People who live in areas that have gone through gentrification that dramatically increases property values, young or old, should get a break.

I do not think that older homes, particularly those in need of updating, should have their values based on what new construction is selling for in a neighborhood like Northern Liberties. Many times the residents don't have the financial means to put in new granite kitchens or the other features of newer houses that attract buyers.

The Homestead exemption should stay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 01:57 PM
 
735 posts, read 1,122,741 times
Reputation: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post




to the suburbs!
That's exactly what's happening.

Anybody thinking "I'll just move to the suburbs where they have decent/good/great schools" is in for a rude awakening. Unless you live on the Main Line or in some other wealthy suburb (read: not the suburbs most people living in Philadelphia who will have trouble paying the real estate taxes can afford), those schools aren't going to be so decent, good or great in the decades to come. I don't mean "in a few decades", I mean starting this decade and increasingly in the next ones.

Those neighborhoods aren't going to stay so "safe" and "clean" either.... and the coffers are going to be hit MUCH harder than they are in an urban, modern city like Philadelphia that can handle those needs.

If you're not a young enough person, then you probably won't know about this until you see it for yourself. These sort of things tend to show up in the schools before they show up anywhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 02:09 PM
 
735 posts, read 1,122,741 times
Reputation: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Debbie1125 View Post
People who live in areas that have gone through gentrification that dramatically increases property values, young or old, should get a break.

I do not think that older homes, particularly those in need of updating, should have their values based on what new construction is selling for in a neighborhood like Northern Liberties. Many times the residents don't have the financial means to put in new granite kitchens or the other features of newer houses that attract buyers.

The Homestead exemption should stay.
I agree with you that older construction should not have its value calculated the same as new construction.

However, the fact is that newcomers pushed out longtime residents, and therefore should not be exempt from the same happening to them. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

As for this stopping the growth? I would think it will push the growth out even further as people seek out lower-valued neighborhoods a bit further out.

I will say that I definitely feel for people like Clark Park though. I am also FULLY in favor of the Homestead Exemption.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 03:24 PM
 
735 posts, read 1,122,741 times
Reputation: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom_567 View Post
25 creative court cases later, and the state income tax receivables go to places like Camden in exchange for payoffs and votes, and suburban property taxes are no longer reduced by state payments.
You do realize that Camden and other working class places pretty much subsidized the suburbs for years, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87 View Post
I was talking about prop tax only. But add wage to it and its more expensive then the burbs. Its gonna mean a mass exodus from the city
Because you know, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87 View Post
well, tom_567 agrees too.. And he is right. Why would you stay In the city with sub par schools, safety, police services, when you can get great schools, clean and safe area and wonderful Police services for the same cost?
Great schools? Maybe a handful of districts but the fact is that your "safe", "clean" suburbs with "great" schools aren't going to be that way much longer. Police services? What police services? You haven't dealt with much real crime yet. See how "wonderful" your police service is then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343 View Post
Lol I like how you continue to spurt out new nonsense everyday. You must know the things that come out of your mouth aren't true, so why do you even bother?
I think it's pretty obvious why.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87 View Post
yea okay its nonsense. So much so that Philly is going to raise taxes to make up for the non payers cause it easier to make the honest people pay more then to make the dishonest pay anything..

its true cause I have more years in Philly for 1/2 my life then you have been loving. Came back in 35 years when you have real experience
Yup, it is nonsense.

You lived in the Northeast as an adult. Please stop speaking like you've lived all over the city or like you grew up there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant$ View Post
I live in Delaware County and thought my property taxes were high...I was going to fight it until I saw what the house was assessed for (last one was way back in 2001) and I was like, "oh, nevermind" LOL
Well it's a different case in Delco. The property taxes are so high to pay for the schools and other services, thanks to reduced funding for the past however many decades. It's sort of a similar situation to the Northeast.

The good news is that assessments should be much lower next time around (unless you live in one of those Drexel Park homes that is).

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87 View Post
No brainer. Id sell to some sucker for $275k and get a nice big, safe home in the burbs.. If you decide to stay, you pay the price of gentrification, my friend.
Of course you would. The funny thing is that person would probably rightly think you were a sucker.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343 View Post
The only reason for AVI is because people with $500,000 homes in GHo and NoLibs are paying $600 in property taxes? You don't think that's a form of tax delinquency either? I absoluetly 100% understand why home owners will be mad but the inability for the city to collect tax money from tax delinquent properties is out of their control. It is really the states fault, and is exactly why the city is attempting to change that. The city wants to get more job growth in the city, which is really the most important thing. The only way they can do that is by reworking Philadelphia's arcane tax structure. They're not purposely coming after you because they're lazy and don't want to do anything else... they're TRYING to change things for the better, to get more job growth in the city and continue this population growth.
Exactly.

By the way, there was a bill at the state level to help combat blight and abandoned/neglected properties. I remember reading about it. I'm not sure if it passed or not (probably not).

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotodome View Post
Separate from the AVI, I wonder what effect the expiration of all those new construction 10year tax abatements is having/will have? Anyone know any word on that?
I don't have any information but my thought is that it would continue to make the most desirable neighborhoods more exclusive (as they should be) and push the people who could barely afford them out a bit further (as it should). This would be made a lot more inevitable by an increased influx of high-paying jobs and corporations to the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 03:50 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,567 posts, read 3,100,739 times
Reputation: 1664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Debbie1125 View Post
People who live in areas that have gone through gentrification that dramatically increases property values, young or old, should get a break.

I do not think that older homes, particularly those in need of updating, should have their values based on what new construction is selling for in a neighborhood like Northern Liberties. Many times the residents don't have the financial means to put in new granite kitchens or the other features of newer houses that attract buyers.

The Homestead exemption should stay.
They are gaining already by the increased equity in their home. They should pay. This is a tax plan, not a social welfare program.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 04:13 PM
 
788 posts, read 1,267,677 times
Reputation: 1236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343 View Post
So your making your city better by living here and being a tax paying citizen. Your paying less than what you should, and much less than the suburbs, and now the the city wants to raise taxes to WHAT THEY SHOULD BE in order to get more money (because they are cash strapped as it is, to say the least), and you just want to pack up and leave? Like you wouldn't have been paying more in the suburbs all this time anyways?

Why don't you wait to see what your taxes will actually be, before just assuming what they will be. Because, as far as I know, the city has not released anything.

Also, the city will be receiving nearly $100 billion from these tax increases. $100 Billion. That's a lot more money to do a lot more things that they couldn't do before.
$100 Billion for a city long known for its corrupt politicians to just throw away as they please. PSD has been a failing school district for well over a decade and has not shown much improvement, despite all the mounds and mounds of cash we taxpayers throw at it. If this city went after the deadbeats who don't pay their taxes and employed honest people to handle the taxpayers' money, I don't think we'd be in the financial hell we're currently in.

To be honest, for what I pay in city wage tax, I don't really care to pay more for a failing school district through higher and higher property taxes. My teacher friends have better benefits and better pay than I have, but I have an equally stressful job that requires me to work year round. I also have to contribute much more to my retirement and health care costs. Not only that, but I don't get snow days and constant time off. I'm not saying they don't work hard, but at some point the city can only take so much from its taxpayers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 04:35 PM
 
735 posts, read 1,122,741 times
Reputation: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by katykat01 View Post
$100 Billion for a city long known for its corrupt politicians to just throw away as they please. PSD has been a failing school district for well over a decade and has not shown much improvement, despite all the mounds and mounds of cash we taxpayers throw at it. If this city went after the deadbeats who don't pay their taxes and employed honest people to handle the taxpayers' money, I don't think we'd be in the financial hell we're currently in.

To be honest, for what I pay in city wage tax, I don't really care to pay more for a failing school district through higher and higher property taxes. My teacher friends have better benefits and better pay than I have, but I have an equally stressful job that requires me to work year round. I also have to contribute much more to my retirement and health care costs. Not only that, but I don't get snow days and constant time off. I'm not saying they don't work hard, but at some point the city can only take so much from its taxpayers.
That doesn't really have anything to do with AVI though. For starters, PSD was taken over by the state in the '00s and some schools were run by Edison Schools in the early '00s, who did an awful job.

The SRC needs to be abolished. They hired a corporate, clearly corrupt Superintendent and are undoubtedly behind the "reform" plan that basically screws the district and its neighborhoods.

As for teachers and other public unions? If it were up to me, the taxpayers would decide the salary level (% of the average salary in the state or city or district) for every public employee, especially politicians, and raises would only happen if approved by taxpayer vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2013, 07:15 AM
 
802 posts, read 1,315,426 times
Reputation: 509
People in low income neighborhoods such as certain sections of North Philly are not paying their fair share as far as property taxes are concerned.

I've been doing random searches of some of the streets on the OPA website. Many are paying under $500. That doesn't even cover the cost of basic city services. I'm not sure if I saw it posted here or on Philly.com, but the suggestion was a flat amount should be assessed of $1,000. This is a great idea even though the mayor and council would NEVER consider it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top