Reassessment rears its ugly head (Pittsburgh: appointed, assessors, attorneys)

[squarian]

Collier twins make the appeals system look bad and Richie FitzG says ¡No pasarán!

"You say either and I say either, You say neither and I say neither
Either, either Neither, neither, Let's call the whole thing off."




County assessments of identical Collier homes show big difference
Fitzgerald backs breaks for seniors

[BrianTH]

I'm not surprised, but I am amused, that so many local politicians are trying to protect the FUBAR status quo.

[WILWRadio]

How often do these county assessments take place? Will this vary with each county in the area?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

How often do these county assessments take place? Will this vary with each county in the area?

It does in fact vary by county, and Allegheny County is only doing it because of a court order.

[robrobrob]

Reassessments are bad for politicians. Great for attorneys and appraisers.

I think that whenever a change to an assessment is contemplated the hearing officers should look at the assessment for the house next door to see if they are even in the ball park.

[Bong477]

No doubt the current system isn't very good or fair, its hard to have confidence that the new one will be better though. Given a choice of the devil you know or the devil you don't... most want the devil they know.

Certainly total taxes aren't going down as a result of reassessment and its hard to imagine that a reassessment will have anything other than the general effect of what seems to be the current trend in taxes already (at least at a federal level, PA income taxes are basically a flat percent of your income), that is... those that already pay significant taxes, i.e. the middle and upper middle class who live in the neighborhoods that are doing well, will pay more while those that don't pay significant taxes will pay less. Of course, some will argue that's how it should be... maybe they are right but I'm pretty sure I pay enough taxes already and don't expect me to get excited about anything that is likely to make them higher.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

Reassessments are bad for politicians. Great for attorneys and appraisers.

They are also good for the relevant housing market, and for anyone who is being overtaxed due to the lack of a reassessment.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Bong477

No doubt the current system isn't very good or fair, its hard to have confidence that the new one will be better though. Given a choice of the devil you know or the devil you don't... most want the devil they know.

Even if it is just as screwed up, just getting more up to date assessments is a good thing.

I really think the opposition is a combination of two things. Some people just don't get the anti-windfall laws, and think reassessment means automatic tax increases. And some other people are fully aware they are getting away with transferring some of their rightful tax burden to other property owners, but are willing to defend that anyway.

those that already pay significant taxes, i.e. the middle and upper middle class who live in the neighborhoods that are doing well, will pay more while those that don't pay significant taxes will pay less.

It is actually going to be more complicated than that. The fact is that even if your house isn't worth much now, if your house also wasn't worth much in 2002, then currently you aren't contributing much in relation to people whose houses were already worth a lot more in 2002. So the reassessment might have meaningful affects on the first group's taxes in percentage terms, but adjusting that first group's taxes won't actually have much affect on the second group's taxes.

Meanwhile, a lot of houses that cost a lot in 2002 actually haven't appreciated that much. So a lot of higher income people aren't necessarily due for a tax increase, and may actually get a tax decrease.

So really, most of the action is between properties that were valuable in 2002 but haven't appreciated much, and properties that have appreciated a lot. But that doesn't break down along income lines in any neat fashion--and in fact, I wouldn't forget that a lot of the property tax base is not residential properties at all.

To help illustrate this, I think this image courtesy of Nullspace is helpful. It shows the relative size of property taxes paid in Pittsburgh by neighborhood, reflected in the size of the circles:



Interactive version here:

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data...sessed-propert

That's just Pittsburgh and not all of the county, but the same logic will apply. If you live in one of the small circles you may care about what happens in that small circle, but what happens in the small circles isn't going to have much affect on what happens in the big circles. Between the big circles, the question is how they have appreciated relative to each other--and note the biggest circle of all is Downtown.

[Copanut]

That article was misleading, it made the county assessment system look bad. The assessors did the right thing, it was the Appeals Board, that are not county employees, but appointed by politicians, that lowered the value.

[squarian]

Sen. Wayne Fontana (Brookline Democrat) said he would reintroduce legislation to halt all court-ordered reassessments through November 2012 or until the Legislature adopts statewide assessment reforms.

Read more: County to reassess Pittsburgh values first

A state-wide solution obviously would be preferable. Unfortunately, Fontana's bill has already failed to gain enough support (a Dem in a Rep controlled chamber) and the Gen Ass have already made their opinion on the matter clear though the Westmorland bill.

As with transportation, education and other areas where pressing policy solutions are needed, SW PA and Pgh in particular are victims of reverse secession - we've left the Commonwealth and no one told us. If Richie FitzG is really serious about being willing to go to jail, then perhaps he has nothing to lose by organizing a real secession. Yinzer Liberation Front, anyone?