U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Great White North Hills
8,180 posts, read 7,123,419 times
Reputation: 4372
I know enough people working on the assessment to know that the numbers are good, we're only hearing about the extremes that would have been corrected during the informal appeals.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
11,013 posts, read 7,088,859 times
Reputation: 3438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Copanut View Post
I know enough people working on the assessment to know that the numbers are good, we're only hearing about the extremes that would have been corrected during the informal appeals.
Oh that is great. What about the people that have their home triple or even worse in taxes? Do you just expect them to move and all is great for you?

What about the casino? Wasn't that supposed to be good for us? What about the drink tax? That did a lot. What about Marcellus Shale? Wasn't that supposed to be huge for us all? Where is all this new money? 7% drink tax and PAT cutting tons of routes? Marcellus means nothing I guess. All a bunch of silliness.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:22 PM
 
20,274 posts, read 17,807,567 times
Reputation: 2819
Quote:
Originally Posted by h_curtis View Post
What does that have to do with what I said.
I tried (and apparently failed) to explain this to you already in another thread.

It is a good bet that if the reassessment goes through this year, the Allegheny County millage increase will get challenged in court. The County has got an argument about why they weren't violating the anti-windfall laws, but it is by no means a slam dunk and they could lose.

However, if Fitzgerald succeeds in at least delaying the reassessment another year, then this isn't a reassessment year anymore, and the County's tax increase is perfectly safe.

Now if you didn't understand that, keep re-reading this post until you do.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:24 PM
 
20,274 posts, read 17,807,567 times
Reputation: 2819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Copanut View Post
I know enough people working on the assessment to know that the numbers are good, we're only hearing about the extremes that would have been corrected during the informal appeals.
That sounds more than plausible to me, but I'd still like to see a formal report on the error rate, and possibly some lessons learned, come out of all this.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
11,013 posts, read 7,088,859 times
Reputation: 3438
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
I tried (and apparently failed) to explain this to you already in another thread.

It is a good bet that if the reassessment goes through this year, the Allegheny County millage increase will get challenged in court. The County has got an argument about why they weren't violating the anti-windfall laws, but it is by no means a slam dunk and they could lose.

However, if Fitzgerald succeeds in at least delaying the reassessment another year, then this isn't a reassessment year anymore, and the County's tax increase is perfectly safe.

Now if you didn't understand that, keep re-reading this post until you do.
All I am saying is we already had a massive county tax increase this past year! No one seems to even talk about it, yet the percentage of that tax was HUGE! Everyone in our region has a few mill laying around I guess, so all is well.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Wilkinsburg
1,661 posts, read 1,213,262 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by h_curtis View Post
All I am saying is we already had a massive county tax increase this past year! No one seems to even talk about it, yet the percentage of that tax was HUGE! Everyone in our region has a few mill laying around I guess, so all is well.
Dude, the 1 mil hike is probably going to cost you like $100 bucks. For someone that buys houses with cash, that should be pretty affordable. Let it go. And, if the reassessment goes through, your taxes will probably be lowered enough to offset that increase.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 02:29 PM
 
250 posts, read 133,230 times
Reputation: 183
My local school district is still trying to challenge my 2011 assessment (based on a recent purchase) at the Board of Viewers. This tells me that either their system is completely automated or they are hedging their bets that there may not be a 2012 reassessment at all, and any success they have at raising my 2011 numbers will carry into future tax years.

This is all such nonsense- I used to own property in CA and there, they understand how to implement a reasonable property tax system. The day you buy your house, it is immediately reassessed at your purchase price, PERIOD. If you cant afford to pay it you know that ahead of time and you don't buy the house. No histrionics, no court challenges, no problem. Once the taxes are established they cannot touch your tax amount- unless you pull a permit to improve the property, then they can assess the "improvement value".
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Mexican War Streets
1,290 posts, read 819,500 times
Reputation: 888
The plot thickens:

Judge reaffirms order to use 2012 reassessment figures - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 02:43 PM
 
20,274 posts, read 17,807,567 times
Reputation: 2819
Interesting Chris Briem post:

Nullspace: Ni!

Of course that is "interesting" as in "May you live in interesting times."
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 03:26 PM
 
Location: City of McKeesport
3,891 posts, read 3,715,953 times
Reputation: 2346
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
Yes, the assessed value should be equivalent to a base-year market value. If there are properties where that isn't true, they should be corrected.

What neighborhoods are you looking in?
Just random neighborhoods where I see cheap houses for sale. I have a tendency to watch real estate like a hawk. Then I research the homes on the assessment site. When I find some more examples I will post them here. Suffice to say, I have seen abandoned and derelict homes assessed for more in 2012 than in 2002, when they were occupied!

One example was 1810 Walz Street in Spring Hill. It's an abandoned apartment building currently on the market now (and not selling) for $15k (not a foreclosure), yet the new assessment value went up to more than $50k (from around $40k in 2002). I don't have exact numbers, or more examples, because the 2012 assessment values have been removed from the site. Spring Hill is a stagnant neighborhood at best.

Last edited by PreservationPioneer; 01-06-2012 at 03:36 PM..
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.


 
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:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $79,000 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 > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top