80% Property Tax Increase... Loosing my Home? (Vancouver, Camas: fit in, rent, assessors)

[stingray427]

Originally Posted by Fat Freddy

Yes, that was my point.

I was commenting that we don't seem to realize that while it is happening, only after it has taken place and we experience the fallout of higher taxes, while those who caused and manipulated the rise in property values profit from it.

So then it is just like working the more $$$ you make, more your house is worth the more tax you will pay.
this is not good if you are fixed income, retired or even working...
So then what does one do here in Washington?

[Fat Freddy]

Originally Posted by stingray427

So then it is just like working the more $$$ you make, more your house is worth the more tax you will pay.
this is not good if you are fixed income, retired or even working...
So then what does one do here in Washington?

The Rich get richer and the Poor get poorer.
The same as everywhere else.
The advantage we retired folks have is that we usually die before we get really poor.

[stingray427]

Originally Posted by Fat Freddy

The Rich get richer and the Poor get poorer.
The same as everywhere else.
The advantage we retired folks have is that we usually die before we get really poor.

You might be better off in California

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

The window for appeal has past.

Thurston county uses data from one year ago to form their opinion of value... so in a down market... you are out of luck... the Assessor won't even consider sale comps from this year...

I think we can use comps from Jan > July, but nothing since July. But... it really doesn't matter, as my comps were 50% lower than the assessor who had chosen a 'sweet spot' area, which had really super views, ez access, on a very nice quiet dead end area, rather than 200' off a 60 mph road...and not in an area that gets the killer ice storms and wind we get 800' higher and only 3 miles further up the road. They gave me a 1% break. (temporarily)

fact is... you will not win on a fight for residential valuation, UNLESS your place burns down or something...That is not too tempting, since the bare land is way over 50% of the total. Building a house is too expensive in this 'non-inflationary' economy. I did a main panel breaker box and primary cable last week to the tune of ~ $1500 in materials alone, up about 50% in 5 yrs. I was keeping my fingers crossed that the wire wouldn't get stolen from the trench while waiting for inspection.

[Ultrarunner]

I have to say the lady who answered the phone at the assessor's office was very polite. She provided copies of sales info for tax year 2006 and a price work-up for my home and land.

I reviewed the information and saw that the Assessor does not consider wet land buffer zones to be unbuildable. I called back and said almost all of my land is now delineated as wet land buffer and was told I would need the equivalent of an official county determination that my land is not buildable before the assessor could make an adjustment.

The Thurston county building officials office told me that I would first need to apply for a building permit and be turned down before they could make a determination. I would also have to pay all of the associated fees to apply.

Once again, caught between a rock and a hard place. On one hand the Assessor states my land is all buildable and the building department says maybe it is and maybe it isn't. The kicker is that I first must attempt unsuccessfully to obtain a building permit and I have no desire to build anything.

I also have the appraisal from my bank showing less square footage for both my home and garage than what the assessor's estimate. I was told that the assessor would need to independently verify square footage and would need total access to my home if I filed an appeal.

The assessment comps provided are either for superior properties or properties that sold in 2006 for record prices. One of the comps is currently for sale with an asking price 80k less than it sold for last year. I was told this was not relevent because it has not sold yet and even if it did... sales in 2007 can not be considered.

I'm beginning to think Janb is right... you can't fight city hall or just how much of my life do I want to spend fighting the county...

[Fat Freddy]

Originally Posted by stingray427

...You might be better off in California...

You think things are different there?
They're not.

[Sandy Nelson]

Ultrarunner.
Please don't give up. Continue the fight.

Sandy

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I...the assessor's office was very polite. ...

.... On one hand the Assessor states my land is all buildable and the building department says maybe it is and maybe it isn't. ...

I also have the appraisal from my bank showing less square footage for both my home and garage than what the assessor's estimate. I was told that the assessor would need to independently verify square footage and would need total access to my home if I filed an appeal.
...
The assessment comps provided are either for superior properties or properties that sold in 2006 for record prices. One of the comps is currently for sale with an asking price 80k less than it sold for last year. I was told this was not relevent because it has not sold yet and even if it did... sales in 2007 can not be considered.

.. how much of my life do I want to spend fighting the county...

I got 80% of my land rated at 20% value due to steepness, it reduced my overall taxes ~ 5% (the majority of value is in 'Improvements' - according to assessor)

The Assessor uses "footprint" sq footage, (outside dimensions)
the appraisers use "net" (minus exterior walls, and some hallways)

The Assessor gets his performance measured by getting the highest $$ in revenue

As my spouse says... "choose your battles wisely," (I don't) ... "life is too short"... "its all gonna burn"...

I am aggressively looking for Plan B, which will not include WA state for home ownership, as I see no way it can be affordable into the future - UNLESS it is through 'triple net business rentals' for real estate holdings, BUT... don't do that in a county adjacent to another state, as if their costs are lower, your tenants will flee.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by janb

The Assessor uses "footprint" sq footage, (outside dimensions)
the appraisers use "net" (minus exterior walls, and some hallways)

The Assessor gets his performance measured by getting the highest $$ in revenue.

The exterior measurements of my two car detached garage are 24 x 24, which equals 576 sq. ft.

The assessor lists and is taxing my garage as 1020 sq. ft.

My property has 3 structures... my home, my 2 car wood frame garage and my steel shop building.

My steel shop building is accurately listed by the Assessor.

The assessor lists my home 25% larger than the two appraisals I have. The appraisals only vary by 18 sq. feet. Maybe the difference can be attributed to differences between footprint and net measurements as Janb pointed out.

I have no explanation as to why the assessor lists my garage square footage at nearly twice it's actual size.

I might as well double the size of my 2 car garage since I'm already paying the taxes.

So logically, I wouldn't even need a permit to enlarge my garage... as long as my combined total garage footprint doesn't exceed the square footage I'm already paying for... right?

Much of my value is in the land. It is very scenic and I've gone to great length to give it a park like look... not to fancy... but very pleasing with native flora.

I expect my land will have continuing land value issues as long as the Assessor says it is buildable and the County Building Dept. believes otherwise.

The only thing I've learned about Washington's Property tax system so far is that it is both frustrating and confusing.

[laurhite]

WOW! I'm excepting a job in the Seattle area and I'm not sure where to move. The increase to my salary doesn't appear to offset the expense. I'm from Indiana and I pay 800 per HALF - not per month!! I'm not sure where I'm going to live and I'm questioning whether I should buy.