Question RE: Property Taxes (Albuquerque, Rio Rancho: insurance, how much, attorney)

[mortimer]

One of the reasons for this law (which has had unintended consequences) is that it was considered unfair for grandma/grandpa to have to pay constantly increasing property taxes when they don't have a salary that increases along with their tax.

At first glance; yup, that's not fair. At second glance; everything else is going up (gasoline, bread, beer, wine, whiskey, chocolate, coffee, etc) why should they get a break on the taxes?

If society decides that they *should* get a break, then perhaps, the property could owe the taxes and settle things up whenever it gets sold.

In CA, for instance where grandpa/ma are paying $700/year next to some young family paying $7,000/year, grandma/pa they are also sitting on $hundreds of $thousands in equity that they didn't do anything in particular for.

I'm not willing to subsidize such a thing if anyone cares.

[Merlander]

Originally Posted by EnjoyEP

Seriously, I have a very "hot" interview for a position in ABQ tomorrow, and I am guessing very likely may have an offer soon forthcoming from it. Thus, I will be weighing things very heavily possibly as early as this weekend. Thus, this property tax thing is a very big deal to me, and thus I appreciate any insights / inputs that I can on the issue!

I will be anxious to hear what, if anything, you hear from the legislators Tim!!!

I will keep you guys posted on what I hear. I think one of the possible outcomes is that the 3% yearly cap will be raised, while the lightning reassessments will be significantly reduced. Another is that the lightning reassessments will go away, but all property taxes will be reassessed to compensate for lost tax revenue. [both would be good for you, EP]

Good luck on your interview! What's with the "moderator" I see under your screen name???

Mortimer - good points. I think the idea of some reassessments on new sales and some caps on tax increases makes sense, but maybe they just need to play with the numbers a bit.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by Tim Rankin

I will keep you guys posted on what I hear. I think one of the possible outcomes is that the 3% yearly cap will be raised, while the lightning reassessments will be significantly reduced. Another is that the lightning reassessments will go away, but all property taxes will be reassessed to compensate for lost tax revenue. [both would be good for you, EP]

This is good information Tim, thanks for the update! I guess it sounds like that the property taxes situation - for the most part, overall - is still all-in-all pretty good in ABQ than in most areas. Keep me / us posted here, if you don't mind, as you get more feedback as this is very helpful!

Originally Posted by Tim Rankin

Good luck on your interview! What's with the "moderator" I see under your screen name???

Thanks for the well wishes on my int., the salary stuff would be phenomenal, although all of a sudden I am starting to think that even if it goes well, I may "pass" on this one (although that would be really hard to do because of the dough and the opportunity to get back so quickly); I guess I will be able to make a better decision after I talk to them of course. I am not going to lie...pretty darn nervous.

As for the moderator thing, yeah, I guess I got a CD-Forum "promotion" of sorts! I think it was because the NM and ABQ forums have been missing a mod for quite some time, and when they inquired I told them I would be happy to try to pitch in and help. (Don't worry, the salary doesn't increase from member to mod! ).

[Merlander]

Here is one response I got from the city, regarding the lightning reassessments and 3% cap:

"I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with us. Let me
take this opportunity to share some information as well......

The City is not the one who created or will be making changes to this
law...
The law that limits the increase in valuation AND obligates the Assessor
to re-value and re-assess properties that sell is a State Statute, voted
on and amended by the State Legislature. (7-36-21.2 NMSA)

The Legislature has several bills before it currently that they are
reviewing for consideration in this legislative period.
Karen Montoya, your Assessor, is involved with the process as a
reference, both as the Vice Chair of the New Mexico Association of
Counties/Assessors Affiliate and as the Assessor for the County that
makes up 1/3 of the state tax base.

Her involvement is to help estimate the effects of proposed legislation-
she does not get to vote on these in any way.

The bills that are currently being considered would only affect the '3%
cap' law and not revoke it totally.

However, If the law were to be revoked as you mentioned, this what I
would expect to see is;

Of the (approx) 180,000 residential properties, the assessments on
30,000(+) properties that sold in 2006 would remain virtually unchanged
while properties that have been capped would increase substantially.
(very substantially)
This would mean a large increase in the tax base of the county which
generally drives tax mil rates down... consequently; I would expect the
tax bills of the recently revalued properties to drop while the
'uncapped' properties would see an increase in their tax bill--

I'm guessing from your note that you recently purchased and were one of
the many properties that were revalued in 2007.

In closing, I would encourage you to share your concerns with the
Legislators that represent you. This issue of the tax lightning vs. the
inequities in assessments that the law has created is a very high
profile issue right now and I'm sure they would appreciate your input.

Thanks again for your comments.."

Also, it now looks like a transfer tax is on the table for the whole state of NM:

http://www.stopthehometaxnow.com/ (broken link)

[abqsunport]

great research Tim!!!!

[TKO]

Yes, of course the uncapped people would go down if they remove the cap. It would spread the burden out more evenly. There is a thing called Yield Control, where the state DFA who sets the mill rates won't let revenues go up by more than a certain percentage (taking growth into account) as well. This has always been so. Result is if values go through the roof, rates come down. I've seen it happen even with the cap because of crazy new growth in Cruces.

I worked in the property tax industry in this state for many years. Even with a state income tax the over all amount is far less than the property tax in Texas. Property taxes are about a fourth as much. I pay 700 on a town house valued at 75 (thank you cap!) and I make mid fifties and my income tax is about 1.5K. Add 'em togther and it's still less than my property taxes would be in Texas. By a bunch.

[uforoswell]

In 2001, State Legislator pass HB366 (prop 13 for you ex-CA’s). As already stated in this thread, it’s intention has gone astray. Here in Roswell, property values have been very low for decades. We are experiencing some major growth and are having a lot of real estate turnover. Property values have shot up dramatically. I actually think we forgot the $200K range because the values of new home seem to jump from $190K to $300K+ in less than 2 years. So we are now experiencing the inequities of HB366. I live in a huge Historic House (restored it) that I bought in 2005. I pay $2,200 in property taxes, 2.5 times more than my two next door neighbors (their houses have a much higher market value than mind). I just sold the place for $350K, so the new owner we have to pay to $3K+ in taxes, further separating the disparity from his neighbors.

Now the Roswell City Council wants to levy another mil rate increase on the property owners for a $7M Aquatic Swim Center. Yes, that number is right. They want us to pay for a $7M swimming pool with a few extra attractions. I am, of course, against any kind of mill rate increase. Luckily the voters get to decide. I have been campaigning against this misused of property tax dollar for months and have done a lot of research myself. Roswell has a lot of senior citizens on fairly fixed incomes. They are the ones who have been buying the new houses in Roswell for years as retirement homes. So they are also the ones who are paying higher property taxes and they are the one who do not want their mill rate to increase.

In Roswell, there is this mentality in our City Council that they can tax this community into prosperity. Just last December, the CC considered raising our GRT from 7.0 to 7.25. Roswell has been experiencing a steady increase in GRT and property tax revenue every year since 2001 but yet they can’t seem to balance their budget and ‘want’ more. I for one will pay more taxes when ‘needed’.

[sdzur]

Hello friends & fellow taxpayers.

I have filed a challenged to the failure to include proud new property owners in the 3% limit. I am very interested in this issue because I was involved in a somewhat similar lawsuit in Arkansas where I am a licensed attorney. I am not an attorney in NM and am challenging the NM law as applied to my very own recently purchased property. In Arkansas there was also legislation that conflicted with the state constitution as well as assessment practices that violated the state constitution. We won tens of millions of dollars in refunds for the taxpayers. (you can google "Amendment 59 class action lawsuit in Arkansas" and pull up the reported cases).

Our Amendment is NOT like Proposition 13 because proposition 13 clearly called for an "acquisition value" system. This is one in which the taxes you pay are based upon when you acquired your property (long-time owners pay less) rather than a current value appraisal system in which you pay based upon current value.

The NM Constitution as amended only allows preferential tax treatment classifications based upon owner-occupancy, age & income. The NM legislature, in my humble opinion, improperly interpreted the New Mexico Constitution in enacting legislation that gave preferential treatment (i.e., a 3% cap) to old timers while excluding transferees--buyers who purchased their property in the previous tax year--from the 3% cap.

I have a blog in which I explain all of the details of my lawsuit and the legal arguments I will use to challenge my tax increase. Being that I am not licensed here I cannot help anyone with their own lawsuits (which must be filed by the deadline posted on the Assessor's website) but I'm glad to share my legal analysis, as long as you agree that it is just my opinion and not legal advice since I'm not licensed to practice here! E-mail me for a link to my blog.

Stephanie Dzur

[WasSoggyInSeattle]

One of the reasons for this law (which has had unintended consequences) is that it was considered unfair for grandma/grandpa to have to pay constantly increasing property taxes when they don't have a salary that increases along with their tax.

At first glance; yup, that's not fair. At second glance; everything else is going up (gasoline, bread, beer, wine, whiskey, chocolate, coffee, etc) why should they get a break on the taxes?

If society decides that they *should* get a break, then perhaps, the property could owe the taxes and settle things up whenever it gets sold.

My sister is doing something like this - she is over 60, lives in TX on a very, very low-income (<$1000/mo). I don't know the details so probably should keep my mouth shut but... I've never been good at that. Anyway, her taxes on her house will be deferred until her death. Upon which her two sons will have to pay it out of the "estate". She was reluctant to do it as she didn't want to "leave them with nothing" but neither want the house, except what they can get out of when they sell and neither are really helping her out financially so she decided to do it. And why not?

Taxes here are pretty high, although not near where they are in TX. We also just got our tax assesments and most everyone's went down significantly. Ours did about 8K, but many I've talked to went down $20-30K. Not their taxes though... the guy interviewed on TV muttered something about there not being a decrease in taxes even though the property values have dropped due to budgets being set or something. Not real clear other than don't expect a big drop in taxes this year.

[mrgoodwx]

Interesting topic. I believe HB366 stated taxes could not rise more than 3% per year unless ownership changed. Consequently, I've noticed my property tax bill rise 3% each year since 2001...seems automatic. However, now that I am considering selling my house and have studied the market a bit lately...I get the impression the value of my Albuquerque home has dropped 5 to 10 percent in the past year. But...I think I can count on my next tax assessment to show the "automatic" 3% rise in taxes. It just seems to me that tax caps should somehow be tied to market conditions and adjusted each year...or is that too difficult?