Property reassessment appeals question (Pittsburgh, Upper St. Clair: renting, house, neighborhoods)

[EveKendall]

I know this is a hugely controversial issue but I am interested in (hopefully constructive) feedback. Like many of you I received my property reassessment for my house in the city. My home has gone up about 50%. It is still assessed at about $20,000 less than I bought it for 18 months ago. My issue is that it is a duplex on a street of identical duplexes. They are all in great shape from the outside and everyone takes care of their front lawn, porch, etc. However, my half of the duplex was assessed much higher than any other duplexes, and was assessed as $50,000 more than my other half! I am really confused by this. Most of these homes have been owned by the same people for decades, but at least three (inlcuding mine) have been purhased in the past two years for roughly the same price.
My question is: should I appeal based on the fact that ours is now assessed as the highest on the block, even though it is assessed at less than what I paid for it in the summer of 2010? I do not mind paying more but it seems incredibly unfair that I will be paying double my neighbors who have the same house!
Thank you.
Rafaella

[BrianTH]

No one really knows yet how the appeals process will work in practice, but it sounds to me like you would be more arguing that your neighbors are undervalued instead of you being overvalued. I'm not sure that would be considered grounds for lowering your assessment--instead, it seems like grounds for the City or school district winning an appeal against your neighbors.

[gg]

All we can agree on it is the most stressful think we all have to go through at a very stressful time of year. What would anyone expect from the sleazy politicians.

[Nick538]

No politician should have access to so much taxpayer money.

We really need to shift to a fee based system for many services.

Schools should be funded at a local level by the parents of the children who use the schools. I don't have kids in school, probably never will. Why, then, should I pays hundreds of thousands of dollars in property taxes that go strictly to fund schools?

If you want something, buy it. If you want 50 new Rolex watches, more power to you. Just don't expect others to pay for them.

Eliminate the portion of your property taxes that goes to fund schools. There is absolutely no reason why your annual property tax on a $100,000 home in Pittsburgh should be higher than the annual property tax on a $450,000 home in California.

One-party Social Democrat control has destroyed Pittsburgh, and most of western Pa. The decent areas-Cranberry, Upper St. Clair, Peters and so forth, still vote for Republicans. All of the lower areas-Pittsburgh, Aliquippa, Monroeville, Washington, Pa, vote Social Democrat.

That should tell you something.

[gmagoo]

How many times has this "destroyed " city been named America`s most livable city?

[MeinGlanzendMotorrad]

Originally Posted by Nick538

I don't have kids in school, probably never will. Why, then, should I pays hundreds of thousands of dollars in property taxes that go strictly to fund schools?

Well, clearly your education hasn't done you much good, but educating the masses is a huge benefit to society at large, thus we pay for everyone to receive an education.

[BrianTH]

Yep, public school education is for the benefit of the children, who in the future will be our citizens, neighbors, employees, investors, and so forth.

That said, in a modern economy it doesn't make much sense to fund schools with a hyperlocalized property tax.

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Yep, public school education is for the benefit of the children, who in the future will be our citizens, neighbors, employees, investors, and so forth.

That said, in a modern economy it doesn't make much sense to fund schools with a hyperlocalized property tax.

Been throwing money at the city school system for how long? What are the city schools ranked in relationship to the state? They are ranked pretty low overall to say the least. Goes to show you money doesn't equate to great schools. Much of that comes from parenting and a vision of caring. Caring people are worth much more than money. Money is just a coverup that does nothing.

[BrianTH]

Many studies have found that money spent specifically on instruction correlates with better results. Here is a recent one:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpo...l-performance/

As an indication of the relative size of this effect, we find that a 10 per cent increase in teachers’ pay would give rise to a 5-10 per cent increase in pupil performance. Likewise, a 5 per cent increase in the relative position of teachers in the income distribution would increase pupil performance by around 5-10 per cent.

That said, we don't necessarily do a good job in the U.S. of making sure we are prioritizing public school spending on instruction, and there are many other inefficiencies we could address in our public education system.

By the way, if you adjust for the nature of the student population, the City district overall is doing decently these days. Here is one, admittedly crude, representation of that:

Overachieving local school district ranking information - Pittsburgh Business Times

But it can definitely do better, and fortunately is moving in that direction:

Welcome To A+ Schools!

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Many studies have found that money spent specifically on instruction correlates with better results. Here is a recent one:

Yet another very misleading chart. Have a look at they top dogs in that chart. Notice anything different about them? Much more homogenous places for the most part except maybe Australia. That might be worth a look, but places like Finland, Sweden and Iceland, don't have inner-city neighborhoods that resemble ours. If you take away all that element, one has to wonder how we would fair?

Money has very little to do with how well those countries are doing in education. That has much more to do with a way of life. I am very familiar with several of those countries first hand. They have no slums and poverty like we have. Totally different lifestyle than our Rap listening population or our Appalachian hillbillies. I mean that doesn't exist in those places.