The Miami Herald reports on one mayor that seems completely clueless on the current housing downturn (maybe the mayor should start reading this site):
“Yes, the housing market is slow. Yes, the contest has a number of restrictions. But still, the city of Miami Gardens thought it would be easy to sell this house.”
“After all, the sale sounds like a good deal tinged with some competitive mystery. The city is selling off a three-bedroom house for $170,000, almost $70,000 below its market value.”
“It plans to select the homeowner in a random drawing. The problem: Virtually no one seems to want to put their name in the hat.”
“Only six people have turned in completed forms since the city started accepting them in June.”
“The low turnout has left Mayor Shirley Gibson scratching her head, while highlighting just how difficult the path to home ownership can be in Miami-Dade.”
“‘I don't know what this means,’ Gibson said. ‘Everybody said they needed to get a house or find affordable housing. There are supposed to be all these agencies doing training. If [these agencies] are doing all that and getting people ready, where are they?’”'
Meanwhile, many cities continue to complain that they will be affected disproportionately if the “super exception” amendment passes. The Sun-Sentinel reports:
“The communities with many of the condos and homes most affordable for middle-income families in Broward County would take the biggest financial hit if a shake-up of state property tax breaks wins voter approval.”
“The proposed ‘super exemption’ on a statewide ballot in January could cost Coconut Creek, Lauderhill, Margate, North Lauderdale, Tamarac and West Park at least a tenth of their tax base, according to an analysis of property tax data by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Each city would face drastic cuts in services.”
“The six cities lack large swaths of luxury housing, investment property and commercial development that protect other communities from a major hit. Instead, vast numbers of homeowners in their middle-class neighborhoods and senior communities could cut thousands from their tax bills.”
“‘It would be tough to run the city and offer people the services that we have always offered,’ North Lauderdale Mayor Jack Brady said. ‘Come check our books, because we haven't overspent. This would devastate us.’”
In one letter to the Sun-Sentinel editor, a reader argues:
“Suppose this ‘super exemption’ passes, and the non-exempt value of a single-family home is reduced by $195,000. Great, but, what's to keep the Property Appraiser from raising the assessed value to the real market value at 100 percent, in conformity with State of Florida guidelines? Guess what? It's already happening. Here's a real example: a single-family home in the Bel Air subdivision of Lauderdale-by-the-Sea now shows an assessed value $165,000 higher, compared to $428,000 in 2006, in a market that has been declining for the past two years, and this is generally true for all of the homes in this subdivision. This substantially wipes out the ‘super exemption’, and with the protection afforded by the Save Our Homes (SOH) limitation gone, future tax increases would be unpredictable. While appraisals are partly an analytical process, much subjectivity goes into the process. The only protection we have from our government is the Constitution, whether it be state or federal, and we cannot afford to give up SOH, even though they are throwing us a bone by allowing us to elect to keep it, but stopping short of making it portable.”
“The only transparent way of predicting your tax burden is by eliminating property taxes entirely and replacing them with a consumption tax or sales tax, making your burden ‘simply unfooled-around with,’ as some TV commercial says it. This would keep your tax burden in line with your ability to pay; and by keeping necessities like food, medicine, emergency supplies, back-to-school clothing, etc, exempt from sales tax, the impact on lower income folks would be minimized and, perhaps, even improve their possibility of home ownership. But, with that not likely to ever happen, beware of the new proposals.”
“Do yourself a favor and go to the Property Appraiser's website, check out the current Assessment Value for your property, and click on the Super Exemption Calculator to see what your future risk is. The Calculator shows that in 25 years the single-family home in the example above will have a SOH taxable value of $263,000 versus the Super Exemption taxable value of $1.6 million, for an ad valorem tax difference of $29,000 per annum out of your pocket. So, come January 29, 2008, vote NO, to the proposed Constitutional Amendment. But if the "super-exemption" passes, and you currently have SOH protection from rising real estate taxes, elect to keep it, and lobby the Legislature to make SOH portable. Don't fall for the ‘gift.’ It's a Trojan Horse.”
Of course, this argument is easy for this reader since he is protected by SOH in a home he bought long before the boom. He currently lives in a house with an assessed of $593,000. Yet, due to SOH, he is currently paying taxes on $116,530 worth of its value.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Stumble It!
6 comments:
I love the "below market" comments that mostly come from realtors, but also from idiotic politicians.
They all use last year's prices (or worse, 2005 prices) to determine market prices, but those days are long gone. No one cares what these crappy houses were selling for last year.
If it were truly below market, then people would be scrambling to buy the places. Instead, they are priced at market -- that's why only six people applied.
Bob Eckblad is an asshole.
Bob is jerk is paying 20% of the tax that his next door neighbor is paying. No wonder he doesn't want the super exception. He was to continue paying nothing while enjoying the local services that his neighbor pay for.
It's not surprising this asshole is also a realtor (scroll down on this page):
http://www.lbts.com/realty.html
Yeah, I get pissed when some idiot claims the answer to So. Fla real estate issues is portability.
Give me a break!
Like real estate, economies are also local. If FL voters continue to support SOH the FL economy will go into a recession. Part time residents will leave in droves taking their money and over-the-top tax payments with them. Small businesses are already going under and the state is losing their taxes. Portability exasperates an already unfair tax system. Sooner or later new homeowners will sue for equity and win. Pig-headed homesteaders will lose in the end, so except reality and change the system with a cap on gov't spending. It's the only answer.
I agree with the cap in spending, not assessments.
Capping an assessment means nothing.
Cap the problem at its source--cap the spending. Politicians can fudge around with millage rates and assessed values. If you simply cap the amount of money they can spend, you solve that problem.
I find it funny, though, that most Save Our Homes proponents don't realize that what they're saving on taxes every year by being homesteaded, they're losing on the value of their homes.
New buyers, because they have to pay 3 times the amount of taxes that the current owner does, will simply be limited in how much they can pay for the house.
For instance, let's say the potential new buyer has to pay $6000 more a year in taxes (which is common here in Palm Beach County on a $450k single family home). That $6000 in extra taxes is equal to another $77,000 loan (30yr, 6.5% fixed).
Their house would be worth $77,000 more if the new buyers didn't have to pay that much in taxes, since they could put that money towards the mortgage payment instead.
Also, even if the super exemption passes, it doesn't cover the un-homesteaded properties. So, if that snowbird's house across the street goes down in value (because they're all selling their properties because of the ridiculous taxes) the homesteader's will, too, because their comps will be lower.
exactly!! its called penny-wise and pound -foolish.
Post a Comment