Friday morning open topic thread
We find several items in the morning news today, on topics we believe should be of particular interest to our Weber County Forum readers.
The first is a commentary submitted to us by gentle reader Dan S., who highlights two articles from this morning's Standard-Examiner, on the subjects of property taxes, the rising cost of housing, and the declining number of families who can afford to own a home.
Dan makes several thoughtful political points, relevant to the upcoming municipal election. He also raises the inevitable question -- whether rising home values are "necessarily a good thing" for a stable "homeowner"community.
Secondly, the New York Times reports that the U.S. Senate gave final approval yesterday to a package of new ethics and lobbying rules, with an overwhelming majority of Republicans and Democrats agreeing to improve policing of the relationship between lawmakers and lobbyists.
Among other things, the new legislation calls for bans on gifts, meals and travel paid for by lobbyists and makes it more difficult for lawmakers to capitalize quickly on their connections when joining the private sector.
Noticeably absent from this new bill are restrictions on pork-barrel earmarks.
The legislation is reportedly receiving "mixed reviews" on Capitol Hill, even amongst some legislators who voted to aprove it, which make us wonder what our readers "out here in the provinces" think about it.
Please consider these two items suggested topics for today's discussion -- or alternatively treat this space as an open thread.
Whatever you do, however, we hope you won't let the cat get your tongues.
Update 8/5/07 7:44 p.m. MT: The Deseret Morning News ran a very well-documented article on the Utah rising property value/property tax problem in this morning's addition, which we link here for our readers' attention.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
25 comments:
To Dan S.
To further your comments a little, in the latest city budget, tax receipts are actually higher than expected and next year is going to be higher yet. This all with out any significant contributions from any of the administration’s business development project. In other words the city is doing better than the mayor was suggesting. This fact didn’t support his logic that he was using in his arguments to justify his business development plans and so he chose to not point it out. The city is growing in revenues, not because of Godfrey but because Ogden is finally catching up with the rest of the state and because of the general health of the Utah economy overall. Real estate in Ogden will only continue to equilibrate to the relative values of the rest of the state but only if we maintain the city as a good place to live. Not a tourist trap but a place where people want to live. As home values escalate real estate tax receipt will increase by virtue of those increased values. These tax receipts in addition to all other receipts will continue to increase as Ogden catches up with the general activity level that the overall area is experiencing.
One of the problems affecting the standard of living in this city is simply the fact that a very sizable portion of those tax receipt within Ogden are not being reapplied to the city service but rather being diverted by Godfrey to fund his business development plans that have mainly been flowing to his cronies. Most cities use about 10% of their city budget to fund business development but Ogden City under this administration has steadily increased this allocation over the years to a level currently in the range of 30%. This higher level has been at the expense of services to the residents. Additionally he has pledged an undeterminable but large amount of our revenue streams generated by city owned developments such as the old defense depot, funds that would normally flowed back to the city to off set city operating costs, to subsidize his crony’s developments.
Further his lack of experience in negotiating his been evidenced in the contracts that he has entered into with third parties in that he has given the other party way more in the negotiation process than was necessary to accomplish the transaction. This means that Ogden City’s take on these transaction will be smaller than it should have been for a long, long time. It always easier to sell something that’s worth a dollar for 75 cents and that exactly what this administration has done with our assets.
IN Re: the Senate vote on the new anti-corruption in lobbying bill, Rudi wrote: "The New York Times reports that the U.S. Senate gave final approval yesterday to a package of new ethics and lobbying rules, with an overwhelming majority of Republicans and Democrats agreeing to improve policing of the relationship between lawmakers and lobbyists."
What he left out --- inadvertently I'm sure under the press of other business --- is the fact that every single one of the 14 Senators who voted against the bill was a Republican.
Imagine that.
In Utah, when property values go up, the tax rate is supposed to go down so revenue does not rise simply because of real estate inflation.
Is that readjustment in tax rates happening? If so, total property taxes for homeowners should be staying the same. Is it?
There once was a man named Howard Jarvis, born in Ogden, later lived in California.
For many years he observed the tyrany of out of control property taxes in California fueled by greedy and incompetent politicians and their insatiable appetite for ever more money to spend on pet projects, cronies and inneficient local government.
He finally got "Mad as Hell" (the name of his book - read it) and decided to do something about it.
After many years of struggle he finally succeeded with the now famous (infamous if you're a politician or public trough slopper) - PROPOSITION 13.
It sent shock waves through California government with many cries of doom eminating from those at the public troughs. There were dire warnings of a total collapse of property values and the state economy. The real estate industry thrashed around with predictions of catastrophy. It didn't happen, land prices in California did just the opposite.
Well Proposition 13 worked, the property owners of California were able to stay in their homes. Retired people through out the state narrowly escaped being taxed out of their homes - like is now happening in Utah.
If you want to get a rise out of the people in local tax offices, if you want to see a look of panic on public trough slopper's faces, just start saying out loud - "UTAH NEEDS A PROPOSITION 13!"
We really do need it. This never ending escalation of property taxes is outrageous and only fuels the unchecked growth of local governments - the main reciepients of this looting of the public.
The so called check's and balances that are supposed to protect the property owners from this criminal taking is a farce. The "so called truth in taxation" meetings they are having around the state is nothing but public theater to placate the tax payers. In theory the over all taxes collected are supposed to be even. It is bull shit. Most every one's taxes are going up, but who's is going down? In order for this scam to be true, for every one who's property tax went up, you would have some one else who's taxes went down. Does any one know anyone who's property tax has gone down?
We are being manipulated and robbed by this wide circle of elected and appointed officials who's opinion of our property values are the only ones that count.
They tax your house based on what other houses sold for. That assumes that every one's house is for sale. If that were the case the prices would go way down, and of course your property tax would too. The disingenuous politicians point with pride to the increase in value of your house. Well, if your not selling it, that is a total red herring. The only benefit of your house going up is that you get to pay more taxes. If you are on a fixed income like many in Ogden are, all you get is squeezed out of your home so people like Godfrey can blow more of your money on their cronies or pet projects.
Taxes on a home should not be raised past normal inflation rates until the home is sold. Only then will it be fair taxation, as the new owner is buying into the higher evaluation. Only then will we be free from being taxed out of our homes.
If the market goes down, there is no provisions for an automatic tax reduction, like there is for an increase if the market goes up. Each individual property owner has to go through the hassle of appealing and proving to the bastards that they have over appraised your property. The large burden of proof is on you!
If you dispute the opinion of the County wonk who decides what your property is worth, you have to jump through big hoops, hire your own appraiser and then maybe they will adjust their opinion. Then again maybe they won't.
It is all about transfering of wealth from the private property owner to the public trough sloppers.
TIME FOR UTAH'S VERY OWN PROPOSITION 13.
The property taxes on my home went up 10%.
Oz:
Of course, there were downsides to Prop. 13 as well. California used to have one of the best public school systems in the nation. Not any more. And the way it was written, Prop 13 made it nearly impossible to adjust rates up when there was a serious decline in state revenues, and that resulted in cutting services and maintenance that very nearly no one thought should be cut. While I agree things had gotten out of hand in California, I suspect the Prop 13 Solution was, in some ways [not all] the equivalent of a kind of tax reform carpet bombing rather than the targeted strikes that would have avoided throwing, in some cases, the baby out with the bath water.
But it did the the attention of the boys down there in Sacremento, didn't it?
I like the idea of freezing tax rates beyond normal inflation rates on homes until the point of sale. [Naturally I do. I'm a homeowner in Ogden.] But that will result for a time in some reduced revenues which means some other mechanism will have to be found to fill the gaps. This is not likely in Utah. Note how Our Glorious Leaders [aka the Curtis/Bramble Mafia] in the legislature whacked the food sales tax [a good idea] but then did nothing to replace the lost revenues for agencies that relied on the food tax revenues.
And if that particular reform goes through [no property tax rise beyond inflation until point of sale], you will eventually have someone who bought a house two years ago learning that his next door neighbor who bought twenty years ago is paying on similar property one tenth of the taxes the new buyer is paying. And you can bet the buyer's state legislators are going to hear about that long and loud and every year when the tax notices arrive. Think the boys and girls down in Salt Lake will be able to stand against that kind of pressure? I'm giving odds against.
Tax fairness reform is a minefield most legislators do not want to step onto. And when they do, they do not do so in ways the protect the interest of John Doe, homeowner. Witness Our Glorious Leader Governor Huntsmen and his Republican legislative lackeys opting for the "flat tax" model for Utah's income taxes. If I were a Republican malefactor of great wealth [I know, I know, redundant] in Utah, and I could design an income tax plan to serve my interests, the flat tax is where I'd come out.
Not to mention that Utahans, like the residents of every other state in the union, keep clamoring for more services from government [more prisons, more police, better schools, more roads, more rail transit, more health services, more recreation, more ATM trails, more consumer protection, shorter lines at the DMV, more universities etc. etc. endlessly] while at the same time screaming bloody murder at the suggestion that they'll have to actually pay for all they want government to do for them, and pay for it through taxes. Sadly, "don't tax thee, and don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree" has in the view of most Utahans --- most Americans --- become practically part of the Bill of Rights.
So yes, absolutely, Utah's tax laws [state and local] need a thorough rinsing in a strong detergent. But in the prevailing climate here, the chances of that resulting in reforms that move us closer to some reasonable standard of tax fairness is not high, Oz. Not high at all.
I don't know why your'e all griping about the rising cost of living and our tax burden. Just don't have kids. You'll be amazed at what you can afford without the little ingrate rugrats.
Jason W., I just want to acknowledge your brilliant, insightful, culminating post yesterday. The cherry on top.
So who's gonna throw me under the bus today? Can't wait.
How does Truth-in-Taxation (TNT) work?
Accountant,
RE: Is that readjustment in tax rates happening? If so, total property taxes for homeowners should be staying the same. Is it?
My valuation this year went up $20,000; my tax only changed four dollars, so I would say yes.
Southsider,
you're one of the lucky ones, mine went up by more than $100. That's on top of similar increase for over the last 8 years
googleboy
Thanks for the link on Truth-in-taxation.
It explains how it's supposed to work. Unfortunately that is only so much bull shit to make the tax payers think there is some fairness involved.
Show me the mass of people that have lower taxes now than then. If it were truly revenue nuetral like these lying bastards claim, we would have plenty of people with lower taxes. There would be as many reductions as there are increases.
Unfortunately the link comes from the Utah Tax Payers association. A phony front for the NeoCon clique that controls things around here.
It is headed by Senator Howard Stephenson, one of the leading Republican operatives that have mastered the fine trick of lying out of both sides of their mouth at the same time.
It amounts to about the same thing as having a "Truth in Government" organization run by Matt Godfrey.
We are sheep, the Republican NeoCon's are the shearers. Buzz Buzz Buzz, thank you master...
My property taxes up about 150 under the new budget if it passes, up about 450 if the new budget does not pass.
The Truth in Taxing business I think refers to total property tax revenues, which are to hold steady. I don't think it applies to individual properties necessarily. I note that under the "new budget" provision, school taxes on my property will drop about 300, accounting for the tax under the new budget being only 50 more than last year rather than 450.
Is that drop in the school tax payments the result of the Fairness in Taxing law at work? I don't know. Asking.
Curmudgeon
The Truth in Taxation biz is supposed to be a zero sum game for the government entities. They are not supposed to benefit from run ups in real estate like we have had here for a last few years. It does not apply to individual properties.
In other words, just because the value of real estate supposedly went up 20 percent does not mean the taxing entities get an automatic 20 percent more money out of the hides of the citizens.
The point is that if 100 people all had large increases in their taxes because of this faux increase in real estate values, then you would theoreticaly have 100 people who's taxes went down the same amount, resulting in a zero increase to the bandits at city hall. So show me an appreciable number of people who have had their taxes go down. For every one you produce I would guess I could show you a hundred who had tax increases. Antedodal? sure, but it still begs the question - who's taxes has gone down?
And yes, I did say faux increase in property values. The housing market follows all other markets in the basic supply and demand equation. Only a very small percentage of houses are on the market at any one time, yet all properties are evaluated based on this small cross section. If every one decided to cash out in the boom market, the values would drop through the floor. So for these disingenuous politicians to tell us how lucky we should be that our houses are worth more is just pure bull shit. The only real benefit you get, if you are not selling, is a much higher tax bill. You don't get any more service, you don't get anything except the previledge of giveing more of your hard earned money to these vultures.
An alternative to your earlier post about all the services people get from the government can be answered by the alternative you didn't mention. A government living within its budget. A government that is run efficiently. A government that doesn't spend tax payer money on such nonsense as bogus business trips to China by a bunch of dumb ass legislators, or millions to their cronies in industry, etc etc.
There is absulutely no incentive for governments to run efficiently when all they have to do is raise your taxes when they make stupid multi million dollar mistakes. Virtually none of these wothless bastards that populate the various levels of government could make it in private industry. They are all leaches upon the people.
My taxes went up 150 dollars, and my income did not go up by that much in the whole last year.
Maybe we should look at when you buy your house you are locked into that value til you sell it, and that is how much your tax is from there til you sell it. after all is it not worth what you payed and not what you could get out of it. Because you may not get that out of it.
OK new press release!
The mayor is now shaking down all the businesses in the ogden area to help him raise over a half million for his re-election. The reason for all of this is, so when he loses, he will have a severance package to retire on. All the money that he does not use for the campaign, he can now put in his pocket. Lets see how he does with this question. Should you have money left over in your account, just what will you do with it?
Oz:
I am truly thankful for your latest reply, and so will every teacher at any level who reads it be. For you have given us, at last, an unbeatable reply to the old canard about "those who can do; those who can't, teach." It is "those who can, do; those who can't, legislate."
Thank you, Oz. Truly deeply grateful.
Mother:
If I knew, for certain, that his alleged campaign war-chest was in fact going to be his severance pay if it got fat enough --- that he'd withdraw from the race to collect it all --- I'd probably contribute, and think the donation worth every penny.
I would like to contribute to the Mayor's campaign for re-election.
1st I would donate some sticky gooey tar.
2nd I would donate a large amount of chicken feathers.
3rd I would donate a rail to run him out of town on, along with his cronies in the Muni building.
O.K. boys and girls, don't get all bent out of shape but, perhaps Mr. Reid and fellow past benefactors are strong arming the local businesses under the guise of campain contribution, but in reality is a legal defense fund.
What pray tell has lying little matty done for anyone of the business community? The only exceptions being some soon to arrive outdoor equipment warehousers. And of course his private cabal, functioning in collaboration with his RDA/ ecconomic development scams. Gadi, Neilson, Peterson and the likes.
I could have sworn that I saw Stewart Reed driving north on Washington Blvd yesterday afternoon in a new silver Porsche 911 Carrera.
Nice:
Impractical. Not nearly enough room to fit in the camping gear for trips to Arches or the Tetons. Why in the world would anyone want one of those?
Did he have his biker colors flying?
Did he have his main squeeze Matty wrapped around his neck?
Were they heading to Harrisville to tell Matty's mom about their thing?
The S E is soft on Godfrey, because of all the tax breaks and government handouts that have been given to the S E over the years.
We need to shine the light on that.
Dear License:
In re the SE being "soft on Godfrey," please see this morning's lead editorial. Link here.
Doubtless Rudi will have a main thread up on the editorial soon enough, but until then, I'd like to note that the SE editorial this morning pointed out something that I'd not noticed when I first scanned the documents when WCF put them on line. Here's the key graph:
• The city’s admittedly rough estimates early on were that the urban section of the gondola between downtown and Weber State University would see 825,000 riders per year, and that the mountain section between Weber State and Malan’s Basin would have 420,000 riders. Four months later, in July 2006, under the heading “Gondola 1 — City Owned,” developer Chris Peterson informs the city’s Chief Administrative Officer John Patterson that the urban gondola should expect only 60,000 “Resort riders.” That leaves 765,000 of the city’s original estimate to be accounted for. Furthermore, Peterson estimates his mountain gondola would have 100,000 riders, as opposed to the original 420,000 estimate.
Wow.
Good work, SE. And I notice the editorial highlighted that by making the lead item in the editorial's bill of particulars. Nice work.
Post a Comment