18% increase in house appraisal. They're kidding, right?

[Yukon_PNW]

Originally Posted by banjomike

Home sale prices are still posted into the county tax rolls, so anyone who's interested can still discover what a sale was, along with a home's sale history, as it's still public information.

Can you expand on this? I haven’t been able to find anything.

[Wulf335]

According to a cdapress.com article titled "County Keeps MLS Deal Intact" from Feb 1, 2018, the county assessor's office gets sales data from the local MLS.



"The MOU states that the county will provide to the MLS a quarterly download of all assessment records for all properties within Kootenai County. The MLS provides the county all records of sales that occur as recorded and maintained by the MLS."


It kind of defeats the whole sales price doesn't need to be disclosed thing. Shady AF.

[oregonwoodsmoke]

I paid my taxes in full as soon as I got the bill. I just received a bill for additional taxes for $347. Labeled supplemental value.


So maybe you aren't done yet paying property taxes, OP.

[rkcarguy]

I feel your pain guys. Yes I'm from Washington but I've peeked your way a few times over the past several years. Welcome to Californication sadly. The average listed home price in my town is only affordable for the top 13% of income earners, and property taxes on that assessment level plus our "impervious area fee's" nearly add up to what my whole house payment was in 2004. We've seen a 280% increase in valuations in the last 15 years with stagnant to minimal increases in job opportunities at the same time. Count your blessings if it's only up 18%, and yes it's time to petition your state and local governments for a Prop 13 type bill before it's too late. A lot of long time residents with waterfront or view homes have been taxed out of their homes, for example the countertop/granite guy that redid my grandmothers counters bought a waterfront lot and built a small rambler on it for $110K in the 1990's. It assessed for $950K recently, more taxes than his house payment was! So he promptly sold it and banked the $$$, and is renting a single wide lol while he waits for a market correction or possibly will just have to move out of the area.

[dcisive]

Like I've said before, and where I used to live (child factory) I do feel that at both ends of the spectrum (seniors & children) it seems are the ones that need the most assistance. Kids with schools and education and seniors with competent medical care and tax breaks to keep them in their homes. Sadly some places (like that child factory place) have no mercy on seniors in any regard. It's ALL for the kids and they yank the taxes up year after year in a big way with nice fat bond measures added more than often. I'm not sure how a Prop 13 would work for the seniors other than have some format to cap the levels of increase that come upon us. If I were still in my 30's or 40's and working full time it wouldn't be much of an issue. Over 65 and yeah......it's a BIG issue.

[Cnynrat]

The major provisions of Prop 13 were:

1. Rolled back assessed values 2 years (from 1978 when it was passed to 1976)
2. Limited property taxes to 1% of assessed value
3. Limited increases in assessed value to a maximum of 2% per year
4. Required 2/3 vote of the legislature to increase any tax rates
5. Required a 2/3 vote of voters to pass any special purpose local tax, i.e. a tax for a specific purpose such as road repair, etc.
6. Established that properties can only be reassessed to a new base value when they are sold, or when new construction is completed.

All of these provisions were implemented via amendment to the state constitution. In practice, assessed values almost always increase by 2% per year, and tax rates are almost always 1%. So even though these were supposed to be maximums, in practice they have become default values.

So you can see how 1, 2 & 3 provide some protection to seniors.

There were a few related follow on initiatives passed, many of which addressed special cases in terms of when a property can be reassessed to a new base value.

What I saw happen in my county is the county kept a greater percentage of property tax revenue and flowed less and less back to the cities. Cities were highly constrained from raising taxes, so many had to scale back basic services over time. Where they could, fees were created and/or increased, e.g. building permit fees increased dramatically. This made it more expensive to build, which worsened housing affordability. Where were lived, fees to build a single family home were $40 -50k.

Many cities adopted strategies to try to attract commercial development that generates lots of sales tax receipts. As is the case here, the state has formulas that determine how a portion of sales tax receipts are flowed back to the source community. Auto malls are one popular approach. That may have worked for a time, but when the manufacturers rationalized their dealer networks post 2008/9, many were left with vacant auto dealerships and half empty malls.

Prop 13 did protect seniors against the worst of property tax increases, but it also created a very challenging environment for municipal finance. On balance, I don't think it was the best approach.

Dave

[dcisive]

Originally Posted by Cnynrat

The major provisions of Prop 13 were:

Prop 13 did protect seniors against the worst of property tax increases, but it also created a very challenging environment for municipal finance. On balance, I don't think it was the best approach.

Dave

Well like I said if it were up to me I'd have a cap on the burden Seniors had to deal with altogether. It's not just because I'm a senior NOW. I felt this way even when I was MUCH younger. I just feel no matter what once one gets to that "golden years" level not only does income get curtailed but any financial involvement gets over limits real quick. I for sure think it's abominable to threaten one's ability to remain in their home taxing or assessing them out of it beyond age 65. It's those from say 20-50 that generate the largest incomes on average anyway, and are best able to put up with bonds, tax increases and more. One thing I realize for certain is until one is IN those shoes they just don't care much about or for it. But oh baby once they are over that age range they'll feel the pinch big time. That's about all I can say about it. As for the few older folks (even on this board) that are just fine with tax increases at their age it's nice they are so blessed with the ability to deal with it. Most of as are NOT.

[Cnynrat]

Originally Posted by dcisive

Well like I said if it were up to me I'd have a cap on the burden Seniors had to deal with altogether.

As I said above, that's just one of the reasons why I'd like to see a well thought out approach to move away from property value as a foundation for funding local government. It doesn't always accurately reflect "ability to pay," and the case of retired seniors is just one example of a group that can get caught out by that. I agree that we don't want to drive people out of a home they own with property taxes that they can not afford to pay.

But, we need to fund the necessary services provided by local governments, so some thought needs to be given for how we might replace the current property tax system. I don't see that happening in the current discussions about this issue in Boise.

Dave

[dcisive]

too bad they can't adopt a sliding income scale method as opposed to so called values. If one was "under" the level so to speak, they could possibly be off the hook. Oh well..........guess that would be too fair