Deseret Morning News Mostly Right On Property Tax Proposals
Full Disclosure: I am currently employed by the Davis County Assessor as a Certified Residential Appraiser. This blog post represents my own opinion only.
Today’s Deseret Morning News editorial rightly cautions lawmakers considering property tax policy revisions in the upcoming legislative session. Many of the changes proposed by various lawmakers could cause far more harm than good. Any attempt to assess residential parcels using a measurement other than current fair market value will create inequities as bad or worse than those we have seen this past year. Too many of the proposed changes would alter this method of assessment and would result in an unfair distribution of the tax burden in most of Utah’s counties (the potential inequities favor wealthy property owners over average home owners in nearly every case).
There are obvious problems with the current system that need to be fixed. One example of a very positive change that should be considered is the proposal to require counties to assess all parcels every year instead of only assessing each city within the county every five years. Many of the property tax inequities which occurred in Davis County this year wouldn’t have happened under this policy.*
My only disagreement with the Deseret Morning News stems from their opposition to Sen. Neiderhauser’s proposal requiring voter approval of any tax increases above and beyond levels of inflation. As a resident of Davis County where we’ve been hit with several foolish tax increases over the past few years I think this proposal deserves some discussion. This policy would put more power in the hands of voters instead of the politicians who sometimes seem to pay more attention to narrow partisan interests than they do to the needs of county residents.
*It should be noted that Davis County is making every effort to implement this policy even if the state doesn’t require them to do it. James Ivey, the Davis County Assessor (and my boss), has asked for and received additional funding from the Davis County Commission to pay for the personnel needed to complete this huge task for tax year 2008.
5 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I am totally disgusted with property taxes in Utah. If you cannot afford a home, your family suffers and many times may even disolve (divorce etc.). The government seems to be so greedy, that they are forcing the hard working class people out of their homes with the continuosly never ending rise of property taxes. Do they really think that our wages continue to go up like property taxes do? Do the math, and check out the stats. We have a big problem here!!!
Comment by steve C. — November 28, 2007 @ 8:14 am
Amen Steve.
I think it is important that as the legislature considers changes to the way property taxes are administered we make sure they don’t adopt measures which put the hurt on working class people even worse than the current system does.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — November 28, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
I like Senator Neiderhauser’s proposal as well. I think James Ivie is right that we should try to equalize when we assess all homes. We should not suspend tax payments for some, because that shifts the burden to others.
Comment by Tyler Farrer — November 28, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
When it comes to issues of dollars and cents, Sen. Neiderhauser puts his accounting background to good work. His proposal to do top-to-bottom audits in each department every four years and institute zero-based budgeting is one of the main reasons I voted for him. This proposal sounds equally on-target.
I’ve seen the sting on our own tax bill. Since last year, our property taxes jumped a solid 15% or so. $200 a year might not sound like a lot, but I don’t think we should part with one more red cent than we have to. I can’t imagine how much this adversely impacts lower-income and fixed-income families; nobody should be taxed out of their property.
Comment by Jesse Harris — November 28, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
The proposal to evaluate property value every year seems to be obviously the best plan. Is the rolling 5 year average proposed because some think it is better, or is it a practical thing because it would cost a lot more to hire enough staff to reevaluate each property each year? Is the 5 year average a decent compromise?
As for the comments, I think the inflated real estate market, along with the exclusionary non-disclosure laws you already blogged about, is the real problem for affordable family housing. Overcoming the initial price barrier to ownership at a monthly payment that leaves enough leeway for savings and emergencies is getting ridiculous. I couldn’t afford to buy my own house now, 18 months after we purchased it. But we made sure we got a mortgage that used a reasonable percentage of our income, so when our taxes went up, we had enough flexibility to cover the unexpected increase. I’m not defending tax increases, I’m just saying that buying a house too close to your income limit is as much a problem as mortgage fraud. I think the elderly who have owned homes forever and are facing huge increases in home value with a fixed income need some protection, but younger purchasers can only be taxed out of their property if they over-extend themselves.
Comment by UtahTeacher — November 29, 2007 @ 2:18 am