Property Taxes (again)....

The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.

Moderators: Jim DeVito, Dan Alaimo

michael gill
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:28 am
Location: lakewood

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby michael gill » Thu Sep 30, 2021 7:03 pm

News costs money.

People who gather it are educated and professional and work it as a job. They need to be paid.

It has never been free.

The old ad model is broken.

You still have to pay for news gathering somehow.

Sorry.


User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14103
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:41 am

michael gill wrote:News costs money.

People who gather it are educated and professional and work it as a job. They need to be paid.

It has never been free.

The old ad model is broken.

You still have to pay for news gathering somehow.

Sorry.


Spoken like a professional.

I would add, my point was management let journalists down chasing shiny objects they thought would save them money and make their stock holders happy.

Is the old model broken, hardly, all of it is still powered with ads. All of it.

I see much of it settling down, now that everyone realizes online ads get about as many hits of value as Jehovah Witnesses get invited in for tea.

TV, Games, Videos, and Websites are getting better at realistic delivery that demands you watch the ads to get the content.

If they can ever become as subtle as newspaper and magazines they will cash in. Also the first media group that truly captures a seamless transition between all mediums will set the new tone for the future.

But again what do I know.

Does music, art or writing stop if there are no checks?


.


Jim O'Bryan
Lakewood Resident

"The very act of observing disturbs the system."
Werner Heisenberg

"If anything I've said seems useful to you, I'm glad.
If not, don't worry. Just forget about it."
His Holiness The Dalai Lama
Matthew Lee
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:15 am

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Matthew Lee » Fri Oct 01, 2021 7:39 am

This is a classic case of the genie out of the bottle. When the Internet was nascent, it was all about chasing eyeballs and making money on ad revenue. So almost all the media operated without a firewall. Everything was free and people got used to paying nothing for news.

However, that was not a tenable model and I believe the pandemic itself forced many to change their ways as advertising for many dried up. It's not just the PD at all. Our daughter goes to school in Florida and we used to be able to access the local newspapers there on the internet for free. Not anymore. They cost. So does Crain's Business. So does Sports Illustrated. And on and on and on.

Prior to the internet, print media wasn't free. The NY Times didn't hand you out free newspapers on the corner. But people got used to free media on the internet and it is hard for many to go back to paying for it.


michael gill
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:28 am
Location: lakewood

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby michael gill » Fri Oct 01, 2021 9:18 am

Absolutely.

"Free Press" refers not to the cost to the consumer; it refers to a press unencumbered by government intervention.

Remember the kid on the corner shouting "Extra! Extra!" ? You had to buy that paper to get it. All those papers and magazines Bridget noted ... when print was the delivery system, you had to pay to get the articles.

Only in the news media is the requiring payment to get a product or service referred to as a "paywall."

I did not mean to hijack this discussion about taxes.

It does suck when the taxable value of a house you bought (even years ago) for one price increases with recent sale price of houses nearby. House Bill 920 provides some shelter from that. Your taxes don't go up as much as the taxable value would seem to indicate. Still, no argument: higher taxes are painful. And yet we have to pay for police, fire, parks, schools, etc.


User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14103
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:12 am

michael gill wrote:It does suck when the taxable value of a house you bought (even years ago) for one price increases with recent sale price of houses nearby. House Bill 920 provides some shelter from that. Your taxes don't go up as much as the taxable value would seem to indicate. Still, no argument: higher taxes are painful. And yet we have to pay for police, fire, parks, schools, etc.


I was assured by the County Auditor's office that starting January 1, we can protest recent evaluations.

He would not comment on possible success rate of them lowering the values.

Within the "zone" are four houses that were 1) bought by a person that just loved and had to have the house though it wasn't for sale. 2) A house gutted and flipped for insane money. 3) A 3 bedroom bought sight unseen so that the man from NYC could be near his kids, and 4) a house that went for 4 times what it went for a decade ago, on a hunch that it could go higher. This is what they used to figure my house value, among other things.

I always thought only a fool bought a house thinking taxes would not go higher. Call me the fool, I never thought it would be this crazy.

If the market tanks for any one of a million reasons, we are living in a Brazil.

.


Jim O'Bryan
Lakewood Resident

"The very act of observing disturbs the system."
Werner Heisenberg

"If anything I've said seems useful to you, I'm glad.
If not, don't worry. Just forget about it."
His Holiness The Dalai Lama
Richard Baker
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:06 am

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Richard Baker » Fri Oct 01, 2021 7:42 pm

How many of you voted to make the county assessor an appointed position. Only someone totally ignorant would vote to allow the government to appoint a tax collector and it appears there is no shortage of ignorance in Cuyahoga County.

The same socialists that voted for the assessor appointed position who are on government pensions, or the dole will claim we have to pay for government services. Let them please explain how the cost of government has gone up 19 percent in three years after previous increase of 12 percent. Will the city's infrastructure be repaired or replaced or will the students get a better education, absolutely not. The size of their realms and salaries of all the government agencies and socialist programs will be expanded. However, their bubble will bust when the next housing crisis hits and real estate bottoms out.

The people on fixed income and young families will struggle or be force to sell their homes to pay a 19 percent property tax increase in Lakewood. There is little doubt why Detroit, the richest city in the world in the 1940s, became a Democrat managed broken bankrupt city dump. I'll bet that ninety five percent of the people that work for the city and school district live don't live in Lakewood due to the taxes.

You have the right to an assessment hearing, you do not need an attorney. Under the freedom of information act, request all the assessments of the homes in your taxing district, all sell values of homes they based the increase in your property value on. In addition, the math they used to determine why your home is valued higher than neighbors in the same district who have larger houses in better condition. Have a real estate agent friend assess the value of your home based on its condition and particulars.

These fools in the assessor office don't drive down the street and look at your home and condition. If it had burned to the ground, they wouldn't know it. In addition. if tens of thousands of home owners requested an assessment hearing, that will bog them down and they are required to have hearing within a reasonable time period.


Tim Liston
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 3:10 pm

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Tim Liston » Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:49 am

Richard Baker says: “(Assessors) don't drive down the street and look at your home and condition. If it had burned to the ground, they wouldn't know it.”

Check out the results of all 25 properties on my street (values obfuscated for privacy)….

Current New Chng Address
$x24,800 $x62,500 19% 01100 Forest
$x79,700 $x51,900 19% 01101 Forest
$x78,200 $x50,000 19% 01102 1/2 Forest
$x43,900 $x47,300 19% 01102 Forest
$x96,200 $x90,400 19% 01104 Forest
$x27,000 $x89,100 19% 01105 Forest
$x18,600 $x17,100 19% 01106 Forest
$x17,300 $x53,600 19% 01107 Forest
$x62,100 $x68,900 19% 01109 Forest
$x73,300 $x44,300 19% 01115 Forest
$x64,200 $x33,400 19% 01116 Forest
$x59,900 $x28,300 19% 01117 Forest
$x24,600 $x67,300 19% 01119 Forest
$x31,100 $x13,100 19% 01120 Forest
$x64,800 $x53,100 19% 01121 Forest
$x24,900 $x05,700 19% 01122 Forest
$x38,600 $x40,900 19% 01123 Forest
$x87,400 $x18,000 19% 01124 Forest
$x98,200 $x92,900 19% 01125 Forest
$x02,800 $x79,300 19% 01126 Forest
$x88,400 $x43,200 19% 01127 Forest
$x76,500 $x67,100 19% 01130 Forest
$x68,500 $x19,500 19% 01131 Forest
$x81,700 $x73,200 19% 01132 Forest
$x20,000 $x99,800 19% 01133 Forest

So what the Country would have me believe it that, after individually assessing the condition of each property, including (1) improvements made (or not made) during the last three years, (2) whether the property was sold or not during that time, and (3) other factors that would affect the assessed value, that all 25 homes on my street (which is chopped in half by Clifton Blvd.) increased in value by exactly 19%. Right.

I also checked another street at random. Wilbert. Exactly the same result. All 25 Wilbert properties show a 19% increase. BTW the above information is easy to glean from the link I provided above, an entire street all at once. Just omit the street number. And it’s no longer behind a paywall.

This is not the work of people who wish to represent taxpayers fairly. Their interest is in maximizing revenues to the entities they fund, primarily LCSD. And doing as little work as possible. Check out your street and let us know what you find out.


michael gill
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:28 am
Location: lakewood

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby michael gill » Sun Oct 03, 2021 10:41 am

Hi Tim,

My taxes went up significantly more than yours.

I live on Edwards Ave, not far from Detroit. This is all public info, so I don't mind saying my valuation went up 42,700 from 147,300. That is an increase of 28.9 percent. So it looks like you are getting off easy.

I note that the comparand you chose--Wilbert--is also north of Lake. I suspect they identified some average increase for different zones of the city.

Does this amount to soaking the people whose houses are worth less, hitting the people harder who can least afford it? If home values are an expression of wealth, that seems to be what is happening, at least if my personal example is indicative.

That aside, let's assume you are correct that they simply applied the same rate of increase--derived from an average of recent sales in the district--across the board. They would do that to avoid looking at individual properties one by one. That would save the government money, which is to say it would save spending tax dollars. Do you think the government should add staff and spend more tax dollars to look at properties one by one?

Someone above noted that a house could have burned down and they would not know, meaning, I guess, that those people would likely have seen the same rate of increased valuation. While I believe the odds are against that, I also believe their chances would be pretty good when they went to dispute the increase.

Also, let's not forget that HB 920 tempers the impact of these increases.

From the County website:

"Suppose a school district receives voter approval to raise $5 million through a 5 mill levy. The following year, after a reappraisal, property values have increased. House Bill 920 does not allow the school district to receive any additional revenue from this voted levy. The voted 5 mills will be reduced to a millage amount that will generate $5 million, and each taxpayer will pay a lower "effective" tax rate. In order for the school system to raise more revenue, it must go to the voters for approval of another levy.

"If a property increased by exactly the same percentage as the district as a whole, the taxes for that district will stay the same. If a property increased by less than the average, taxes will decrease. If a property increased by more than the average, taxes will increase. While the total tax dollars raised stays the same, an individual taxpayer's share will be based on his new property value. In this way, House Bill 920 equalizes the burden of a voted tax.

"House Bill 920 applies to all voted levies. ... "

https://fiscalofficer.cuyahogacounty.us ... l-920.aspx


Bridget Conant
Posts: 2894
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:22 pm

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Bridget Conant » Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:05 pm

A few comments to Tim and Michael.

Ohio law requires regular property assessments. Cuyahoga is on a 3 year schedule, but here’s how it works: 3 years ago was a comprehensive assessment. They are SUPPOSED to look at every home, verify condition, and updates values. This revaluation was merely a market update and is only based on sales price increases. So every 6 years they are supposed to physically inspect property and do a “real” assessment and midway, at 3 years, do a “quick” update. That’s how it’s always been done.

In reality, they do not inspect individual homes. They may drive down a street to determine general desirability and if homes are maintained or becoming decrepit. But a real home by home inspection is not done despite what they claim.

The off year adjustment considers recent sales. I do notice when prices go up, they quickly adjust values upwards, but they are very slow to adjust downwards when the market declines.

Lastly, to Michael’s comments, as you astutely noticed, average Lakewood homes in more modest neighborhoods are hit with higher percent increases. This is typical- I have long been aware that values on run of the mill Lakewood homes on regular side streets tend to be valued much more strictly (higher per sq ft) than the luxury homes north of Clifton and in Clifton Park. They bring the values up VERY slowly on these “nicer” homes, if at all, while hitting the average homeowner with big increases because one flipped house on their street got a high asking price. I have literally seen homes on Cook Ave with higher tax valuations than a home on Lake. That’s just not fair.

On one big reassessment years ago, my home had a huge jump while some luxury condo homes along the river had small or no increase. Absolutely no reason for it as those home were selling well.


Tim Liston
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 3:10 pm

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Tim Liston » Sun Oct 03, 2021 6:52 pm

Just some random notes in response to the two posts above, in no particular order. And somewhat hastily written….

1) During this past three-year cycle, it’s true that modestly-priced homes are seeing higher valuation increases (and tax increases) on a percentage basis. I do suspect that’s reflective of the actual market for Lakewood homes 2018-2021. Is anyone disputing that? If so please provide evidence, maybe by way of median vs. average citywide increases. SE Lakewood (including Birdtown) is getting hammered but I suspect those homes’ sale prices have increased on a percentage basis higher than elsewhere in 2018-2021.

2) I just don’t get HB 920. I keep hearing that it moderates our increases but I see no real-world evidence of that. Mike and Bridget, the three of us have owned our Lakewood homes for decades and yet all three of us are still paying almost precisely 3% of the value annually. Right? And isn’t that also the going rate for newly-purchased homes in Lakewood (click here)? As near as I can tell HB 920 is mythical, like Bigfoot . Not at all like Prop 13 in California. Someday please fill me in with real numbers if I’m wrong. Not just County propaganda. Someday I should get down in the weeds and try to find out what really is going on.

3) Mike you said “my taxes went up significantly more than yours.” Mike that’s false. By my calculations, my valuation is going up $72,143 (19% of $379,700). Your valuation is going up $42,700. Hence my taxes are going up almost 70% more than yours. To say that I’m “getting off easy” is comical.

4) And none of this is my point. My point is that Lakewood property taxes are clumsily/arbitrarily determined, bear little relation to ability to pay, and as everyone who has posted here agrees have become so extreme that they risk driving people to other locales. The Ohio average is half of Lakewood's and the nationwide median is a third of Lakewood's.

5) Bridget thanks for the insights on the three-year / six-year cycles. Of course we all know that the homes never get physically inspected.

6) But Bridget I think you’re wrong to assert that “luxury” homes increase more slowly than modest homes in the longer run (e.g. 10-20 years). Yes that clearly is the case 2018-2021. But in my experience (and Mike Gill’s) that’s not been the long-run case at all.

Enough for now. Nothing will change, unfortunately.


michael gill
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:28 am
Location: lakewood

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby michael gill » Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:17 pm

You're right, Tim: when I said my taxes went up, I meant what I said in the paragraph after that. My assessed value increased by 28.9 percent, which is significantly higher than the 19 percent increase you reported having. I think you understood that.

The point stands: people whose houses are south of Lake will be paying on valuations that increased at a dramatically higher rate than yours did. People with less money are getting hit harder.


michael gill
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:28 am
Location: lakewood

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby michael gill » Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:19 pm

You're right, Tim: when I said my taxes went up, I meant what I said in the paragraph after that. My assessed value increased by 28.9 percent, which is significantly higher than the 19 percent increase you reported having. I think you understood that.

The point stands: people whose houses are south of Lake will be paying on valuations that increased at a dramatically higher rate than yours did. People with less money are getting hit harder.


Tim Liston
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 3:10 pm

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Tim Liston » Fri Oct 08, 2021 7:12 am

Cleveland.com is now running an article that reminds us that the informal process for disputing valuation increases has been eliminated, and that the only option now is the “more stringent and time-consuming” ordeal before the County Board of Revision. They cite COVID and the lateness of this year's notices. The article basically asserts that a recent appraisal, which it notes “can cost hundreds of dollars” should accompany your BoR appearance. It points out that the whole process is daunting and will likely result in a substantial reduction in complaints, despite this year’s very large increase in almost everyone’s property taxes.

Cuyahoga County, citing COVID, forgoes informal process to dispute 2021′s home appraisals (Click Here, though for now the article is behind a paywall)

Property taxes, and especially the way the increase has been invoked this time around in Cuyahoga County, are proof that they just don’t give a sh1t about taxpayers. Property taxes are a very substantial expense for most people, particularly here in NEO. They are not based on one’s ability to pay them. They are no longer tax deductible and the State no longer picks up even a small portion. They are confusingly calculated (more on that in a later post). And now they are very time-consuming and expensive to contest. Just show me the money....


Bridget Conant
Posts: 2894
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:22 pm

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Bridget Conant » Fri Oct 08, 2021 7:56 am

I noticed that, as well. The “informal” process, which many took advantage of, is no longer available. The formal one requires a hearing in front of the full Board of Revision and they notify your local school board which can also argue against any reduction. Yes, very daunting for the average homeowner.

It’s clear they are using this reassessment to basically gouge the property owners. They need the tax money!

BTW, my taxes increased 30%. Three years ago they went up 30%! That’s a big increase in 6 years - up 100,000


User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 14103
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Re: Property Taxes (again)....

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:35 am

Bridget Conant wrote:I noticed that, as well. The “informal” process, which many took advantage of, is no longer available. The formal one requires a hearing in front of the full Board of Revision and they notify your local school board which can also argue against any reduction. Yes, very daunting for the average homeowner.

It’s clear they are using this reassessment to basically gouge the property owners. They need the tax money!

BTW, my taxes increased 30%. Three years ago they went up 30%! That’s a big increase in 6 years - up 100,000



Bridget

I was assured the process to protest will open again January 1 and run through March.

This is over the top, and what we are doing is paying for the failures of government. People flee the county, and they are forced to make it up. Let's go after the poor and middle class they are less likely to protest and or get lawyers on it.

.


Jim O'Bryan
Lakewood Resident

"The very act of observing disturbs the system."
Werner Heisenberg

"If anything I've said seems useful to you, I'm glad.
If not, don't worry. Just forget about it."
His Holiness The Dalai Lama

Return to “Lakewood General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests