Deseret News | Reader comments: Lawmakers may head off revolt over property taxes

Reader comments
Lawmakers may head off revolt over property taxes

Page:
1
2
Next >

Fed Up | 5:52 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

It is time to change and put a cap on property taxes!! Valuations and property taxes are out of control!

Fair is fair | 7:01 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I have a suggestion for Mr. Pigget. I'm happy to pay extra property tax while my children are in school. Just one caveat. Let me opt out of paying into a social security system that has provided for Mr. Pigget for the last 19 years and will not be around when I retire.

Anonymous | 7:27 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

The archaic notion that cities and counties have the right to assess taxes based on property values should be illegal; it oppresses the property owner, dumps huge windfalls of dollars into schools and cities regardless of need, and creates hardships for those who bought their home ten or twenty or thirty years ago, are now retired, and are left with only one option to pay their property taxes--sell the house.

Something is wrong with this picture. I challenge the school districts (who receive the lions share of property taxes) to justify their windfall. They will never be able to. It's a system that needs to be exposed.

When a city grows, additional homes and businesses are built and additional revenue is automatically generated to accommodated growth, new schools, more teachers; there is absolutely no need to say, "well, property values have gone up, let's reassess and look at all the money we'll get."

Someone needs to take the system to court and have the whole scam thrown out.

Comments continue below

PleaseDoSomething | 7:40 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Our assessments were affected by corrupt appraisals, etc. PLEASE DO SOMETHING so we're not taxed for someone else's criminal acts!

Steve of Layton | 7:42 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

My taxes in Layton went up 32% this year. This is a simple abuse of the tax system. I do not live extravicantly - no 4 wheelers, trailors, boats, second homes, never owned a new car. My wife and I have never traveled to Hawaii. I make a good income - yet still do not have any wiggle room financially to support my family.

This tax increase forces me into making some massive decisions - such as do I now have to sell my home to support my family. And I have it far better than many. I don't know what the elderly will do on their fixed incomes!

Property taxes should never go up more than the annual rate for cost of living. Those over 65 should have a frozen tax rate - unless they sell their home and have their rate set on their new residence value. These are reasonable standards for overseeing tax increases.

WHEN IS ENOUGH, ENOUGH REGARDING WHAT IS BEING REQUIRED AS A TAX BURDEN!

Tax Bird | 7:53 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Skimp on infrastructure, schools, and government (assessments). Sounds like the tax bird is coming home to roost..

Tricky Dick | 8:30 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I should pay for increased assessments over and above what I paid for the property, unless I sell. There's a little system in some agriculture arenas called "Greenbelt" wherein property holders pay reduced property tax on lands used for agriculture. If the "use" changes, then they pay "rollback" taxes for the previous five years. Why can't I pay taxes based upon purchase price and make up a difference IF I ever sell? Better yet, why not charge me additional sales tax based upon the current price of bread and milk for the purchases I've made of these products in years past when they cost less? That would certainly add to the tax revenues and make as much sense as escalating property values which are only realized if a person sells the land.

Sick of this | 8:38 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

These taxes along with income tax are all illegal anyway. They should have NEVER been created nor should we allow them to continue.

Down with illegal taxation!!!

TaxPayerRevolt | 8:40 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Taxes should only be based on what the house sold for. We should not be paying taxes based on what someone things our house is worth. Will the counties reimburse a homeowner who sells the house for less than the assessor guessed it might be worth? No way, they will keep the money. The assessment of a house should be solely based on what the homeowner paid for the house and any additions they may add. There should be a modest 2% increase in the valuation of the house each year, and when houses depreciate during a recession the taxes should go back down in the same amount and when the houses go back up then they can use the 2% increase again based on the new value. It is time that taxpayers simply inundate their legislators to change the system, and if they don't vote in new ones who will listen. DO IT NOW OR LOOSE YOUR HOMES.

Scott Leishman | 8:51 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

It's a shame that the previous comment was under the heading "Anonymous." I for one am proud to proclaim the same thing -- Property Taxes are an inherently corrupt and vile attack on liberty and the free market.

There are, however, two reasonable options.
1. Remove property tax completely, and replace it with a sales tax (on all non-food items). Everyone pays their fair share. You buy more, you pay more. You responsible save, you pay less.

2. If it is property taxes that are required to run a government, let those with property have the vote. Simply require a proof of property ownership to get into the voting booth. (If this isn't sounding rather archaic and dangerous -- perhaps you should read your history:)

The salient fact is: Any time you punish a populace for gaining wealth and property (this includes cars) you hinder free trade of wealth, thus making it more difficult on those trying to obtain it. And I personally would liek to see everyone become wealthy. (Good luck in this system though)

Joe | 8:58 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Put a cap on it--3-4 percent per year increase.

ReplaceTaxesWithUserFees | 9:13 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

The $2.9 billion hypothetical price tag on Huntsville illustrates the fallacy of current property tax assessments.

Those assessments place a market value on a hypothetical sale of each property.

But if all properties were put on the market at the same time, the market value of real property would be lower ... because there would be a surplus of property for sale.

But current assessments are based on a market value established from only a few homes selling in a neighborhood, not all of them at the same time.

Jeremy | 9:25 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Over almost any 30-year period, housing values increase at a rate of about 6%. That should be the maximum rate for year-to-year tax increases. Then, when a property's title changes hands or when a property undergoes changes (construction), have it appraised to ensure the property's taxes are still in line. A system like this would save tax dollars by avoiding appraisals and studies to adjust property taxes every few years. It would also save city governments a lot of headaches because when we have a spike in property values it won't spike the tax and won't cause everyone to freak out.

Scott...also | 9:27 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Scott Leishman.. I could not agree with you more! However, there is one issue that needs to be addressed; some of our property tax goes to pay for Police/Fire/Ambulance. While I totally agree that there should NEVER be a tax on property, there needs to be a way that these services are paid for.

Ernie | 9:32 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

My house was assesed four years ago when I built it. My taxes were 1900 then and now they have jumped to 2950. Thats over a 50% increase in 4 years and my salary has only gone up 5% in that time period. Inflation has been low but taxes seem to be way out of whack. The County seems to have timed their valuations at the peak of the housing bubble and prices have already begun to drop. Our elected officials need to take a close look at this and protect us from these unreasonable and unfair practices. If you also add to this soaring health costs, doubled gas prices, and higher insurance rates and it seems that everyone is trying to squeeze every last cent from you. They don't care if you have enough left to buy food and other necessities, it's only about who can take your money first.

Ernie | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

By the way, I live in Utah County.

Liz | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I don't know what all the fuss is about. There are appeals processes in place if you feel like you are really improperly valued. Some kind of tax freeze for seniors also seems appropriate. however, Utah is in the lowest 1/3 in the nation for property tax rate (number 34 out of 50). Utah is also consistently at the bottom for per pupil funding in schools.

As a long-time resident of Utah who has moved to two different states within the past couple of years, I have seen a huge difference in both my tax bill (which is nearly double the rate of Utah in both states that I have lived in) and the quality of my children's education (which is far superior in terms of class size, grade level expectations, test scores, etc). Perhaps there is a correlation.

Be grateful that you have gotten off easy in the past and look forward to improved services in the future.

R | 9:47 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Does anyone realize that the majority of the property taxes go towards funding our public schools and that Utah is 51st in the nation in its funding of public schools. If we start limiting property taxes now where is the funding for our schools going to come from. Already our children are attending schools in inadequate facilities with pay for Utah teachers at embarassing levels. Property values do not follow a standard 2-3% per year increase, they ebb and flow with often dramatic results. It is likely in the next 5-10 years we will see a minimal increase in property values, stagnation of property tazxes and an even more critical shortage for public education. Rushing to action that will have serious negative repurcussions years down the road is unsound and a pandering to the anti-tax movement.

kimmie | 9:56 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

you should pay taxes based on your worth, and your income. How is a 70 year old on a fixed income to pay for the increase in property taxes that has tripled?

Owen in Santa Clara | 9:59 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Clearly, something is wrong with this system that penalizes stability and fixed income persons trying to remain in their houses. As my neighbors and I discussed these issues an interesting proposal surfaced.

We agreed that developers and speculators drive up the value of properties and seem to have the dollars to do that.

Consequently, let them pay the bill.

Utah Property Taxes should be entirely replaced as a local government revenue source with a significant real estate transfer tax.

Granny | 10:00 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

The tax increases along with all of the inflation in basic expenses is making it extremely hard on the older folks who have lived in the same houses for years. Karen Travis paying $10,508 a year for taxes in Alta is unjustified. Huntsville with the 2.9 billion dollar tax sign is also interesting. If that is true, I would certainly like an accounting of the distribution of these taxes. The "Green" concerns needs to cover the green of the tax dollars. There needs to be a better accounting of the funds and better conservation of them. The Capitol wanting new buildings because the others aren't attractive enough is ridiculous!

Concerned Utahn | 10:56 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

As much as we Utahns dislike anything associated with California, there is at least one thing worth emulating in California ï¿½ Prop.13, championed by Utah native Howard Jarvis. Nearly 30 years ago, California homeowners began a grassroots movement aimed at stopping skyrocketing property taxes. It called for limiting tax rate increases from exceeding 1 percent of the property's market value, and established a maximum annual increase in assessed value of 2% unless the property was sold. Thank heaven, 60% of the voters were smart, and Prop. 13 succeeded despite all the doomsayers like teachers' unions, politicians, newspapers and corporate lobbyists in Sacramento predicting the collapse of the state.

Read the Deseret News article of August 28, 2007 by Joseph M. Dougherty, ï¿½Is Utah next for a cap on home tax?ï¿½. I hope the answer is a resounding YES.

Will | 11:01 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I am astounded by many of the comments. While most seem to be thought out, some are quite brainless. I am a teacher, I am also a home owner. Perhaps homeowner is a misnomer. How can you own something but still have to pay 10-15% of your income per year to keep? Some people continue to want more and better services at... someone else's expense. I am not against taxes, I am against unfair taxes. A tax that could force you to lose what you have worked many years for is immoral. Yes, school is important but I think we all lose sight of the fact that education is primarily a family responsibility. We the school should be taking up the slack, not the other way around.

Howard | 11:08 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Utah needs to model its property tax model after California's property tax system. Reassess the house when it's sold and limit the increase in assessed value to 2% per year.

Paul Judd | 12:51 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I am sick an tired of heraing the Utah Schools do not get enough money arguemnt. If the school will eliminate all of the non esssentials programs that are a complete waste of time & money they would have more then enough money. Some examples are teaching kids how to tie flies for fishing, how to golf,wood shop, jewerly making and a thousand other optional classes. Not to mention Swimming pools in some high schools that benefits a minority of the students. Traveling all over the state for sports competition. We are trying our best to entertain our kids but failing to educate our kids in the important things in Life. Maybe we should have a class on staying out of debt, how to balalnce a check book. Lets get back to the basics and stop all of this nonsense. We should cut the Education budget and drop these silly waste of money and time non essential classes & activities. Then we can drop our taxes. By the way the People in Huntsville got on average a 100% to 300% tax increase this year. My taxes went up over $1,800.00 this year. Our counties are out of controll.

Utahn Moved from CA | 12:53 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

We difinitely need learn from California about our property tax system as our property raise overall for next 20 years (or more...) Re-assess the house only 1) when it's sold and limit 2)limit the increase in assessed value to 2% per year. End.

jackhp | 12:54 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Every single person in this thread needs to read about Utah's Truth in Taxation method of computing property taxes.

I'll start you off with one thought: increased property valuations do not equal increased revenues.

(just Google "Utah Truth in Taxation" and you'll find out why.)

mandogg1126 | 12:56 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

yea i know about the whole thing, i think somebody should put a stop to all of this nonsense. tax model

mandogg1126 | 12:57 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

yea i know about the whole thing, i think somebody should put a stop to all of this nonsense. tax model

mandogg1126 | 1:00 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

yea its not up to the constitution.in the bill of rights its free not a representatie of house. utah is a great state and needs bill rights for house modeling!

jackhp | 1:04 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

"D-Bell", LOL, nice touch D-news.

jackhp | 1:08 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Is it really too much to ask that "news" stories include information on how property taxes are actually figured? I've read dozens of stories recently in Utah's newspapers and I've only run across one (in the Trib) that even tried to explain Utah's Truth in Taxation method (which is revenue neutral BTW.)

jackhp | 1:18 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

They didn't print the entire Alta lady's statement. She really said rebating taxes back to what she paid last year would give lawmakers time to change the way taxes are levied "so that someone else gets jacked besides me." (just editorializing here folks, I wasn't there. :) )

tom | 1:24 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

While the focus is on out of control growth of taxes, I believe the real culprit is the out of control growth of the taxing entities that benefit from the property taxes.

Those are the counties, cities, school districts, mosquito districts, and all those other entities listed on your tax bill. They are the ones that get the money and thus put the demand on increasing property taxes.

A lot of these entities are just simply out of control in their never ending growth, most of which far exceeds the increase in population that they serve or the inflation rate. Look at all these huge palaces that they keep building for their offices, and the cars and expense accounts and salaries that are way higher than most working people ever dream of getting. It used to be that working for any government agency had a certain public service element to it and usually a lower or at least equal salary to private enterprise. Not anymore, not with the huge salaries and perks these commissioners, department heads and all the other multitude of employees are now getting.

Seek out and communicate with the numbers of organizations that are now forming.

Volunteer advocate | 1:58 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

What about considering the feasibility of using volunteerism as a tax abatement method? Could we save tax dollars by allowing seniors and other citizens in the community to volunteer as a method of lifting some of the property tax burden? Would this help solve other social problems in education and senior care giving? Why does raising taxes always have to be the answer when we have a surplus of baby boomers ready to retire? Why not think outside the box and use alternative methods for funding government services and programs?

Anonymous | 2:02 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

so sad that people who live in mutimillion dollar cabins at Alta have to pay ten grand a year in taxes

L | 3:06 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Interesting Comments -
1. I'm sorry for Karen Travis, mentioned in the article, that she has a 1700 square foot "cabin" in Alta which is bigger than my house & with the amount of tax she pays, it must be worth a heck of a lot more than mine.

2. I don't know how it is now but after living in Detroit, Cleveland & Denver areas in the past, Utah tax costs were always lower.

3. Most of us (inclding me) are really usually pretty demanding on what we want from government. We want our roads maintained and plowed, our kids to have fewer students per class, parks & open spaces, no out-houses etc. Maybe we should go back to the "good old days" low taxes, one room schools, dirt roads, horse-drawn fire trucks, just a Sheriff etc., but I don't think that is what most of us want.

4. We should participate in our tax hearings, ask that things be eliminated if that is the case and demand efficency & accountable for the taxes we do pay. There are some activities that have waste or excess. Lets go after those things and our taxes should go dow.

Richard | 3:09 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I think property taxes are the most unfair taxes there are. If I have a million dollars and decide to buy a bunch of collectibles (coins, stamps, paintings, etc.) then I don't have to pay a yearly property tax on those things. But if instead, I decide I want to spend it on a big house, then guess what, I have to pay thousands of dollars more each year than if I bought a small house. That is very unfair.

I know that tax money is needed to support schools, city services, and infrastructure, but there has to be a better way to fund those things than with an arbitrary property tax.

BTW, I think parents should pay for half of their child's education directly and have half paid by taxation. Under such a system I would want school choice for parents. Society benefits from having a well educated next generation, but so do families. If parents paid half, then they would make sure they got their money's worth by demanding a good education. (I have 2 kids in school with 2 more to start soon, so I'm not some childless person who doesn't like to pay.)

Farmington homeowner | 3:49 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

My taxes went up 45% over last year. Davis Co.'s "Equity Adjustment" will drop that to 37%. That's still a big hit. And BTW, jackhp, your interpretation of Utah Truth in Taxation is not correct. It doesn't say that revenues won't increase when property valuations jump, it merely states that the taxing entity must hold a hearing when they do. Although we saw more people at the four hearings in Davis County than in the past, and the anger levels were dramatically escalated, once the hearings are complete the revenues may still increase. Our recourse is to replace the officials responsible via the voting booth. Too few of those affected are sufficiently alert or involved in either the hearing or voting processes to make their voice heard. Let's hope that the voices that ARE heard suffice to rouse our elected officials from their slumber and fix this mess!

tax payer | 5:17 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

There is no question that property taxes in utah are a million miles past rediculous, however its the same problem as income taxes. all of us who are working our butts off cant take the time off work to go somewhere to complain and definantly do not have the time to join special interest groups. it would be perfect if we would quit electing people who have never ran a bussiness and have no idea what real life is like. they should make property taxes be what they were when you bought your house and thats where they stay. then maybe we could retire in the house we worked most our life to pay for. do you ever wonder if the people who make these decisions have ever worked a 80 hour week to make ends meet or to provide for there familys. I wonder how they could run the government if they had to live on an exact amt and there wernt special sessions to bail them out of there own stupidity. Do you wonder what it would be like to get an automatic increase every year and have to spend it so you got one the next year.

cre8ncam | 5:33 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

I really think those without children should not have to pay for schools. And those with many children should pay more than those with few

Crystal | 5:34 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Google, dbell and blogspot to actually read what he wrote and spoke to the hearing yesterday. Amazing!

average guy | 5:37 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

The government should have to live on a budget just like the rest of us. this is how much you get period. figure out a percentage and thats it. maybe even run it like a bussiness. oops we over spent lets revaluate. wouldnt we all like to live by those rules!!!!!
i guess we are are all like the polititions sugar daddy. at least until we are completely feed up with there over spending.

paul bell | 6:06 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

the only way this blatant transfer of wealth from the property owners to the out of touch bureaucrats will ever stop is if the people come together like they did in California with Prop 13. It took a Utahn by the name of Howard Jarvis to bring that about. It can be done, Howard proved it. It seems like here in Utah, with so many utahns all about, that a leader should emerge and pull this together for the people. Every one can take a step in this direction by joining or communicating with the various groups that are forming to fight this madness. One I have heard of in Davis County can be contacted at Citizens for tax fairness. Google it, it is the first entry that comes up. There are others forming around the state, find one and participate.

The only way to combat this is to come together and stand united against those who will otherwise run us out of our homes with this obscene taxation. Otherwise the politicians and bureaucrats will keep us divided and unable to ever resist this blatant ripp off.

Prop 13 is great | 8:02 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

My parents have lived in their So. Cal. home since 1976, about a year or two before Prop 13 went into effect. It has saved them in their retirement years. I have four kids in school. I hate that older citizens on fixed incomes are having to pay for my children's schooling based on the over inflated home prices of today's market, which has dropped, since the cities spoken of in the article had their tax evaluation updates, thanks to the "bust" in the housing market. Of course the cities went ahead and re-evaluated during the "boom" in the housing market which had sent housing prices to an all time high, making the tax increase unreal.
Yes, schools in Cal. did suffer by losing some programs, like free summer school, after Prop 13 in California...but that isn't nearly as devastating as losing your home to the cost of property taxes you're forced to pay in order for someone's kids (like me as a child) to go to summer school. So I missed out on more summer school...big whoop, my parents can still afford their home AND their taxes. UEA will hate a Prop 13, but homeowners will rejoice for years.

jhug | 8:51 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

why should I have to pay for what someone else "thinks" my house is worth...if it won't sell for that much it isn't worth it. Quit quessing on my property value and then tax me for it! Income tax is base on your INCOME...not what someone "thinks" you are worth. Our homes should be the same...what WE PAID for it!

Overtaxed | 9:27 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

Property taxes should be collected only for property related services such as fire protection and should be strictly limited as to yearly growth. As far as education goes it is long past time that the cost of educating children should be shifted primarily to the parents of those children rather than the general population. This is particularly true of those who burden the schools with absurd numbers of children. These people are what, in any other context, would referred to as social parasites. Just like anything else, if you choose to have it YOU get to pay the bill. And please don't tell me that I should pay for the education of these children because they will be paying for my Social Security retirement money. Remember, they are also the same ones who will cause more demand for resources and cause so much inflation that someones retirement funds will be worth next to nothing.

Wobee | 9:51 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

There is something insane about extracting taxes on assets that do not produce an income.

Education should be funded through State and Federal taxes. It should not be based on counties or cities taxation revenues from property.

Education is a right for all on an equal basis.

Minor Machman | 10:31 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

"Acquistion value" taxation: Bought your house for $250K. Title Office forwards 1099 to State Tax Co. where TRUE MARKET VALUE is registered. Next yr. single cheap Dell PC 250K X 1.025 + $256,250 (new taxable assessed!) WOW that was easy! Tax calculation $256,250 X .01 = $2,562 new property tax. WOW we need a PHD in statistical analysis HELP! Same drill next yr., and next, etc. until sold to old college roommate for $275K when process is repeated. Scares me! Oh the complications are jsut freak'in me OUT! Dude!
Oh and if the old college room dog decides to marry and settle down...lives there until he dies, his kids get the house with the same tax base until they sell it. Oh please hire twenty assessors and PHD's with math degrees! Go to dbelltax.blog.com get the facts, information, become part of solution, be a "wingman for property tax reform". A force for positive change for you and your family's sake. This bogus "current market value" crap has to stop and now if any of you are going to be allowed to live here. Namaste, D-Bell

A Patriot | 11:44 p.m. Sept. 20, 2007

The Founding Fathers fully understood the evils of taxation - and wrote into the Constitution that taxation (of any sort) on individuals was not permitted (Article I, Section 9). Thus for 126 years people owned their land (instead of renting it from the government as we do now) and owned every penny they made. The 16th amendment opened the floodgates in 1913. You want your freedoms back - start by repealing the 16th amendment (oh, yeah, forgot that our corrupt politicians on both sides will never allow THAT to happen...).

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.