The percentage of non-taxable property has always been distorted by
the inclusion of Public Park Land and the Beachfront properties.
Assets that could not be taxed since the tax payers owned them.
Of course now the beachfront is private, wonder how much tax that is
generating. Weren't we promised a tax bill reduction from new
ratables?
The non-taxed calculations should really only include non-taxed
property that COULD be taxed if the zoning/use were different. Such
as, not-for-profit/service entities.
The percentage would more realistic but I suspect would still be
unusually high.
The "Park" is already being taken out of Asbury Park with zero set
back redevelopment and the continued non-enforcement of the City's
rights-of-way. Businesses are actually operating on public property
(untaxable) !!!!
Werner
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Joe D'Andrea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. Let's tax all those government parks we have in Asbury.
That way we can loose the "Park" in "Asbury Park" while we're at it.
Imaging the savings in toner and ink when we cut 40% of the name.
>
> Seriously... we "got rid of" a lot of government owned property
when we sold the waterfront buildings and land to a private entity.
(I don't think that was the right thing to do.) All that's left is
City Hall, the transportation center, the fire house, pubic
maintenance yard and waste water treatment plant.
>
> How much more... or should that be how much less... can we have?
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
