Hopefully my comment didn't sound as if I intended to say that residents
without kids in the school system shouldn't have the obligation to pay those
taxes. I do believe that everyone has an obligation to pay.
My point was simply this: Some towns experience growth by attracting ratables
that cost more than the new revenue generated, creating a net increase in the
tax burden on everyone. The primary examples are suburban towns who attract
growth in the form of large-lot, McMansion type subdivisions. This type of
5-bedroom home development strains school capacity to an extent far greater
than the new taxes that are captured. To the contrary, other forms of
development attract residents that generate more tax revenue than the per
capita resources that those developments bring, resulting in a net gain for the
town and a net reduction in the tax burden on all properties. In the case of
Wesley Grove we see the latter example: a net benefit of taxes versus resources
due, in large part, to the fact that there are no new kids in the school
system. It's simply the opposite of the "suburban sprawl" financial conundrum.
When the revaluation of AP properties is finally complete, we will be able to
get a clearer picture of who is paying the "full boat" of taxes and who has
really been getting a deal. It ought to be the great equalizer and is long
overdue.
As far as condo living (townhouse), I do have plenty of flowers, and my time
NOT spent mowing a lawn is instead spent at the beach or at the Brickwall!
Sure, we give up the privacy of a yard, but we spend the time elsewhere in town.
Cheers!
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "oakdorf" <oakdorf@...> wrote:
>
> Well, I see we agree.
>
> I responded to your point how some people have "NO KIDS" using the
> resources.... as if therefore, those people shouldn;t be obligated to pay
> their portion of school taxes - or garbage, ems etc....
>
> And my the $84,000 note was in response to a asburyparksun.com and APP
> article that the AVG assessed home in AP is $84,000 - which I believe to be
> wrong - the data on the state site is wrong and is based on the "number of
> rows" - associated to the database - which contains misc "junk data" - bored
> - I scrubbed it somewhat to remove it and came up with the AVERAGE ASSESSED
> value is $128,000. Of course, that has no bearing on taxes - just wrong data
> being used in research or comments to the press....
>
>
> And we agree there are arguments on both sides on whether the abatements,
> given to the developers (to spur development and therefore occupation which
> create a demand for businesses) has a long term benefit. those properties
> need to come on the tax rolls and will once those periods expire. State
> contribution will decrease (should) and AP may someday become less dependent
> on state aid to run it's day to operations.
>
> Thanks Doug.
>
> PS - nothing against condos . I just wouldn't know what to do in one. No
> lawn, flowers... however, I've been looking.
>
> dd
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
asburypark-dig...@yahoogroups.com
asburypark-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asburypark-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
