Seems to me that, while a number of good points have been made
already, a few things have been omitted or glossed over...
1) A revenue-neutral approach is a possibility. A city-wide
reappraisal would be combined with a change to the millage rate for
real-estate tax, so that the total income received by the City would
not change. This wouldn't eliminate the possibility that individual
property owners would see substantial changes, but it would be likely
to lower the chances of that happening.
2) Like it or not, the City is in violation of current state law
regarding real-estate taxation. City Council members, fearing the
effects on their popularity and chances of re-election, have
repeatedly blocked funding for the actions needed to bring the City
into compliance. This dance might go on forever -- it's already
survived several different city and state administrations -- but
that's not guaranteed. If the City is forced into action by a lawsuit,
the likelihood is that things will be done in a rapid, slipshod
fashion, which will probably not be beneficial for the average citizen.
3) One thing that needs to change, in my view, is that the City needs
much more rigorous and equitable enforcement of the laws relating to
building and construction permits. (This isn't likely, given that L&I
staffing was being cut even before the current budget crisis...and L&I
has never been the most competent or corruption-free of the City's
departments, either.) Nonetheless, when done properly, the permitting
process serves a dual function. It helps to ensure that buildings are
up to code, thus protecting the safety of the building's users. More
relevant to this discussion, though, it also provides key information
to the city about changes being to existing structures, some of which
should be triggering re-appraisal for the upcoming tax year.
Two examples:
When I look out my kitchen window, I see the rear of the houses on the
north side of the 4400 block of Sansom. In the last decade, many of
these have been gutted, rehabbed, and flipped. About a half-dozen have
one or two decks added. To the best of my knowledge, none of them
posted a permit for the addition of a deck prior to or during
construction. A deck permit costs $100, which isn't very much. But it
easily adds several thousand dollars to the sale price of the property
(most of these went for between $300-500K), and should also affect its
appraised value. A look at Hallwatch.org shows me that, with only two
exceptions, the properties on that strip are appraised at about $50K,
with most of the appraisals being made 18 months ago.
When I stand on my front porch, and look at the opposite side of
Chestnut St., I see a lot of properties that have undergone
substantial improvement in the last two years, generally changing from
uninhabited (and in some cases, burned-out) rowhouses to well-rehabbed
apartment buildings filled with tenants. One of the owners there is a
gent named Syla Hysni, who's also doing a lot of rehab on the 100
block of South 45th. (He was the subject of an Inky article about a
month back, which lauded him for all the improvement he's bringing to
the neighborhood.) Another of the big owners is Tessler Land Trust,
who've also done great work. Each of them owns multiple properties on
that block.
All of Tessler's rehabs have been fully permitted. On the other hand,
none of Hysni's work has ever displayed a permit. The average
appraised value of Tessler's four rehabs is $155K, with the highest
being $270K. The average appraised value of Hysni's three rehabs is
$28K, with the highest being $54K. And the places Hysni is working on
not only have more apartments than the Tessler properties, but also
have basement storefronts.
I'm not saying that getting permits is easy, because it's not. It's a
time-consuming, aggravating process that nobody enjoys. And unless L&I
gets thoroughly revamped and fully staffed, that's unlikely to change
in the future.
But doing construction w/o a permit is, in part, a scam that keeps
appraised value down and thus hurts the rest of the tax-paying
population.
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
