19 thoughts on “Tax Assessments Up 10%”

  1. all this before they raise the meals tax. It’s a good thing that the city not growing of they would really have to raise taxes.

  2. The Charlottesville City government has yet to meet a tax they weren’t entirely comfortable raising.

  3. I agree, the City Councilors are quite happy to adopt almost any new tax but that may change. One speaker at the budget forum suggested a license (tax) for bicycles. If that suggestion gains any steam I’m sure Maurice Cox would protest.

    The City Council doesn’t raise the assessments. They just manipulate the real estate market as much as they can so that values go up and then their property owning consituents are happy.

  4. Wait, isn’t this going to shaft renters? If the city declares the value of the house that they’re renting to be greater, won’t that prompt many landlords to raise rents accordingly? Paired with the raised meal tax, that could make things pretty unpleasant for people like me.

  5. The councilor recognize that there are too many renters in the city. We are overun with rental housing so the City Council has made the protection of owner occupied single family neighborhoods a priority. If you don’t like it you should get your butt in gear and buy a house or move to Buckingham.

    The proposed meals tax increase is only one percent and will match what is charged in the county. If you don’t want to pay it then don’t eat out.

  6. It’s important to remember that the city doesn’t set these values — they’re determined by state standards. The city has no choice but to value houses at their actual market value. If you have a complaint about the value of houses, complain to your friendly neighborhood realtor. :)

  7. The city sets policy that does have dramatic impacts on the value of housing. Increased permit fees and other regulatory costs are passed on to the consumer. The government controls the supply of land that can be used to build apartments. Choking the supply in the face of a growing need for rental housing means higher costs. Go to college Waldo, and take econ-101.

  8. It is naive to say the city doesn’t control assessments. The native assessment is ultimately set by the market. But the impact is determined by the amount of the property tax. So while it’s technically true that the city doesn’t set values they do however impact taxes 100% by controlling the levying of property taxes. Otherwise if there were no property taxes the city would have little interest in a home’s value.

  9. It’s not just the collecting of property taxes that drives elected officials interest in maintaining and raising property values. Speakers at Council meetings regualrly demand that the council reject various development proposals because of the effect on the value of their neighboring properties. The councilors respond because they want to keep their home owning constituents happy. i can’t prove it but I’d bet that students and renters don’t vote in the kind of numbers that homeowners do.

  10. Go to college Waldo, and take econ-101.

    You don’t have to be nasty: obviously, the manner in which the city chooses to develop certain areas will affect the overall value. My point was merely that the city is not in control of the assessments. At the last City Council meeting, I watched a frustrated Park Street resident vent at council for several minutes about how her home has been valued by the city at a considerably higher value than she was prepared for, in terms of tax payments. But I’ll warrant that she’s simultaneously in favor of her neighborhood looking nice, having less traffic, etc., which increase the value of the area and, therefore, the value of her home. After she’d finished, Kevin Lynch gently explained what I just explained in my previous post: the city doesn’t set the value of the homes on that level.

    Rather than launch into a 500-word essay about how the valuation of neighborhoods comes into existence based on the city’s fiscal policies and planning practices, my short answer is likely to be far more useful to considerable more people at this macro level of analysis.


  11. Contrary to popular belief, the homeowners and prospective buyers, not the Realtors, set the market value for homes. Market value is what any ready, willing and able buyer will pay for a home.

  12. The city can’t win, here. Either, they help to create a desireable community, by providing good schools, safe neighborhoods, public parks, trash removal, etc., which makes people want to live here and results in increased property values (and higher assessments), or they let the place go to hell in a handbasket, so nobody wants to live here, real estate values fall (and assessments drop). I know which I’d prefer. Gripe about taxes, if you want, but assessments?

  13. I think you’re probably right about students and renters not voting in the same proportion as homeowners do. But, it’s no surprise, particularly with students, who are mostly temporary residents with not much at stake.

  14. If you don’t like it you should get your butt in gear and buy a house or move to Buckingham.

    Um, I’m 19. Buying a house is not only an impossibility, but it would also be an incredibly stupid move on my part. Looks like I didn’t pick such a bad time to move out of Charlottesville after all.

  15. A stupid move? I don’t think so. At least not if you can find a way to afford it. You are going to have to pay for shelter no matter what so you ought to try and get as much as you can for your money. If you started paying for a house with a thirty year mortgage you could have it paid off before you turn fifty.

    Here in Charlottesville/Albemarle you can also get more home for your money if you buy instead of rent.

  16. Yes It makes perfect sense:

    Most 19 year olds can’t get a loan for a car much less an overpriced c-ville home.

    Most 19 year olds (without spouses or rich daddy’s) probably cannot afford an overpriced c-ville home.

    Raising the assessment in an already overpriced market makes it that much more difficult for a 19 year old to enter into such an agreement.

    The meals tax is just adding insult to injury.

  17. Hopefully we can pay for a lot more of those nifty “traffic calming” deathtraps. I think we need some of those on 29N.

Comments are closed.