Wednesday, June 2, 2010

“Paterson property tax up 10%” plus 3 more

“Paterson property tax up 10%” plus 3 more


Paterson property tax up 10%

Posted: 02 Jun 2010 09:58 AM PDT

Message from Five Filters: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

PATERSON — The City Council has adopted a 2010 fiscal year budget that includes a tax increase of hundreds of dollars for the owner of a home assessed at the city average.

The $225.1 million budget is up from last year's $208.1 million. Budget Director Russ Forenza said the owner of a property assessed at $350,000, the city's average, will pay about $376 more for a total city tax of $3,938.50. That's a 10 percent increase from fiscal year 2009's $3,562 municipal tax bill.

An increase in the current quarterly tax bill alone will amount to $215 for the average-assessed property. The tax bill was sent out Friday.

Taxpayers are seeing an increase for two reasons: the city fell far short of selling vacant lots in an April property sale, bringing in $3.2 million rather than an anticipated $12 million. And, unlike last year, state officials are not permitting the city to postpone pension payment obligations, adding $9.5 million in revenues to be collected.

Finance Director Tony Zambrano said part of the reason for the delay in adopting the budget was the flooding from this spring's nor'easter, which caused some auctions for property sales to be rescheduled.

One council member raised concerns that the budget adoption — a month later than normal — is cutting it too close to raise sufficient revenue.

"It creates a cash shortage. I think it's irresponsible," 6th Ward Councilman Andre Sayegh said in a phone interview Tuesday.

Residents typically have a month to fully pay their tax bills from the time they receive them. The city expects to collect $104 million from taxpayers.

Resident Quincy Battis said he didn't want homeowners to "point the blame" at Mayor-elect Jeffery Jones, "when this occurred under the watch of Mayor Joey Torres." He said he believes the tax bills were postponed until after the May 11 municipal election.

But Torres said the reason the tax bill was held had nothing to do with the election.

"He doesn't know what he's talking about," Torres said of Battis. "We were trying to get legislators to waive our pension payments."

At-Large Councilman Kenneth Morris said the city couldn't adopt the budget until May because it had to wait and see exactly how many sales of city-owned property it could make.

Meanwhile, Morris said, several successful commercial property developments helped to offset taxpayers' burdens.

"If it had not been for the additional revenue from Center City and the development of Route 20, the situation would be direr than it is now," he said.

City employees' salaries and benefits make up the largest portion of the budget. The city employs 786 people and an additional 100 employees are hired through various grants.

The police budget is $43.8 million, down from last year's $43.9 million; the Fire Department's budget increased to $30.5 million from $26 million last year.

E-mail: mandell@northjersey.com

Five Filters featured article: Into the Abyss. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Paterson property tax up 10%

Posted: 02 Jun 2010 09:51 AM PDT

Message from Five Filters: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

PATERSON — The City Council has adopted a 2010 fiscal year budget that includes a tax increase of hundreds of dollars for the owner of a home assessed at the city average.

The $225.1 million budget is up from last year's $208.1 million. Budget Director Russ Forenza said the owner of a property assessed at $350,000, the city's average, will pay about $376 more for a total city tax of $3,938.50. That's a 10 percent increase from fiscal year 2009's $3,562 municipal tax bill.

An increase in the current quarterly tax bill alone will amount to $215 for the average-assessed property. The tax bill was sent out Friday.

Taxpayers are seeing an increase for two reasons: the city fell far short of selling vacant lots in an April property sale, bringing in $3.2 million rather than an anticipated $12 million. And, unlike last year, state officials are not permitting the city to postpone pension payment obligations, adding $9.5 million in revenues to be collected.

Finance Director Tony Zambrano said part of the reason for the delay in adopting the budget was the flooding from this spring's nor'easter, which caused some auctions for property sales to be rescheduled.

One council member raised concerns that the budget adoption — a month later than normal — is cutting it too close to raise sufficient revenue.

"It creates a cash shortage. I think it's irresponsible," 6th Ward Councilman Andre Sayegh said in a phone interview Tuesday.

Residents typically have a month to fully pay their tax bills from the time they receive them. The city expects to collect $104 million from taxpayers.

Resident Quincy Battis said he didn't want homeowners to "point the blame" at Mayor-elect Jeffery Jones, "when this occurred under the watch of Mayor Joey Torres." He said he believes the tax bills were postponed until after the May 11 municipal election.

But Torres said the reason the tax bill was held had nothing to do with the election.

"He doesn't know what he's talking about," Torres said of Battis. "We were trying to get legislators to waive our pension payments."

At-Large Councilman Kenneth Morris said the city couldn't adopt the budget until May because it had to wait and see exactly how many sales of city-owned property it could make.

Meanwhile, Morris said, several successful commercial property developments helped to offset taxpayers' burdens.

"If it had not been for the additional revenue from Center City and the development of Route 20, the situation would be direr than it is now," he said.

City employees' salaries and benefits make up the largest portion of the budget. The city employs 786 people and an additional 100 employees are hired through various grants.

The police budget is $43.8 million, down from last year's $43.9 million; the Fire Department's budget increased to $30.5 million from $26 million last year.

E-mail: mandell@northjersey.com

Five Filters featured article: Into the Abyss. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Sylvania Township trustee vote kills chance for TARTA sales tax

Posted: 02 Jun 2010 03:21 AM PDT

Message from Five Filters: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

Barring a change of heart, TARTA's offer to provide some property-tax relief in exchange for a half-cent sales tax is dead.

Sylvania Township trustees last night rejected the regional mass transit authority's proposal by a 2-1 vote.

Board Chairman Carol Contrada said she shared many of the concerns expressed by trustees Kevin Haddad and John Jennewine, but said she would have preferred to have a special meeting on June 15 so that TARTA would have more time to explain its position. She also said any issue of taxation should go before voters.

Mr. Haddad said he saw no point in waiting. He told TARTA General Manager James Gee that the transit authority doesn't deserve an $8.4 million budget increase because of the degree to which it has lived off government subsidies.

TARTA hasn't come close to being operated as efficiently as a private business, said Mr. Haddad, citing the beauty salon he has owned on Monroe Street for three decades as an example of a well-run business.

"When it's public funding, you don't run it like a business because it's a gravy train," he said.

Mr. Jennewine agreed.

"We all see the empty buses," he said. "I could go in there in a day and a half and cut out 30 percent of the routes. It seems you guys are out of touch."

The Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority had proposed giving up its 2.5-mill levy on property in exchange for a half-cent sales tax. The switch was expected to boost TARTA's annual tax revenue from $17.2 million to $25.6 million.

It thought voters would have been receptive to the idea because with a sales tax, costs are spread around to more people - even visitors.

But to get the proposal on the Nov. 2 ballot, TARTA needed authorization from each of its nine member communities before the August filing deadline.

Sylvania Township's rejection last night killed the plan unless the township board reverses itself, said Mr. Gee, who spoke to The Blade from the hallway of the Sylvania Township offices after fielding questions from trustees.

"What we were seeking to do was give voters a choice," Mr. Gee said. He said he was disappointed the board would not at least take up Ms. Contrada's suggestion for a special meeting.

"They chose not to give us the opportunity to answer their questions," he said.

Mr. Jennewine said he was irked to learn the Ohio Public Transit Association, of which Mr. Gee is a board member, had begun exploring asking voters to approve a 0.25-percent statewide sales tax in the fall of 2012 to generate revenue for public transit across Ohio.

"Are you guys waiting for approval [of the local proposal] here before you spring that additional revenue stream on us?" Mr. Jennewine asked.

Mr. Gee is listed on the state organization's Web site as its secretary/treasurer. He said he was recently elevated to vice president.

He said he had not brought up the state organization's proposal because it is in its infancy stages and no attempt has been made to gather signatures to get it on the ballot.

He said he was not sure how much TARTA would receive from a statewide tax.

The local TARTA sales tax would have been authorized for 10 years.

Mr. Jennewine said he is receptive to the idea of shifting property taxes over to sales taxes, but not at the level of money TARTA had requested.

TARTA's nine member communities include Toledo, Ottawa Hills, Sylvania, Sylvania Township, Spencer Township, Maumee, Waterville, Perrysburg, and Rossford.

Perrysburg and Rossford - the only two in Wood County - would have had the option to withdraw from TARTA if the transit tax were enacted.

Ottawa Hills, Spencer Township, and Lucas County recently gave their authorization for the TARTA plan to go before voters.

According to figures Mr. Gee presented last week, a Sylvania Township family now paying $166 a year for an average-sized house was expected to pay $111 a year in additional sales taxes if the TARTA ballot proposal were enacted.

In Waterville, where the average household now pays about $142 a year in property taxes, families would have saved roughly $42 a year with the proposed sales tax, according to figures TARTA presented to village officials last week.

Approving the TARTA ballot proposal, though, would give Lucas County the second-highest sales tax in Ohio, a 7.25 percent charge on all taxable items instead of the current 6.75 percent.

Cuyahoga County, which has a 1-cent transit tax, collects 7.75 percent on taxable items.

Fulton and Henry counties charge 7 percent; Wood and Ottawa counties charge 6.5 percent. Monroe County collects Michigan's 6 percent state sales tax.

TARTA's $1 base fare is among Ohio's lowest for public transit. Mr. Gee said during a radio interview yesterday afternoon that revenue from those fares generates only about 1 percent of the transit authority's budget.

Mr. Gee also predicted savings for Toledoans while trying to woo authorization for a ballot question from a Toledo City Council committee.

"Within the state of Ohio, we are the last property-tax system in the state," Mr. Gee told the council's intergovernmental relations committee. "[The sales tax] is a tax that an individual has control over."

Councilman Tom Waniewski, the committee's chairman, questioned if a TARTA sales tax would "crowd out" the possibility of the city replacing its income tax with a sales tax of its own some day.

Contact Tom Henry at:
thenry@theblade.com
or 419-724-6079.

Five Filters featured article: Into the Abyss. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Property-tax hike proposed

Posted: 01 Jun 2010 07:47 PM PDT

Message from Five Filters: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

PAWTUCKET –– After many residents felt the impact of a property-tax rate increase this year, Mayor James E. Doyle's proposed budget for city services and schools beginning July 1 goes to a public hearing Wednesday and calls for another tax hike.

As proposed, the budget would require a residential property-tax rate increase of 84 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation.

But the amount of state aid the city will get in the next budget year is in question.

The House Finance Committee last week announced a state budget plan that would eliminate almost all of next year's motor vehicle excise-tax phaseout program reimbursement to communities. Pawtucket's payment would drop from the budgeted $10,090,288 this year to $760,471 in the new budget year. If a cut of that size occurs, "we have a real predicament, we have a problem," said Finance Director Ronald Wunschel.

He said that it could affect local taxes, spending on services and personnel, or a combination.

The budget hearing is at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.

As presented, the budget would increase the residential property-tax rate to $18.62 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, compared with the current $17.78 per $1,000. A property owner whose house is assessed at $190,000 would see about a $160 tax increase, according to Wunschel.

The mayor's budget is $202.7 million, down from this year's $204 million. That includes $91.2 million for schools and $111.5 million for municipal departments. The school proposal is a 3.6-percent decrease from this year while the city-side proposal is a 1.95-percent increase.

The tax levy would increase 4.49 percent — to $92.26 million from $88.29 million this year — which is just under the 4.75-percent state cap on levy increases. The other major source of revenue for the city is state aid.

mmckinne@projo.com

Five Filters featured article: Into the Abyss. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

0 comments:

Post a Comment