Quoted from TakingItBack

Pretty insane how they can also say that our overall Assessment of the City went up $900,000,000 from $1.5 billion to $2.4 billion and we dont feel any tax relief.  HOW!

How/why is there no tax relief, you ask?    The answer is simple.   BECAUSE THE DEM SOCIALISTS have exempted virutally ALL the businesses downtown, i.e., their political cronies, from paying property and school taxes.

1.    Take a piece of vacant lant, it might be assessed for $1,000.   Build a house on it and that property then is assessed at $100,000.  

2.     Take a little 800 square foot, one story house with 2 bedrooma and one bathroom.   Add more sq ft to the first floor, add a second floor, add another bath, a couple more bedrooms, and the house may have it's assessment increased from $50,000 to $100,000

3.     Take a residential house with no garage and build a garage, the assessment will increase.

4.     Imagine your own house, you walk out your front door to a couple steps down to the sidewalk, same in the back.   So you add on an attractive porch on the front so you can sit there.   You add a deck in the back to enjoy.   Your assessment WILL increase.

5.    Think of the buildings downtown 9 years ago, and look at them today.   Yes, they were repaired, fixed up, added on to, etc (at taxpayer expense of course).   The assessed values of the properties of course increased.

Collectively, all the above increases result in the TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE of all properties in the city to rise.  

So why are the taxes going up?    Because in the examples above, Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, the owners pay property and school taxes.   All the properties in No 5 above pay virtually no property and school taxes whatsoever.

There are really two "assessement numbers" that play into the tax equation.  One is the number that the dem socialists want to boast about, i.e, the total assessed value.  Then there is the number they keep secret, and that is the "total TAXABLE value."       Total assessed value of ALL properties in the city MINUS the total asssessed value of thedowntown properties equals the total TAXABLE value.   And it is the total TAXABLE value that is use to determine the tax BILLS

Think of it this way:

      Total Asssessed Value      
-    Total Assessed Value of the downtown properties connected to the dem socialists
      Total Taxable Assessed Value


In Nos 1 thr 4 above are mere hard working homeowners, stuggling financially in a tough economy, typical total household incomes in the city is about $30,000 and most people are not getting raises.   In No 5 above, those politically connected people/businesses who are very very well heeled.   They can EASILY afford to pay the taxes but they are greedy for their own pockets.   Heck, are any of those millioniares using their tax exempt properties to put on Thanksgiving dinner for the poor in the city?   Is fat Morris hosting such a dinner at his uppity snobbish catering place, that key hall for the poor in the city, for the homeowners who are struggling to pay foir their own Thanksgiving dinner in order to pay taxes on Proctors?    How about the Hilton family?  How about the millionaire Mallozzi family with their bakery, are they baking pies to donate to the Concerned for the Hungry Thanksgiving Baskets?    


A government entity puts together a budget.   There are many sources of revenue---state aid, fed aid, permit fees, a share of sales taxes, and there is property taxes.   When a budget is put together, we'll assume all other revenue sources are factored first, and the property taxes last.   The revenue that must be collected in the form of property taxes is called the tax LEVY.   The property tax RATE is determined by the equation:   Tax LEVY divided by TOTAL TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE of all properties.     Let's use small numbers.  

Start with Total Assessed Value of $1,000,000 and a Tax LEVY of $200,000.     Do the math.   Levy divided by TAV = Tax RATE         200,000 divided by 1,000,000 = .20.   The tax RATE therefore is .20.   For a property assessed at 10,000, the tax BILL would be 200    

The following year, the Total Assessed Value increases to 1,200,000 and the Tax LEVY stays the same.   The math:   200,000 divided by 1,200,000 - .1667.   If you're own assessment stayed at 10,000, your tax BILL would be $167.   If the Tax LEVY increased to 210,000, the tax RATE would be .175 so your tax BILL would be $175.

Now we have Schenectady.   The dems exempt downtown from taxes.     The math to determine your tax BILL is really determined by Tax LEVY divided by Total TAXABLE Assessed Value.   And let's say the city decides to LOWER the Tax LEVY.   But downtown is exempt so, again, using simple numbers we'll say the Total TAXABLE assessed value is at $750,000.    Now to the math.   A REDUCED TAX LEVY of $190,000 divided by a Total TAXABLE assessed value of $750,000 equals a tax RATE of .25333, so on your house assessment of 10,000, your tax BILL rises to 253.    You see what happens?   The Total ASSESSED value in the city rises, but the total TAXABLE ASSESSED value is reduced when the downtown properties are exempt from paying taxes.   Even though the tax LEVY goes down, your tax BILL increases from $175 to $253


And the FACT is that since the taxes rise on the homeonwers, the REAL values of the homes go down (regardless of what the city says) since the REAL value of the homes is what willing buyers will pay to willing sellers.

And the FACT is that in Schenectady the REAL values of homes are going DOWN no matter what SB tries to claim when he reads something written by a mere newspaper worker.

A mere newspaper worker writes that GCAR says the values are increasing.   But GCAR's own website does not have ANY numbers that are the same as tne newspaper worker.

And SB absolutely REFUSES to address the OFFICIAL numbers actually published by GCAR itself, he prefers to believe a mere newspaper worker who made up some numbers.

So, SB, shows us on the GCAR website where the numbers show Schenectady's values are increasing.   Show us SB, provide a link to the GCAR website itself.  Well?    You STILL have not been able to come up with any proof.

TakingItBack, don't think when I use the term slumlords I mean rental property owners in general. In fact, I know many rental property owners just as disturbed about the slumlords as I am, because they ruin the neighborhoods thus making it difficult for responsible property owners to get decent tenants. Unfortunately, our city officials earn the same paycheck even as residents flee because the poverty industry takes up the slack.

Quoted from Madam X

TakingItBack, don't think when I use the term slumlords I mean rental property owners in general. In fact, I know many rental property owners just as disturbed about the slumlords as I am, because they ruin the neighborhoods thus making it difficult for responsible property owners to get decent tenants. Unfortunately, our city officials earn the same paycheck even as residents flee because the poverty industry takes up the slack.

I hear you and appreciate your response.  

The poverty industry is here because NYS leadership wants it here.....the railway 'switchers' get paid well to grease the rails.......

And another day and SB STILL REFUSES to admit he/she is wrong.

Another day and SB STILL cannot provide one shred of proof that values in the city and county are going up

Quoted from mikechristine1

And another day and SB STILL REFUSES to admit he/she is wrong.

Another day and SB STILL cannot provide one shred of proof that values in the city and county are going up

I wouldnt take it to heart.  I really think SB is just here to mess with people.  He/She isnt serious most of the time.  Just here to get us to use ALL CAPS and exclaimation points.  

I can't get this computer to do bold or italics for emphasis. I'm used to a PC, maybe that's the problem. What's the point of going to a discussion site just to mess with people? I agree that's probably the motivation, but could a person be more childish? Oh, wait, that Gertie/DVOR character could be and is. Doesn't understand things from a grownup's perspective and resorts to playground taunts.
I have relatives house shopping, they have been watching the market too, of course property values are falling.
On a related topic, I haven't been able to uncover anything as to how come a vacant condemned two-family house in my area has suddenly come undercity ownership. Is this a good thing for the taxpayer? Maybe if a building is condemned long enough the city can seize it? There have been a lot of moredecrepit properties vacant much longer. I'm just curious, especially since our city government has a way of doing sneaky things not for our benefit.

Total assessed values went up almost a BILLION dollars but the all DEM morons refused to cut the tax rate like they should have. Nothing will improve until taxes and fees are slashed. This cannot happen with the present all DEM fossils. It's not enough to vote for Roger Hull. Vote NO! on the City amendment and Vote Row B for City Council and County Legislators.

when the value goes up , the rate goes up, the levy goes up.......

THERE IS NO 'GETTING AHEAD'.....in NYS only government puppets go anywhere

Quoted from Smoking Bananas

i will indulge u one last time:


* Schenectady: down 9 percent.



Within the Capital Region, Schenectady County saw the largest increase in average sale price of a home in September, according to GCAR . The price of a home increased 14 percent, to $189,434, compared to compared to a year ago.

.

Misprint by a newspaper worker



So tell us SB, provide us the proof from GCAR.    We're waiting

Quoted from senders

when the value goes up , the rate goes up, the levy goes up.......
                THERE IS NO 'GETTING AHEAD'.....in NYS only government puppets go anywhere

These sounds like Captain Stratton on his knowledge of the canals. He's getting a little behind in his work like pizza boy who thinks 218=400.

POTENTIAL SIGNS
OF CREDIT DISTRESS
* Declines or large swings in collection of
economically sensitive taxes, e.g., sales
and income tax collections
* Trend of operating losses; fund balance
draw down
* Declining financial margins
* Deficit ending fund balance
* Increasing reliance on operating transfers
* Rising mandated or fixed cost as percent
of budget
* At or close to tax ceiling (no margin)
* Increasing employee benefits
* Pension deferrals or assumption changes
* Decreasing capital project outlay
* Self-insured with no corresponding
reserves
* Significant litigation or settlement
* Sale of asset for operating revenue
* Interest earnings as percent of cash on
hand
* Current tax collections less than 95
percent or declining trend
* Declining taxable values
* Loss of major employer
* Sharply increased debt obligations
* Debt structure not consistent with useful
life of financed asset

Quoted Text

Stats 101: Mean versus Median


By Jennifer Burnett | Monday, November 7, 2011 at 11:57 am

As we are exposed to more and more data and statistics on a daily basis, it has become even more important to understand how to interpret that data – and how to spot when they are being manipulated.  This series is designed to explain the common ways that data and statistics are used and to arm you with the information you need to ask the right questions and understand the true meaning behind all of those numbers.

Determining the difference between the terms average, mean and median is the subject of this blog.

What is average?

The word 'average' is used so commonly that we don’t really even question what it means when we see it.  But dismissing the use of averages can be a mistake.  Generally when we hear the word 'average' we associate it with the term 'mean' – or when we add up all of the values in a data set then divide by the number of values.  Oftentimes, our assumption will be correct. However, the term 'mean' and 'average' are not necessarily interchangeable.

The term 'average' is generally used to express that something is statistically the norm, that is, what value we expect, is in the middle, or common.  Technically, the term 'average' includes a few ways to measure what value best characterizes a particular sample, including mean and median.  This common misconception leaves us vulnerable to manipulation by those who would use it to make a data set look favorable to their cause. So, it is important to ask what someone really means when they use this term.

Mean versus Median

The term 'median' is also a common term used when describing a data set, especially among number crunchers.  To calculate a median value, we look at the midpoint of a data set, or the point in a set of values where the number of values above and below are equal.   For example, in the Data Set A, value 4 is the midpoint, with 3 values above and 3 values below.

We use both median and mean to give us a sense of what the 'average' or middle of a group looks like.  It may be the case that the median and mean of a given set of data are very similar.  Take the data set above, for example.  The median value is 12 and the mean is 13 – not a huge difference.  In other cases, however, the difference between the two calculations can be significant.  It all comes down to how evenly the values in your dataset are distributed.

When values are evenly distributed, the mean will be similar to the median.  Say, for example, your town has a population of 1,000 and everyone makes exactly $50,000 a year.  The midpoint is the same as the mean - $50,000.  Bill Gates hears how nice your town is and decides to move there.  The next year, Mr. Gates sees some tough times and only earns a billion dollars.  Suddenly, your little town has a mean income of over $1 million. The median remains $50,000.  If you only looked at the mean income of your town, your first thought might be: “Wow!  My town is full of millionaires!” But that figure is clearly not representative.  Having one billionaire in the town has skewed the distribution of incomes, making a mean calculation less useful.

Real world example:

According to the Congressional Budget Office, mean real household income[1] grew 62 percent between 1979 and 2007.

Sounds good, right?  However, note that mean is being used here.

When we use median (where half of all households have income below the median, and half have income above it) to measure income growth, the picture changes. Between 1979 and 2007, real household income grew by only 35 percent.  The difference between 62 percent growth and 35 percent growth is pretty significant.



The reason for the big difference? Incomes are not evenly distributed across the population.  Traditionally when looking at income distribution you have a few people at the bottom, a lot of people in the middle and a few people at the top. This is where we get the term “middle class.”

For the past thirty years, the same is also true about the growth in income – it has not been evenly distributed.   Because the mean (62 percent) is so much larger than the median (35 percent), this tells us that the distribution of income growth is skewed significantly toward the higher end.  That is, a small portion of the population has seen disproportionally larger gains in their income than everyone else.



QUESTIONS TO ASK:
If someone uses the term 'average,' what calculation are they actually referring to?
If someone uses the term 'mean' when describing a data set, how evenly distributed is the data set? That is, does the data set have a few extremely high or extremely low values?
If the answer is "yes" or “I don’t know” to the question above, would median be a more appropriate choice?

When in doubt, ask for both median and mean – if they are significantly different, that tells you that your data set is probably skewed in one direction or another and could affect your decisions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/drupal/content/stats-101-mean-versus-median

Another sign of the great DEM moron renaissance. Home prices dive, 100 year old Downtown business boarded up {can't sell} and the Schenectady Armory rots without even a $1 bid.

dalai salami = total. complete idiot