From the words of DV on May 14, 2015
I think a reval is long overdue.
DV, how long overdue would you say?
And DV, should the reval increase or decrease the assessments?
If you say decrease, then we all would say that you admit that--under McCarthy and plex and the dems, and all the so called wild uncontrolled spending of taxpayer money on these so called "economic development projects"--have actually caused a massive reduction to the tax base which is the direct opposite of what you have been claiming they would do.
So DV, are you willing to respond? Or pretend to have us on ignore?
On the coming council meeting, there is a certiorari for several residential properties. Here is one in particular. 1070 Brierwood Blvd. Assessment per 2011 assessment roll, $333,800. And of course, I actually provide the evidence (unlike some people)--the image from the actual official assessment roll
What is interesting is the owner listed the house for sale on Oct 15, 2010, asking $199,900 far less than what it was assessed for 10 months later!
No willing buyers (evidence it was not worth what the city assessor claimed), so on January 7, 2011, asking price reduced to $194,500.
Still no willing buyers, (more evidence it was not worth what the city assessor claimed), so on May 12, 2011, asking price was reduced to $184,500
Then another six months later (over one year since being listed), STILL no willing buyers, the listing was removed, I would say for the holidays, listing removed November 15, 2011 (right before Thanksgiving) and then listed again right after New Year, on January 15, 2012, this time the asking price had been reduced to $166,400.
Research proves the incompetence of the city's Assessor's office and the Board of Assessment. The owner (actually her estate) grieved the assessment, in early 2011 I believe it would still be the UNQUALIFIED puppets of the ex BS mayor, who denied a reduction, despite overwhelming evidence. The estate filed a certiorari according to court records and you'll see on the 2012 Assessment roll, the Assessment was reduced to $187,500.
Actually that amount appeared on the tentative roll.
Now remember, when it was listed again for sale, after the holidays, the asking price was $166,400
Still no wiling buyers, the asking price was reduced on July 31,2012 to $159,900
It finally sold. It sold for $135,000 on March 2, 2013. WOW, $200,000 less than what the city assessors office claimed it was worth!!!!! That is really PROOF POSITIVE that the mayors, the assessors that have served them, and their puppets on the Board of Assessment are
TOTALLY UNQUALIFIED to do their jobs
You can see that in 2013 the final assessment roll was unchanged from 2012, but it does indicate the change of ownership.It looks like the new owners grieved to the Board of Assessment in 2014. This would be board members appointed by the UNQUALIFIED mayor McCarthy who appointed his sleaze STAR double-dipper Mary D, who brags on how great houses are selling when she talks at McTHIEF's stupid bus tours, and just to refresh everyone's memory, Mary is the husband of the metroplex architect. And remember, they are a pair of TAX DEADBEATS.
Based on the tentative AND final assessment roll in 2014 being the same $187,500, (and it is STILL $187,500 on the 2015 tentative roll, if anyone actually needs to SEE the EVIDENCE, I will be happy to post it) it is evidence that McTHIEF's cronies are not qualified to render decisions, they made no changes to this property's assessment as no changes on the final roll, issued July 1, 2014.
The (new) owners then filed a tax certiorari on July 23 2014. And the settlement was discussed, albeit secretly, this past Monday and I would say will be on the consent agenda this upcoming Monday.
I wonder what the reduction will be.
Therefore, under McCarthy's leadership, are home values increasing or decreasing in the city? Is the tax base increasing or decreasing?
Mayor McCarthy and his team are doing a great job in the city. Keep up the good work.
WATCH. TOTAL SILENCE.
Again, should the "long overdue reval" increase assessments or decrease assessments. And remember, answering that a decrease is needed means admitting that the tax base under McCarthy has fallen!
Logged
