Quote:
Originally Posted by Londonee
So why does this make sense from the city's standpoint? I get that you are enjoying this mental exercise of parsing statements into justifications, but in a cash strapped city allowing the practice of your big-time moneymakers to earn you effectively zilch is almost criminal. Especially with reasonably popular solutions at hand. Besides, the notion that the city assessors have accurately determined the value of the land in the first place to bolster your argument is laughable. For the record, I don't think this should apply to areas outside of greater CC.
As an aside, this lot is owned by Michael Singer Real estate. It was taxed at $600k pre AVI in 2013 (which is, again, criminal). It jumped to $2.6mm in 2014 and jumped again to $4.2mm last year. My guess is that another jump in the next few years will push these guys to sell.
|
If you re-read my posts on this topic, I've never said the city assessors have accurately determine the value of land. I even said I don't have faith in the assessment process. Until they make the assessment process more of a science rather than an art, there's lots of subjectivity and variables to play with which results in inconsistent assessments.