Thursday, July 24, 2008

NYC homeowners in the doghouse


New York must rescind its 7% property tax cut next year in order to keep the city from drowning in red ink, the city's fiscal watchdog warned Tuesday.

Eliminating the cut will raise more than $1 billion extra in each of the next three years, which would still leave the city with a $12.6 billion budget gap over those three years, the state Financial Control Board said in its review of the city's fiscal plan.


Property tax cut faces ax

Bloomberg's early-edition budget for the next three years assumes the Council will agree to eliminate the tax break. The control board, a relic of the city's near-bankruptcy in the 1970s, said the Council needs to agree.

"If you take a look at the national economy and the local economy, we're probably going to have to make more attempts to reduce our expenses while hopefully maintaining services," Bloomberg said.


Right, so maybe this isn't the right time to start spending money translating documents into other languages.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

This always amazes me, why do home owners have to pay this leach City property tax if it can just come in and take the property in the Bloomberg boom? Do these people get their tax money back? After all paying property taxes is on "your Home" not bloombergs next project. During Eminent Domain our local governments should have to give these people 1/2 their taxes back, what a racket.

Trilby said...

Hm... and when they add back the 7%will they also revalue the properties, to reflect the lower market values? Why not just shoot me in the head now instead of pushing me incremantally to the brink?

Taxpayer said...

Here's a spending program to cut. No services will be cut with this plan.

Cut eminent domain. Cut the spending of over billions of our tax dollars that go to developers to produce these grotesque monstrosities that yield no benefit at all to the original property owners or the taxpayers who foot the bill.

Force developers to put their own money at risk. Force developers to negotiate with the owners of the property they claim they can do better with. If the developer has a good plan, and the developer believes in it, he will cheerfully put up his own money and cheerfully negotiate with the current owner.

Why is the Commissar interfering with the rights of property owners to use their own property as they themselves see fit? And, why is the Commissar blocking the ordinary, traditional negotiations that occur between owner and prospective buyer? Is the Commissar frightened that we will all learn that his land grab thefts are all phony plans to extract kickbacks from the developers?

Commissar, stick to the problems that will define your permanent legacy: Calories, trans-fats, lethal artificial turf, collecting kickbacks from harassed business owners.

Oh, yeah. The Smoking Ban. World-Wide. You and Gates (who cannot and never has produced a stable, reliable PC Operating System, and, who, like you, became a billionaire through greed and lies) make a great pair. Both egocentric zealots who never really accomplished anything useful or honestly.

Anonymous said...

Using our tax dollars to translate English into how many languages? Stop that stupid idea....duh!

How pathetic is he?

Nicky B said...

to TAXPAYER:
How arrogant is this Mayor?.. Facing a decided deficit and budget problems, this man promotes a virtually ILLEGAL eminent domain process at Willets Point. If the 'renewal' of Willets Point is such a dominant agenda, why not let it morph the way the Urbitran study (in 1992) concluded?
Install the infrastructure and, VOILA, the property becomes too expensive for junkyards to occupy.
To spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer money and then bequeath it to a developer is scandalous. Watch out Bloomberg, you could wind up a DISGRACED billionaire. And Kerry Nation Schulman might be in the next cell!

Anonymous said...

A "dumb" question:

If the housing market is down, why does Bloomberg allow the NYC Dept. of Finance to increase my real estate taxes each year?

Isn't the assessed value of my
home dependent on a percentage of its market value ?

I can't get what I could have for my house today compared to three years ago, but my yearly assessment keeps on going up!

It sure seems that we're all being f--ked royally by "hizzoner"
and his cavalier administration!