| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 3:32:40 PM
|
| Speaking of taxes, did I hear Mayor DeMaria correctly during the Chamber Chatter program, when he said, he doesn't want to keep the taxes too low, so people won't buy investment properties? What about the rest of us who live here, wouldn't lower taxes be beneficial to us? That statement makes no sense to me. Did I hear him right? I hope I am wrong. |
Edited by - massdee on 04/22/2008 3:44:03 PM |
 |
|
|
n/a
deleted
11 Posts |
 Posted - 04/22/2008 : 4:49:12 PM
|
| I did not see the show and why be mad at poster tails. I have not read any lies and I am hearing the same exact things. What is wrong with getting the word out for you benifit and what is it that mayor is covering up and his people since you get so upset over it. Whats upseting is this guy with the dump. |
|
|
|
Marie
Senior Member
114 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 5:16:33 PM
|
I did see the show, and I now have more questions than answers. I heard the mayor say he doesn't want to keep the taxes TOO LOW! Why would he want to hurt the tax payers like that? I don't get it either. Maybe he can afford all the increases we have had to endure but many of us can not.
I heard the mayor say he would like to see office space, retail space, residential space and a marina down on lower Broadway. He also wants a transfer station down there. Why can't we have the rest of those without the transfer station?
I heard the mayor say that no increase in the budget is looking pretty good. If there weren't such high salaries being paid to some maybe there would be a decrease? Oh I forgot he doesn't want our taxes TOO LOW.
I heard him say that Wood Waste is a "hot bed issue if you are a blogger. The whole city is talking about Wood Waste. Is he that far out of touch with the tax payers?
|
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 7:32:20 PM
|
We can want all of those things Marie but it all comes down to whether or not a developer can sell the office space and marina space. Typically, a developer isn't going to build unless he can get an anchor tenant to commit to leasing from day 1.
I was also concerned about the mayors statement about the taxes being too low.....but I think we need to give him the opportunity to clarify that statement. He has said in the past that absentee landlords are a huge problem in the city. Many of them increase costs by overcrowding and many of them don't keep their property maintained as well as they should.
Does anyone know if the city is able to charge a different tax rate on owner occupied property than we do for non owner occupied property? Personally, if someone owns multiple homes I think it should be taxed as a business rather than residential property. The only flaw I see in that is the person that owns a home but also owns a piece of property from a family inheritance of some sort. Maybe there could be an exemption for situations like that??? Just trying to think outside the box a bit.....
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 9:18:25 PM
|
| I believe there is only two tax rates, commercial and residential. I think the city would be in for one heck of a law suit if they tried to tax non-owner occupied homes at a different rate, after all they are still residential. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 9:45:03 PM
|
| why not tax them at the commercial rate (if it is higher)? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 10:29:39 PM
|
| The main impediment would be found in MGL Chapter 59, Section 2a; it defines the four classification of real estate in the state (residential, open space, commericial and industrial). As a matter of practice though, I believe that Everett only has two tax rates, residental and commercial (i.e., everything but residential). Can't say that the idea doesn't deserve some consideration though. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 10:32:53 PM
|
While we chew on that one....another question...
Can the city go after Building Permit money/fines for work that was done but not properly permitted....but the work is already completed? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2008 : 11:21:35 PM
|
| That information would most likely be found in the city's revised ordinances, probably under the code enforcement section. Think that it used to be under building regulations but got moved when the code inforcement task force was established. |
|
|
|
Marie
Senior Member
114 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2008 : 11:06:58 AM
|
Wouldn't a developer have an easier time selling office space, retail space, residential space and a marina if a waste transfer station is NOT located down there? All of these other uses for that property came right from the mayor on Chamber Chatter.
As for the mayor saying he doesn't want to keep the taxes low, so people will not buy investment properties, I feel is ridiculous. Maybe if our tax rate was lower there would be less homes in foreclosure. People are having hard financial times right now, every little bit will help. I can't imagine any mayor saying he will keep the tax rate higher in order to stop people from investing in Everett. I am bewildered over this. I don't think this can be justified or clarified in any way, shape or form.
Should the city prevent people who don't live in Everett from opening businesses? Isn't that the same as being an absentee landlord? Where does the owner of Wood Waste live? That business is a slum, yet the mayor is willing to work with him.
I am tired of the "honest" resident having to pay for the "sins" of others.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2008 : 10:07:48 PM
|
| I am patiently waiting for the budget meetings to begin. I expect things to go much smoother than last year. I am sure the budget committee will find some areas to cut, especially since the cuts they wanted last year didn't happen, unless Carlo makes these cuts before he submits the budget. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Must See TV
