|
this ruling the legislature moved to eliminate the Limited A7arket Value
<br />wncept over a two year period so that all ho�stead property would use
<br />estimated market value for ta�c purposes. This �ant that the value of a
<br />house would increase appro;iimately one-half the difference between Limited
<br />Market Value and Market Va1ue for 1980 and the other one half in 1981.
<br />This in turn would result in an increased assessed value.
<br />7b of£set this increase the legislature took two actions. First, the
<br />irethod of calculating assessed value was changed for ho�restead property.
<br />Instead of 20s for the first $17,000 and 33.33% for the balance, the new
<br />calculation calls for 18% for the first $21,000 and 30o for the balance.
<br />Second, the legislature increased the hoirestead credit from $325 in 1979
<br />to $550 in 1980. Thus, even though the gross t� may be higher in 1980,
<br />the net ta�: may be reduced. This tends to effect the lower cost house imre
<br />than the higher, however.
<br />In addition, the state "Circuit Breaicer" will tend to offset a certain
<br />portion of the increase in market value. This is a result of sotre changes
<br />in the laws concerning incoire levels.
<br />The net effect of these changes on the "average" or "typical" property
<br />aaner is difficult to evaluate. Much depends on the Limited Market Value
<br />of the property combinecl with the actual am�unt the property value will
<br />increase to get to the SOo mark. At this point, without sufficient data
<br />to k� extr�nely a��uraLe, it appeaLs chat app�o�:5ateiy o'S% of Roseviiie
<br />residents wi11 pay the same or a lesser am�unt in property taxes. Of the
<br />remaining 350, about one hal£ to two-thirds will receive modest increases
<br />on the order of less than 100. The remaining 10 - 15� wi11 have increases
<br />of greater than lOs and possibly as much as 500. To further wmplicate
<br />matters, depencling on the value of hon�s, those receiving a 50e increase in
<br />ta�ies could range in dollar aimunts anywhere from fifty to several hundred
<br />dollars. If comronly accepted statistical distributions are applied, however,
<br />it is unlikely that there will be many households receiving large dollar
<br />increases.
<br />; wiT�i�
<br />Belcw is a stmurary of the major sources of revenue included in the 1980 budget.
<br />Source
<br />Property T�
<br />Intergovernmental
<br />Licenses & Permits
<br />Court Fines
<br />Charges for Seivices
<br />Special Assess�nts
<br />Trans fers
<br />1979
<br />Budget
<br />2,576,833
<br />1,143,100
<br />220,136
<br />25,000
<br />3,185,401
<br />624,135
<br />1,346,365
<br />1980
<br />Proposed
<br />2,803,741
<br />1,362,432
<br />229,925
<br />28,000
<br />3,028,241
<br />542,589
<br />860,994
<br />Total 9,090,970 8,837,922
<br />Ibllar
<br />Increase
<br />(L�crease)
<br />226,908
<br />249,332
<br />9,7II9
<br />3,000
<br />(157,160)
<br />( 81,546)
<br />(485,371)
<br />(253,048)
<br />Percent
<br />Increase
<br />(L�crease)
<br />8.8
<br />22.4
<br />4.4
<br />12.0
<br />(4.9)
<br />(13.1)
<br />(36.1)
<br />( 2.8)
<br />
|