Revenue Enhancing Ideas

[Jim O'Bryan]

Considering the property taxes that the city will receive from Rockport's $400,000+ homes, and other developments in the area...my guess is yes.

I hope that the turning of doubles into singles also picks up a little more steam. A percentage of the fee could could be earmarked for this project.

Stephen

You completely lost me on this one.

I have never figured out how turning doubles into singles, does anything but give us another option in homes, costs the owner more than they will recover, and takes a property and reduces it value and taxes.

I would rather see the city push for marrying lots and tearing down two $130,000 homes to put up a $300,000 home.

At the same time home sales a depression level sales, down 28% from last year. Rentals up 4%. As the money market tightens and it is, sales will fall dramatically and rentals will soar.

Now we need to educate landlords on how to get more out of their property. The easy way, is also the lazy way, and you rarely win taking the cheap lazy way in life.

FWIW


.

[Dee Martinez]

And renters pay exactly the same property tax as homeowners.
So what you're talking about is a renter paying THREE types of tax, instead of two.
Im all for the city getting a better handle on whos here in terms of being able to collect income tax from renters. Lakewood is unique in this regard and needs to make a special effort. This isnt the right effort.

another thing, lets remember that the CITY is financed generally through the INCOME tax. While the city does get some, PROPERTY taxes primarily benefit the SCHOOLS.

Renters (in most cases) do not pay property taxes. Renters pay rent to the owner of the dwelling. Rent is not a tax. Renters (in most cases) are not liable for any type of property tax. The Rent goes to the owner of the dwelling.. The owner of the dwelling pays the property tax and his money goes to the government to pay the taxes. Renters are not paying property taxes. This is a pretty black and white situation. 15,000 renters paying a $100 each in registration fees would generate $1,500,000 in registration fee revenue. That is nothing to sneeze at... I proposed a registration fee not a tax.

I mistyped in this post.
I meant to say that renters pay the same INCOME tax as homeowners. The post makes more sense with that change.
Whether or not the renter is liable for the property tax, the renter certainly pays it. The money the landlord uses to pay his tax bill isnt coming from heaven above.

A far better solution in my mind would be to require landlords to provide the city with names of tenants. This way we could get them into the income tax system faster. I agree that it is a problem getting renters into the sytem. Renting by nature is a transient sort of thing, and by the time the system catches up with them, many are already gone.

This isnt an indictment of renters In fact, this would even be a
benfit to renters since it would avoid that "surprise" 3 years down the road, when they finally snag you and your presented with a bill for 3years of income tax + interest and penalties.
right now, I believe its voter registration rolls that the city uses for tax purposes. There should be a better way.

[Dee Martinez]

I dont know if double posting breaks a rule but I wanted to also say that I think Mr Cole is on the right track.
While "thinking outside the box" is all well and good, the reality is that governments fund their services through taxes and fees. I mean, do we really think that replacing adult crossing guards with 5th graders is going to put more police on the street?

Mr. Call wants to reduce minimum staffing. But Lakewood residents are asking for MORE in this area, not less. They want MORE parks maintenance not less. I have nothing against giving college kids jobs picking up trash but parks maintenance is a REAL JOB. Its a government function which is going to be funded by TAXES and FEES.

My own research leads me to agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Cole. If Kettering Ohio can raise $28 million on a 1.75 income tax, why does Lakewood only collect $18 million on 1.5? I checked the data, and average income doesnt tell the tale.
Also, why does Cuyahoga County roll over and play dead when a well-connected property owner howl about his assessment? Assessment appeals and the loss of revenue connected to them are a HUGE issue for Lakewood.

I have changed my thinking a bit since this thread started (isnt that good?) I want to see us get whats coming to us FIRST, then we can look at raising the rates. And I do agree with Mr. Call that working for Lakewood shouldnt be a gravy train compared to working for other cities. But I dont think 5th graders at school crossings is going to pull us into solvency.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Grow Lakewood by 26 acres. Build the Peninsula. It won't solve anything in the 4 year life of our Council and Mayor but we need to look beyond the next election to plan Lakewood's future.

Real land, real taxes and we would raise the avg. income of Lakewood.

A vision for the future.

We need to look at all options available and implement all that save. One or two may not do the job but each improves the situation.

[Stephen Eisel]

Stephen

You completely lost me on this one.

I have never figured out how turning doubles into singles, does anything but give us another option in homes, costs the owner more than they will recover, and takes a property and reduces it value and taxes.

Maybe this would be a good story for the LO??? I see that First Federal of Lakewood has a sign up near Bunts and Lakewood Heights in front of a remodeled home. (I thought that this was a double into a single conversion, maybe not) It would be neat to get the banks spin on this.. I have not seen any data that shows that a converted double to single loses market value. If anyone has any data then please share it with us. I will also go the county auditors site and see if the dwelling has gone up or down in value..

[Rick Uldricks]

How many ways and how many times does some need to address any issue with you Stephen?

Your logic is faulty. I could get a comparable rental cheaper in other suburbs than Lakewood. Since I choose to live in Lakewood I am willing to pay rent that includes covering THE COST OF PROPERTY TAXES.

Anyone in property management will tell you that all these costs go into figuring fair market rental values.

Unless you are suggesting that ALL residents pay a yearly fee, this argument is null and void.

I rented for 15 years in several different cities and many different apartments/landlords, and I never paid a property tax. I am certain that the landlord or property management company paid their property tax with my rent money, but since I didn't own the property, I didn't have to pay tax on it.

[sharon kinsella]

Rick - If they paid their property tax with your rent money - then who - bottom line paid the taxes.

Semantics aside, rents are based on costs, property taxes are part of the costs of maintaning rental property. Therefore, rent includes property tax costs, so in essence the tenant, through the payment of rent to the property owner, is paying the taxes.

[Rick Uldricks]

deleted

[sharon kinsella]

Rick - this whole dialog was brought about by the ridiculous idea that renters should pay a residency fee.

Am I responsible if retailers don't turn in what they collect from sales tax, no. But I still paid the tax. Same thing.

By the way, car payments include the sales tax charged.

[Rick Uldricks]

deleted

[sharon kinsella]

Why thank you. :?

[Stephen Eisel]

Rick - this whole dialog was brought about by the ridiculous idea that renters should pay a residency fee.

Am I responsible if retailers don't turn in what they collect from sales tax, no. But I still paid the tax. Same thing.

By the way, car payments include the sales tax charged.

The key word was revenue stream not shortfall in tax collections. You are not responsible for retailers that do not turn in taxes from retail sales. The same way that you are not responsible for property taxes as a renter. Spin out however you want. Renters (in most cases) do not have the burden or liability of paying a property tax. just sayin

[Stephen Eisel]

A far better solution in my mind would be to require landlords to provide the city with names of tenants. This way we could get them into the income tax system faster. I agree that it is a problem getting renters into the sytem. Renting by nature is a transient sort of thing, and by the time the system catches up with them, many are already gone.

yep! If we are all going to have to pay a "legal city income tax" then all in the city should share in the burden.

[Shawn Juris]

How about selling passes for overnight street parking? While I think that the suggestion of residency fees certainly targets a segment that makes sense, this would be less pointed. $100/year or pay a $40 ticket.

[Kate McCarthy]

I thought earlier in this thread, though I could not find it, Lynn Farris suggested a drink tax to increase revenues. I was wondering if that was feasible within state laws and came across a proposal that Kent was putting forth to change state law to allow municipalities to impose a sin tax. Does anyone know the status of this?

http://portsmouthcitizens.info/Council/ ... oposal.pdf

I think a municipal sin tax with revenues targeted to safety could put some more police on the streets and have little effect on the average resident of Lakewood.