Cranbury 5-cent, increase in property taxes from the school this year

[Money]

5-cent, increase in property taxes from the school this year. The tax rate is $1.03 per $100 of assessed value. A house assessed at the township average of $605,000 would pay $6,231.50 in school taxes for the 2012-13 school year, about $301 more than this year if the budget is passed April 17.


http://www.centraljersey.com/articles/2012/03/05/cranbury_press/news/doc4f4fda0075ebd295618423.txt

[5%]

Why does the article state a 1% increase, it looks like a 5% increase based on the tax example and a .05 rate increase to 1.03. Am I missing something?

[2%?]

[yup]

[citizen]

[ok]

[so]

[ok]

[so]

Ok wrote: “Because the ratables on the warehouses are decreasing faster than the homes. As each warehouse gets reassessed at a lower rate it increases the percent of the burden on single family homes.”

Sorry, some of us are still too slow so you’ll need to explain it in greater detail.

Yes, the warehouse values are declining faster than residential values. So collectively the residential taxpayers will shoulder a greater percentage of the budget.

But it’s not clear why that explains the ~5% delta in the ratables year-over-year if computed using the figures provided in the article versus the ~1% increase that was quoted as occurring. If the warehouses assessments go down, they will pay less taxes because the tax rate will be applied to their assessment values and result in a lower total taxes. That doesn’t explain why $1.03 this year versus $0.98 equals only a 1% difference in the tax rate itself. The tax rate is determined by the total budget and the total assessment values of properties in Cranbury.

However, what you imply is that the tax rate itself is variable from property to property and that residential properties will be seeing a ~5% tax rate increase and that commercial properties will presumably have a decrease in the tax rate to collectively result in an overall 1% change in the tax rate, as opposed to an overall reduction in total assessed values being used to compute a tax rate. If this is so, then the article is leaving out a few essential figures to be able to compute the 1% tax rate increase.

[agree]

I agree with "so." They repeated the same illogical statistic in today's article in the Cranbury Press. A $0.05 increase from $0.98 to $1.03 which they are calling 1%. That's not 1%. It's more like 5%. All this other stuff "ok" is saying about the ratable doesn't change the fact that $1.03 from $0.98 is not 1%. They need to explain this better.

[Mtg]

I don't disagree on the school's need to raise taxes. However, I do agree that this is a 5% increase in tax rate. Is it possible the budget went up 1% and the paper mixed up tax rate and budget increases?

[tax increase]

The article states:

"The average household in Cranbury would pay about $8,712 total in school and municipal taxes, about $391 more than last year, if the budgets pass."

No matter what rationale or how anyone spins it, this is a 4.7% school and municipal tax increase for the average household.

[hoping to help]

The Cranbury School's 2012-13 Proposed TAX LEVY is increased 1% over the current year. The tax levy, by state mandate, is allowed to increase to 2%.

As a result of the proposed tax levy, the TAX RATE will increase to $1.03 or .05 per $100 of assessed rate over the current year.

The tax rate is calculated each year as a proportion of the money that is needed to be raised and the overall value of the community. In the last few years, Cranbury, as most communities has declined in aggregate value. So the effect is that even if the amount of money to be raised stayed the same, the tax rate would increase.

[thanks]