Comments on: Rybak’s house for sale — at $200,000 above market value

By: Justin C. Adams

Justin C. Adams — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:54:13 +0000

I don’t think the mayor indicated that he wasn’t going to move to the north side, I think the author of the article is concluding he won’t because the Mayor doesn’t qualify for incentives here – it’s a kind of joke, but I don’t think it is the mayors.

Re valuation and property tax burden. Remember that all taxes are paid out of your income, regardless of what they’re assessed against. Property taxes tend to work out regressively and they are a detriment to the pursuit of home ownership. Unfortunately we have a very income tax adverse group of state leaders and virtually no power to levy a progressive tax on the local level, so we’re stuck with it.

But as regards our houses here in Folwell and elsewhere that are evaluated higher than market value and the Linden Hills houses that are evaluated lower, the only real question regarding the fairness of the taxes each home owner pays is about the total sum as a percentage of income.

Since the tax is flat, and since as income increase so does the value of the home and also the property tax valuate (but only up to a point – you can’t buy a 250,000,000 home in minneapolis), the richest pay less of their income to property taxes. I think that’s unfair.

I’d solve that problem, if I were in charge of everything (haha), by exempting the first couple hundred thousand dollars of taxable value so a family in a modest house would not pay property tax on it, but someone with multiple homes or a more valuable home than average (or needed, perhaps) would pay for the overage.

By: Joshs Brain

Joshs Brain — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 02:47:13 +0000

Josh, if you are rich and have a big rich house you pay the at the proper evaluation, otherwise you
are being subsidized by people that are actually paying the proper evaluated rate. By your reasoning
just because Bill Gates pays $100 more than you in Fed taxes it is OK, cuz he gets the
same Federal services, even as he swims in a big bank vault filled with money like Scrooge McDuck? Or maybe you are rich with no sense of justice and civic morals.

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:47:58 +0000

I’m not defending the Mayor here, but home values in that neck of the woods tend to be very high. Thus, since all homeowners in the city pay the same property tax rate (special assessments aside), people there tend to pay a lot more in taxes, even if the tax assessed value is below the market value. And, theoretically at least, they do not get any higher level of service than residents elsewhere in the city.

All I’m saying is that while they are in some sense getting a good deal if assessed values as a function of market values tend to be lower there than in other parts of the city, that does not necessarily mean that the rest of the city is subsidizing them. It is not that simple.

By: Paul Schmelzer

Paul Schmelzer — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:10:51 +0000

Cyn,
That’s not what the story says. Dickinson, who is not the real estate agent working on Rybak’s house, was speaking generally about how many houses assessors have to look at and how that sometimes means it’s years between assessments.

By: cyn

cyn — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:20:28 +0000

“The house hasn’t been viewed by the assessor’s office in years”???? How lucky for him. The county keeps raising my home valuation and I’ve had the assessor to my home twice in the last 5 years to get the valuation lowered to where it belongs! How nice for the mayor that he gets such preferential treatment as being ignored by the assessors office. Wish I could receive such favors.

By: Jeffs Brain

Jeffs Brain — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:59:36 +0000

Jeff, tax value does not equal market value, that is the point.

Let me spell this out for you. I have a house tax valued over market price. I pay a large tax
bill. The mayor has a house tax value about 30% less than market price, he pays a proportionately
smaller tax bill (30%) than the rest of us that are valued at over market price.

Therefore we subsidize the mayor. Or is that still not clear?

By: mill

mill — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:33:01 +0000

If the good mayor can get $200K above the taxable listing – which, in spite of the realtors assertions is at least loosely market-based, then I’d want an investigation conducted to make sure the buyer isn’t just some phat-cat influence-buyer, who will be repaid with some huge government contract later worth millions when RT hits the next big public job. If RT can get 200 above, maybe Norm Coleman can similarly sell his, and get out from his underwater mortgage situation.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:20:35 +0000

Remember when the mayor of Chicago moved to Cabrini Green for a while? She was scared away eventually but it was a catalyst for public housing reform nationwide.

Maybe R.T., who sometimes likes to pretend he’s interested in the environment, could use this opportunity to move to someplace a bit more walkable than suburban Lake Harriet. Oh wait, but if he moved someplace walkable he’d have to give up his job, because Minneapolis isn’t walkable.

http://walkscore.com/get-score.php?street=4415+Dupont+Ave+S%2C+Minneapolis%2C+mn&go=Go

By: Freedom Lover

Freedom Lover — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:36:42 +0000

Ummm… is anyone considering that perhaps the home is grossly under-valued precisely BECAUSE it is the mayor’s house?

As we’ve seen with many nominees in politics of late, taxation appears to be something for the “little people” to diligently pay, and optional for politicians until they get vetted for a higher office. All is forgiven, they pay their back taxes, and the criminal charges the rest of us would be subjected to are mysteriously dropped or not pursued.

By: News Day: Movers and shakers / Fong Lee update / Building in Shadow Falls / Animal news / more « Mary Turck

Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:39:49 +0000

[...] Mayor R.T. Rybak’s Lake Harriet area home is up for sale, reports the Minnesota Independent, with an asking price of $750,000. According to Rybak’s communications director Jeremy Hanson, [...]