Story from the Tribune ...

As housing boom stalls, suburban schools seek students to fill buildings

What does this mean for the projections in District 41?

I wouldn't think that it would impact Glen Ellyn that much. Will there be a small impact? Likely. However, established suburbs like Glen Ellyn and Wheaton don't have a lot of empty land where hundreds of houses were supposed to/projected to go. Collar communities like Oswego, Aurora, Elgin, Sugar Grove, Elburn and Huntley are the ones getting pounded as full planned subdivisions with housing projections of hundreds and thousands are being foreclosed, taken back by banks and/or not moving forward....that really screws up the projections.

Just my thoughts however...I very well can be wrong.

What does this mean for the projections in D41?

Like Fan, I think that the areas mentioned have a much different scenario than D41. Interesting to see Ehlers quoted. It reminded me that D41 used Ehlers to project our enrollment in D41. I found my copy of the 2002 Enrollment Study done for Glen Ellyn District 41. Under "Impact of the Residential Development" Ehlers says: "Residential construction occurring within the District, or expected to occur within the district over the next eight to ten year, is expected to have minimal impact on District enrollment."

Of course, we chucked Ehlers to curb when it showed that enrollment would not even hit 3,600 and then start trending down a bit in the 2007/2008 year.

Now it seems that enrollment numbers, at least here in 41, are not driving the next building request. If the numbers aren't materializing (per the Dr. you-know-who NIU study), then there has to be another selling point. Programs and square footage per student. Does anyone else remember the specter of mandated all-day kindergarten being pulled out of the ref magic bag last year, days before the vote? And now, according to our latest space utilization consultant, our classroom sizes do not conform to state and national standards. So, my question is, besides the districts that have been experiencing explosive growth and have been building newer schools, aren't there more districts in Illinois that have older buildings with square footage issues?

My favorite part of the article is this:

The district hired Larson's firm in the middle of the building boom to conduct long-term growth studies. The firm typically reports high-, medium- and low-growth scenarios; the district used the high-growth scenario when it put the referendum proposal to voters.

Eighteen months later, the numbers haven't materialized.

"The students are still coming," Bumbales said. "They are just coming a little slower."



Sound familiar?

Dear Ohma: like Melbourne, you are great a reconstituting the past very accurately. On one post, I brought to eveyones attention re: the situation in Florida with empty schools titled, "where have all the children gone". Housing prices and the cost to live in many areas in Florida got so high that many young families with children could no long afford to live there. I opined that this situation may be mirrored here in GE with crazy RE prices and high taxes to boot. I have also wondered if the school districts ever anticipated a slowdown in tax revenues or worst case, a wholesale drop in revenue due to declining home values. The past 40+ million ref proves that these guys are out of touch, IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
I wouldn't think that it would impact Glen Ellyn that much. Will there be a small impact? Likely. However, established suburbs like Glen Ellyn and Wheaton don't have a lot of empty land where hundreds of houses were supposed to/projected to go. Collar communities like Oswego, Aurora, Elgin, Sugar Grove, Elburn and Huntley are the ones getting pounded ...

Over the weekend we were driving down Weber road toward Lockport. We were surprised to see huge big box retailers standing amid the corn fields, with the subdivisions quite spotty. And there were many sites where groups of heavy machinery stood idle in a field.

We compared it to a situation such as 59 in S Naperville a few years ago - by the time the big boxes were in, the paving over of neighboring farmland was progressing at a frenetic pace.

It is REALLY going to be interesting to see how this housing/RE situation unfolds.

From today's Chicago Tribune:

Chicago home sales plunge

Further, not only has the sales rate plunged, so have the prices.

quote:

Glen Ellyn real estate agent Karen Lippoldt said sellers "need to get more aggressive with pricing."

Nonetheless, asking prices are coming down. "I had over $500,000 in price reductions for the year in 2007," she said.

Having already seen a 5.4% increase in Assessor's Value for 2007 [even though objective sources show a 2.5% decline in overall market prices for my zip code], for the first time in 25 years, I can actually multiply the top-line Assessor's Value times three and come close to a low-end market price for my home.

And, this is what I suspect local township assessors are doing: Wringing out the slack in their "1/3 of market value assessments" and keeping their fingers crossed that prices don't "plunge" any further.

Do these taxpayer-funded township assessors even have formulas that take DECREASES in market-value into account?

BTNs

I think the 5.4% increase is an average that covers a period of 3 years vs. the 2.5% covers less than 1 year. My guess is that they will account for the decrease in market value next assessment period, but simply jack-up the rate. Either way, I bet we will never end up paying less. No way.

No, DuPage townships do an assessment every single year, so that 5.4% increase is for a single year - 2006 compared to 2007. They do have something they call a "quadrennial" assessment. I believe 2008 is that magical fourth year!

Not 100% sure what all a "quadrennial" year entails. Perhaps more field work on the part of the poor, over-worked township assessor's staff?

Cook County only re-assesses every three years.

As far as the rate, that is always a big black box mystery that we never learn till around May 1st.

The rate is what is supposed to be throttled down by the PTELL [tax cap] law.

From Milton's website:

quote:

On November 13, 2007, all property owners in Milton Township were notified of the changes to assessed value. These changes resulted from the state mandated general reassessment this office is required to conduct every four years.

So I think 2007 assessed values were based on an average of the last 4 years, which included the rising market, no? When did home values start to drop in our area? I thought there was a noticeable difference by fall of 2007, which would not have been included in the re-assessmnet if they were issued in November. I could be wrong.

I don't live in Milton Township but I know that every single year for the last 25 years I have gotten an annual Assessment Notice.

It is actually called a Notice of General Assessment and comes from the DuPage County Supervisor of Assessments. Go figure.

The increase between 2005 and 2006 was 6.6%, between 2004 and 2005 it was 7%, and, as I posted earlier, between 2006 and 2007 it was "only" 5.4%.

If the townships aren't increasing Assessor's Value every single year, how come my Assessor's Value goes up every year? I know they don't go out and physically look at every single property. No, they apply some formula.

And how do I know this? Because I check a semi-random sample of homes in my immediate area [about 25 of them] and if they haven't been sold in the year-just-ended? They all have the EXACT same increase as me - 5.4% on the button.

I'll never fully understand the process. IMO, it's confusing on purpose. Milton has like three different methods for valuing land, each is more complex than the other. No rules, as far as I know when to apply one vs. the other either. I requested this information via certified letters. My requests have been unresponded to, I even asked asked during my State hearing as did the the State representative. They have nothing in writing, but use their judgement when choosing which method to apply was their reply.

Yes, just like the pump price of gasoline, Assessor's Values are quick to go up but slow to go down.

The one thing that any patronage worker at a township will tell you [over and over and over again] is that Illinois law requires that the Assessor's Value be "1/3 of market value". 33.333% of what your home and land are ostensibly worth on the open market.

They will also tell you [over and over and over again] that they are not "market appraisers" and that their methods are "different" than a licensed real-estate appraiser [whose very livlihood depends upon pinpoint accuracy].

In year's past, anyone who "did the math" would come away feeling like "Gee, I better not whine about my assessment because when I multiply it by three, it is WAY, WAY below market value. Boy, am I getting a good deal!"

It was almost as if the assessors did this on purpose - sort of as a combination "fudge factor" [better to be too low than too high] AND built-in method of keeping the bitterboys and bythenumbers of this world off their backs.

Those days are over. Now, as I posted earlier, a "Times Three" on my Assessor's Value is actually in the market value ballpark. At the low-end of the ballpark, but still, feasible.

Oh, and I agree with you 100% on this....

quote:

it's confusing on purpose

Sure is. And we didn't even discuss County and State Equalizers which can jack your AV up to that oh so magical EAV - Equalized Assessed Valuation.

Funny thing is that for 2007, there are no equalizers being applied - no DuPage County equalizer and no State of Illinois equalizer. This hasn't happened since 2003.

Now, ask me how and why these other equalizers are applied.

Answer: I have no frikking idea how or why.

BTNs,

Seems like you have got a better handle on this than me, hence your handle "BTNs". I simply applied common sense and lost, although I think I got through to the State. We will see in the next month or so. When I get my decision, I will post the results here.

quote:

In year's past, anyone who "did the math" would come away feeling like "Gee, I better not whine about my assessment because when I multiply it by three, it is WAY, WAY below market value. Boy, am I getting a good deal!"

I noticed this too. In fact, I tried to argue this at my hearing. I took actual sales prices of homes that sold the same month I bought mine and compared assessed value to actual sales price. I notice that at that time, most were approx 10-12% below true market value ("sales price") while mine was only 4%. The State told me that unless I compared every single home that sold in the month of August vs. the 4 I that I had elected to use my, analysis was not representative of the whole. I used 4 that were within one square block of my home and since when do you need to obtain comps of every single home.

quote:

The mission of the Assessor's Office is to assess all properties in a manner that is fair, accurate and equitable to all.

My a$$!

I vaguely recall that you had some assessment problem and the township assessor basically gave you the run-around. Something about a corner lot? Or some odd shape of your parcel?

So, you kicked it up a notch? To the Great State Assessment Poobahs?

I keep telling myself that I have to go out, learn everything humanly possible about assessments and then set up an information clearinghouse type of Web site on the subject. Many otherwise intelligent people go MEGO ["my eyes glaze over"] on me when I try to talk to them about their real-estate assessments.

One guy tells me: Oh, I just pay the taxes in my mortgage payment. The bank takes care of it for me."

Jeez Louise! Thank God I pay a ton of college tuition and get to use the Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits on my annual 1040 return. If I didn't have these credits, I'd be paying more in property taxes than I am in Federal income taxes. As it is, the bulk of my Federal refund goes right to - DuPage County Collector anyway.

This is why I largely ignore talk about "Bush's tax cuts" and what have you. Federal taxes aren't a problem for me. Property taxes are a problem for me. A BIG problem.

quote:

As it is, the bulk of my Federal refund goes right to - DuPage County Collector anyway.

Word up! All of ours is used to meet our burden and the sad part is that it only covers little more than half.

quote:

Federal taxes aren't a problem for me. Property taxes are a problem for me. A BIG problem.

Amen to this!

Yes, I no longer have a mortgage but I still have to pay a ton of "rent" to the County just to live in my paid-off home.

Look, I pay my taxes. I bitch, but I pay them. I just want to know why I keep having to pay ever and ever more for not a whole lot more in return. The whole property tax thing is becoming a real burden.

Governments - at all levels - have to start cutting back. I haven't had a raise in almost four years. I've managed by cutting back on things and spending less. It is only common sense, something that most in government seem to not have.

Have we arrived at the six-figure village truck driver yet?

The main reason I argued my assessment is to prove that certain statements made on their website are 100% false. It's a matter of principle.

Their website states "The mission of the Assessor's Office is to assess all properties in a manner that is fair, accurate and equitable to all".

This is false and they know it and thus the reason for re-examining their methodology. I should FOIA the audio tape from my hearing. On it, Jenny from the Assessor's office tells the State Rep that they have no written rules for deciding when to use the "site value" method as opposed the "front line" method. Also there are no written rules for deciding when to classify a lot as "irregular" vs. "regular". It's all arbitrary my friend.

Soon, I hope, a bright light will be shone upon the darkness of local township assessors. 2007 is in the books as they say.

However, if my November of 2008's Notice of General Assessment shows yet another increase in Assessor's Value? The lid will come off this kid's jar.

I'm thinking pitchforks, scythes and flaming torches. Sound good?

The taxpayer-funded township assessors are loathe to "talk market" with people like you and I. No, they'd much rather obfuscate, waver and "talk assessments" which only they have control over.

They will repeatedly remind you that everything is based on "1/3 of market value", yet, they don't want to "talk market"?

I guess the real Q is: What happens when the market value of nearly every property DECLINES?

In 25 years of owning the same home, I have NEVER seen my assessed valuation - ANY flavor, equalized or top-line Assessor's Value - go backwards. I've seen it stay flat and I've seen it have miniscule increases. The last 6-7 years have been brutal on the increase side of the ledger.

Now that real market value has slipped, and slipped considerably, how long will we have to wait to see this show up in our little love letters from the Assessor Boys and Girls?

BTNs,

I assume you have appealed your property tax. I am curious, what was your argument? Did you simply pick three comps and fill in the blanks on the form, or did you perform detailed analyses? I'd love to hear your approach. Mine is not worth sharing in detail yet, unless I win.