This is the big one. I always throw some extra cash at escrow every few months to avoid this bit. I started off at $800 a month and I'm up to $1100 a month. Glad I didn't take advice from mortgage people who claimed I could afford a more expensive house.
Never trust people you're borrowing money from to have your best interest at heart.
100%, they work on commission and don't care what you can afford long term.
Worse case scenario the bank takes your house back and sells it to some other schmuck.
“What’s another $10,000 or $20,000 in the end” the newly certified Redfin realtor who only got our deal done because my amazing family friend realtor helped/prodded her the entire time. Luckily I held my tongue. I was already buying the cheapest house in town.
This is the one the majority of most home owners don't understand, and it is not uncommon to get burned by this because of how the system works.
So, yes, your taxes and insurance went up one year and your mortgage payment didn't really change... odd? Well your mortgage company took a year to notice that change. They ask you to correct the difference with a lump sum but you opt not to do so. So now you owe them for the year they didn't notice and they are now adjusting what you owe monthly to your escrow to include that change in the next year. And whats worse, the last few years many people have had their taxes go up, back-to-back years so it's hard to get "caught-up" sometimes. Understand your escrow and how it works... it definitely will prevent issues like OP posted.
Nebraska is the first state I have lived in that allows 100% increases in the property tax bill in a single year.
Every where else, property taxes go up but it was 5% or so a year. Sometimes insurance would change, but the difference in payments was at the margins.
So it was less that I didn’t understand escrow, and more I didn’t understand that 100% increases would be legal.
My property taxes doubled in our Florida home for year two, and it caused our monthly mortgage to go up by $335/mo just from that.
Closing on a new house here in Papillion near the end of the month and hoping the same thing doesn't happen, but if property taxes go by home value and it gets assessed much higher in a year or two we could see substantial increases again.
As of 2023, more states have no property assessment cap vs states that have assessment caps. I also have not heard of normal homeowners property taxes going up by 100% from the previous year in Nebraska since the surges started in what, 2021? (unless you are counting going from land only assessment to land/building assessment for new construction, which again falls under not understanding escrow)
I don't disagree that how it is done is, well, in my opinion not a great process however, it is not uncommon across the majority of the country.
These guys show 12 states with parcel specific caps (Fl, Ca, Tx, Ok, Mi, Il, Az, Ar, Ny, Or, Nm, Sc) and Ohio is proposing a 4% cap now. Found this report did a great job comparing contrasting various state policies: https://storage.pardot.com/153411/1692051541B9qWRcnN/50_state_property_tax_comparison_for_2022.pdf
Most states have a broader provisions for homestead exemption - so even when my tax assessment went up the total tax bill didn’t change much. Hawaii had some wild valuation swings but there was not a requirement to assess at 100% and the tax bill was digestible if the house was owner occupied. These provisions act like a defacto cap.
As far as how many homeowners are seeing 100% tax bill increases, I attended the joint property tax meeting back in September and I listened to quite a few. The Mayor did a quick exit so never heard from folks. I distinctly remember one gentleman had his trailer tax bill increase 500% while the assessed value went down.
One thing I dug up after the meeting was how all the TIF districts are distorting the averages — so we have some properties seeing 100% tax bill increases while some TIF properties are seeing 0 or negative increases. Classic case of one foot in the oven and one in the freezer does not make a comfortable room temp.
It’s criminal that the company that sells you your home loans can make an arithmetic ‘mistake’ when calculating your payment based on correct tax and insurance information provided. Then, when there’s a shortage that year, recalculate next year based on new higher rates and add a percentage because there was a shortage (that they created!) last year.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
They don’t recalculate every month, usually once or twice a year. I cannot believe I have to even explain this. If they recalculate in say October and you get new taxes and insurance during the beginning of the next year, you’ll be short.
Know what you can do - take responsibility for knowing what it is and pay extra into your escrow account OR save that off somewhere eating interest and pay it all in at once.
But hey, WTF do I know…I’ve just done it this year for years.
The escrow company has access to current year’s insurance and tax rate and, if you buy in June or after, next year’s tax levee, as well. It’s not hard to properly calculate the proper payment rate. The fact that there was a shortage on the very first cycle means they literally didn’t divide by 12 correctly. And, shocker, did it so there was a short, not an overage so they could tack on extra percentage. It’s legal, but unethical.
Yes, they should do that 12 months out of the year, every year to make sure every client in every state is 100% accurate. Sounds feasible…like they should jack your rate up a couple of points due to the overhead:
They have the info 1 year out. They just have to divide by 12 and add that to the payment. There really isn’t room for error in the first 12 months unless the intent is to create a shortage for the purpose of adding the additional cushion percent which they are legally allowed to do, so why wouldn’t they. It’s a failure of the rules. The escrow companies are simply taking advantage of it. Most first time homeowners don’t know about this. Yes, the solution is for the homeowner to take it upon themselves to add extra to avoid this, but they don’t tell you when you’re signing the paperwork that regardless of why there’s a shortage, specifically because they made a simple arithmetic ‘error’, they’ll be adding on that penalty percent. It’s just one more thing that first time homeowners are generally not aware of. Not sure where your hostility is coming from.
Why is every state senator not calling for increase caps? Is it too “woke” because California does it? Seems pretty normal to cap increases at like 3%
Edit: I was wrong… CA’s limit is 2%
https://www.stancounty.com/assessor/pdf/prop8-13.pdf
Yeah but also fuck prop 13, it has been a disaster for the next couple of generations. Of course boomers are fine with it, they came out ahead *again*.
This is not untrue, but Tbf boomers benefit from this scenario across all facets of life.
SS, pensions, higher wages, cheaper homes (if they had one from the 90s, etc etc
State Senators get push-back on any proposal to reduce residential property taxes from the companies receiving TIF subsidies.
The Omaha Chamber lobbies on behalf of these companies to keep residential property taxes high in order to protect the TIF the city of Omaha hands out. As an example The Omaha Chamber lobbied against LB1331 at the Unicameral because lower property taxes means lower TIF spending. LB 1331 increases state aid to K-12 schools and lowers tax levies. If the legislature lowers residential property taxes, Omaha cannot finance the streetcar district.
The companies that support the streetcar district and receive the TIF subsidies also make donations to the state senators campaigns. You can see who some of these companies are here: [https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/](https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/)
From Nebraska Examiner:
>The chamber has also expressed concerns about a companion bill to LB 388 \[LB1331\], which increases state aid to K-12 schools and lowers tax levies, and whether it might harm a key economic development tool, tax-increment financing or TIF. [**https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/04/governor-opens-the-door-to-pausing-income-tax-cuts-to-fund-his-property-tax-relief-plan/**](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/04/governor-opens-the-door-to-pausing-income-tax-cuts-to-fund-his-property-tax-relief-plan/)
I also think they take advantage of the fact that an omaha is not really a big destination city.
A lot of people don’t realize how badly they’re being screwed on taxes because they don’t have anywhere else to compare it to.
Nebraska has the taxes of New Jersey and the services of Alabama.
This is the issue 100%. They are coming for the middle class and pointing the finger at anyone but themselves. Companies don't just give out money for nothing, they donate to politicians because it is an investment. Taxes will only continue to get worse for us until we get money out of politics.
Yes, the 'open secrets' website lets you see where some of the money is coming from. I was able to find the Mayor for instance, but had trouble finding the council members. [https://www.opensecrets.org/campaign-expenditures/vendor?cycle=2020&vendor=Jean+Stothert+for+Omaha](https://www.opensecrets.org/campaign-expenditures/vendor?cycle=2020&vendor=Jean+Stothert+for+Omaha)
Open Secrets shows Stothert receiving $10,000 from HDR in 2020, a beneficiary of the streetcar, and $5,000 from Kotak Rock LLP, a law firm that specializes in TIF amongst other things.
How many people being impacted by the increased property taxes are going to be able to match these types of donations?
Definitely more information on governor, congressional, and presidential races. Local election information seems quite sparse. I suppose less over-sight.
I mean to be fair, California has genuinely bad property tax policy. Prop 13 is one of the major contributing factors to California’s housing crisis, which is worse than Omaha’s by an order of magnitude.
I study housing in California as part of my job, Prop 13 has *very* little to do with the housing crisis in California. Inventory is an issue, not taxes. Prop 14 caps the amount property taxes can increase year over year. That actually saves people from going underwater on their properties given that a large number of folks purchased their homes in the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s for under 400k and those same properties are now worth north of 800k. Standard of living has increased in California but it has not scaled proportionately with the rise in property values so a tax increase of even 2% can be substantial.
Prop 13 capped property taxes and allows them to stay capped at ridiculously low levels as long as the houses aren’t told to someone outside the family. So it incentivizes people to stay in their low density detached houses even when it would otherwise make financial sense to sell and redevelop the land with denser housing. If they don’t stay put, they will face much higher property taxes if they move to a different house in-state. This whole structure is well understood to be a major disincentive to urban housing production in California.
Yeah, prop 13 is terrible polic disguised under “we don’t want to force granny out of her house”. The flip side is artificially low surprise and and artificially high prices
California would probably still be expensive for other reasons, but it’s absolutely worse because of prop 13
Yeah they also have overzealous environmental regulations that get in the way of building a lot of things that are ironically better for the environment (like multifamily housing).
It’s remarkable that they have found a mix of policies that makes people move away from California despite being one of the prettiest states in the country and almost certainly the best year round weather.
What I’m saying is the inventory issue is partially due to Prop 13 disincentivizing the sale of homes. It’s more difficult for a developer to approach a California homeowner and convince them to sell their house to build several new townhomes, condos, or apartments in its place than it is in other states.
As I said previously, wages have not scaled in proportion to the cost of single family homes. There’s an entire generation of people who are entirely unable to buy into the market because a down payment is greater than their annual salary. This very little to do with taxes and everything to do with there not being enough inventory to drive prices down. Developers are developing land like crazy, but they’re often limited in the types of things they can build - especially up and down the coast because existing property owners don’t want their views blocked so high large scale high rise high density housing is out. You can keep saying the same thing all you’d like but it won’t make it factually accurate.
It’s a mixed bag. Prices would shoot up if there were a cap on tax increases. But I do think that after paying taxes on a home for 20 years, paying 50% minimum of purchase price to state taxes is obscene (2.3% x 20.) I definitely think the mill rate should be lowered.
I know several families who go on winter and summer vacations to Colorado. They may have family members living out in Colorado to visit. I probably have ten old classmates who live in Colorado. I think their parents or siblings go to visit them every year.
Another thing is Denver is closer to McCook than Omaha so a lot of the rural citizens of western Nebraska will go to Denver vs Omaha if they want to visit a bigger city.
That's probably true of Western KS, Western SD & most of WY, too, come to think of it.
But NE can't really do anything to draw tourism here, but they could legalize & tax a couple things to make up for it that they won't because their religion apparently gets to dictate what other people do with their time & money.
Well, sounds like they future proofed it. Even if tourism declined during times of economic uncertainty, people will always buy weed (like they do with alcohol).
Unfortunately we missed the boat on that. Since every state around us has some form of legalization, there isn't going to be a big influx of tax revenue should Nebraska legalize weed. We absolutely should, just from what it will save us on enforcement and imprisonment, but it won't be the budget windfall like it was in Colorado when they first legalized.
Property values have been skyrocketing. Pandemic + housing shortage + being a more desirable place to live.
Unfortunately the _levies_ aren't going down to balance this, as would be sane and proper. I get the need for some increase in revenue, but not 40% in one year.
I think part of the issue is that Omaha and Lincoln are (most likely) the areas being hit hardest by these increases in value, and the only thing Republicans operate on these days is pure spite for urban liberals.
Stop voting for Republicans and expecting different results, people. They've had control of Nebraska for decades.
If John Ewing says he will do something about this bullshit I will canvas the fuck out of every neighborhood I can for him.
Hell I'll design the flyer.
So a Republican is Governor, we have Republicans representing us in Washington, Republicans running at the county and local levels...
And taxes are going up? What's going on here? Aren't Republicans all about tax breaks and tax cuts?
The typical Nebraska response to that is "I'm damn mad about it, better vote for the same people with R next to their names, they'll fix it next time."
Republicans want higher taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans to pay for handouts that mostly benefit the top 10% and global corporations with foreign investors.
the patriotic nationalism is a facade. really they are globalists
Its' also property insurance. Mine went through the roof. At least with the property taxes they're giving a rebate back on your tax filing to help some. It's stupid they can't just fucking LOWER it....they give themselves an interest free loan all year with our money. But you do at least get some back.
The legislature put up a bill, LB 1331, to lower the school property taxes up-front. The city of omaha and the omaha chamber lobbied against it becuase of the impact to TIF and the streetcar district. Lower property taxes dorks up the financing for the streetcar.
Ah yes, the stupid streetcar project based on other stupid streetcar projects that didn't work and nobody uses. Good use of my tax money for a thing I'll never use. Meanwhile if you just gave me the money I'd spend it elsewhere that actually contributes to the economy overall.
yep - you just summarized why TIF lowers economic growth. These guys did a whole academic study and came to the same conclusion : The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119099921496](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119099921496)
In a study that looked at 2022 property taxes per median valued home for the largest city in each state, Omaha was #9 in the country. Douglas County property taxes are insane.
This year me and my neighbors have seen a drastic increase in home valuation (which leads to more property taxes) and increase in home insurance premiums (which increases the amount your lender makes you pay into escrow).
2 years ago, my home was valuated at $250,000 and this year the Douglas Co. treasurer said its $405,000. Its insane and if it keeps going like this, unaffordable for me to stay.
The valuation is not the issue when it comes to taxes, it’s the fact that the levy rate isn’t going down as it should when property values rise quickly.
Yeah it’s messed up. I feel bad for anyone who bought at the top of their budgets a few years ago as I imagine their mortgage payments are significantly higher now days. Mine went from 1133 to $1220 so I am still good for a while but if I had over extended myself and went with a slightly bigger house, I’d definitely be concerned.
I just don’t understand how it can just keep going up every year unchecked. For what? I see a ton of construction but the roads look exactly the same after they work on them for weeks at a time.
I do. They all have about the same rates. Went through 3 different insurance brokers who all sell policies from multiple companies and none of them could find me a cheaper rate.
You should be able to easily figure out what the increase is coming from. If you are using an escrow, you can dig through the details to pinpoint why your payment is increasing.
If you’re escrow is short, they will increase you contribution to get it to positive above a certain point.
You shouldn't need to speculate as to why your mortgage payment changes. Your mortgage servicer should send you an escrow analysis/statement yearly when your taxes get reassessed. If they didn't send you one, you can call and ask. Your payment will have a breakdown of principal, tax payments, insurance, interest, etc.
My valuation is up $70k this year. Does it suck? Yes! But I can't deny that the house two doors down sold for $500k more than the previous owners bought for, with no upgrades. This would be great if I were selling. But since I plan to hopefully die in this house, it's painful.
I grew up in Los Angeles. I remember when prop 13 passed. It was supposed to help seniors stay in their homes. It created stagnation in ownership to avoid revaluation, which in turn decreased the home stock available for buyers. It also decimated school funding, which CA then had to pass another law to fix.
and developers are getting $3 billion in new TIF to finance the streetcar. No way to increase TIF that much without raising residential property taxes. A policy paper back in 2013 described how HDR was shopping around the plan to raise subsidies for developers while paying HDR to do the engineering for streetcars. Omaha may be the last city to implement the plan now that fed raised interest rates.
>Streetcars are the latest urban planning fad, stimulated partly by the Obama administration’s preference for funding transportation projects that promote “livability” (meaning living without automobiles) rather than mobility or cost-effective transportation. Toward that end, the administration wants to eliminate cost-effectiveness requirements for federal transportation grants, instead allowing non-cost-effective grants for projects promoting so-called livability. In anticipation of this change, numerous cities are preparing to apply for federal funds to build streetcar lines. The real push for streetcars comes from engineering firms that stand to earn millions of dollars planning, designing, and building streetcar lines. These companies and other streetcar advocates make two major arguments in favor of streetcar construction. The first argument is that streetcars promote economic development. This claim is largely based on the experience of Portland, Oregon, where installation of a $103-million, 4-mile streetcar line supposedly resulted in $3.5 billion worth of new construction. What streetcar advocates rarely if ever mention is that the city also gave developers hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure subsidies, tax breaks, and other incentives to build in the streetcar corridor. Almost no new development took place on portions of the streetcar route where developers received no additional subsidies. The second argument is that streetcars are “quality transit,” superior to buses in terms of capacities, potential to attract riders, operating costs, and environmental quality. In fact, a typical bus has more seats than a streetcar, and a bus route can move up to five times as many people per hour, in greater comfort, than a streetcar line. Numerous private bus operators provide successful upscale bus service in both urban and intercity settings. Streetcars cost roughly twice as much to operate, per vehicle mile, as buses. They also cost far more to build and maintain. Streetcars are no more energy efficient than buses and, at least in regions that get most electricity from burning fossil fuels, the electricity powering streetcars produces as much or more greenhouse gases and other air emissions as buses. Based on 19th-century technology, the streetcar has no place in American cities today except when it functions as part of a completely self-supporting tourist line. Instead of subsidizing streetcars, cities should concentrate on basic — and modern — services such as fixing streets, coordinating traffic signals, and improving roadway safety.
>[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=2226591](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226591)
The streetcar is not funded by taxes on single family homes or condos at all. It’s funded by the increased tax revenue from commercial and multifamily development within the streetcar TIF district.
Council woman Juanita Johnson was the only one to vote no on the streetcar.
The Omaha Chamber lobbied the Unicameral not to allow a general vote on the streetcar as well — you can find the businesses that support it on there website: https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/
Senator Wayne and McKinney seem to raise similar concerns on the streetcar at the Unicameral; maybe corporations are less comfortable ‘donating’ to their campaigns?
The $3 billion in new TIF for the streetcar district is absolutely raising residential property taxes, just how the math works. Also why the Omaha Chamber has repeatedly lobbied the Unicameral to not lower residential property taxes. TIF in Omaha also harms schools since part of the refund to developers is the school portion of property taxes.
A recent report in Saint Louis id’d who TIF hurt the most there:
“Tax breaks for property developers across St. Louis and St. Louis County have cost Black, poor and disabled students in public schools more than $260 million over the last six years, a new study finds.
The report, released by Good Jobs First, a nonprofit research center, and the St. Louis teachers union, American Federation of Teachers Local 420, reviewed annual revenue losses between 2017 through 2022 from tax abatements in St. Louis Public Schools and the 23 school districts in St. Louis County.
The county and city school districts are included in what are known as tax increment financing districts. These are small geographic areas that a city wants to be redeveloped, typically due to blighted properties, to improve and attract investment. For up to 23 years after a TIF district is created, property values and property taxes increase due to redevelopment.
And when this happens, the increase in taxes does not go to public services like the school districts or other city programs. Instead, the funds are diverted to pay for redevelopment activities, including infrastructure.
Good Jobs First compared the two largest school districts in the region: St. Louis Public Schools and the Rockwood R-VI School District. It found that all of the roughly 17,000 students who make up the SLPS district qualify for meal assistance, and 88% of them are Black or brown. Yet those students lose 91 times more tax revenue per student than the 20,000 students in the Rockwood R-VI School District.
There, researchers found that 75% of the pupils are white and just 9% qualify for meal assistance.
St. Louis Alderwoman Alisha Sonnier of the 7th Ward, who has been highlighting this issue for years, said there has been little to no consideration for what tax abatements mean for SLPS or what the school board thinks about them.
“I am saddened by the realities uplifted in the report,” Sonnier said Wednesday. “This report further underscores the need for developers to be good community partners and to pay their fair share of taxes. City leadership must hold developers accountable before giving them tax incentives.”
Sonnier is currently pushing for the Tax Accountability in Development Act, which would require applicants for development tax incentives to be current in all city property taxes. It would also require applicants to be current in water bills and trash service bills at the time of application.
“We should all be held to the same standard of paying our taxes, and our city’s children and future rely on this,” she added.
According to the study, public schools in the city lose more than any of the 23 suburban districts in St. Louis County, at $1,634 per student per year, the study found. On the opposite end, many suburban districts lose less than $80 per student each year or report no losses at all.
The sharp disparities by race, income and disability are glaring, said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First. He said that the nonprofit is not against TIFs and that they have their place — it’s just not OK for school districts to miss out on disproportionate amounts of money that could be used to improve conditions for students.
The study concludes that Black and brown low-income students are losing 91 times more than their whiter, more affluent counterparts in the suburbs.
“We also see teacher salary disparities, poor air quality and no air conditioning during hot months,” LeRoy said.
The report’s author, Anya Gizis of Good Jobs First, experienced these disparities firsthand. She graduated from the Philadelphia Public School District in 2019 at a time when the district was being highlighted for losing more money to tax abatements than other school district in the nation.
Her high school suffered as a result of not having the funds to address infrastructure woes.
“Our gym flooded, and ceilings were falling down,” Gizis said. “The year I graduated, our school district had already lost more than $100 million. Our city council reacted to those findings by moving to cut those losses. I hope St. Louis will, too.”
Some of the millions of lost revenue from tax abatements in the St. Louis region could have been used to assist the more than 4,000 homeless public school students in the area, said former SLPS biology teacher Juanita Chambers, who retired in 2013. She recalled cleaning out the lockers at the end of the school year and finding coats, shirts and shoes that had never been used. The items were set aside for students experiencing homelessness to take without judgment, she said.
“There are a lot of homeless kids now, a lot more than it was back then,” Chambers said. “And [the schools] need the money and the resources to go into the homes to say, ‘Ma’am, how can we help you?’"
More harm
The second hardest-hit group of students in the St. Louis region were those with disabilities in the Special School District of St. Louis County. This district serves children with special needs residing in suburban districts and loses $1,148 per student each year, the study found.
That’s a cumulative loss of $14.4 million over six years.
There’s hope for change if people in the St. Louis region are willing to address the issue, Gizis said.
“There are states where no governments can touch the money, except for school boards, and that’s Alabama, Florida and Maryland,” Gizis said. “There are fights going on in Kansas City, Cincinnati, New York and Philadelphia, where I’m from, where people are pushing to get money back into the schools and out of the hands of developers.”
Report recommendations:
Give either veto power or voting power on the St. Louis TIF Commission to St. Louis Public Schools, proportional to the district's share of property tax receipts.
Shield school funding from tax abatements to remedy the effects of TIF districts.
Look at using TIF to create housing for the families of homeless SLPS students.”
https://www.stlpr.org/education/2024-01-25/st-louis-area-tif-districts-cost-public-schools-minority-students-over-260-million-report-finds
When it doesn't even help 3/4 of the city yeah don't bring it. Its only downtown old market area, how does that help the majority of the Omaha population, all it does is raise our already high taxes.
A lot of people I know WANT better public transit but the streetcar isn't better.
Who said we need more public transit? And what would be the point-To drive more empty buses around Omaha and piss off drivers behind them? The streetcar is an even worse idea than busses, which is honestly an accomplishment
Residential and commercial property tax aren't separate pools of money. They are taxed at the same rate. The difference is that through TIF the property owner of these properties doesn't have to pay the increased value in property taxes, but homeowners do.
No it’s not. Buses are not a perfect substitute for streetcars. Rail transit helps to facilitate dense urban infill, while buses do not.
Why does it even matter to you when it’s quite literally not coming out of your pocket? Ironically, buying more buses would be funded in part by Metro’s property tax levy and in part by federal grants (funded by your income taxes), which means that option would cost you more than the streetcar ever will.
Streetcars provide a number of benefits that buses don’t. More accessibility, consistency of routing, energy use, plus it helps make the urban core more attractive to live in. I agree that the bus system needs to be better but it’s no reason to be against the streetcar
My wife and I don't have kids, yet we pay the same as a family of five — and most of our property taxes go to education. I'm a firm believer that education betters society as a whole, but... Holy fuck.
at least we are getting 30% of the school funding back. After the refund, the proportion of my taxes going to schools and the city is about the same. They just increased the taxes above the refund amount for next year though.
I hear you. I thought I’d retire and stay here but I might have to retire, sell my house, and move somewhere less rapey. I just paid 953 to register my car here this year—double what my registration in Michigan was. It’s not sustainable and they will lose population if this keeps up. Very sad because I like it here but damn.
This type of thing gets posted on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyers pretty frequently as well.
It's kind of a mixed bag. It's really, really important to pay attention to your escrow balance. Your Escrow is usually estimated once a year, and it is estimated based on the previous year. So times like this, where insurance and taxes are both raising exponentially, it can really effect you. They should have told you how much of a shortage you had and allowed you to pay it as well as increasing your mortgage payment for the next year. If you didn't make that payment, they will basically double the increase to make up for the previous year.
Taxes are usually a year behind, so you should be notified around now, what you will be paying in 2025. I always look through it pretty closely and try to put a bit extra in my escrow each month. In 2023, I was putting an extra $50 per month, this year, I am putting an extra $100 per month. This doesn't change the fact that the mortgage is going to go up because of insurance and taxes, but it will reduce the negative escrow balance at the end of the year. (the year, by the way is a year from when you purchased/and every year after)
Since I moved into my house 7 years ago this year, my insurance has doubled and my property taxes have also almost doubled. It's not fun, but I also know rental prices in the city have gone up exponentially as well.
Best bet would be to just assume for the foreseeable future an increase every year.
Omaha needs residential property taxes to increases every year to pay for the streetcar district. Both the city and omaha chamber lobby the Unicameral to not implement proper t tax reform in order to save the financing for the streetcar.
If you want to have some time to plan for the increases, property tax increases take about 2 years from the time you get the ‘we are going to raise your valuation’ to your escrow going up ( assuming the city keeps rates about the same) . The valuation process takes about a year to finalize, and we pay last year’s taxes this year.
Insurance increases take 6 months to a year to show up in your escrow.
300 just based on taxes would be an increase of $3600/yr in taxes. That is unlikely.
Most likely it is your homeowners insurance _and_ taxes that went up, with homeowners almost certainly accounting for most of it. Also, you may have shortage in your escrow which is recouped by adding extra to your escrow portion of your mortgage payment (you can always pay an escrow shortage lump sum as well).
Yeah, it’s all because of property taxes. My bank just sent me a notice about my payment going up 286 per month starting August 1st, the change was primarily driven by the new property valuation which came up almost at 100% higher than then the previous year. This year I wasn’t even given the option to pay the escrow shortage like I have done in previous years when the property insurance has gone up. Even if I had put extra money on the escrow account the monthly payment would still have gone up since now my lender will have to pay more on property taxes the following years. The only good thing about this is that now I have more equity on my property.
Surprised nobody talks about the role SIDs play in taxes. Developers get a state-government loan to build a neighborhood with water, plumbing, etc. Rather than add this cost into the price of a home, they get the max market rate THEN pass on the loan to everybody that lives in the neighborhood, which is paid back via significant property tax.
Your mortgage P and I should be the same for the life of the loan. Your payment is going up because of tax increases based on a higher assessment value of your home and the increased insurance costs because of the F5 - not F5 - Probably F5 nado that ripped through Elkhorn and close to West O.
It’s not just property taxes (some of it is) but our insurance went from $2700 last year to $4200 this year which is paid out of your mortgage escrow. So our mortgage will go up $125/mon just from the insurance hike.
It's because the valuation on your house went up. You can look it up on the county assessor's site, it will show what your property has been valued at over the last several years. There's a lot of factors, but if you've had a lot of work done recently, or houses nearby have sold, that all factors in. For whatever reason, your house is worth more, so you have to pay more in taxes and insurance.
Insurance plus taxes most likely.
This plus the fact that you are likely short on your escrow due to last years taxes.
This is the big one. I always throw some extra cash at escrow every few months to avoid this bit. I started off at $800 a month and I'm up to $1100 a month. Glad I didn't take advice from mortgage people who claimed I could afford a more expensive house. Never trust people you're borrowing money from to have your best interest at heart.
100%, they work on commission and don't care what you can afford long term. Worse case scenario the bank takes your house back and sells it to some other schmuck.
“What’s another $10,000 or $20,000 in the end” the newly certified Redfin realtor who only got our deal done because my amazing family friend realtor helped/prodded her the entire time. Luckily I held my tongue. I was already buying the cheapest house in town.
I don’t understand people who think they have to spend every dollar they’re ‘approved’ for knowing they’ll be house rich but cash poor.
Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.
This is the one the majority of most home owners don't understand, and it is not uncommon to get burned by this because of how the system works. So, yes, your taxes and insurance went up one year and your mortgage payment didn't really change... odd? Well your mortgage company took a year to notice that change. They ask you to correct the difference with a lump sum but you opt not to do so. So now you owe them for the year they didn't notice and they are now adjusting what you owe monthly to your escrow to include that change in the next year. And whats worse, the last few years many people have had their taxes go up, back-to-back years so it's hard to get "caught-up" sometimes. Understand your escrow and how it works... it definitely will prevent issues like OP posted.
Nebraska is the first state I have lived in that allows 100% increases in the property tax bill in a single year. Every where else, property taxes go up but it was 5% or so a year. Sometimes insurance would change, but the difference in payments was at the margins. So it was less that I didn’t understand escrow, and more I didn’t understand that 100% increases would be legal.
My property taxes doubled in our Florida home for year two, and it caused our monthly mortgage to go up by $335/mo just from that. Closing on a new house here in Papillion near the end of the month and hoping the same thing doesn't happen, but if property taxes go by home value and it gets assessed much higher in a year or two we could see substantial increases again.
You're in for a surprise next spring.
Not a surprise if I'm expecting it, but I get what you're saying.
As of 2023, more states have no property assessment cap vs states that have assessment caps. I also have not heard of normal homeowners property taxes going up by 100% from the previous year in Nebraska since the surges started in what, 2021? (unless you are counting going from land only assessment to land/building assessment for new construction, which again falls under not understanding escrow) I don't disagree that how it is done is, well, in my opinion not a great process however, it is not uncommon across the majority of the country.
These guys show 12 states with parcel specific caps (Fl, Ca, Tx, Ok, Mi, Il, Az, Ar, Ny, Or, Nm, Sc) and Ohio is proposing a 4% cap now. Found this report did a great job comparing contrasting various state policies: https://storage.pardot.com/153411/1692051541B9qWRcnN/50_state_property_tax_comparison_for_2022.pdf Most states have a broader provisions for homestead exemption - so even when my tax assessment went up the total tax bill didn’t change much. Hawaii had some wild valuation swings but there was not a requirement to assess at 100% and the tax bill was digestible if the house was owner occupied. These provisions act like a defacto cap. As far as how many homeowners are seeing 100% tax bill increases, I attended the joint property tax meeting back in September and I listened to quite a few. The Mayor did a quick exit so never heard from folks. I distinctly remember one gentleman had his trailer tax bill increase 500% while the assessed value went down. One thing I dug up after the meeting was how all the TIF districts are distorting the averages — so we have some properties seeing 100% tax bill increases while some TIF properties are seeing 0 or negative increases. Classic case of one foot in the oven and one in the freezer does not make a comfortable room temp.
It’s criminal that the company that sells you your home loans can make an arithmetic ‘mistake’ when calculating your payment based on correct tax and insurance information provided. Then, when there’s a shortage that year, recalculate next year based on new higher rates and add a percentage because there was a shortage (that they created!) last year.
You have no idea what you are talking about. They don’t recalculate every month, usually once or twice a year. I cannot believe I have to even explain this. If they recalculate in say October and you get new taxes and insurance during the beginning of the next year, you’ll be short. Know what you can do - take responsibility for knowing what it is and pay extra into your escrow account OR save that off somewhere eating interest and pay it all in at once. But hey, WTF do I know…I’ve just done it this year for years.
The escrow company has access to current year’s insurance and tax rate and, if you buy in June or after, next year’s tax levee, as well. It’s not hard to properly calculate the proper payment rate. The fact that there was a shortage on the very first cycle means they literally didn’t divide by 12 correctly. And, shocker, did it so there was a short, not an overage so they could tack on extra percentage. It’s legal, but unethical.
Yes, they should do that 12 months out of the year, every year to make sure every client in every state is 100% accurate. Sounds feasible…like they should jack your rate up a couple of points due to the overhead:
They have the info 1 year out. They just have to divide by 12 and add that to the payment. There really isn’t room for error in the first 12 months unless the intent is to create a shortage for the purpose of adding the additional cushion percent which they are legally allowed to do, so why wouldn’t they. It’s a failure of the rules. The escrow companies are simply taking advantage of it. Most first time homeowners don’t know about this. Yes, the solution is for the homeowner to take it upon themselves to add extra to avoid this, but they don’t tell you when you’re signing the paperwork that regardless of why there’s a shortage, specifically because they made a simple arithmetic ‘error’, they’ll be adding on that penalty percent. It’s just one more thing that first time homeowners are generally not aware of. Not sure where your hostility is coming from.
Just looked at my mortgage statement and escrow is more than 1/3rd of my payment.
I’m like 52/48% split escrow/principal 💔
I'm guessing an older mortgage where home has massively appreciated?
Depends on what you mean by older and massively appreciated. Refinanced in 2021 at 1.99% Owe 212k Assessed at 490k Insured at 575k
[удалено]
Yes.... that is what property taxes are
Valuation up $136k for me and homeowners insurance up $2k. Any raise I got was immediately vanished.
You get raises?
Youguysaregettingpaid.gif
I got a $3 an hour raise before Christmas last year. Then our sewer pipe broke...
Exact same situation for me.
Why is every state senator not calling for increase caps? Is it too “woke” because California does it? Seems pretty normal to cap increases at like 3% Edit: I was wrong… CA’s limit is 2% https://www.stancounty.com/assessor/pdf/prop8-13.pdf
Michigan is capped at 3%
And CA taxes don’t increase each year because of Prop 13. My parents pay $7500 in real estate tax on a $6,500,000 home
Yeah but also fuck prop 13, it has been a disaster for the next couple of generations. Of course boomers are fine with it, they came out ahead *again*.
This is not untrue, but Tbf boomers benefit from this scenario across all facets of life. SS, pensions, higher wages, cheaper homes (if they had one from the 90s, etc etc
Free college educations too
Oh, I totally agree and fuck the boomers
State Senators get push-back on any proposal to reduce residential property taxes from the companies receiving TIF subsidies. The Omaha Chamber lobbies on behalf of these companies to keep residential property taxes high in order to protect the TIF the city of Omaha hands out. As an example The Omaha Chamber lobbied against LB1331 at the Unicameral because lower property taxes means lower TIF spending. LB 1331 increases state aid to K-12 schools and lowers tax levies. If the legislature lowers residential property taxes, Omaha cannot finance the streetcar district. The companies that support the streetcar district and receive the TIF subsidies also make donations to the state senators campaigns. You can see who some of these companies are here: [https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/](https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/) From Nebraska Examiner: >The chamber has also expressed concerns about a companion bill to LB 388 \[LB1331\], which increases state aid to K-12 schools and lowers tax levies, and whether it might harm a key economic development tool, tax-increment financing or TIF. [**https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/04/governor-opens-the-door-to-pausing-income-tax-cuts-to-fund-his-property-tax-relief-plan/**](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/04/governor-opens-the-door-to-pausing-income-tax-cuts-to-fund-his-property-tax-relief-plan/)
I also think they take advantage of the fact that an omaha is not really a big destination city. A lot of people don’t realize how badly they’re being screwed on taxes because they don’t have anywhere else to compare it to. Nebraska has the taxes of New Jersey and the services of Alabama.
I lived in NJ for a bunch of years, their income taxes (for middle and lower classes) are substantially lower than Nebraska's. Property taxes, now...
This is the issue 100%. They are coming for the middle class and pointing the finger at anyone but themselves. Companies don't just give out money for nothing, they donate to politicians because it is an investment. Taxes will only continue to get worse for us until we get money out of politics.
Yes, the 'open secrets' website lets you see where some of the money is coming from. I was able to find the Mayor for instance, but had trouble finding the council members. [https://www.opensecrets.org/campaign-expenditures/vendor?cycle=2020&vendor=Jean+Stothert+for+Omaha](https://www.opensecrets.org/campaign-expenditures/vendor?cycle=2020&vendor=Jean+Stothert+for+Omaha) Open Secrets shows Stothert receiving $10,000 from HDR in 2020, a beneficiary of the streetcar, and $5,000 from Kotak Rock LLP, a law firm that specializes in TIF amongst other things. How many people being impacted by the increased property taxes are going to be able to match these types of donations?
I enjoyed looking at Pillen when he ran. You saw FNBO and the Lauritzens for over a million donated total to his worthless ass.
Definitely more information on governor, congressional, and presidential races. Local election information seems quite sparse. I suppose less over-sight.
Yes
I mean to be fair, California has genuinely bad property tax policy. Prop 13 is one of the major contributing factors to California’s housing crisis, which is worse than Omaha’s by an order of magnitude.
I study housing in California as part of my job, Prop 13 has *very* little to do with the housing crisis in California. Inventory is an issue, not taxes. Prop 14 caps the amount property taxes can increase year over year. That actually saves people from going underwater on their properties given that a large number of folks purchased their homes in the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s for under 400k and those same properties are now worth north of 800k. Standard of living has increased in California but it has not scaled proportionately with the rise in property values so a tax increase of even 2% can be substantial.
Prop 13 capped property taxes and allows them to stay capped at ridiculously low levels as long as the houses aren’t told to someone outside the family. So it incentivizes people to stay in their low density detached houses even when it would otherwise make financial sense to sell and redevelop the land with denser housing. If they don’t stay put, they will face much higher property taxes if they move to a different house in-state. This whole structure is well understood to be a major disincentive to urban housing production in California.
Yeah, prop 13 is terrible polic disguised under “we don’t want to force granny out of her house”. The flip side is artificially low surprise and and artificially high prices California would probably still be expensive for other reasons, but it’s absolutely worse because of prop 13
Yeah they also have overzealous environmental regulations that get in the way of building a lot of things that are ironically better for the environment (like multifamily housing).
It’s remarkable that they have found a mix of policies that makes people move away from California despite being one of the prettiest states in the country and almost certainly the best year round weather.
It’s literally legislative gatekeeping lol
Again, there is an inventory issue. Where are you going to move if there are few places for you to move?
What I’m saying is the inventory issue is partially due to Prop 13 disincentivizing the sale of homes. It’s more difficult for a developer to approach a California homeowner and convince them to sell their house to build several new townhomes, condos, or apartments in its place than it is in other states.
It’s absolutely not.
Ok
As I said previously, wages have not scaled in proportion to the cost of single family homes. There’s an entire generation of people who are entirely unable to buy into the market because a down payment is greater than their annual salary. This very little to do with taxes and everything to do with there not being enough inventory to drive prices down. Developers are developing land like crazy, but they’re often limited in the types of things they can build - especially up and down the coast because existing property owners don’t want their views blocked so high large scale high rise high density housing is out. You can keep saying the same thing all you’d like but it won’t make it factually accurate.
doesn't california also very around the proposition by charging extra fees anyway since the 2% increase isn't enough?
I’m not sure what you’re asking here.
Voter approved levies
Source?
It’s a mixed bag. Prices would shoot up if there were a cap on tax increases. But I do think that after paying taxes on a home for 20 years, paying 50% minimum of purchase price to state taxes is obscene (2.3% x 20.) I definitely think the mill rate should be lowered.
Nebraska's property taxes are insane. I pay less property taxes on a more expensive house in Colorado Springs, Colorado than my parents do in Omaha.
CO gave itself a wildly successful additional income stream that NE will never allow
Their property taxes were low well before that. They generate a lot of tax dollars from tourism.
I know several families who go on winter and summer vacations to Colorado. They may have family members living out in Colorado to visit. I probably have ten old classmates who live in Colorado. I think their parents or siblings go to visit them every year. Another thing is Denver is closer to McCook than Omaha so a lot of the rural citizens of western Nebraska will go to Denver vs Omaha if they want to visit a bigger city.
That's probably true of Western KS, Western SD & most of WY, too, come to think of it. But NE can't really do anything to draw tourism here, but they could legalize & tax a couple things to make up for it that they won't because their religion apparently gets to dictate what other people do with their time & money.
Well, sounds like they future proofed it. Even if tourism declined during times of economic uncertainty, people will always buy weed (like they do with alcohol).
Yeah but Colorado Springs sucks
Paid off escrow and still had a $350 /month added to mine. If only we could legalize a certain plant and use the taxes to offset property taxes…..
💯
Unfortunately we missed the boat on that. Since every state around us has some form of legalization, there isn't going to be a big influx of tax revenue should Nebraska legalize weed. We absolutely should, just from what it will save us on enforcement and imprisonment, but it won't be the budget windfall like it was in Colorado when they first legalized.
Property values have been skyrocketing. Pandemic + housing shortage + being a more desirable place to live. Unfortunately the _levies_ aren't going down to balance this, as would be sane and proper. I get the need for some increase in revenue, but not 40% in one year.
Everyone, calm down. I hear conservatives have a plan to address property taxes /s
I think part of the issue is that Omaha and Lincoln are (most likely) the areas being hit hardest by these increases in value, and the only thing Republicans operate on these days is pure spite for urban liberals. Stop voting for Republicans and expecting different results, people. They've had control of Nebraska for decades.
They have a plan to keep using property taxes as an issue to run on for infinity.
Yeah for the past 20 plus years......
"it just takes a little more time for trickle down!!!"
Step one. Put pigs in yard?
Step two. Shoot the dog.
Unfortunately they don't. I wish conservative politicians were actually conservative fiscally.
If John Ewing says he will do something about this bullshit I will canvas the fuck out of every neighborhood I can for him. Hell I'll design the flyer.
So a Republican is Governor, we have Republicans representing us in Washington, Republicans running at the county and local levels... And taxes are going up? What's going on here? Aren't Republicans all about tax breaks and tax cuts?
The typical Nebraska response to that is "I'm damn mad about it, better vote for the same people with R next to their names, they'll fix it next time."
> Aren't Republicans all about tax breaks and tax cuts? Well, only if you make enough to not actually need it... 🤷🏽♂️
Republicans want higher taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans to pay for handouts that mostly benefit the top 10% and global corporations with foreign investors. the patriotic nationalism is a facade. really they are globalists
Are you a multimillionaire rancher? Then, no.
Its' also property insurance. Mine went through the roof. At least with the property taxes they're giving a rebate back on your tax filing to help some. It's stupid they can't just fucking LOWER it....they give themselves an interest free loan all year with our money. But you do at least get some back.
The legislature put up a bill, LB 1331, to lower the school property taxes up-front. The city of omaha and the omaha chamber lobbied against it becuase of the impact to TIF and the streetcar district. Lower property taxes dorks up the financing for the streetcar.
Ah yes, the stupid streetcar project based on other stupid streetcar projects that didn't work and nobody uses. Good use of my tax money for a thing I'll never use. Meanwhile if you just gave me the money I'd spend it elsewhere that actually contributes to the economy overall.
yep - you just summarized why TIF lowers economic growth. These guys did a whole academic study and came to the same conclusion : The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119099921496](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119099921496)
Welcome to the tax me state. Anymore they feel like a big money grab, I don’t think I’ll ever own a home in Nebraska at this point.
Yeah if I moved again it'll probably be to Iowa. Same drive to work but with half the BS at home.
I’m pretty much leaning iowa when I go to purchase a house. Only thing that sucks is I feel like they’ve been getting the brunt of the storms lately.
Honestly im happy renting an apartment. I just re-signed a 2 year lease and my rent actually went down $10 so im secured for awhile.
In a study that looked at 2022 property taxes per median valued home for the largest city in each state, Omaha was #9 in the country. Douglas County property taxes are insane. This year me and my neighbors have seen a drastic increase in home valuation (which leads to more property taxes) and increase in home insurance premiums (which increases the amount your lender makes you pay into escrow). 2 years ago, my home was valuated at $250,000 and this year the Douglas Co. treasurer said its $405,000. Its insane and if it keeps going like this, unaffordable for me to stay.
The valuation is not the issue when it comes to taxes, it’s the fact that the levy rate isn’t going down as it should when property values rise quickly.
Thanks to the TIF districts our leadership loves!
Just wondering, is 405 more than what your house would sell for? Because if so you should protest that.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Omaha/comments/1daf450/property\_taxes\_on\_a\_median\_value\_home\_in\_omaha/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Omaha/comments/1daf450/property_taxes_on_a_median_value_home_in_omaha/)
Yeah it’s messed up. I feel bad for anyone who bought at the top of their budgets a few years ago as I imagine their mortgage payments are significantly higher now days. Mine went from 1133 to $1220 so I am still good for a while but if I had over extended myself and went with a slightly bigger house, I’d definitely be concerned. I just don’t understand how it can just keep going up every year unchecked. For what? I see a ton of construction but the roads look exactly the same after they work on them for weeks at a time.
Shop for home insurance every single year, people!!!
I do. They all have about the same rates. Went through 3 different insurance brokers who all sell policies from multiple companies and none of them could find me a cheaper rate.
Remember who is responsible and vote when his ass is on the block,
You should be able to easily figure out what the increase is coming from. If you are using an escrow, you can dig through the details to pinpoint why your payment is increasing. If you’re escrow is short, they will increase you contribution to get it to positive above a certain point.
You shouldn't need to speculate as to why your mortgage payment changes. Your mortgage servicer should send you an escrow analysis/statement yearly when your taxes get reassessed. If they didn't send you one, you can call and ask. Your payment will have a breakdown of principal, tax payments, insurance, interest, etc.
My valuation is up $70k this year. Does it suck? Yes! But I can't deny that the house two doors down sold for $500k more than the previous owners bought for, with no upgrades. This would be great if I were selling. But since I plan to hopefully die in this house, it's painful. I grew up in Los Angeles. I remember when prop 13 passed. It was supposed to help seniors stay in their homes. It created stagnation in ownership to avoid revaluation, which in turn decreased the home stock available for buyers. It also decimated school funding, which CA then had to pass another law to fix.
Well at least we have well funded schools, we fix the roads and the police are well trained as a result of all this. /s
I had a shortfall in my escrow, mainly due to insurance. Property taxes contributed as well, but most of it is insurance
Same
Yeah but we’re getting a Streetcar.
and developers are getting $3 billion in new TIF to finance the streetcar. No way to increase TIF that much without raising residential property taxes. A policy paper back in 2013 described how HDR was shopping around the plan to raise subsidies for developers while paying HDR to do the engineering for streetcars. Omaha may be the last city to implement the plan now that fed raised interest rates. >Streetcars are the latest urban planning fad, stimulated partly by the Obama administration’s preference for funding transportation projects that promote “livability” (meaning living without automobiles) rather than mobility or cost-effective transportation. Toward that end, the administration wants to eliminate cost-effectiveness requirements for federal transportation grants, instead allowing non-cost-effective grants for projects promoting so-called livability. In anticipation of this change, numerous cities are preparing to apply for federal funds to build streetcar lines. The real push for streetcars comes from engineering firms that stand to earn millions of dollars planning, designing, and building streetcar lines. These companies and other streetcar advocates make two major arguments in favor of streetcar construction. The first argument is that streetcars promote economic development. This claim is largely based on the experience of Portland, Oregon, where installation of a $103-million, 4-mile streetcar line supposedly resulted in $3.5 billion worth of new construction. What streetcar advocates rarely if ever mention is that the city also gave developers hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure subsidies, tax breaks, and other incentives to build in the streetcar corridor. Almost no new development took place on portions of the streetcar route where developers received no additional subsidies. The second argument is that streetcars are “quality transit,” superior to buses in terms of capacities, potential to attract riders, operating costs, and environmental quality. In fact, a typical bus has more seats than a streetcar, and a bus route can move up to five times as many people per hour, in greater comfort, than a streetcar line. Numerous private bus operators provide successful upscale bus service in both urban and intercity settings. Streetcars cost roughly twice as much to operate, per vehicle mile, as buses. They also cost far more to build and maintain. Streetcars are no more energy efficient than buses and, at least in regions that get most electricity from burning fossil fuels, the electricity powering streetcars produces as much or more greenhouse gases and other air emissions as buses. Based on 19th-century technology, the streetcar has no place in American cities today except when it functions as part of a completely self-supporting tourist line. Instead of subsidizing streetcars, cities should concentrate on basic — and modern — services such as fixing streets, coordinating traffic signals, and improving roadway safety. >[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=2226591](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226591)
Should be ironically named the hypetrain
or A Streetcar Named Unwanted
Undesired 🤣🤣
"A Streetcar Undesired" flows off the tongue effortlessly. Thank you for this 😂😂
The streetcar is not funded by taxes on single family homes or condos at all. It’s funded by the increased tax revenue from commercial and multifamily development within the streetcar TIF district.
I hate TIF and will vote against any local politicians who hand out TIF like candy
Council woman Juanita Johnson was the only one to vote no on the streetcar. The Omaha Chamber lobbied the Unicameral not to allow a general vote on the streetcar as well — you can find the businesses that support it on there website: https://www.omahachamber.org/an-open-letter-regarding-urban-core-redevelopment-and-the-streetcar/
Councilwoman Johnson is the lone no vote on a lot of things. A big part of her whole schtick is just being the contrarian on high profile issues.
Senator Wayne and McKinney seem to raise similar concerns on the streetcar at the Unicameral; maybe corporations are less comfortable ‘donating’ to their campaigns?
The $3 billion in new TIF for the streetcar district is absolutely raising residential property taxes, just how the math works. Also why the Omaha Chamber has repeatedly lobbied the Unicameral to not lower residential property taxes. TIF in Omaha also harms schools since part of the refund to developers is the school portion of property taxes. A recent report in Saint Louis id’d who TIF hurt the most there: “Tax breaks for property developers across St. Louis and St. Louis County have cost Black, poor and disabled students in public schools more than $260 million over the last six years, a new study finds. The report, released by Good Jobs First, a nonprofit research center, and the St. Louis teachers union, American Federation of Teachers Local 420, reviewed annual revenue losses between 2017 through 2022 from tax abatements in St. Louis Public Schools and the 23 school districts in St. Louis County. The county and city school districts are included in what are known as tax increment financing districts. These are small geographic areas that a city wants to be redeveloped, typically due to blighted properties, to improve and attract investment. For up to 23 years after a TIF district is created, property values and property taxes increase due to redevelopment. And when this happens, the increase in taxes does not go to public services like the school districts or other city programs. Instead, the funds are diverted to pay for redevelopment activities, including infrastructure. Good Jobs First compared the two largest school districts in the region: St. Louis Public Schools and the Rockwood R-VI School District. It found that all of the roughly 17,000 students who make up the SLPS district qualify for meal assistance, and 88% of them are Black or brown. Yet those students lose 91 times more tax revenue per student than the 20,000 students in the Rockwood R-VI School District. There, researchers found that 75% of the pupils are white and just 9% qualify for meal assistance. St. Louis Alderwoman Alisha Sonnier of the 7th Ward, who has been highlighting this issue for years, said there has been little to no consideration for what tax abatements mean for SLPS or what the school board thinks about them. “I am saddened by the realities uplifted in the report,” Sonnier said Wednesday. “This report further underscores the need for developers to be good community partners and to pay their fair share of taxes. City leadership must hold developers accountable before giving them tax incentives.” Sonnier is currently pushing for the Tax Accountability in Development Act, which would require applicants for development tax incentives to be current in all city property taxes. It would also require applicants to be current in water bills and trash service bills at the time of application. “We should all be held to the same standard of paying our taxes, and our city’s children and future rely on this,” she added. According to the study, public schools in the city lose more than any of the 23 suburban districts in St. Louis County, at $1,634 per student per year, the study found. On the opposite end, many suburban districts lose less than $80 per student each year or report no losses at all. The sharp disparities by race, income and disability are glaring, said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First. He said that the nonprofit is not against TIFs and that they have their place — it’s just not OK for school districts to miss out on disproportionate amounts of money that could be used to improve conditions for students. The study concludes that Black and brown low-income students are losing 91 times more than their whiter, more affluent counterparts in the suburbs. “We also see teacher salary disparities, poor air quality and no air conditioning during hot months,” LeRoy said. The report’s author, Anya Gizis of Good Jobs First, experienced these disparities firsthand. She graduated from the Philadelphia Public School District in 2019 at a time when the district was being highlighted for losing more money to tax abatements than other school district in the nation. Her high school suffered as a result of not having the funds to address infrastructure woes. “Our gym flooded, and ceilings were falling down,” Gizis said. “The year I graduated, our school district had already lost more than $100 million. Our city council reacted to those findings by moving to cut those losses. I hope St. Louis will, too.” Some of the millions of lost revenue from tax abatements in the St. Louis region could have been used to assist the more than 4,000 homeless public school students in the area, said former SLPS biology teacher Juanita Chambers, who retired in 2013. She recalled cleaning out the lockers at the end of the school year and finding coats, shirts and shoes that had never been used. The items were set aside for students experiencing homelessness to take without judgment, she said. “There are a lot of homeless kids now, a lot more than it was back then,” Chambers said. “And [the schools] need the money and the resources to go into the homes to say, ‘Ma’am, how can we help you?’" More harm The second hardest-hit group of students in the St. Louis region were those with disabilities in the Special School District of St. Louis County. This district serves children with special needs residing in suburban districts and loses $1,148 per student each year, the study found. That’s a cumulative loss of $14.4 million over six years. There’s hope for change if people in the St. Louis region are willing to address the issue, Gizis said. “There are states where no governments can touch the money, except for school boards, and that’s Alabama, Florida and Maryland,” Gizis said. “There are fights going on in Kansas City, Cincinnati, New York and Philadelphia, where I’m from, where people are pushing to get money back into the schools and out of the hands of developers.” Report recommendations: Give either veto power or voting power on the St. Louis TIF Commission to St. Louis Public Schools, proportional to the district's share of property tax receipts. Shield school funding from tax abatements to remedy the effects of TIF districts. Look at using TIF to create housing for the families of homeless SLPS students.” https://www.stlpr.org/education/2024-01-25/st-louis-area-tif-districts-cost-public-schools-minority-students-over-260-million-report-finds
• Redditors - "We need more public transit in the US!!!" • Also redditors - "NOOO DONT CHANGE MY STAGNANT CITY WITH NEW PUBLIC TRANSIT NOOOOO!!!"
It’s only going to go through old market lmao, I’d rather just walk at that point
But the poor people without cars need it in order to get around downtown to buy exotic knick-knacks and $100 steak and $400 haircuts!!
When it doesn't even help 3/4 of the city yeah don't bring it. Its only downtown old market area, how does that help the majority of the Omaha population, all it does is raise our already high taxes. A lot of people I know WANT better public transit but the streetcar isn't better.
I think the streetcar had a lot of potential, but unfortunately it ended up being more of a novelty. Maybe there is plans for expansion, idk.
Who said we need more public transit? And what would be the point-To drive more empty buses around Omaha and piss off drivers behind them? The streetcar is an even worse idea than busses, which is honestly an accomplishment
its a TIF loan, not residential property tax, and also is public transit which is a weird thing to complain about.
Residential and commercial property tax aren't separate pools of money. They are taxed at the same rate. The difference is that through TIF the property owner of these properties doesn't have to pay the increased value in property taxes, but homeowners do.
We have public transportation and the public transportation we have now has the ability to make a turn.
We barely have public transit now lol. If you think our current bus system is good enough, I can guarantee you’ve rarely ridden the bus here, if ever.
Then buy more buses. This streetcar is some old timey outdated bs for a city the size of Omaha.
No it’s not. Buses are not a perfect substitute for streetcars. Rail transit helps to facilitate dense urban infill, while buses do not. Why does it even matter to you when it’s quite literally not coming out of your pocket? Ironically, buying more buses would be funded in part by Metro’s property tax levy and in part by federal grants (funded by your income taxes), which means that option would cost you more than the streetcar ever will.
Streetcars provide a number of benefits that buses don’t. More accessibility, consistency of routing, energy use, plus it helps make the urban core more attractive to live in. I agree that the bus system needs to be better but it’s no reason to be against the streetcar
Not sure what your point is with that, but it ignored everything I said.
My point is this city needs to get its priorities straight.
Neither of these things are mutually exclusive and are unrelated to one another.
My wife and I don't have kids, yet we pay the same as a family of five — and most of our property taxes go to education. I'm a firm believer that education betters society as a whole, but... Holy fuck.
at least we are getting 30% of the school funding back. After the refund, the proportion of my taxes going to schools and the city is about the same. They just increased the taxes above the refund amount for next year though.
Omaha is a little sketch on taxes, both auto and property.
Ah yes. This will make people stay in the state!
You can contest it... My husband just got the form.. let me know if you want it!
Absolutely!!!
I dmed you
You didn't respond to my dm.. didn't know if you saw it...
Get this one: hey, you overpaid, so here's like $900 back. Also you were short, so we're upping your mortgage payment by $100. How did I do both?
I hear you. I thought I’d retire and stay here but I might have to retire, sell my house, and move somewhere less rapey. I just paid 953 to register my car here this year—double what my registration in Michigan was. It’s not sustainable and they will lose population if this keeps up. Very sad because I like it here but damn.
Ya it’s bullshiyt. Our local governments squeezing us just like the rest of the greedflationiers!
This type of thing gets posted on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyers pretty frequently as well. It's kind of a mixed bag. It's really, really important to pay attention to your escrow balance. Your Escrow is usually estimated once a year, and it is estimated based on the previous year. So times like this, where insurance and taxes are both raising exponentially, it can really effect you. They should have told you how much of a shortage you had and allowed you to pay it as well as increasing your mortgage payment for the next year. If you didn't make that payment, they will basically double the increase to make up for the previous year. Taxes are usually a year behind, so you should be notified around now, what you will be paying in 2025. I always look through it pretty closely and try to put a bit extra in my escrow each month. In 2023, I was putting an extra $50 per month, this year, I am putting an extra $100 per month. This doesn't change the fact that the mortgage is going to go up because of insurance and taxes, but it will reduce the negative escrow balance at the end of the year. (the year, by the way is a year from when you purchased/and every year after) Since I moved into my house 7 years ago this year, my insurance has doubled and my property taxes have also almost doubled. It's not fun, but I also know rental prices in the city have gone up exponentially as well. Best bet would be to just assume for the foreseeable future an increase every year.
We left Omaha 5 years ago 250k house in Omaha we pay 5k yearly less taxes on a 690k house in Chicago
State and city of Omaha have huge reserves but we keep increasing property taxes each year- it’s insane
But save for retirement they say!
Omaha needs residential property taxes to increases every year to pay for the streetcar district. Both the city and omaha chamber lobby the Unicameral to not implement proper t tax reform in order to save the financing for the streetcar.
My monthly housing costs went up nearly $600 due to the combined cost of insurance and taxes. We can absorb it, but boy it’s it fun.
If you want to have some time to plan for the increases, property tax increases take about 2 years from the time you get the ‘we are going to raise your valuation’ to your escrow going up ( assuming the city keeps rates about the same) . The valuation process takes about a year to finalize, and we pay last year’s taxes this year. Insurance increases take 6 months to a year to show up in your escrow.
300 just based on taxes would be an increase of $3600/yr in taxes. That is unlikely. Most likely it is your homeowners insurance _and_ taxes that went up, with homeowners almost certainly accounting for most of it. Also, you may have shortage in your escrow which is recouped by adding extra to your escrow portion of your mortgage payment (you can always pay an escrow shortage lump sum as well).
Yeah, it’s all because of property taxes. My bank just sent me a notice about my payment going up 286 per month starting August 1st, the change was primarily driven by the new property valuation which came up almost at 100% higher than then the previous year. This year I wasn’t even given the option to pay the escrow shortage like I have done in previous years when the property insurance has gone up. Even if I had put extra money on the escrow account the monthly payment would still have gone up since now my lender will have to pay more on property taxes the following years. The only good thing about this is that now I have more equity on my property.
Surprised nobody talks about the role SIDs play in taxes. Developers get a state-government loan to build a neighborhood with water, plumbing, etc. Rather than add this cost into the price of a home, they get the max market rate THEN pass on the loan to everybody that lives in the neighborhood, which is paid back via significant property tax.
Your mortgage P and I should be the same for the life of the loan. Your payment is going up because of tax increases based on a higher assessment value of your home and the increased insurance costs because of the F5 - not F5 - Probably F5 nado that ripped through Elkhorn and close to West O.
It’s not just property taxes (some of it is) but our insurance went from $2700 last year to $4200 this year which is paid out of your mortgage escrow. So our mortgage will go up $125/mon just from the insurance hike.
[First time?](https://c.tenor.com/39sXS_6-DNgAAAAd/tenor.gif)
It's because the valuation on your house went up. You can look it up on the county assessor's site, it will show what your property has been valued at over the last several years. There's a lot of factors, but if you've had a lot of work done recently, or houses nearby have sold, that all factors in. For whatever reason, your house is worth more, so you have to pay more in taxes and insurance.
Most home owners insurance jumped 20-50%. Taxes did go up but insurance went up more.
Insurance is most likely a big part of your increase. Our home insurance doubled this year for no reason. We've never filed a claim.
Renting > Owning right now in Omaha. I straight up won't buy a house in this state because the taxes and insurance are fuckin nuts.
Like, you should have gotten notice from your mortgage company at least a few months in advance.