A Walnut Hills couple is asking the City why they, and other condominium owners, are being treated differently from owners of single-family homes.
In a letter to City Council, the couple alleged that getting a next day walk-through inspection of the renovation of their recently-purchased condo by Buildings & Inspections would cost them $400, while the owner of a single-family home would pay nothing for the same service.
A free walk-through would require them to wait two weeks, putting the renovation work on hold and delaying the sale of their old home, adding to their costs.
The couple cites three other circumstances where they believe there's a discrepancy in treatment:
* The City does not include condominiums in its homeownership totals,
* The City does not include new condominium purchases in its new homeownership totals, and
* The City provides recycling services to single-family through 8-unit houses, but not to individual condominium units.
With condominium ownership on the rise - especially among young professionals and empty nesters - the couple is asking the City to revise its methods of reporting.
They are also asking for their $400 to be refunded "as a matter of equity".
The issue has been turned over to the City Manager's office for a report, which is due by mid-March.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Does Cincinnati treat condos differently from single-families?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(Atom)
Recent Comments
5 comments:
If the city charges the same amount of property taxes on condos as they do on houses, then they damn better well treat them the same as houses.
Amen Gerard! The problem is that over 90% of the condominiums being purchased in the City of Cincinnati are new or fully renovated, so they all have a pretty major tax abatement associated with them. That means that the City of Cincinnati is actually LOSING money on each newly construted condominium that is purcahsed in Cincinnati for the first 10 years. That doesn't make it right, but I can see why the City would try and avoid offering these services.
You are not really losing money if the condo would have been left vacant and not rehabed without the tax abatements.
The city, possibly, is seeing an increase in revenue, from sales tax and increased income, from the remodeling work since it will employ people and products are bought to renovate the buildings and condos.
Peter,
I do not know if that is the problem because the same is true for both newly constructed single family and single family rehabs. I believe the problem is that both the city and some lending institutions have antiquated policies that have not been suffeciently updated to handle condos. This needs to be fixed.
Michael Redmond
"That means that the City of Cincinnati is actually LOSING money on each newly construted condominium that is purcahsed in Cincinnati for the first 10 years."
Depends on how you look at it. Future Taxable Value discounted back actually makes the city money vs leaving the lower present taxable amount either the same or potentially at a declining amount. Others, especially here in OTR, were city owned and historically have not collected tax, some for years.
That being said, I would say that there is a bit more of a disconnect between the auditor and inspections. Other than being antiquated, they may just have hoped that no one would complain.
Michael Redmond
Post a Comment