Property numbers signal pain for county

Roughly 660,000 of the 730,000 parcels of land in Clark County have slipped enough in value to yield smaller tax bills in July, according to preliminary research by the county treasurer.

The number would surpass the estimated 470,000 property owners whose taxes fell in 2009, not to mention the 55,000 in 2008 and the 19,000 in 2007.

"That’s substantial," Treasurer Laura Fitzpatrick said. "That’s the vast majority of the parcels impacted."

But she cautioned that the number was an early ballpark estimate and that her staff still had much work to do to verify the figures.

The properties’ assessed values are declining to levels below 2004-05, the year the 3 percent tax cap for owner-occupied homes was imposed in Nevada. It’s the threshold that must be crossed before owners see smaller tax bills.

If assessed values sag as much as indicated, county government, which faces a $120 million shortfall, could take a worse hit in the coming year than the $82 million in property taxes it lost in 2009.

Fitzpatrick said she doesn’t have all of the data yet to estimate the future revenue loss.

While the forecast is sure to compound the county’s financial worries, it should bring some welcome relief to residents who have watched their homes depreciate in the tough economy.

In November, the median sale price for local homes was $125,000, almost 28 percent less than a year before, according to SalesTraq, a Las Vegas-based market research firm.

It stands to reason that more home-owners than ever will see their tax bills shrink at least a little, considering 2008’s sharp overall drop in property values coupled with 2009’s, said Michele Shafe, assistant county assessor.

"It would seem that most of them would," Shafe said.

All but 8,000 of the 469,000 single-family homes listed on the tax rolls dipped in value since July, some by as much as 30 percent, Shafe said. And most of the area’s 121,000 condominiums and town houses have lost 20 percent to 40 percent of their value, she said.

Assessed values are figured by using 35 percent of the properties’ taxable value, which is based on what the structures and land are worth.

By law, the assessed value cannot exceed the market value. So as the sale price drops, so do the tax-generating assessments.

But assessed values must fall to pre-2005 levels before taxes shrink.

Why?

Several years ago, a 3 percent cap on property tax increases was imposed on owner-occupied homes with an 8 percent cap on commercial properties, based on 2004-05 assessed values. The caps were designed to rein in taxes on skyrocketing real estate prices.

After the tax went into place, property values continued to rise, often dramatically, while taxes were kept artificially low.

Owners pay whichever is less: a 3 percent increase from last year’s tax bill or the regular tax rate on the most recent assessed value. This year, the regular rate was 3.276 percent for residential properties.

Many people get confused and angry when they see their homes depreciating and their taxes going up, Shafe said. They do not realize that their assessed values, although dropping, have not reached the 2004 mark, and so their tax bills still increase by 3 percent.

They also have not figured how much money the tax cap saved them over the years as their property values spiked, she said.

In July, both the treasurer’s and assessor’s offices received a barrage of calls from people who were irked about their tax bills.

But in the new year, the prolonged market slide is expected to bump down taxes on most properties and diminish complaints.

Meanwhile, county officials expect their finances to get squeezed harder.

"This year is going to be challenging, to say the least," Fitzpatrick said.

Contact reporter Scott Wyland at swyland@reviewjournal.com or 702-455-4519.