2 ms·

I think Mello-Roos is awful in some ways. New owners in the area shouldn't have massively disproportionate tax burdens because they moved there a few years lat

I think Mello-Roos is awful in some ways. New owners in the area shouldn't have massively disproportionate tax burdens because they moved there a few years later (in some cases that is a very large difference). Especially when you consider things like the fact that people are still using the resources just as equally. Areas change, and increasing taxes on all residents (even if it forces some out) is unfortunately part of the downward pressure of house prices that our market is missing. Elsewhere in the country in saner real estate markets, if taxes increase too much and you need to move as a result, that's what happens. It absolutely sucks, but it helps balance the inventory.

gozur88 10y ago
>New owners in the area shouldn't have massively disproportionate tax burdens because they moved there a few years later (in some cases that is a very large difference). But they're paying for new infrastructure that didn't need to exist if they didn't move there. How is it fair to ask existing homeowners to pay more because new people moved in nearby? Mello-Roos is really no different than developer fees included in the price of a new home.
- shostack 10y ago
  Let me paint a picture for you and you tell me if you think this is fair. If you moved to the area in 2012, odds are you got a very good deal. If you moved in 2015, odds are you paid several hundred thousand dollars more for your home than your neighbor in a comparable home. Do you think there is such a radical difference in infrastructure needs during that period to warrant shifting a disproportionate percentage of that burden to the person who bought only a couple years later? That is madness when talking about the kinds of dollars we are when things are percentage based. Further, long-time owners in the area have been paying massively less than newer residents despite taking advantage of any new infrastructure funded by newer taxes thanks to Prop 13. Oftentimes to a comical degree.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    >If you moved to the area in 2012, odds are you got a very good deal. If you moved in 2015, odds are you paid several hundred thousand dollars more for your home than your neighbor in a comparable home. I don't see what that has to do with new infrastructure. If you moved in 2007, people moving to the area in 2011 were paying half what you paid. >Do you think there is such a radical difference in infrastructure needs during that period to warrant shifting a disproportionate percentage of that burden to the person who bought only a couple years later? When you move into a Mello-Roos district you're paying for the infrastructure that was built for you. That's not a shifting tax burden. That's paying your own freight. If it's too much, don't move there. There are plenty of old houses that were either never in a Mello-Roos district or for which the bonds are paid off. >Further, long-time owners in the area have been paying massively less than newer residents despite taking advantage of any new infrastructure funded by newer taxes thanks to Prop 13. Oftentimes to a comical degree. That's true, but it's also true for new residents who move into an older area.

gozur88 10y ago

>New owners in the area shouldn't have massively disproportionate tax burdens because they moved there a few years later (in some cases that is a very large difference). But they're paying for new infrastructure that didn't need to exist if they didn't move there. How is it fair to ask existing homeowners to pay more because new people moved in nearby? Mello-Roos is really no different than developer fees included in the price of a new home.

shostack 10y ago
Let me paint a picture for you and you tell me if you think this is fair. If you moved to the area in 2012, odds are you got a very good deal. If you moved in 2015, odds are you paid several hundred thousand dollars more for your home than your neighbor in a comparable home. Do you think there is such a radical difference in infrastructure needs during that period to warrant shifting a disproportionate percentage of that burden to the person who bought only a couple years later? That is madness when talking about the kinds of dollars we are when things are percentage based. Further, long-time owners in the area have been paying massively less than newer residents despite taking advantage of any new infrastructure funded by newer taxes thanks to Prop 13. Oftentimes to a comical degree.
- gozur88 10y ago
  >If you moved to the area in 2012, odds are you got a very good deal. If you moved in 2015, odds are you paid several hundred thousand dollars more for your home than your neighbor in a comparable home. I don't see what that has to do with new infrastructure. If you moved in 2007, people moving to the area in 2011 were paying half what you paid. >Do you think there is such a radical difference in infrastructure needs during that period to warrant shifting a disproportionate percentage of that burden to the person who bought only a couple years later? When you move into a Mello-Roos district you're paying for the infrastructure that was built for you. That's not a shifting tax burden. That's paying your own freight. If it's too much, don't move there. There are plenty of old houses that were either never in a Mello-Roos district or for which the bonds are paid off. >Further, long-time owners in the area have been paying massively less than newer residents despite taking advantage of any new infrastructure funded by newer taxes thanks to Prop 13. Oftentimes to a comical degree. That's true, but it's also true for new residents who move into an older area.