4 ms·

I think you're misreading the incentives of homeowners; in general, they want to maintain or improve their quality of life, property values are a secondary conc

I think you're misreading the incentives of homeowners; in general, they want to maintain or improve their quality of life, property values are a secondary concern (this idea that everyone would be happy with a shitty neighborhood and a giant bank account is absurd.) The big problem with increasing the density of a previously low-density area is that it adds load to the public services which make the quality of life high, without the commensurate increase in property tax per resident. And future residents generally choose places to live based on quality of life and afforability; so a place which has lots of great public services due to historically high property tax collection, where new high-density housing is built, is very attractive, for a while, because you get the best of both worlds, until the public services eventually decline to the level commensurate with the average property tax receipt per resident.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
> The big problem with increasing the density of a previously low-density area is that it adds load to the public services which make the quality of life high, without the commensurate increase in property tax per resident. If you need a given amount of tax revenue per person, set the tax rate so that you get that amount of tax revenue per person. This might be a different rate based on a different housing market. So what?
- jerkstate 5y ago
  Oversubscribed public services AND tax increases? Can’t imagine why anyone is against this.
- uberman 5y ago
  the problem is thought that people don't pay local school and property tax based on individuals. They pay based on per $k of property value. To be blunt, a high density housing project going into a low density community is literally leaching off the existing tax basis. Exacerbating this is the fact that developers often know how to game local tax laws further reducing their tax burdens and thus shouldering it on others.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago

> The big problem with increasing the density of a previously low-density area is that it adds load to the public services which make the quality of life high, without the commensurate increase in property tax per resident. If you need a given amount of tax revenue per person, set the tax rate so that you get that amount of tax revenue per person. This might be a different rate based on a different housing market. So what?

jerkstate 5y ago
Oversubscribed public services AND tax increases? Can’t imagine why anyone is against this.
uberman 5y ago
the problem is thought that people don't pay local school and property tax based on individuals. They pay based on per $k of property value. To be blunt, a high density housing project going into a low density community is literally leaching off the existing tax basis. Exacerbating this is the fact that developers often know how to game local tax laws further reducing their tax burdens and thus shouldering it on others.