3 ms·

> Probably need some form of tax amnesty system where counties can seize these properties, sell them off for any amount and wipe tax bill clean. However, that's

by toast0 1y ago

> Probably need some form of tax amnesty system where counties can seize these properties, sell them off for any amount and wipe tax bill clean. However, that's process would be ripe for corruption which thinking about TX, I'm surprised they haven't allowed that. In Washington state, tax foreclosure has a minimum bid of the taxes due and if there is no bid, the county takes title. Then there are procedures to sell those 'tax title' properties, my county says typically the minimum price is 80% of assessed value ... which would typically be more than the tax debt, so maybe better to participate in the tax foreclosure auction. I don't know that the county has a duty to maintain tax title lands. Vacant land is probably going to get emergency maintenance by a government agency of last resort anyway.

jdeibele 1y ago
There might not be a duty but I would say it's good policy. Tall grass is a fire risk and often a place to dump things. Also a source of weeds that spread to neighboring properties.
SoftTalker 1y ago
Worse than vacant land will be land with abandoned structures, which would need to be demolished at someone's expense. Especially industrial sites where there may be hazardous waste, underground tanks, etc. present as well.
- bobthepanda 1y ago
  Right but there's not much of a difference between the government taking title and having to do it, and the government suing somebody who won't do it and then probably having to do it anyways. Most Rust Belt cities had to do something like this because it turns out that just letting derelict property go resulted in neighborhoods death spiraling.
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    Yep. We should probably have industrial developers pay into some kind of fund that is then available to pay for cleanup if the site is abandoned. Basically insurance against a bankrupt owner leaving a mess for the public to deal with. Instead we often give them tax abatements and other incentives with little recourse if they don’t deliver the promised economic growth and jobs.

by toast0 1y ago

jdeibele 1y ago

There might not be a duty but I would say it's good policy. Tall grass is a fire risk and often a place to dump things. Also a source of weeds that spread to neighboring properties.

SoftTalker 1y ago

Worse than vacant land will be land with abandoned structures, which would need to be demolished at someone's expense. Especially industrial sites where there may be hazardous waste, underground tanks, etc. present as well.

bobthepanda 1y ago
Right but there's not much of a difference between the government taking title and having to do it, and the government suing somebody who won't do it and then probably having to do it anyways. Most Rust Belt cities had to do something like this because it turns out that just letting derelict property go resulted in neighborhoods death spiraling.
- SoftTalker 1y ago
  Yep. We should probably have industrial developers pay into some kind of fund that is then available to pay for cleanup if the site is abandoned. Basically insurance against a bankrupt owner leaving a mess for the public to deal with. Instead we often give them tax abatements and other incentives with little recourse if they don’t deliver the promised economic growth and jobs.