In a way, you are suggesting a homesteading type situation.
Iām not sure I follow you. I even Googled homesteading and still donāt know exactly where youāre coming from.
" Homesteading is a lifestyle of self-sufficiency. It is characterized by subsistence agriculture, home preservation of food, and may also involve the small scale production of textiles, clothing, and craftwork for household use or sale."
What Iām suggesting is giving a tax break to certain homeowners that have been priced potentially out of their home because of the rising tax value of the house. We already give breaks to certain people such as disabled veterans and the like. This would not really be that radical of an idea. And as another poster suggested perhaps that tax break can be recouped upon the sale of the house.
1 Like
I suspect you are using the word homesteading in a different way than I understand it.
#Deb I think you have a valid point. I also think that in certain ways zoning laws as they now exist create a distortion in the free market system. The answer that I keep coming back to is we need to create density and use our land and infrastructure more wisely for things to become affordable.
2 Likes
@Eastsider I canāt post in the politics thread (locked in some way it appears) but I have a bit of an answer to your question there that also still relates here. While that 97% approval of rezoning stats does sound suspect, it could still be true because most cases that know they either wonāt have a chance because of comments councilors have made in the past or directly to them arenāt submitted at all or withdrawn if they think theyāll lose a vote. So I think itās more about their Noās that come before any vote is actually taken that have the chilling effect.
1 Like
I think youāre probably exactly right. By the time something comes up for a vote people probably have a pretty good idea itās going to pass. And also once you post a few things you will be unlocked and able to post in the politics threat. Looking forward to seeing you there. 
2 Likes
Using the Smoky Hollow Phase 3 as an example, yes, it was approved and would be in the approved column. But, it was a āNoā in reality. Iāll spare the details but without this forumās activation and them forcing Kane to help to appear to fulfill THEIR obligation to affordable housing I feel it would be in the No column.
2 Likes
@Eastsider
Homesteading in Florida allows residents to protect themselves from rapidly escalating property values (and therefore taxes) by anchoring the value of the home when homesteading is established, and with only a small possible increase in value per subsequent year. Homesteading also comes with an exemption of taxes from the first $50,000-$75,000 of a homeās value.
I think that there are other states that do some similar things with their property taxes.
6 Likes
#johm Thank you for that information. I was not familiar with the term used that way. It sounds similar to what Iām suggesting. The main thing for me is that people who own homes in gentrifying areas and have lived there for years should be able to stay there as long as they wish. Rising taxes on property is one of the concerns that they have. Itās only a small piece of the affordable housing puzzle but I think it would help quite a few people including perhaps their families that live there with them.
1 Like
The term is actually āhomestead exemption.ā It was originally established to help people keep their homes after the Great Depression.
It can only apply to a personās primary residence, but it is also portable so long as a person is moving from one primary Florida residence to another. However, the exemption moves with the resident, not the home.
My parents had this exemption on their house in Miami.
2 Likes
I think the property tax relief is a good idea in certain circumstances like someone who is a senior citizen and in a gentrifying area. There is a history of some states instituting tax frezes that just end up helping lots of people who donāt actually need the tax breaks. Californiaās Prop 13 is a great example of this. Verdunity did a good podcast on that part of this subjects. https://www.verdunity.com/podcast/episode-36
In Raleigh, I would be for this in historically African American Neighborhoods that were red lined in the past, but I am not so into helping out people around Hayes Barton avoid taxes before their property is sold or passed on for a huge windfall.
5 Likes
You can also keep taxes low on unimproved homes as homes around them are either substantially upgraded or razed/replaced. Once upgraded or replaced, itās an indicator that thereās an ability to absorb additional tax burden.
3 Likes
I think this is how it actually plays out in Raleigh. In the area around St. Augs College the new homes are $450,000 plus and have tax rates set around that. The older homes all have tax values bellow $200,000.
With our tax rate around 0.009 or 9/10ths of a percent. It generally plays out that someone who bought a home for $70,000 a long time ago might see their taxes go up from $630 a year to $1800. That is generally how I am seeing it play out around me.
3 Likes
The taxes are increasing because of tax hikes by Wake County (5 years in a row now) and any additional tax hikes by the city that you live in. The Wake County evaluations are tax neutral unless you get an above average increase (or below average) in the value of your property. What actually increases with the tax evaluations is the actual land itself and not the home unless some improvements have been made.
1 Like
Why is downtown the only area where affordable housing has to be required for a building to be approved? Why not North Hills or Crabtree or Brier Creek? The city should come up with a comprehensive plan and then implement it fairly and accordingly rather than randomly requiring a building here or there to include āaffordableā units.
11 Likes
@rgmedd . Can I get an Amen!!
2 Likes
What would a ācomprehensive planā look like? I keep seeing pro-developer people posting over and over about how these requests are random or how thereās no plan but itās already right there in the cityās plans if anyone bothered to look. It zones and/or recommends areas like the Peace Street Corridor where the council has ārandomlyā worked with Kane on AH consider AH as they are along designated transit lines. Any developer feigning surprise are simply doing it as part of their dance with the city. The city canāt institute inclusionary zoning standards, in large part because these same developers pay off the GA to keep those tools āillegalā and rob communities of making their own choices on AH, and then they turn around and snow some of the pro-āmarketsā lobby saying they are surprised the city would be asking about AH for their projects. I expect that from them, thatās part of their business model (although often cynically or unthought fully executed, but there still seems to be a lot of people here falling for it and continuing to point fingers at the wrong parties instead of where the actual solutions lie (Step #1: change the GA, Step #2: lobby the GA, etc.). Makes me wonder how many here are directly involved with the development lobbyā¦
1 Like
Everyone running for city council is running on āaffordable housingā so thatās why it keeps coming up. Maybe itās not random, but in that case why doesnāt every developer all over the city know exactly the percentage of affordable housing that is required for each development? Or do they? Iām not a city planner so I donāt know that. Also, Iām not a developer but I live downtown and am very interested in the topic. Iām all in favor of affordable housing as well as subsidized housing and I do think the city is doing a lot for subsidized housing. For affordable housing aimed at workers and teachers and police, etc who are not going to get subsidized housing the city will be making more of an effort because thatās what everyone running for city council is running on. Maybe this wasnāt ārandomā but if it was planned then why was there a need for negotiation? And my real question is whether there are workers and teachers and police etc in other parts of the city who might also need affordable housing. If there exists a plan for that then I am not aware of it.
2 Likes
Fair enough. I think youāre right that the city council could stand to beef up the language and add some more teeth to whatās out there (and add new) policy) instead of some of the political window dressing thatās certainly going on right now. But I do think developers understand that considering AH as part of their projects is expected now (here and pretty much any other city in the US, often to even higher degrees). Iāve worked on a few different sides of the development community so perhaps Iām a little cynical but have seen a few things. I still encourage those really interested in affordable housing to contact some state and national leadership - most AH funding and tools come from higher up the gov chain. And Rmeg, I do think there are some places that directly offer AH to employees but I donāt know too many details. Good question tho
1 Like
A post was merged into an existing topic: Maywood Corridor