Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People want to live in Rockville. That's a fact. Schools are overcrowded. That's also a fact.
It's a bad idea to stop people from coming to Rockville. The evident solution is to build a new school and have the builders pay for it.
Problem solved.

What that really means is: have the new residents pay for the new school. The builders pass the costs on to the new residents - or, if that's not economically feasible, the new units don't get built.

Why should the new residents pay for the new school, when their housing is contributing to only a small fraction of the students at the school?

Theoretically this makes all housing costs go up, which means all buyers pay

Why would it make all housing costs go up? Also, if so, not all buyers would pay equally. And really, the last thing we need is policies that *increase* housing costs.

Anonymous wrote:

There's this amazing thing called Google. All you need to do is type in search terms and it's amazing the things it turns up. For example, there was a discussion of this in the news not long ago.

https://wamu.org/story/18/10/31/in-the-race-for-montgomery-county-executive-candidates-are-divided-on-development/

I remember reading about this going in SS and Bethesda in the past. These giveaways are really not uncommon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Developers pay impact fees. And property owners pay property taxes. And renters pay rent to property owners, who use the money for property taxes.

Developers impact fees are clearly insufficient in MoCo.

The problem is developers fund county councilmembers campaigns and in turn, they give them exemption from these fees. It's a cozy arrangement.

What exemptions, specifically, are you referring to? How and where are developers exempt from impact fees?

Anonymous wrote:

If we want to penalize people for bringing in new children for the schools then it makes perfect sense to race homebuyers and sellers of existing properties. Why do you disagree? Because it possibly impact you at some point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Developers pay impact fees. And property owners pay property taxes. And renters pay rent to property owners, who use the money for property taxes.

Developers impact fees are clearly insufficient in MoCo.

The problem is developers fund county councilmembers campaigns and in turn, they give them exemption from these fees. It's a cozy arrangement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Developers pay impact fees. And property owners pay property taxes. And renters pay rent to property owners, who use the money for property taxes.

Developers impact fees are clearly insufficient in MoCo.

The problem is developers fund county councilmembers campaigns and in turn, they give them exemption from these fees. It's a cozy arrangement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Developers pay impact fees. And property owners pay property taxes. And renters pay rent to property owners, who use the money for property taxes.

Developers impact fees are clearly insufficient in MoCo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Developers pay impact fees. And property owners pay property taxes. And renters pay rent to property owners, who use the money for property taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just charge every home buyer and home seller a $10,000 fee? That would cut back the number of homes being sold and decrease the total increase of new kids. Then they can use that money to pay for the new school. Problem solved.

Other problems created.

Also, a new high school currently costs about $155 million.

https://apps.montgomerycountymd.gov/BASISCAPITAL/Common/Project.aspx?ID=P096510

$155,620,000 divided by $10,000 = 15,562 sales. The number of households in Rockville is around 25,000.

Note that this would affect both buyers and sellers.

Also note that the Montgomery County Council did approve an increase in the recordation tax, as a way to increase capital funding for MCPS, and that Nancy Floreen's vote for the recordation tax increase was the likely reason why the realtors did not support her when she ran for county executive.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/real-estate/county-council-approves-recordation-tax-increases/

If we want to penalize people for bringing in new children for the schools then it makes perfect sense to race homebuyers and sellers of existing properties. Why do you disagree? Because it possibly impact you at some point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just charge every home buyer and home seller a $10,000 fee? That would cut back the number of homes being sold and decrease the total increase of new kids. Then they can use that money to pay for the new school. Problem solved.

Other problems created.

Also, a new high school currently costs about $155 million.

https://apps.montgomerycountymd.gov/BASISCAPITAL/Common/Project.aspx?ID=P096510

$155,620,000 divided by $10,000 = 15,562 sales. The number of households in Rockville is around 25,000.

Note that this would affect both buyers and sellers.

Also note that the Montgomery County Council did approve an increase in the recordation tax, as a way to increase capital funding for MCPS, and that Nancy Floreen's vote for the recordation tax increase was the likely reason why the realtors did not support her when she ran for county executive.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/real-estate/county-council-approves-recordation-tax-increases/

Anonymous wrote:It costs money to run and staff a school not just to build it. Since property taxes would likely be lower for condos, that burden would fall more heavily on the existing single family homeowners.

In places like New England they fund schools by having very high property taxes, this ironically also keeps real estate values lower and more stable, and prevents overdevelopment, but with the loss of the SALT deduction that's not likely to be popular in MoCo.

IMHO you are foolish to give away top tier school district slots to developers who will eagerly use it as a selling point/higher price justification but who will then not be on the hook to help pay for the schools. You have effectively just done a wealth transfer to the developer at the expense of either school quality or existing homeowners.

Anonymous wrote:Why not just charge every home buyer and home seller a $10,000 fee? That would cut back the number of homes being sold and decrease the total increase of new kids. Then they can use that money to pay for the new school. Problem solved.