land value tax shift in downtowns, a tool for smart growth may 11, 2010 gary flomenhoft

LAND VALUE TAX SHIFT

in Downtowns, a tool for SMART GROWTH

May 11, 2010

Gary Flomenhoft Research Associate/ Lecturer CDAE, Fellow, Gund InstituteUVM, Burlington, VT

“There is nothing more difficult to carry out, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. For those who would institute change have enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and they have only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order.”

---Nicolo Machiavelli, 1490

Vermont Property Tax Shift-Statewide

VT Tax Revenue 2004

VT taxes-2004

Personal Income

Estate Tax

Sales & Use

Other fees

Beverage

Captive Insurance

Telecommunications

Telephone Company

Cigarette

TOTAL PROPERTY

Meals & Rooms

Corporate Income

Telephone Property

Bank Franchise

Insurance

Tobacco Products

TOTAL WASTE

TOTAL AIR AND WATER

Other general taxes

TOTAL ENERGY

Property taxes comprising 35%Personal income 20%Sales and use 12%Energy taxes 12%

VT Tax Revenue-Property split

VT Taxes-2004

buildings-NICU24%

Other fees

Tobacco Products0% Other general

taxes

TOTAL AIR AND WATER0%

TOTAL WASTE0%

TOTAL CHEMICALS0% Speculative Gains Tax

0%current use property

land-NICU

Cigarette2%

Beverage0%Captive Insurance

1%

Sales & Use12%

Telecommunications

Telephone Company0%

Bank Franchise0%

Insurance1%

TOTAL ENERGY12%

Estate Tax1%

Personal Income20%

Property Transfer Tax2%

Meals & Rooms5%

Corporate Income3%

Telephone Property0%

Buildings 24%Personal income 20%Sales and use 12%Energy taxes 12%Land 11%

Vermont Property Taxes

eee property tax (PROP68)

0%

current use property1%

land29%


Current Use Penalty Tax0%

buildings 65%

Speculative Gains Tax 1%

Proposed Property Tax Revenue

2004 REVISED VT Property taxes

eee property tax (PROP68)0%

current use property1%

land-NICU65%


Current Use Penalty Tax0%

buildings-NICU29%

Speculative Gains Tax1%

Q: What Causes Sprawl?

One factor is land speculation. How?

A: By withholding land from the market, and holding for gain, price is driven up, and people have to move further out from center city to find available affordable land. (30% vacant land-Brookings)

“The most comfortable, but also the most unproductive way for a capitalist to increase his fortune, is to put all monies in sites and await that point in time when a society, hungering for land, has to pay his price.” ---Andrew Carnegie

LAND SPECULATION

Q: Why is speculation bad?

A:

Drives up price of land

Creates Sprawl

Withholds land from market

Creates slums

“Flipping”

VT anti-speculation tax: only applies to >25 acre industrial and forest land

PROP 13: corporations avoid through selling shares

LAND SPECULATION

Q: What good or service does a land speculator provide to the market?

A: Nothing. Mortgage backed securities=Real Estate Bubble and financial collapse?

“The land speculator profits in direct proportion to the damage done to society”

-Winston Churchill

ANNUAL RETURN

YEAR BURL MEDIAN HOME PRICE

%

increase

Annual increase

1970 $21,500

2000 $127,600 593%

2005 $204,500 951% 6.65%

2008 $249,965 1162%

2000-2008 196% 8.4%

“Land is not the only monopoly, but it’s the mother of all monopolies.” ---Winston Churchill

VT HAS an anti-speculation tax

What makes land valuable? Publicly created

Populationdemandnatural features public improvementspublic services: fire, police, schools, wasteprivate investment in the areabusiness activitylimited supplyzoninggrowth restrictions (Santa Cruz)growth boundaries

Not due to private effort

What makes buildings valuable-Privately created

Work

Investment

Materials

Architecture

Etc.

Value created through private effort

CLASSICAL ECONOMISTS ON LAND Adam Smith:

“Ground rents are a species of revenue which the owner, in many cases, enjoys without any care of attention of his own. Ground rents are therefore, perhaps a species of revenue which can best bear to have a peculiar tax imposed upon them.”

John Stuart Mill:“Landlords grow richer in their sleep without working,

risking, or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold title.”

Modern Economists

Right: “Land tax is the least bad tax” ---Milton Friedman

Left: “Usurious rent is the cause of worldwide poverty” ---Joseph Stiglitz

Green: “Taxation of value added by labor and capital is certainly legitimate. But it is both more legitimate and less necessary after we have, as much as possible, captured natural resource rents for public revenue.” ---Herman Daly

HOUSING GAP

FROM:

HOUSING&WAGES IN VERMONT

VT HOUSING COUNCIL

3 Ways to control land prices

1) Community land trust

2) Municipal leasehold

3) Tax land at high enough rate to deter speculation

Tax Increment Financing-TIF (Wikopedia)

TIF is a tool to use future gains in taxes to finance the current improvements that will create those gains. When a public project such as a road, school, or hazardous waste cleanup is carried out, there is an increase in the value of surrounding real estate, and often new investment (new or rehabilitated buildings, for example). This increased site value and investment creates more taxable property, which increases tax revenues.

Delay-Loss of revenue

“Value Recapture” (Wikopedia)

Value capture refers to the process by which all or a portion of increments in land value attributed to "community interventions" rather than landowner actions are programmed in advance and recouped by the public sector. These "unearned increments" may be captured indirectly through their conversion into public revenues as taxes, fees, exactions or other fiscal means, or directly through on-site improvements to benefit the community at large…

SUMMARY OF INCENTIVES

LOCATION TAXES ARE CONSTRUCTIVEEncourage building upkeepStrong anti-blight influenceStimulate new constructionLower land pricesBring land into useDiscourage sprawlPro-labor, creativity & effort

IMPROVEMENT TAXES ARE DESTRUCTIVEPenalize buildings & improvementsReward rundown buildingsPromote slums and blightRaise land pricesEncourage sprawlSubsidize unearned land speculationAnti-labor, anti-creativity & anti-effort

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

“Value Recapture” of public investments

Wright Act 1889: Tulare, CA Irrigation DistrictFinanced by tax on land value. Trees, vines, structures, etc. on the land were exempt

CA Central Valley Irrigation Districts

San Joaquin Valley Agriculture

80% produce in US

“Value Recapture” of public investments

Crossrail – the London rail project was under consideration to fund by land tax.

Studies say public transit could pay for itself through capture of increase in land values around transit stops.

HISTORICAL APPLICATIONS

Denmark: 1790’s, 1950’s, 1960’s

California: 1890’s irrigation districts

Australia: 1930’s-present, Sydney, Canberra-leasehold

New Zealand: 1930’s-present 80% site only

South Africa: Jo-berg

Hong Kong: leasehold

Singapore: rent collection

Taiwan: 1940’s-land to the tiller

NY city 1920’s: 10 yr. abatement of improvements

Pennsylvania: 1913-present

MODERN APPLICATIONS

Australia, New Zealand

Pennsylvania, date adoptedAliquippa School District 1993Aliquippa 1988Allentown 1997Altoona 2002Clairton 1989Clairton School District 2006DuBois 1991Duquesne 1985Ebensburg 2000Harrisburg 1975Lock Haven 1991McKeesport 1980New Castle 1982Oil City 1989Pittsburgh (Until 2001) 1913Pittsburgh Improvement 1997Scranton 1913Steelton 2000Titusville 1990Washington 1985

MODERN APPLICATIONS

City RatioAliquippa School District 14.8182

Aliquippa 7.0702

Allentown 4.6976

Altoona 10.1833

Clairton 22.9508

Clairton School District 24.1935

DuBois 21.1111

Duquesne 1.8890

Ebensburg 3.0075

Harrisburg 6.0000

Lock Haven 5.7036

McKeesport 3.9286

New Castle 4.8391

Oil City 3.3764

Pittsburgh (Until 2001) 6.0000

Pittsburgh Improvement N/A

Scranton 4.5981

Steelton 1.4617

Titusville 3.1137

Washington 15.0000

Harrisburg-Poster Child for LVT

1983 listed as 2nd most distressed city in US. * The number of vacant structures, over 4200 in 1982, is today less than 500 (1994) = 80% reduction in vacancy.

* With a resident population of 53,000, today there are 4,700 more city residents employed than in 1982.

* The crime rate has dropped 22.5% since 1981.

* The fire rate has dropped 51% since 1982.

* Number of businesses tripled to 3000

* 3.5B invested in projects

These results are especially noteworthy when one considers the fact that 41% of the land and buildings of Harrisburg cannot be taxed by the city because it is owned by the state or non-profit bodies.

EVIDENCE

Average Annual Value of Building PermitsDun and Bradstreet Data

(Rustbelt)

1960-1979

1980-1989

Percent Change

Akron

134,026

87,907

-34.41

Allentown

48,124

28,801

-40.15

Buffalo

93,749

82,930

-11.54

Canton

40,235

24,251

-39.73

Cincinnati

318,248

231,561

-27.24

Cleveland

329,511

224,587

-31.84

Columbus

456,580

527,026

15.43

Dayton

107,798

92,249

-14.42

Detroit

368,894

277,783

-24.70

Erie

48,353

22,761

-52.93

Pittsburgh

181,734

309,727

70.43

Rochester

118,726

82,411

-30.59

Syracuse

94,503

53,673

-43.21

Toledo

138,384

93,495

-32.44

Youngstown

33,688

11,120

-66.99

15 City Average

167,504

143,352

-14.42

Evidence for development

•45 studies prove that when towns adopt LVT, a spurt in new construction and renovation results.

•63 studies conclude that towns switching from taxing buildings to taxing land always out-constructed and out-renovated their neighbors who were subject to the same economic-growth influences.

Contact:Steven B. Cord (Professor-Emeritus)10528 Cross Fox Lane, Columbia MD 210441-410-997-1182 (phone/fax)[email protected] (e-mail)www.EconomicBoom.info

Goal for Today

Gather support for enabling legislation allowing Vermont Downtowns, Growth Centers, and Village Centers to tax land at a higher rate than buildings.

1) Revenue neutral

2) 50% or 100% shift to land value tax statewide

3) Total revenue divided by total land assessment =land value tax rate

Vermont Property Tax-shift Study Criteria

1) Single rate statewide & city by city

2) No separation of school district from municipal tax district

3) No adjustment for common level appraisal

Vermont Property Tax-shift Study Limitations

2000 BLD LAND TOTAL RATIO

State $12.2B $5.4B $17.8B 2.26%

68.8% 30.4% 100%

Burlington $1.1B $.53B 1.59$B(8.9% of state)

2.04%

67.6% 33.2% 100%-13.5%/yr

5 YR SHIFT-1 54.1% 45.9% 100%

2 40.6% 54.4% 100%

3 27.1% 72.9% 100%

4 13.6% 86.1% 100%

5 0% 100% 100%

ASSESSMENTS-2000

GrossPropertyClassNumber_of_Parcels

AvgParcelDiffFromCurrent

Agricultural 1319 $8,916

Commercial/Industrial 3082 $8,283

Not Available 5 $6,528

Residential 68916 $3,144

Total 73322 $3,464

Statewide DECREASE and INCREASE BY GPC

INCREASE

DECREASE



Agricultural 324 -$6,714

Commercial/Industrial 5794 -$10,927

Not Available 5610 -$6

Residential 87837 -$2,198

Total 99565 -$2,597

Burlington Tax Shift Analysis (2004)

Burlington INCREASE OR DECREASE BY GPC



Agricultural 4 $11,443

Commercial/Industrial 605 $11,088

Residential 6,437 $2,617

Total 7,046 $3,350

INCREASE

DECREASEGrossPropertyClass

Number_of_Parcels


Agricultural 1 -$1,256

Commercial/Industrial 525 -$14,080

Residential 2488 -$3,820

Total 3014 -$5,606

Burlington BIGGEST INCREASE

Acres Prp Cl Owner Name Street Name $ Diff

6.21 CL MCAULEY SQUARE HOUSE 123 ST PAUL STREET $534,736

16.72 RL FLYNN EST J J TRUSTEE ATTN PRISCILLA S $324,133

2.16 C DONOHOE O'BRIEN BOX 119 $237,471

4.89 C LAKE CHAMPLAIN KING STREET $200,695

2.06 CL PAM-RADISSON 60 BATTERY STREET $198,870

1.21 CL DONOHOE O'BRIEN BOX 119 $152,246

3.3 CL UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT C/O LAND $147,935

1 CL CODY CHEVROLET INC ET L C T $126,370

1.79 C HOWARD BANK N A 111 MAIN STREET $110,327

0.31 CL CHITTENDEN COUNTY OF L C T $95,316

0.85 C CHITTENDEN TRUST CO P O BOX 820 $90,503

Acres Prp Cls Owner Name Street name $ Diff

0 C RAD-BURL L L C PAM-RADISSON -$268,344.00

0 C STARR FARM C/O VENCOR INC -$241,677.00

25.93 CA NORTHGATE HOUSING P O BOX 3094 -$225,725.00

0.25 C BURLINGTON SEVEN P O BOX 119 -$206,911.00

0.91 C VERMONT SUBACURE LLC P O BOX 1103 -$194,112.00

0 CC PECOR, RAYMOND C JR KING STREET -$189,769.00

1.77 C THE MAY DEPARTMENT 611 OLIVE STREET -$156,388.00

0 C FIRST HEALTHCARE CORP 3300 AEGON CENTER -$145,538.00

0 C DONOHOE O'BRIEN BOX 119 -$140,337.00

0 C BURLINGTON SQUARE CURTIS CENTER -$130,232.00

Burlington BIGGEST DECREASE

Prop Property Bldg/

Cls Class # Building Land Total Land Total Total Diff w/ % Diff w/

Code Name Parcels Value Value Value Ratio Current 100% Land 100% Land 100%L

C Commercial 368 $184,002,513 $81,786,800 $264,356,721 2.25 $6,515,422 $6,074,324 -$441,099 -7%

CA Commercial Apartments 350 $101,175,845 $28,664,900 $129,709,145 3.53 $3,196,854 $2,128,948 -$1,067,906 -33%

CC Commercial Condo 83 $30,107,301 $804,500 $30,858,401 37.42 $760,546 $59,750 -$700,796 -92%

CL Commercial Land 57 $5,029,400 $15,577,000 $11,573,000 0.32 $285,232 $1,156,907 $871,675 306%

CR Commercial 212 $30,013,355 $17,267,200 $47,280,555 1.74 $1,165,292 $1,282,439 $117,147 10%

CRC Commercial 1 $40,600 $119,800 $160,400 0.34 $3,953 $8,898 $4,944 125%

E Education 11 $2,592,000 $504,600 $3,096,600 5.14 $76,320 $37,477 -$38,843 -51%

EU Education - Utility 1 $26,500 $43,600 $70,100 0.61 $1,728 $3,238 $1,510 87%

F Farm 2 $78,900 $237,700 $262,200 0.33 $6,462 $17,654 $11,192 173%

FL Farm Land 3 $36,000 $181,800 $145,800 0.2 $3,593 $13,502 $9,909 276%

I Industrial 14 $16,645,107 $4,429,900 $21,075,007 3.76 $519,422 $329,010 -$190,412 -37%

IL Industrial Land 4 $300,800 $1,300,500 $1,289,700 0.23 $31,786 $96,588 $64,802 204%

MH Mobile Home 124 $2,493,000 $26,200 $2,519,200 95.15 $62,089 $1,946 -$60,143 -97%

ML Mobile Home on Land 6 $146,200 $116,700 $262,900 1.25 $6,480 $8,667 $2,188 34%

R1 Residential < 6 Acres 5,098 $372,403,300 $283,223,300 $655,493,000 1.31 $16,155,495 $21,035,057 $4,879,561 30%

R2 Residential >= 6 Acres 1,114 $77,587,300 $50,129,300 $127,716,600 1.55 $3,147,745 $3,723,114 $575,369 18%

R3 Residential 344 $29,072,700 $15,466,100 $44,538,800 1.88 $1,097,718 $1,148,671 $50,953 5%

R4 Residential 239 $22,914,800 $10,950,800 $33,865,600 2.09 $834,663 $813,318 -$21,344 -3%

RC Residential Condo 1,757 $191,790,100 $931,100 $192,721,200 205.98 $4,749,870 $69,153 -$4,680,717 -99%

RL Residential Land 199 $853,800 $12,887,100 $13,191,900 0.07 $325,132 $957,128 $631,996 194%

TE Education 29 $7,503,602 $2,905,600 $10,210,602 2.58 $251,654 $215,800 -$35,854 -14%

V1 Vacation 1 44 $1,938,400 $1,282,500 $3,220,900 1.51 $79,383 $95,252 $15,868 20%

Municipal Totals 10,060 $1,076,751,523 $528,837,000 $1,593,618,331 2.04 $39,276,840 $39,276,840 0 $0

Burlington RESULTS BY PROPERTY CLASS

ESSEX JUNCTION:

LAND VALUE TAX SHIFT DETAILS (2008)

ESSEX JUNCTION RES,CONDO,COM

MERGED

LAND BLDS TOTAL BLD/

LAND RATIO

RATE REV

$309,345,011 $801,849,353 $1,111,194,364 2.59 .020563-

.021058

$23,227,393

$309,345,011 7.5086% $23,227,393

CATEGORY NUMBER AVERAGE

DECREASE 1422 -$3,223

INCREASE 1960 $2,335

ESSEX JUNCTION SEPARATED

RESIDENTIAL & CONDOS

LAND BLDS TOTAL BLD/

LAND RATIO

RATE REV

$252,071,291 $511,368,773 $763,440,064 2.029 2.1058% $16,076,521

$252,071,291 6.3778% $16,076,521


DECREASE 1716 -$1,170



RESIDENTIAL & CONDOS-TOP 10 DECREASETYP PARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

RES 5 TIFFANY LN $615,400 $91,000 1.140 $79,825 -$7,155

RES 71 CASCADE ST $487,900 $80,800 0.780 $103,590 -$5,121

RES 40 BEECH ST $450,500 $74,600 1.030 $72,427 -$4,729

RES 24 CORDUROY RD $501,700 $95,300 0.710 $134,225 -$4,487

RES 23 MAPLE ST $476,500 $89,600 0.480 $186,667 -$4,320

RES 40 TYLER DR $414,400 $70,100 0.340 $206,176 -$4,256

RES 39 TYLER DR $408,200 $69,800 0.310 $225,161 -$4,144

RES 22 TYLER DR $406,200 $69,400 0.250 $277,600 -$4,128

RES 35 TYLER DR $405,500 $69,200 0.230 $300,870 -$4,126

RES 6 TYLER DR $405,100 $69,500 0.260 $267,308 -$4,098


RESIDENTIAL & CONDOS- TOP 10 INCREASETYP PARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

RES 4 HIAWATHA AVE $102,700 $102,700 0.190 $540,526 $4,387

RES 3 WILLEYS CT $104,000 $104,000 3.290 $31,611 $4,443

RES 165 MAIN ST $104,400 $104,400 2.030 $51,429 $4,460

RES 10 OLD COLCHESTER RD

$104,900 $104,900 2.090 $50,191 $4,481

RES 1 NORTH HILLCREST RD

$107,100 $107,100 0.150 $714,000 $4,575

RES 60 OLD COLCHESTER RD

$111,600 $111,600 3.000 $37,200 $4,768

RES 22 JACKSON ST $117,600 $117,600 0.120 $980,000 $5,024

RES 71 BRICKYARD RD $137,900 $137,900 19.500 $7,072 $5,891

RES 76WEST ST $144,600 $144,600 7.730 $18,706 $6,177

RES 315 SOUTH ST $1,215,200 $589,000 446.66 $1,319 $11,975


COMMERCIAL

LAND TOTAL BLD/LAND RATIO

RATE REV IBM

$57,273,720 $347,754,300 5.07 2.0563% $7,150,872 $2,131,281

(30%)

$57,273,720 12.4854% $7,150,872 $584,820

(8.2%)


DECREASE 37 -$73,240



COMMERCIAL-TOP 10 DECREASEPARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

1000 RIVER ST $103,646,400 $4,684,020 233.150 $20,090 -$1,546,461

POWER LINES $24,862,200 $0 85.040 $0 -$511,241

3 EDUCATIONAL DR

$35,248,400 $4,406,700 97.800 $45,058 -$174,617

128 WEST ST $3,686,700 $0 7.070 $0 -$75,810

GAS LINES $3,672,000 $0 0.000 $0 -$75,507

48 PARK ST $7,583,600 $869,800 25.370 $34,285 -$47,343

136 WEST ST $2,183,500 $0 0.000 $0 -$44,899

203 PEARL ST $2,156,200 $0 1.140 $0 -$44,338

1 PEARL ST $4,197,700 $446,300 1.890 $236,138 -$30,595

34 PARK ST $2,036,800 $181,500 2.600 $69,808 -$19,222


COMMERCIAL-TOP 10 INCREASEPARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

56 PEARL ST $390,900 $279,300 0.29 $963,103 $26,834

150 WEST ST $1,491,900 $478,600 7.25 $66,014 $29,077

102 MAPLE ST $10,216,300 $1,967,600 33.5 $58,734 $35,586

30 OLD COLCHESTER RD

$414,200 $414,200 7.93 $52,232 $43,197

30 HIAWATHA AVE

$2,622,100 $802,600 7.92 $101,338 $46,290

111 WEST ST $2,012,600 $761,000 29.46 $25,832 $53,629

75 PEARL ST $3,409,000 $996,300 5.14 $193,833 $54,293

29 CASCADE ST $1,950,600 $952,100 32.0 $29,753 $78,764

58 PEARL ST $3,232,300 $1,393,100 8.57 $162,555 $107,469

105 PEARL ST $27,444,400 $9,627,300 129.75 $74,199 $637,671

GROWTH CENTER Res, Condo, Comm Merged

LAND BLDS TOTAL BLD/LAND RATIO

RATE REV

$16,086,725 $40,324,075 $56,410,800 2.507 .020563-

.021058

$1,163,543

$16,086,725 .072329 $1,163,543


DECREASE 36 -$7,410.73

INCREASE 58 $4,599.76

GROWTH CENTER MERGED

TOP 10 DECREASE (ALL COM)PARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

1 PEARL $4,197,700 $446,300 1.890 $243,152 -$54,037

34 PARK $2,036,800 $181,500 2.600 $68,373 -$28,755

15 LINCOLN $1,805,800 $149,900 0.550 $180,514 -$26,290

4 PARK $1,869,300 $225,300 1.400 $155,045 -$22,143

82 PEARL $1,535,300 $232,500 0.840 $276,762 -$14,754

4 PEARL $1,567,400 $243,300 0.940 $240,720 -$14,633

9 LINCOLN $1,195,800 $145,400 0.440 $340,182 -$14,073

100 PEARL $1,557,700 $256,900 1.110 $227,782 -$13,450

4 MAIN $1,053,800 $148,500 0.510 $303,685 -$10,928

20 MAIN $1,033,900 $145,100 0.430 $364,418 -$10,765

GROWTH CENTER MERGED

TOP 10 INCREASE (ALL COM)PARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

110 PEARL $777,400 $317,300 0.730 $434,658 $6,964

15 PEARL $280,100 $176,600 0.210 $840,952 $7,014

106 PEARL $764,700 $316,500 0.720 $439,583 $7,168

86 PEARL $258,900 $195,800 0.200 $979,000 $8,838

92 PEARL $219,500 $202,300 0.340 $595,000 $10,119

1 MAPLE $471,700 $275,300 0.220 $1,251,364 $10,213

98 PEARL $230,900 $208,200 0.450 $462,667 $10,311

102 PEARL $204,100 $204,100 0.380 $537,105 $10,566

56 PEARL $390,900 $279,300 0.290 $963,103 $12,164

58 PEARL $3,232,300 $1,393,100 8.570 $162,555 $34,296

GROWTH CENTER SEPARATED

RESIDENTIAL AND CONDOS


RATE REV

$2,407,525 $4,800,875 $7,208,400 1.994 0.021058 $151,794

$2,407,525 0.06305 $151,794


DECREASE 15 -$1,296.27

INCREASE 14 $1,388.86


TOP 10 DECREASE RES&CONDOTYP PARCEL TOTAL SIZE /ACRE DIFF

RES 18 LINCOLN $491,700 0.480 $215,668 -$3,708.75

RES 15 MAPLE $409,800 0.680 $131,522 -$3,150.52

RES 7 PARK $388,300 0.200 $445,915 -$1,392.64

RES 20 LINCOLN $330,300 0.350 $256,588 -$1,381.84

RES 14 RAILROAD $311,800 0.420 $207,627 -$1,231.85

CONDO 65 PEARL $217,700 -$1,152.83

CONDO 65 PEARL $208,500 -$1,104.11

CONDO 65 PEARL $208,500 -$1,104.11

CONDO 65 PEARL $196,500 -$1,040.57

CONDO 65 PEARL $196,500 -$1,040.57


TOP 10 INCREASE RES&CONDOPARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

112 PEARL $210,900 $83,000 0.250 $301,420 $792

2 PARK $277,200 $106,500 0.100 $935,637 $878

90 PEARL $200,100 $85,300 0.500 $178,721 $1,164

25 SCHOOL $239,600 $106,700 0.120 $912,059 $1,682

5 SCHOOL $238,300 $108,300 0.260 $426,112 $1,810

3 PARK $233,400 $106,800 0.130 $768,977 $1,819

29 SCHOOL $221,500 $106,500 0.100 $1,035,289 $2,050

27 SCHOOL $215,700 $107,400 0.180 $597,073 $2,229

5 SCHOOL $188,300 $106,200 0.080 $1,196,067 $2,731

5 PARK $189,400 $107,800 0.210 $698,831 $2,808


COMMERCIAL


RATE REV

$13,679,200 $35,523,200 $49,202,400 2.597 0.020563 $1,011,749

$13,679,200 0.073962 $1,011,749


DECREASE 24 -$10,396.76

INCREASE 43 $5,802.84


TOP 10 DECREASE COMMERCIALPARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

1 PEARL $4,197,700 $446,300 1.890 $236,138 -$53,308

34 PARK $2,036,800 $181,500 2.600 $69,808 -$28,459

15 LINCOLN $1,805,800 $149,900 0.550 $272,545 -$26,046

4 PARK $1,869,300 $225,300 1.400 $160,929 -$21,775

82 PEARL $1,535,300 $232,500 0.840 $276,786 -$14,374

4 PEARL $1,567,400 $243,300 0.940 $258,830 -$14,235

9 LINCOLN $1,195,800 $145,400 0.440 $330,455 -$13,835

100 PEARL $1,557,700 $256,900 1.110 $231,441 -$13,030

4 MAIN $1,053,800 $148,500 0.510 $291,176 -$10,686

20 MAIN $1,033,900 $145,100 0.430 $337,442 -$10,528


TOP 10 INCREASE COMMERCIALPARCEL TOTAL LAND SIZE /ACRE DIFF

110 PEARL $777,400 $317,300 0.730 $434,658 $7,483

15 PEARL $280,100 $176,600 0.210 $840,952 $7,302

106 PEARL $764,700 $316,500 0.720 $439,583 $7,685

86 PEARL $258,900 $195,800 0.200 $979,000 $9,158

92 PEARL $219,500 $202,300 0.340 $595,000 $10,449

1 MAPLE $471,700 $275,300 0.220 $1,251,364 $10,662

98 PEARL $230,900 $208,200 0.450 $462,667 $10,651

102 PEARL $204,100 $204,100 0.380 $537,105 $10,899

56 PEARL $390,900 $279,300 0.290 $963,103 $12,620

58 PEARL $3,232,300 $1,393,100 8.570 $162,555 $36,571

Growth Center land value/acre

TYP LAND

VALUE

SIZE $/ACRE

RES $2,065,500 6.154 $335,620

COM $13,679,200 50.055 $273,286

Greenwich land value/acre

LESSONS FROM THE PAST

Get zoning/set-asides in place to protect environmental/agricultural assets

Get assessments right

Don’t implement at same time as reassessment (Amsterdam, NY, Pittsburgh, PA)

Implement gradually ie: over 5 years

Alaska dividend, or Aspen voucher-irreversible

land value tax shift in downtowns, a tool for smart growth may 11, 2010 gary flomenhoft

Documents

property taxes

energy taxes

new order of things

old order

land value tax shift

gund instituteuvm

smart growth

nicolo machiavelli