[quote=bearishgurl][quote=sdrealtor]I have to disagree with the comment that CFD’s had nothing to do with Prop 13. They had everything to do with it. The cities/counties wanted to expand and needed to build infrastructure to do so. Yes they want the “teeter funds” but if there was no Prop 13 they could just raise property taxes to generate all the revenue they need which is what happens in every other state in the US that I know of.[/quote]
Completely understand all this, sdr. Which begs the question. Why do the municipalities need all these extra “teeter funds” in order to function?
Why, indeed?? They allowed all these extra thousands of permits because they wanted to perpetuate themselves. Encinitas in NCC swallowing up Cardiff, Leucadia and Olivenhain and then forming CFD’s within them is a PRIME example of this governmental greed.
Ask your longtime Encinitas-resident “buddies” if they think Encinitas (and your neck of NCC) was a better place to live before its incorporation/annexations in 1986 . . . or after?
IMHO, there is nothing wrong with Prop 13. Older residents should not have to pay the expenses for the infrastructure burdens caused by new residents.
I also think Mello-Roos bonds were created so that land owners and developers could make more money. These are expenses that should rightfully be borne by them. If the new housing prices don’t support the costs + profits (which should be lower than they’ve been, IMHO) for the developers/builders, then the land prices need to come down. One, or the other.
If all the land weren’t controlled by the mega-developers/builders, we probably wouldn’t see Mello-Roos. It should never have come to this point, BTW. In my utopian world, people would be able to buy their own lots and build their own custom homes. We wouldn’t have all these cheap, tacky boxes on tiny lots…and filthy rich land owners/developers/builders who’ve profited greatly at the expense of new buyers.
