[quote=SK in CV][quote=all][quote=bearishgurl][quote=all][quote=bearishgurl]SK, I was referring to outlying areas. Carmel Valley is not really outlying, and, in any case, a portion of its MR bonds should now be ~10 years from maturity/retirement.[/quote]And no true Scotsman…[/quote]
What about the subdivisions which were built in Carmel Valley in the very early nineties??
[quote=all]Carmel Valley is not outlying, but the area right next to it is?[/quote]
Yes.
[/quote]
Carmel Mountain Ranch was built in very early nineties, it is in PUSD and there is MR. Santaluz is halfway between CMR and CV, about three miles from either. Another 3 miles from a business park that hosts Sony, Nokia, Broadcom, HP… Santaluz is an outlying area only if you are observing the world from a Tijuana suburb.
[/quote]
I would tend to agree. Carmel Valley is no more of an outlying (or at least as much of an outlying area) as Santa Luz. Escondido is more outlying, and if there have been MR abuses there, I haven’t heard much of them. Same with some of the other truly outlying areas that had major development over the last 15 years…San Marcos, Vista, Oceanside. Maybe there have been problems, but if so, they haven’t been near as public as the problems in the PUSD.
And I’m pretty sure there are some MR that are fully paid off in Carmel Valley.
The problem seems not to be the design of the MR laws, but rather abuse of the process. Should be a warning to us all, pay attention to the political process and get people elected who will make wise financial decisions and vote those who haven’t out of office.[/quote]
SK, I never stated that MR (bond-money) abuses are rampant throughout the state. In fact, in my post above with the link to an earlier (Aug 2012) thread on this subject, I stated that other county suburban school districts had appeared to be using their MR bond money appropriately. What I did state was that the MR Act created an environment for Big Development to convince local jurisdictions to approve massive “master-planned communities” which has had the recent effect of creating boom/bust cycles in areas which never witnessed this phenomenon before (ex: Stockton, Los Banos, Napa, Tracy, etc). These “boom-bust” cycles caused these (formerly rural/agricultural) cities and counties to “ramp up” their personnel to increase services for a huge new population increase which turned out to be temporary, causing them to later lay off due to severely falling values (which were never supported by local fundamentals). These developer-driven cycles also occurred in exurbs located in Eastern Alameda County and the City of San Bernardino (an exurb of Los Angeles). The fallout of these “boom-bust” cycles was and is devastating to county and municipal coffers. However, I believe those subd’s in Eastern Alameda County and Napa County are well on their way to recovery now. The same cannot be said for the City of SB, Stockton and Los Banos, for example, because higher-paying white-collar jobs within ~25 miles of these cities (adequate for a monthly mortgage payment) are not in abundance.
I am totally with CAR in that developers should have had to finance ALL the infrastructure on their land as a condition of subdividing for residential development and then roll this cost into the price of each parcel when purchased as new construction.
In the absence of the MR Act, if each new parcel over the last ~30 years (with new construction on it) had been priced appropriately from the get go, CA wouldn’t have all this unwanted and unneeded urban and exurban sprawl because each fully-developed parcel would have been too expensive for the masses of past and present buyers who were drawn to subd’s within the CFDs (in comparison to a home in an established area).
But we can’t turn back the clock. The unintended consequences of the MR Act are now knocking most of CA’s elected and appointed officials upside the head because the MR bond money emanating from these CFD’s was never intended to to be used pay the extra city/county workers salaries to service these residents. The available county and municipal services will be permanently curtailed going forward for EVERY CA resident. And for many overdeveloped jurisdictions throughout the state, the gravity of this problem is such that their residents’ needs are so great that they must permanently “borrow” agencies and their personnel from neighboring cities/counties which either did not have the land available for or were wise enough to NOT fall for Big Development’s ruse.
In conjunction with the later (1986) enactment of Props 58/193 (the progeny of Prop 13), the after-effects of the MR Act have been no less than fiscally devastating to the (former) “Golden State.” As I have posted before here, Henry Mello could not have possibly envisioned this sad scenario when he and Mike Roos introduced the bill to the Legislature and has to be turning in his grave by now :=0.
