Older Homes in Carlsbad

[SD Realtor]

It always serves well for people to find out more about Mello Roos. In the past I have posted links to find out the origins of it. Go ahead and google Mello Roos in California and you will find the origins which in a nutshell simply were created by politicians in order to make up for loss of revenue created by prop 13.

[Occams Realtor]

RB,

I see your point about schools with more students and teachers but new utilities have to be paid by developers. If sidewalks, power and sewer have to be added to build 1000 stucco boxes, the developers have to pay. Upkeep of those stucco boxes is payed by mello roos but what happened to the 1% of property tax collected by the city? The city will collect money from these new developments without mello roos. Isn’t this 1% tax supposed to be applied to the same costs? 1% of a $500,000 stucco box is $5000/year… where does that go? (I think the state gets around 99% but the city gets around 1%. I choose not to ponder where the 99% goes).

While I am pleased I will be locked in at the same property tax percentage because of prop 13, I do not think mello roos should make up the difference for the city. Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

[Occams Realtor]

RB,

I see your point about schools with more students and teachers but new utilities have to be paid by developers. If sidewalks, power and sewer have to be added to build 1000 stucco boxes, the developers have to pay. Upkeep of those stucco boxes is payed by mello roos but what happened to the 1% of property tax collected by the city? The city will collect money from these new developments without mello roos. Isn’t this 1% tax supposed to be applied to the same costs? 1% of a $500,000 stucco box is $5000/year… where does that go? (I think the state gets around 99% but the city gets around 1%. I choose not to ponder where the 99% goes).

While I am pleased I will be locked in at the same property tax percentage because of prop 13, I do not think mello roos should make up the difference for the city. Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

[Occams Realtor]

RB,

I see your point about schools with more students and teachers but new utilities have to be paid by developers. If sidewalks, power and sewer have to be added to build 1000 stucco boxes, the developers have to pay. Upkeep of those stucco boxes is payed by mello roos but what happened to the 1% of property tax collected by the city? The city will collect money from these new developments without mello roos. Isn’t this 1% tax supposed to be applied to the same costs? 1% of a $500,000 stucco box is $5000/year… where does that go? (I think the state gets around 99% but the city gets around 1%. I choose not to ponder where the 99% goes).

While I am pleased I will be locked in at the same property tax percentage because of prop 13, I do not think mello roos should make up the difference for the city. Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

[Occams Realtor]

RB,

I see your point about schools with more students and teachers but new utilities have to be paid by developers. If sidewalks, power and sewer have to be added to build 1000 stucco boxes, the developers have to pay. Upkeep of those stucco boxes is payed by mello roos but what happened to the 1% of property tax collected by the city? The city will collect money from these new developments without mello roos. Isn’t this 1% tax supposed to be applied to the same costs? 1% of a $500,000 stucco box is $5000/year… where does that go? (I think the state gets around 99% but the city gets around 1%. I choose not to ponder where the 99% goes).

While I am pleased I will be locked in at the same property tax percentage because of prop 13, I do not think mello roos should make up the difference for the city. Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

[Occams Realtor]

RB,

I see your point about schools with more students and teachers but new utilities have to be paid by developers. If sidewalks, power and sewer have to be added to build 1000 stucco boxes, the developers have to pay. Upkeep of those stucco boxes is payed by mello roos but what happened to the 1% of property tax collected by the city? The city will collect money from these new developments without mello roos. Isn’t this 1% tax supposed to be applied to the same costs? 1% of a $500,000 stucco box is $5000/year… where does that go? (I think the state gets around 99% but the city gets around 1%. I choose not to ponder where the 99% goes).

While I am pleased I will be locked in at the same property tax percentage because of prop 13, I do not think mello roos should make up the difference for the city. Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

[CA renter]

If yo put it to the builder then he is going to add it to his purchase price. If the purchase price which includes MR is not in line with the market and his profit motive then he is going to walk and the project does not move forward.
——————–

However, this argument is like saying higher interest rates will make housing less affordable. I couldn’t disagree more. There is a certain price/payment threshold beyond which buyers cannot afford to pay. If that threshold is already reached (like now), then PRICES will have to correct if rates go up, it should not mean higher monthly payments.

Developers need to work backward, not forward, when considering new developments.

Instead of saying “cost of land” + development costs + profits = retail price, they need to say “market price” – [cost to develop (including all infrastructure fees/costs) + required profits] = what I will pay for this land.

Buyers determine price, not sellers. Developers determine what they will pay for land, and it is their responsibility not to overpay.

Mello-Roos allows developers to overpay for the land and shift this burden onto the buyers. Ultimately, it is the land sellers who are making all the money, although the developers benefit indirectly because they can more easily acquire land and not have to concern themselves with these development costs…and they are DEVELOPMENT costs.

[CA renter]

If yo put it to the builder then he is going to add it to his purchase price. If the purchase price which includes MR is not in line with the market and his profit motive then he is going to walk and the project does not move forward.
——————–

However, this argument is like saying higher interest rates will make housing less affordable. I couldn’t disagree more. There is a certain price/payment threshold beyond which buyers cannot afford to pay. If that threshold is already reached (like now), then PRICES will have to correct if rates go up, it should not mean higher monthly payments.

Developers need to work backward, not forward, when considering new developments.

Instead of saying “cost of land” + development costs + profits = retail price, they need to say “market price” – [cost to develop (including all infrastructure fees/costs) + required profits] = what I will pay for this land.

Buyers determine price, not sellers. Developers determine what they will pay for land, and it is their responsibility not to overpay.

Mello-Roos allows developers to overpay for the land and shift this burden onto the buyers. Ultimately, it is the land sellers who are making all the money, although the developers benefit indirectly because they can more easily acquire land and not have to concern themselves with these development costs…and they are DEVELOPMENT costs.

[CA renter]

If yo put it to the builder then he is going to add it to his purchase price. If the purchase price which includes MR is not in line with the market and his profit motive then he is going to walk and the project does not move forward.
——————–

However, this argument is like saying higher interest rates will make housing less affordable. I couldn’t disagree more. There is a certain price/payment threshold beyond which buyers cannot afford to pay. If that threshold is already reached (like now), then PRICES will have to correct if rates go up, it should not mean higher monthly payments.

Developers need to work backward, not forward, when considering new developments.

Instead of saying “cost of land” + development costs + profits = retail price, they need to say “market price” – [cost to develop (including all infrastructure fees/costs) + required profits] = what I will pay for this land.

Buyers determine price, not sellers. Developers determine what they will pay for land, and it is their responsibility not to overpay.

Mello-Roos allows developers to overpay for the land and shift this burden onto the buyers. Ultimately, it is the land sellers who are making all the money, although the developers benefit indirectly because they can more easily acquire land and not have to concern themselves with these development costs…and they are DEVELOPMENT costs.

[CA renter]

If yo put it to the builder then he is going to add it to his purchase price. If the purchase price which includes MR is not in line with the market and his profit motive then he is going to walk and the project does not move forward.
——————–

However, this argument is like saying higher interest rates will make housing less affordable. I couldn’t disagree more. There is a certain price/payment threshold beyond which buyers cannot afford to pay. If that threshold is already reached (like now), then PRICES will have to correct if rates go up, it should not mean higher monthly payments.

Developers need to work backward, not forward, when considering new developments.

Instead of saying “cost of land” + development costs + profits = retail price, they need to say “market price” – [cost to develop (including all infrastructure fees/costs) + required profits] = what I will pay for this land.

Buyers determine price, not sellers. Developers determine what they will pay for land, and it is their responsibility not to overpay.

Mello-Roos allows developers to overpay for the land and shift this burden onto the buyers. Ultimately, it is the land sellers who are making all the money, although the developers benefit indirectly because they can more easily acquire land and not have to concern themselves with these development costs…and they are DEVELOPMENT costs.

[CA renter]

If yo put it to the builder then he is going to add it to his purchase price. If the purchase price which includes MR is not in line with the market and his profit motive then he is going to walk and the project does not move forward.
——————–

However, this argument is like saying higher interest rates will make housing less affordable. I couldn’t disagree more. There is a certain price/payment threshold beyond which buyers cannot afford to pay. If that threshold is already reached (like now), then PRICES will have to correct if rates go up, it should not mean higher monthly payments.

Developers need to work backward, not forward, when considering new developments.

Instead of saying “cost of land” + development costs + profits = retail price, they need to say “market price” – [cost to develop (including all infrastructure fees/costs) + required profits] = what I will pay for this land.

Buyers determine price, not sellers. Developers determine what they will pay for land, and it is their responsibility not to overpay.

Mello-Roos allows developers to overpay for the land and shift this burden onto the buyers. Ultimately, it is the land sellers who are making all the money, although the developers benefit indirectly because they can more easily acquire land and not have to concern themselves with these development costs…and they are DEVELOPMENT costs.

[Raybyrnes]

Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

Then the efficient market hypothesis is working. As you suggested people will find better substitutes to paying for a property plus MR.

To me HOA, ML etc are fairly meaningless because I am simply looking at the total package.

To me it is an uphill battle to think you can sell a property with HOA and MR when there are similar properties without HOA and MR.

It doesn’t seem much different than buying high expense mutual funds. They might win but they start out with a substantial disadvantage.

Again you could argue that developers should pay this but I jsut see this as a pas through to the final owner in the form of higher purchase price. In the end someone has to pay and the higher up the food chain you are the less your are going to bite off. Just the way it is.

[Raybyrnes]

Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

Then the efficient market hypothesis is working. As you suggested people will find better substitutes to paying for a property plus MR.

To me HOA, ML etc are fairly meaningless because I am simply looking at the total package.

To me it is an uphill battle to think you can sell a property with HOA and MR when there are similar properties without HOA and MR.

It doesn’t seem much different than buying high expense mutual funds. They might win but they start out with a substantial disadvantage.

Again you could argue that developers should pay this but I jsut see this as a pas through to the final owner in the form of higher purchase price. In the end someone has to pay and the higher up the food chain you are the less your are going to bite off. Just the way it is.

[Raybyrnes]

Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

Then the efficient market hypothesis is working. As you suggested people will find better substitutes to paying for a property plus MR.

To me HOA, ML etc are fairly meaningless because I am simply looking at the total package.

To me it is an uphill battle to think you can sell a property with HOA and MR when there are similar properties without HOA and MR.

It doesn’t seem much different than buying high expense mutual funds. They might win but they start out with a substantial disadvantage.

Again you could argue that developers should pay this but I jsut see this as a pas through to the final owner in the form of higher purchase price. In the end someone has to pay and the higher up the food chain you are the less your are going to bite off. Just the way it is.

[Raybyrnes]

Mello roos is having unforeseen consequences on communities (aformentiond Mystic Point): it is driving away buyers from properties.

Then the efficient market hypothesis is working. As you suggested people will find better substitutes to paying for a property plus MR.

To me HOA, ML etc are fairly meaningless because I am simply looking at the total package.

To me it is an uphill battle to think you can sell a property with HOA and MR when there are similar properties without HOA and MR.

It doesn’t seem much different than buying high expense mutual funds. They might win but they start out with a substantial disadvantage.

Again you could argue that developers should pay this but I jsut see this as a pas through to the final owner in the form of higher purchase price. In the end someone has to pay and the higher up the food chain you are the less your are going to bite off. Just the way it is.

[Author]

Posts