Saving taxes with Open space preservation

[free55]

For thoe of you not yet here in NH, this is a great tax reduction issue to grab hold of.? Hollis, Derry, Londonderry, and many of our NH towns have growing taxpayer initiatives to buy up open space.? Stats show that for every dollar of open space presrved, between 8 and 5 dollars are saved in taxes from schools and other town expenses needed to support the development.? It also helps preserve the beautiful state you are about to relocate to.? You can also get in good with the locals that in many cases are far ahead of their local politicians and have been doing this through initiative petitions in spite of politicians in many towns not seeing or understanding the accounting or the cost savings to taxpayers.? Landowners like this too because they get paid for their property.? The only ones opposed to this are the developers who want to exploit the land as fast as possible and then leave town leaving us taxpayers to pick up the pieces.

Hunters and outdoorsmen love to preserve open spaces for obvious reasons.

Go to your local town government meetings and tell the to hold down your taxes through preserving open space.

[GT]

Housing prices in Londonderry have tripled since 1997. Open space is a complete myth it does nothing other than inflate the housing prices.

[SethCohn]

\.
Go to your local town government meetings and tell the to hold down your taxes through preserving open space.

Let's follow that logic:

For simplicity, let's say A, B & C all own houses.  There is more land, which could be developed for use by D, E & F.
Taxes are fairly fixed (the cost between the town supporting ABC and ABCDE in services is likely small enough to ignore).

That means the Taxes are X/3 (or 33% of the cost) shared by AB&C.

D buys land, which previously was 'open'.  The costs staying fairly equal, the new tax rate is now X/4 or 25% for each of ABC&D.

In other words, developing land SAVES tax dollars for A, B & C, not costs them.

If your argument is that perhaps E will buy land and increases tax costs (ie more services), increasing costs for ABC&D.... the tax costs increases for E should be factored in the value of the development.   That's the place to focus on:  stop giving tax _BREAKS_ to developers (build here, and we'll waive taxes for a while).

[Michael Fisher]

Conservation easements are a terrible idea.  This is where the town buys land from someone with the agreement that they will no longer develop on it, even if they continue to live on it.

This practice is rampant as far as I am aware.  A lot of New Hampshire's land is now owned by the town or state governments and nobody can develop anything new on it.  Conseration easements, planning and zoning boards, and conservation laws have all helped to create the massive artificial bubble in the housing market.

People act SO proud of themselves when they talk about it.  They brag about how "smart" they are for avoiding property taxes and making a large "profit" while still living on the land... that they no longer own.

Americans appear to have lost any sense of the value of owning private property.  There is no need for us to predict what the result of this will be.   

[free55]

In other words, developing land SAVES tax dollars for A, B & C, not costs them.

When you get to NH, you'll find that you've got it backwards.? When a new house is built on previously undeveloped open space, you'll add probably 2 kids into the public school.? That'll cost about $15K depending on what town you're in.? The house will bring in let's say $6K in taxes.? Overall taxes in the community go up a net of $9K.

If you're not in favor of preserving open spaces when you get to NH, that means you'll be on the side with those pushing for higher taxes and anti-hunting anti-gun types that would like to see all game supporting land developed.

[AlanM]

free55,
When I get to NH? Sorry, but I was born here. I have lived here for 53 years, which is probably a mite bit longer than you.

If you want open space, then buy it. It is as simple as that. However, you want to force someone else, (the taxpayer), to pay for it so you can enjoy it. Talk about selfish. 

[free55]

free55,
When I get to NH? Sorry, but I was born here. I have lived here for 53 years, which is probably a mite bit longer than you.

If you want open space, then buy it. It is as simple as that. However, you want to force someone else, (the taxpayer), to pay for it so you can enjoy it. Talk about selfish.?

(I was referring to the FSers yet to move to NH.? You've got me beat by about ten years)

But wrong again.? I challenge you to find where I said "force" people.? This movement has been led by private property owners and only happens when the taxpayers VOLUNTARILY vote for it.? You don't want to save taxes?? Vote it down.

Anti-gun and anti-hunting types will love your position.

[AlanM]

free55,
When I get to NH? Sorry, but I was born here. I have lived here for 53 years, which is probably a mite bit longer than you.

If you want open space, then buy it. It is as simple as that. However, you want to force someone else, (the taxpayer), to pay for it so you can enjoy it. Talk about selfish.?

(I was referring to the FSers yet to move to NH.? You've got me beat by about ten years)

But wrong again.? I challenge you to find where I said "force" people.? This movement has been led by private property owners and only happens when the taxpayers VOLUNTARILY vote for it.? You don't want to save taxes?? Vote it down.

Anti-gun and anti-hunting types will love your position.

You are forcing the people who don't vote for the purchase to pay for it if it does pass. Taxation is force.

[SethCohn]

In other words, developing land SAVES tax dollars for A, B & C, not costs them.

When you get to NH, you'll find that you've got it backwards. 

I'm here, thank you very much.

When a new house is built on previously undeveloped open space, you'll add probably 2 kids into the public school.
That'll cost about $15K depending on what town you're in.  The house will bring in let's say $6K in taxes.  Overall taxes in the community go up a net of $9K.

Bzzt.  You don't know me very well.  Public School?  No way.  That's how we are going to fix the tax problem.  If it costs _you_ $15K to educate your kids, congrats.  I know it won't cost me that, and I'm not asking you to pay for my kids, so don't ask me to pay for yours.

In my mind, that's a perfectly valid reason to charge more in taxes: you use the services.  If you have kids in 'public' school, YOU pay for the costs.  I say we start a (child) head tax here in NH:  If you use the school, you pay for the kids directly.  Get property taxes out of the picture.

If you're not in favor of preserving open spaces when you get to NH, that means you'll be on the side with those pushing for higher taxes and anti-hunting anti-gun types that would like to see all game supporting land developed.

I'm in favor of the situation as it is now: private owners opening up lands to those who respect the rights and ecology of the land.
In other words: hunt because it HELPS animals without natural predators to stay within growth limits, and respect lands posted as nature preserves BY the owners of those lands.  If the Bird Lovers buy lands to protect the birds on it, good for them....  and guess what, THEY DO.

[tracysaboe]

I think you'll find here, that we don't accept Hobsian choices. There's no reason that we should have to give up ownership and control of our land just to cut our property tax. You're going to give your land to the government, so you don't have to "rent" from them anymore? Absurd!

The proper way is to reclaim our property rights and tell government they don't own our land. But that each individual property owner does, and thus they're no reason they should be forced to pay "tribute."

Tracy

[Kat Kanning]

Try looking into the Nature Conservancy if you want to preserve open space.  They take donations and BUY the land, without using force (unless they've started taking tax money).

I'm in NH also and would never never never never never never never never put my child in a public school.  Shoot me first.

[GT]

When you get to NH, you'll find that you've got it backwards.  When a new house is built on previously undeveloped open space, you'll add probably 2 kids into the public school.  That'll cost about $15K depending on what town you're in.  The house will bring in let's say $6K in taxes.  Overall taxes in the community go up a net of $9K.

If you're not in favor of preserving open spaces when you get to NH, that means you'll be on the side with those pushing for higher taxes and anti-hunting anti-gun types that would like to see all game supporting land developed.

On average new homes do not add 2 children. The average is 0.8. The school population in NH is declining and is predicted to be flat or decline over the next few years. New construction will create more demand for services, but the taxes that are paid offset theose services.

Supporting Open Space has nothing to do with being pro-gun. Look around at the towns that constantly try to block hunting and carrying of firearms.

[Lloyd Danforth]

I am under the opinion that communities should encourage adding to the tax base and, as each new dollar comes in reduce taxes for all.

[PattyE]

When you get to NH, you'll find that you've got it backwards.? When a new house is built on previously undeveloped open space, you'll add probably 2 kids into the public school.? That'll cost about $15K depending on what town you're in.? The house will bring in let's say $6K in taxes.? Overall taxes in the community go up a net of $9K.

New Housing Not to Blame for N.H. School Woes, Study Concludes

Pat Hammond
The Union Leader (Manchester NH)
July 18, 2005

[GT]

From the quoted article:

Other findings The 21-page report also finds that: * In all New Hampshire public schools,
single-family detached units generate 0.54 students
single-family attached units: 0.34
two-unit buildings: 0.38
three- or four-unit buildings: 0.34
five- or more unit buildings: 0.21
mobile homes, 0.34

for an average of 0.45 for all structure types.

* In the case study area:
all single-family units genereate 0.55 students
all condomniums: 0.12
all mobile homes: 0.33

The average for all four municipalities was 0.42 students.

* School-age population expanded faster than total population during the 1990s partly because the state was growing but also because the Baby Boomer generation entered the 35- to 44-year-old category, which has an abundance of school children. * Between 2005 and 2020, the state's total population is projected to grow by just over 200,000 new residents, but school enrollment is projected to be lower in 2020 than it is today.