2 hours ago, gg707 said:

 

The "facts" that you are asserting here were largely shown to not be true in a study that was completed as part of the tax abatement review by City Council.  The study is here:  https://www.crainscleveland.com/government/study-shows-foreclosures-are-not-increased-after-tax-abatements-end

 

Some highlights from an actual study:

• Less abatements are being used now than were several years ago, and represent a very small fraction of the city's housing market.
• Residential and commercial properties are no more likely to be sold by an owner or go into foreclosure once a 15-year tax abatement rolls off than they were when the abatement was active.  Most abated properties are not sold when the abatement ends.
• Abatements make up only a fraction of Cleveland's property overall, according to the study. The share of abated parcels has gone from a high of 4.6% in 2008 to 2.5% in 2018.
• The location of abatements is not correlated with areas where there is a risk of displacement, and abated properties are spread all over the city.

The overall conclusion is that our housing market is still very fragile and that is abatements are such a small piece of the housing pie that they aren't causing the parade of horribles that communities like to blame them for.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks. All done here.

23 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

 

 

I mean the real solution is to completely de-commodify housing, but short of that, at the very least we need more community involvement in the decision making process.

 

Perhaps this is veering into the gentrification thread, but to echo @KJP - NIMBY community involvement is what's caused a lot of this housing shortage and crisis in the country. Locally, look at the hot neighborhoods and the pushback to anything that's more than two family multifamily houses (block groups in particular), which again causes major problems when it comes to the existing population and property values. Taxes are based on what you're able to get for your property if you were to sell on the day of the sexennial valuations being solidified, and the new taxes solidify that, these neighborhoods are now the places to be in the city. Housing is a commodity and that isn't going to ever change in the US, same for city, county, and state services that play into your property taxes.

 

Also, please provide citations for the mass exodus after abatements expire.

 

But back to the topic at hand, I've been at events with the city folks, and woooweee the higher up staff just seem arrogant and unable to see the forest from the trees. It'd really be nice to get a younger, technologically savvy and progressive-ish mayor/cabinet in charge but I won't hold my breath.

 

Edit: By paying for a house (most likely at a much higher property value from the average house price years ago) in one of these abated neighborhoods, aren't you part of the proclaimed gentrification/commodification problem @Cavalier Attitude?

Edited March 11, 20205 yr by GISguy

^^Amen KJP. I could speak for hours on this issue...

22 hours ago, gg707 said:

• Abatements make up only a fraction of Cleveland's property overall, according to the study. The share of abated parcels has gone from a high of 4.6% in 2008 to 2.5% in 2018.

 

 

It would be intereting to see the data enumberated by property value in addition to parcel count.

Report recommends Cleveland continue offering tax breaks for development, but suggests some limitations

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/07/report-recommends-cleveland-continue-offering-tax-breaks-for-development-but-suggests-some-limitations.html
 

“...The study recommends capping tax abatement on single-family homes to those valued at $300,000 or less and establishing limits on what is available for high-end multifamily projects.”
...

”Other suggestions include creation of community benefit agreements, where developers agree to provide money for projects that benefit the entire neighborhood, and establishment of land trusts to help stabilize prices.”

Report summary:

https://cityofcleveland.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=8686158&GUID=0D421495-2A0A-473D-B0F6-EAB50DF4CAF8

 

Full report:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7009898-ReinvestmentFund-Report-ClevelandTaxAbatements.html

 

 

Poor writing here:

Quote

“...The study recommends capping tax abatement on single-family homes to those valued at $300,000 or less and establishing limits on what is available for high-end multifamily projects.”

 

What the actual report recommends is capping the maximum abated value at $300,000, which is a completely different thing.