Great Park Neighborhoods
- Thread starter kayochan
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
You have a misplaced particle in there, I would put the "de" at the end of "mom" for extra emphasis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_Chinese_profanity#Mother
MR can go up 2%/ yr or will go up 2%/yr?
Thanks for clarifying. I think PP has good value, but the MR increase is a major turn off.
Of course, MR is not really about the government. It's essentially a way for the builder to recoop their infrastructure building costs.
But that's not the government...that's your builder/developer. Builders/developer have to front the costs for putting in infrastructure in new developments. MR is just a way for them to get those costs back. That's why MR go away after a certain period of time.
Developers/builders do not have to impose a MR. Baker's Ranch has no MR (but they probably just priced it in the selling price).
Yes...it is a work around with prop 13 but the people getting paid from the MR payments are the developers (who float the bonds in the first place).
i think the developer votes to approve/OK the bond to be issued, essentially approving the tax, but the bond is issued by the city/county. this makes more sense as in the future, if a new MR bond was needed to be issued in say, pavillion park, the existing residents of the district would have to approve the bond(tax).
ps99472
New member
test said:
You have a misplaced particle in there, I would put the "de" at the end of "mom" for extra emphasis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_Chinese_profanity#Mother
fishfinder333
New member
Hi guys, been reading a few threads about Pavlion Park homes and many mention 2% annual increase in property tax? Can someone give me more detail about this? Are those posters saying property taxes will increase 2% every year in PP?
fishfinder333
New member
O Hills said:
MR can go up 2%/ yr or will go up 2%/yr?
fishfinder333
New member
O Hills said:
Thanks for clarifying. I think PP has good value, but the MR increase is a major turn off.
Irvinecommuter
New member
O Hills said:
Of course, MR is not really about the government. It's essentially a way for the builder to recoop their infrastructure building costs.
Irvinecommuter
New member
O Hills said:
But that's not the government...that's your builder/developer. Builders/developer have to front the costs for putting in infrastructure in new developments. MR is just a way for them to get those costs back. That's why MR go away after a certain period of time.
Developers/builders do not have to impose a MR. Baker's Ranch has no MR (but they probably just priced it in the selling price).
I'm no expert, but here's what Wikpedia says:
The legislation creating MR allows "'Community Facilities Districts' (CFDs) to be established by local government agencies, (counties, cities, special districts, joint powers authority, and schools districts) to pay for public works and some public services.
These districts seek public financing through the sale of bonds for the purpose of financing public improvements and services. These services may include streets, water, sewage and drainage, electricity, infrastructure, schools, parks and police protection to newly developing areas. The tax paid is used to make the payments of principal and interest on the bonds.
The Mello-Roos fees are generally considered an end-run around Prop 13, which caps property taxes while Mello-Roos are not capped.
In PP (and this is probably the trend), the MR will never drop off, but will instead increase.
The legislation creating MR allows "'Community Facilities Districts' (CFDs) to be established by local government agencies, (counties, cities, special districts, joint powers authority, and schools districts) to pay for public works and some public services.
These districts seek public financing through the sale of bonds for the purpose of financing public improvements and services. These services may include streets, water, sewage and drainage, electricity, infrastructure, schools, parks and police protection to newly developing areas. The tax paid is used to make the payments of principal and interest on the bonds.
The Mello-Roos fees are generally considered an end-run around Prop 13, which caps property taxes while Mello-Roos are not capped.
In PP (and this is probably the trend), the MR will never drop off, but will instead increase.
Irvinecommuter
New member
O Hills said:
Yes...it is a work around with prop 13 but the people getting paid from the MR payments are the developers (who float the bonds in the first place).
qwerty
Well-known member
Irvinecommuter said:
i think the developer votes to approve/OK the bond to be issued, essentially approving the tax, but the bond is issued by the city/county. this makes more sense as in the future, if a new MR bond was needed to be issued in say, pavillion park, the existing residents of the district would have to approve the bond(tax).