Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Richmond Glen tax revenue - how much will it be?

As I explained yesterday, based on documents presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission in 2005 and updating those numbers using CT Valley housing prices trends from the National Association of Realtors... it appears that the Richmond Glen units would sell today for about $330,000. Furthermore... based on the 2009/2010 mill rate, that sales price would generate about $6,000 in property tax dollars per household.

However, if you watch this 90 second YouTube clip you'll hear the suggestion that these units would each generate about $9,000 to $10,000 in property taxes annually.

Now look at this brief analysis of the two aforementioned scenarios:Which is it? Are these units going to sell for $500,000 or $330,000? My guess is that's something PZC may find of interest because it would change the character of the approved neighborhood. For instance, imagine if those sales prices dropped from $330,000 to $160,000. I bet questions would be getting asked.

And how much tax revenue will be generated? Unlike the PZC though, that's something that we know the Budget Committee Chairman opposes knowing.

Maybe I'll compile an updated fiscal impact analysis soon... definitely not tonight though. I'm going to bed.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

And if Matt Hall does the closings on these units, how much money will he generate?

Will Sheldon Dill get a raise in his salary for doing such a good job for the chamber members?

How can these men vote on anything involving this property with this developer?

Whatever happened to ethics?

Tim, is there anyway we can get an outside source to investigate this?

Anonymous said...

New homes taxed at less than about $10k won't help the mix very much even without kids in residence.

$95,000,000 split ten thousand ways (per town residence) is about $9.5k per household. At that rate the town budget is paid for. Of course there are some commercial industrial payers who help out but the bottom line seems to be unless you get a total of almost $10k per household you can't provide the necessary town funding.

We need maybe 5 or 6 in place 500,000 sq ft malls and 4 or 5 250,000 sq ft manufacturing facilities in a hurry - - -

We could also just try to cut the fat now before it is too late.

Haven't heard much from the turf-heads lately either.

Anonymous said...

Tim better put a sign on the door of his bank.. do not ask for a loan for Richmond Glen or I will be a hypocrite

Anonymous said...

"Tim better put a sign on the door of his bank.. do not ask for a loan for Richmond Glen or I will be a hypocrite"

How will he be a hypocrite?
Do you even understand what Tim was trying to do?
He wanted the town to get paid a fair price for the land. I could see if he voted to go along with the $10 Easement, but he voted against it.
By llowing the $10 easement to go through, Matt Hall can make a bundle of money for him through closings. Tim is just an auditor for a major bank(sorry Tim, not demeaning your job, just trying to mak a point). He personally won't benefit.

Learn your facts!

Anonymous said...

Good job Dems, you stuck it to us again on this one.

It's time we charge developers a unit sewage hookup fee that is based on the current capital cost of one unit of capacity.

Septic tanks can cost up to $15,000. It's not fair to have some pay for a septic tank and the developers get free hookups. They want to charge students activity fees and give sewage treatment away for free????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Anonymous said...

What bank does tim work for?