INC NEWS - Act Now For NC's Future -- support the transfer fee or impact
TheOcean1 at aol.com
TheOcean1 at aol.com
Tue Jul 17 19:56:58 EDT 2007
If Melissa can get yes answers to both 1) and 2), you might see me switch
sides rapidly!
Bill
In a message dated 7/17/2007 4:51:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mmr121570 at yahoo.com writes:
That is my understanding of the legislation as well,
Chris. And that's the reason for my support of the
transfer tax.
The alternative is waiting longer for desperately
needed legislation with regard to the impact fee (on
new development), and I fear that by then it will be a
mute point, at least for Durham County (since there
will be little land left to develop).
I presume the passage of the current transfer tax
legislation will give Durham the ability to impose
such an impact fee...that is, that the impact fee (on
new development) would be considered a 'type' of
'transfer fee,' and thus would FINALLY be legal for
Durham County. If this is the case, once the transfer
fee legislation is passed, then we can lobby our
county gov't for imposition solely on new development.
Some believe the transfer tax legislation is an all or
none deal, but I'm still trying to get definitive
clarification on this.
Since Orange and Person counties can already legally
impose impact fees, it is only fair that other
counties be able to do so. Even withdrawal of Orange
and Person counties' ability to impose these
restrictive fees would not be fair to other counties,
since Orange and Person have already financially
benefited from impact
fees for years.
At any rate, I emailed our Durham County legislators
to ask that, if they approve the transfer tax
legislation, they 1) exempt renovators from this tax
and 2) exempt senior citizens who have lived in the
county for 10 years or more.
At least one response has indicated that negotiations
are still on the table, and that this request will be
passed on to the legislators.
Thanks for the continued discussion,
Melissa
--- Chris Sevick <csevick at verizon.net> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I'm a bit confused by your opposition to the real
> estate transfer tax bill. As I understand it, if
> the bill passes, it won't mean that the transfer tax
> will be imposed. It just means that each NC county
> will have the authority to let it's residents vote
> on whether or not to institute the tax.
>
> Even if you oppose the tax, you should support this
> bill. If the majority of the people in this county
> don't want the tax, they can just vote against it.
> I can't think of a much more democratic way to
> address the issue. If we really care about our
> local community, we should entrust our local
> community with these decisions.
>
> - Chris Sevick
>
> =====================
> From: TheOcean1 at aol.com
> Date: 2007/07/16 Mon PM 08:34:46 CDT
> To: mmr121570 at yahoo.com, inc-list at durhaminc.org
> Subject: Re: INC NEWS - Act Now For NC's Future --
> support the transfer fee or impact ...
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0
> Transitional//EN">
> <HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html;
> charset=UTF-8">
> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3132"
> name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
> > bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7
> rightMargin=7>> face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
> <DIV>
> <DIV>
> <DIV>
> <DIV>I hate to disagree so strongly with one of my
> favorite community activists,
> but I must.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>In fact, after reading your Melissa's letter,
> I'd suggest using the email
> addresses below for exactly the opposite purpose, to
> ask our representatives to
> oppose this bill.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Here's my reasoning:</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>While the county's impact fee was recently over
> ruled, I think it was well
> aimed at new construction.</DIV>
> <DIV>It is after all, the new families moving in
> that create the new burdens on
> our school systems and infrastructure. This tax has
> a much greater effect on
> the SELLER of property, than the newcomer moving in,
> as it is passed to the
> seller in the selling price of real estate.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Even Melissa recognized this, with the
> exception she tried to include of
> historic properties. But it's an "all or nothing at
> all" bill, and that
> exception can not be incorporated. Sorry Melissa,
> but would you still support
> this bill if you knew that your friendly amendment
> can't be incorporated?</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>For that reason, far too much of this new
> burden would be borne by senior
> citizens selling their almost historic home they
> built years ago, as
> they try to raise the needed funds to move to a
> retirement community, while
> they pass their homes to up and coming families.
> Those new families will
> renovate those older homes, while they add to the
> burden. Their entire
> neighborhoods will experience great gains in
> property values as multiple
> properties change hands in this way, and in each
> case it will be the exiting
> senior citizen who's once again paid the toll. This
> time, it happens at the time
> they can least afford it, at the tail end of them
> paying their "share" of the
> burden, thirty years after their children
> stopped adding to it.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>No, I do NOT support this bill, and I hope
> others will join me in
> opposition. </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>If Melissa's amendment could be included, then
> I'd agree she's right on
> target. Taxing new construction logically places the
> burden where it's being
> created, but as it is crafted, this bill unfairly
> burdens our senior citizens,
> and discourages renovation and revitalization of
> areas of North Carolina, such
> as East Durham.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Let's not discourage the private sector from
> undertaking the expensive and
> risky investment they've shown willingness to make,
> in the most historic
> sections of Durham, while we unfairly whack our
> elders with the expenses of
> folks who've noticed that our city tops a lot of
> lists as a smart place to live.
> Let the incoming plants pay for the new top soil
> required.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Join me in opposition and let our
> representatives know how you feel. </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Bill Anderson</DIV>
> <DIV>(apologies to Melissa)</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV></DIV>
> <DIV>In a message dated 7/16/2007 8:36:49 P.M.
> Eastern Daylight Time,
> mmr121570 at yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE
> style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
> BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid">> style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent"
face=Arial
> color=#000000 size=2>Please
> see the forwarded message below. And
> please
write your legislators
> regarding the right of local
governments to
> impose transfer taxes and/or
> impact
fees.
I have also attached the
> letter I sent to the
> members
of the General Assembly who represent
> Durham County --
in case
> you need some help to get started.
The
> email addresses for Durham
> County
> Representatives
are:
Larryh at ncleg.net,
> Paull at ncleg.net,
> Mickeym at ncleg.net,
Winkiew at ncleg.net,
> Boba at ncleg.net,
> Floydm at ncleg.net
Thank you for caring
> :)
Melissa
Melissa
> Rooney
mmr121570 at yahoo.com
Note:
> forwarded message
>
>
attached.
______________________________________________________________________________
______
No
>
> need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
>
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile.
> Get started.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
Be
>
> a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the
> latest PS3 news and
> previews at Yahoo!
>
>
Games.
http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121
X-Apparently-To:
>
> mmr121570 at yahoo.com via 209.191.68.144;
> Mon, 16 Jul 2007
> 16:06:20 -0700
X-Originating-IP:
> [4.79.194.36]
Authentication-Results:
> mta371.mail.re4.yahoo.com from=capstrat.com;
>
> domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
Received: from
> 4.79.194.36 (EHLO
> outbound.mailmanager.net) (4.79.194.36)
by
> mta371.mail.re4.yahoo.com with SMTP; Mon, 16 Jul
> 2007 16:06:19
> -0700
Received: from mail.mailmanager.net
> (mail.mailmanager.net
> [4.79.194.37])
by outbound.mailmanager.net
> (Postfix) with
> ESMTP id AD90D36E05
for
> <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>; Mon, 16
> Jul 2007 19:06:12 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type:
> multipart/alternative;
>
>
boundary="-=-XCbound-1184627149"
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
>
> 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer:
> /capad/tools/lm-runner 0.21
X-CWDir:
> ncfuturenow
X-CWMsg: 88118415
X-CWRecip:
> 26488324
X-CWQueue:
> 1302662106
Subject: Act Now For NC's
> Future
To: "Melissa and Mike
> Rooney" <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>
From:
> "Partnership For North Carolina's
> Future" <ncfuturenow at capstrat.com>
Reply-To:
> "Partnership For North
> Carolina's Future"
> <ncfuturenow at capstrat.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007
>
>
=== message truncated ===
______________________________________________________________________________
______
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20070717/82579245/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the INC-list
mailing list