Is Milwaukee poised for a big boom one of these years?

[43north87west]

Originally Posted by jjacobeclark

I'm still going to have to disagree with you 43north87west. On a Cost of Living scale where 100 is average, Milwaukee scores 83 while Phoenix comes in at 104 according to Sperling's Best Places. I just moved to Milwaukee in January after living the last 5 years in Denver, who by the way comes in at 105 on that same scale. I can tell you from my experience there that houses selling for $700,000-$800,000 would only sell for $200,000-$300,000 here in Milwaukee and even less in Appleton. I was blown away by how much money people would shell out for houses that bordered on being dumpy. A 2 bedroom shotgun house in Denver's Five Points neighborhood would sell for over $250,000. A house like that in Wisconsin would fetch less than $100,000, unless it was on a lake of course. Real estate is pretty dirt cheap here in Wisconsin, especially compared to the West.

I don't know where Denver and Appleton came from but they're irrelevant to this discussion. If someone feels that it is relevant to compare a 3BR home at 35th and Lincoln, to a similarly sized home in Whitefish Bay, then I'll gladly move on. That is the same thing as saying a "house in Milwaukee is $200k and a house in Phoenix is $400k". You're assuming totally incomparable neighborhoods and demographics.

I do not believe that anyone coming from my specific neighborhood, in which I sit at this very minute, with my doctor and dentist neighbors, golf courses, mountains, spotless landscaping, good schools, and amenities galore, would sell their $400k 4BR home, and find "the same house" in Cudahy, WI for half the price. Half the price, perhaps, but nothing is the same (demographics, especially). Asserting that comparable Phoenix real estate is twice the price of Milwaukee real estate, is a flagrant error on your part. No such price differential exists.

[jjacobeclark]

Originally Posted by 43north87west

I don't know where Denver and Appleton came from but they're irrelevant to this discussion. If someone feels that it is relevant to compare a 3BR home at 35th and Lincoln, to a similarly sized home in Whitefish Bay, then I'll gladly move on. That is the same thing as saying a "house in Milwaukee is $200k and a house in Phoenix is $400k". You're assuming totally incomparable neighborhoods and demographics.

I do not believe that anyone coming from my specific neighborhood, in which I sit at this very minute, with my doctor and dentist neighbors, golf courses, mountains, spotless landscaping, good schools, and amenities galore, would sell their $400k 4BR home, and find "the same house" in Cudahy, WI for half the price. Half the price, perhaps, but nothing is the same (demographics, especially). Asserting that comparable Phoenix real estate is twice the price of Milwaukee real estate, is a flagrant error on your part. No such price differential exists.

I just compared Phoenix's Ahwatukee neighborhood (85044) to Milwaukee's River Hills neighborhood (53209). The median home price in 85044 is $347,775. The median home price in 53209 is $113,732. Both neighborhoods are affluent. Both neighborhoods have approximately 50,000 residents. Both neighborhoods are within their respective principal cities. If you don't think that's a fair comparison I also researched 53217, the zip code shared by Bayside, Whitefish Bay, Glendale, and Fox Point. The median home price in 53217 is $297,512, which is still less than your Phoenix neighborhood.

[43north87west]

Originally Posted by jjacobeclark

I just compared Phoenix's Ahwatukee neighborhood (85044) to Milwaukee's River Hills neighborhood (53209). The median home price in 85044 is $347,775. The median home price in 53209 is $113,732. Both neighborhoods are affluent. Both neighborhoods have approximately 50,000 residents. Both neighborhoods are within their respective principal cities. If you don't think that's a fair comparison I also researched 53217, the zip code shared by Bayside, Whitefish Bay, Glendale, and Fox Point. The median home price in 53217 is $297,512, which is still less than your Phoenix neighborhood.

Listen, I don't have time for games and I'm tired of this nonsense. I don't know what you're trying to prove but you're not going to be able to. Not only are you messing up data, you don't live in Arizona. While I appreciate your anecdotal stories about astronomical bidding wars on homes in Denver at the peak of the RE bubble, it's not relevant to my original post, which--for reasons I'll never understand--you have taken offense to, and made a project of.

OK then.

River Hills' median home price in 2007 was $866,799. And it's in the 53217 ZIP code. Actually that's where I grew up, so I'm somewhat qualified to comment since I still hold many ties to the area.

Also according to this site, the 53209 ZIP, by the way, is below average in terms of income and home value, compared with the rest of WI. To put it in perspective, Cudahy's average home value is $177k.

No wonder you think Phoenix is expensive, if you think River Hills' median home value is $113k! I mean, didn't that... like... strike you as a little low? (Or were you thinking of the mean River Hills automobile value?) Even Cudahy looks like it's rich compared to 53209, wherever that is.

Let's look at some communities that you mentioned, that have similar homes and home sizes to my area. I'd love to look up "Ahwatukee, AZ", but unfortunately there's no such thing, so I'm stuck using my ZIP code as the next closest system of statistical measures. I'd argue that my area is like areas of Fox Point or Bayside, because it's got golf courses and lakes and parks. But, be that as it may, we'll say it's "like" Fox Point with a mountain instead of a beach.

The median home or condo value in Fox Point is $338,140.
The median home or condo value in Bayside is $382,377

Prices here have moderated significantly since 2007 figures, although Fox Point and Bayside are showing little sign of easing. Even using 2007 figures, the area is pretty much on par with home sizes and quality of life of FP or Bayside. It's very suburban, and very clean, with very little crime

Since I live in both areas, I am quite certain that similarly sized homes here, and similarly sized homes there, in areas like Shorewood, Fox Point, Bayside, or in the residential areas of the East Side, carry similar price tags. I don't know what part of this is hard for you to understand.

[jjacobeclark]

Originally Posted by 43north87west

Listen, I don't have time for games and I'm tired of this nonsense. I don't know what you're trying to prove but you're not going to be able to. Not only are you messing up data, you don't live in Arizona. While I appreciate your anecdotal stories about astronomical bidding wars on homes in Denver at the peak of the RE bubble, it's not relevant to my original post, which--for reasons I'll never understand--you have taken offense to, and made a project of.

OK then.

River Hills' median home price in 2007 was $866,799. And it's in the 53217 ZIP code. Actually that's where I grew up, so I'm somewhat qualified to comment since I still hold many ties to the area.

Also according to this site, the 53209 ZIP, by the way, is below average in terms of income and home value, compared with the rest of WI. To put it in perspective, Cudahy's average home value is $177k.

No wonder you think Phoenix is expensive, if you think River Hills' median home value is $113k! I mean, didn't that... like... strike you as a little low? (Or were you thinking of the mean River Hills automobile value?) Even Cudahy looks like it's rich compared to 53209, wherever that is.

Let's look at some communities that you mentioned, that have similar homes and home sizes to my area. I'd love to look up "Ahwatukee, AZ", but unfortunately there's no such thing, so I'm stuck using my ZIP code as the next closest system of statistical measures. I'd argue that my area is like areas of Fox Point or Bayside, because it's got golf courses and lakes and parks. But, be that as it may, we'll say it's "like" Fox Point with a mountain instead of a beach.

The median home or condo value in Fox Point is $338,140.
The median home or condo value in Bayside is $382,377

Prices here have moderated significantly since 2007 figures, although Fox Point and Bayside are showing little sign of easing. Even using 2007 figures, the area is pretty much on par with home sizes and quality of life of FP or Bayside. It's very suburban, and very clean, with very little crime

Since I live in both areas, I am quite certain that similarly sized homes here, and similarly sized homes there, in areas like Shorewood, Fox Point, Bayside, or in the residential areas of the East Side, carry similar price tags. I don't know what part of this is hard for you to understand.

River Hills is actually in both 53209 and 53217. Anyways, I got my data from this very website. Where did yours come from?

[43north87west]

Originally Posted by jjacobeclark

River Hills is actually in both 53209 and 53217. Anyways, I got my data from this very website. Where did yours come from?

You can answer that question yourself by clicking on the link I provided.

Anyway, troll, I've already fed you too much. See you in another thread.

[Milwaukee City]

Milwaukee Crime Rates Drop Drastically - News- msnbc.com

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by Milwaukee City

Milwaukee Crime Rates Drop Drastically - News- msnbc.com

This is a good sign. If the crime rates stay like this for the next few years, Milwaukee can make a turnaround. Milwaukee and Atlanta have similar crime rates. Both cities are known for having 100+ murders a year. Milwaukee has a climate that alot of people don't want to deal with though. That and Chicago is nearby, so Milwaukee can easliy be overlooked for many reasons. Atlanta is normally a violent city. The fact is, alot of major corporations are in Atlanta and a mild climate(no shoveling 3 feet of snow). People flocked to Atlanta in droves. Milwaukee lost alot of jobs in the 70's and 80's. Crime went up very quickly after that. Atlanta's crime rate went up too, but Atlanta had alot of things to bring people to the city. Milwaukee had to compete with a warmer city with more jobs and the fact that Atlanta has a Chicago-like status in the South. Why is it that Birmingham,AL keeps losing people but Atlanta keeps gaining? Atlanta has more. Milwaukee has alot too, and according to my father(a Milwaukee native), the food in Milwaukee is much better than Atlanta. The fact is, people want what "looks good". Atlanta looked good to alot of people compared to Milwaukee. Chicago had alot of good things, but a city with a cold climate has to try harder to bring people to it nowadays. Crime and jobs dwindling aren't going to help its cases.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by quijote

From what I've read, the population of Phoenix city has been growing, as the population of Milwaukee city has been declining. Milwaukee has had to play with tax hikes and property assessments to garner revenue as people have left the city.

I really don't want to turn this thread into a "Phoenix v. Milwaukee" thread, however, I think this question in your series, quijote, is kind of the whole "chicken or egg" paradigm that relates to the whole property tax quandary that the Milwaukee region finds itself in.

As most here probably realize, I am fully on the "lower taxes are much, much better" side of the fence. I admit it freely and openly - probably more than most others here - I am as biased towards as low taxes (and reduced government wast...umm...I mean spending) as possible, even if it means a "reduction of services" (which is always threatened, but that commentary is for another forum).

OK, just my one side-bar:
I guess I have enough professional experiences in working with (and even for) governmental bodies to know that the excess spending WASTE that occurs with tax-payer dollars at a state or federal level is just so mind-boggling, so mind-blowing, that if all people really saw or understood what I have seen at these levels, they would all be like me in clamoring for extremely lower taxes / spending. I kind of laugh at the state of California's "quandary" with their budget deficit, as now they feel they have to cut massive jobs to make ends meet. I feel extremely confidently that I could go through (and most other semi-intelligent business savvy folks could too) CA's budget and easily lop out billions of dollars of extremely wasteful spending without much consternation; and in doing so, most key/*vital* services would be completely untouched.

But as it relates to Milwaukee...

It is true. One element sees property taxes here as well, the population has steadily declined (up until a little uptick here recently) since the heyday of the 60s, and as such, the population base (as well as business base) has declined, thus, there is a need to up taxes among those still left.

However, this area doesn't realize that self-destructiveness that this cycle pursues. It is like the reverse-analogy to the business mantra that in the worst financial times, often, you have to "spend money to make money".

Well, here, there is a time coming soon (I actually think it has long since passed), where people will need to decide if they wish to continue to totally turn off prospective businesses or relocators with extremely high taxes. Or, continue to chase out current residents / businesses due to the taxation levels.

I know to some - and some on this forum - that tax issue is an "eye roller" or vociferously shot down, however, to legions of folks out there, it *is* a big deal. It just is. Folks may not like that it is a big deal to others, but that doesn't change that it is a big deal.

My attitude is, okay, weather-wise, the upper Midwest may not have the quality of life selling point that the Sun Belt has in attracting businesses and new residents. However, then, do other incentives (one of the biggest being have an attractive taxation rate) to lure new folks / businesses [eg: JOBS] in. Make the tax climate as friendly as possible and people'll be more likely to come - or to stay.

I just don't get the mentality of beating up the people that are holding out in a city / region and taxing them to death, essentially taking the attitude of "just shut up and deal with it". People in this national and global age have significant choices in where to live or do business - much more so than 50 or even 25 years ago. And when a Texas or a Florida or an Arizona or a Colorado offers a much more generous taxation process in addition to the increased sun and warmer winters, that is just a tough sell for those with no ties to this area, or, to keep the retiree with some expendable (but not limitless) financial resources.

Sure, if we took down our property tax policies for some time, might there be some temporary pain to those accustomed to our high spending practices? Undoubtedly. But in general, I think the region would be better positioned for growth and the attraction of new businesses / jobs in the future by far.