The Montanan's problem with outsiders moving in.. (Billings, Missoula: real estate market, houses)

[wesley81]

Originally Posted by TypicalCalifornian

I have never understood the dislike of speculators. Speculation is the grease and oil that makes capitalism work. Does a farmer speculate when they decide to grow soybeans or wheat or some other product based upon an entire spectrum of informations...what other farmers might do? what they feel about the growing season will be like? the state of the soils on their farm? etc. Does a bakery owner speculate when they buy more wheat than they will need this week or month? If not is the bakery owner speculating when they negotiate a long term contract for wheat so that they can make a long term contract with a store, etc?

So if a land speculator determines that people will want to leave California and move to say, Montana, and "speculates" that these movers will want 5 acre ranchettes costing between $1m and $1.5M, and further speculating they can obtain permits, roads, sewers, obtain financing, etc....is this speculator not providing value and at considerable risk? Are they then a speculator, or a developer first?

Oil speculation. I have no idea how speculation is even remotely a consideration in this discussion of soaring gas prices. The BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are consuming enormous quantities of oil yet no (significant) new quantities of this is coming on line. Further, inventories of oil are falling, certainly not something consistent with "speculation". When one thinks of speculation, inventories of an item would have to be witheld in some way such that a price artificially rises. In our case, no oil goes unused, today, next week or next month. Now The oil owners, say the Saudi's ARE NOT pumping every drop out of their ground in a short term, exercising the same good sense a Montana farmer might "speculating" that selling now is not as profitable as it will be in the future. So both the farmer and the oil owner are speculating in the sense they assume some future events conducive to their maximizing profits.

Are developers in Montana building properties that are unsalable? Perhaps, and if so they will be chastened by their decision to the benefit of Montanans. Will oil prices ever fall? Only if new supply is developed (or substitutes) which one political party who shall go unnamed here is preventing.

It's not speculation to understand oil prices will rise if new supply does not come on line, it's a no-brainer.

PS I am neither a speculator nor a developer...too chicken to put my money into a game I can scarcely comprehend, but I do appreciate those brave souls who speculate about my needs and wants without asking me to guess what I will want to eat, drink, or where I will live in the future and stay up nights trying to find ways to meet my unknown needs.

Just because someone builds or develops something that someone somewhere will end up buying doesn't make it right.

[TypicalCalifornian]

Originally Posted by wesley81

Just because someone builds or develops something that someone somewhere will end up buying doesn't make it right.

And that leads into the root problem...who decides what is right? and by what criteria? If a society just complains, and does not identify the legal, moral, ethical, and practical implications of their choices, its just grumbling to no end. Complaining about gas prices while hating oil wells has always struck me as something beneath thoughtful, decent people.

Montanans could pass strict zoning laws but that of course limits the freedom of the landowner to use and dispose of their property as they see fit. In California we have the coastal commission and Sierra Club etc. In practice that frankly boils down to "I got mine, tough for you". I think decent people might find that hypocritcal if not unfair to the property owner making use of their property and exercising their dreams and needs.

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by TypicalCalifornian

Montanans could pass strict zoning laws but that of course limits the freedom of the landowner to use and dispose of their property as they see fit. In California we have the coastal commission and Sierra Club etc. In practice that frankly boils down to "I got mine, tough for you". I think decent people might find that hypocritcal if not unfair to the property owner making use of their property and exercising their dreams and needs.

In my observation, strict zoning laws and covenants are part of the problem. Witness:

There is a strong tendency to zone toward maximum housing density and maximum taxability, rather than toward preserving existing uses. Frex, if at some point in the distant past a given section of land was whacked up into 1 acre plots, it will likely be zoned medium-density residential, even if it is currently grazing land or wheat fields. You'd be amazed how much of the middle of nowhere was divided into smallish lots of 1, 2, or 5 acres, way back when the lot lines were first recorded, which I gather was mostly in the 1930s. MANY GROUPS OF THESE SMALL LOTS ALREADY EXIST, even in very remote areas. Don't believe me? Check out Gallatin County Map Engine which lets you view lot lines if you zoom in close enough. And even where the existing plots are larger, they are mostly 10 to 20 acres -- just right for "Low Density Residential" zoning, and ideal to market as McRanches.

And once zoned, each group of these "residential" lots becomes attractive to developers, because that "residential" zoning (which in turn encourages restrictive covenants) means not only can they build houses there, it KEEPS OUT anything like dairy farms or feedlots that might discourage new home sales to well-heeled buyers.

But until the land is zoned, anything goes. If you want to build a feedlot, NO ONE CAN STOP YOU. That by itself makes unzoned property LESS likely to be sucked up by McRanches, because it's perceived as "undesirable" for housing developments, since gods know what trash will move in next door and thereby decrease your property's value!!

BTW, I live on the boundary between a county with strict zoning, and a county with very little zoning. The difference is plain for all to see. Zoning clearly ENCOURAGES development, and RESTRICTS your ability to do as you wish with your own land.

.

[geonerd]

Originally Posted by Timberwolf232

I hear ya.. Like Leonard Cohen put it, "I'm neither left nor right, I'm just staying home tonight."

I think a lot of the resentment out here comes from fiscal changes more than people moving in. Cost of living goes up faster than wages and it gets to be tough on people. It's way easier to blame others than to try to fix the problem. (I've been guilty of the same... cringing when I see a CA plate etc... Mostly because my brother in-law lives out there and he's a lazy arrogant leech that has the cash to buy and sell property here and in other states to make his money. Leeches like that in my opinion deserve the salt treatment. ) For the most part I think you'll find that people don't really care what you believe personally or politically and are pretty accepting of new ideas.

Good luck with your interview.

Thanks, I think it's in the bag, but we'll see...

Being from a small town on the east coast I think I can appreciate what you guys are talking about regarding development. You see it all over western North Carolina now. It's like the new Key West. Lots of NJ, NY, DC transplants buying up property for a quarter of what it costs per acre/sqft in their home states just so they can turn it into a big profit short term. I don't know what the solution is, but it definitely doesn't make them any friends.

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by Reziac

In my observation, strict zoning laws and covenants are part of the problem. Witness:

There is a strong tendency to zone toward maximum housing density and maximum taxability, rather than toward preserving existing uses. Frex, if at some point in the distant past a given section of land was whacked up into 1 acre plots, it will likely be zoned medium-density residential, even if it is currently grazing land or wheat fields. You'd be amazed how much of the middle of nowhere was divided into smallish lots of 1, 2, or 5 acres, way back when the lot lines were first recorded, which I gather was mostly in the 1930s. MANY GROUPS OF THESE SMALL LOTS ALREADY EXIST, even in very remote areas. Don't believe me? Check out Gallatin County Map Engine which lets you view lot lines if you zoom in close enough. And even where the existing plots are larger, they are mostly 10 to 20 acres -- just right for "Low Density Residential" zoning, and ideal to market as McRanches.

And once zoned, each group of these "residential" lots becomes attractive to developers, because that "residential" zoning (which in turn encourages restrictive covenants) means not only can they build houses there, it KEEPS OUT anything like dairy farms or feedlots that might discourage new home sales to well-heeled buyers.

But until the land is zoned, anything goes. If you want to build a feedlot, NO ONE CAN STOP YOU. That by itself makes unzoned property LESS likely to be sucked up by McRanches, because it's perceived as "undesirable" for housing developments, since gods know what trash will move in next door and thereby decrease your property's value!!

BTW, I live on the boundary between a county with strict zoning, and a county with very little zoning. The difference is plain for all to see. Zoning clearly ENCOURAGES development, and RESTRICTS your ability to do as you wish with your own land.

.

Reziac,

This makes a lot of sense, and based on this and other posts, I'd guess that you are pretty active in "what goes on" and I sure appreciate your insight into some of these changes we (and most of the country it seems, looking through other states forums) are seeing out here.

My question is what do you think a normal, working person do to help get things back on track?

I really worry about my 2 year old being able to carve out a living anywhere, and I'm working very hard to build up a business that, if he chooses, he can be a part of later in life. Right now things are tough, because I have a lot going on work-wise, but costs are going through the roof and we really have to stretch the $$. (Not that we won't make it, because we will...)I really can't understand how so many people can come out here and afford these $350K+ homes when wages, even for skilled and degreed people don't even come close to what those payments must be.

Sure as a family we'd love to have some property to raise a few cows and grow some grain, but as it is I'm not a farmer or a rancher and I can't see how we'd ever be able to afford something like that anyway. (Not to mention the lack of time to run the place...) Plus, even if we could afford it I don't agree with what the impact of these McRanches does the the country anyway and I don't think my conscience would let me be another McRancher, unless it had something to produce to benefit the community as a whole.

[TypicalCalifornian]

Well I certainly agree that zoning down, or up, whichever is the correct way of expressing the idea is guarantee the land gets developed to that standard. And realistically all zoning as I suggested (a tiny bit tongue in cheek) will slow things, but not stop anything and is a "full employment act for lawyers" which I think we can agree is worse than even Californians lol.

This new economy with high oil prices, and higher tax rates, might very well have solved the "slurbizing" of Montana. We may very well have little option but to live close to work, in more urbanized areas, and in smaller, low impact dwellings.

[geonerd]

well i got the job here in GF and have been here for a couple of weeks.

so far almost everyone has been super nice. i think this idea that montanans are rude to outsiders is propogated by a few people here on this forum who probably just like to complain more than anything else and has nothing to do with where they are from.

in fact, the few people i have come across who weren't so nice, were from other places.

the moral of this story? this forum isn't going to help you decide whether great falls or montana or anywhere else is a good place for you to move. you're just going to have to visit and decide for yourself.

[ElkHunter]

Originally Posted by geonerd

well i got the job here in GF and have been here for a couple of weeks.

so far almost everyone has been super nice. i think this idea that montanans are rude to outsiders is propogated by a few people here on this forum who probably just like to complain more than anything else and has nothing to do with where they are from.

in fact, the few people i have come across who weren't so nice, were from other places.

the moral of this story? this forum isn't going to help you decide whether great falls or montana or anywhere else is a good place for you to move. you're just going to have to visit and decide for yourself.

Yup, you will meet nice people. They all are nice as long as you don't say, "Well, back home we did this." They don't take kindly to that. hahaha

If you move into Montana with an open mind, you'll be fine.

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by geonerd

well i got the job here in GF and have been here for a couple of weeks.

so far almost everyone has been super nice. i think this idea that montanans are rude to outsiders is propogated by a few people here on this forum who probably just like to complain more than anything else and has nothing to do with where they are from.

in fact, the few people i have come across who weren't so nice, were from other places.

the moral of this story? this forum isn't going to help you decide whether great falls or montana or anywhere else is a good place for you to move. you're just going to have to visit and decide for yourself.

Congratulations on the job!

Are the falls still running full bore? I was up there a little over a month ago and they had the dam all the way open, and the sun river was up to ground level. How's it looking now?

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by geonerd

well i got the job here in GF and have been here for a couple of weeks.

so far almost everyone has been super nice. i think this idea that montanans are rude to outsiders is propogated by a few people here on this forum who probably just like to complain more than anything else and has nothing to do with where they are from.

in fact, the few people i have come across who weren't so nice, were from other places.

the moral of this story? this forum isn't going to help you decide whether great falls or montana or anywhere else is a good place for you to move. you're just going to have to visit and decide for yourself.

It's good to know that Great Falls hasn't changed much since I was a kid there

In fact the only time I can remember anyone being rude or pushy-shovey was the initial crazy rush for the annual sidewalk sale, downtown. Lordy, those middle-aged biddies can fight and claw like wild beasts!

And of course the daily afternoon traffic jam downtown, because the standard is that after the light turns red, the next three cars go through but I never saw that generate anything but a few minutes of confusion til the lights changed down on the next corner, and gave people room to move out of the jammed-up intersections.

But really, that's about all I ever saw that you could call rude. Ask someone for directions and you might find yourself given a lift to where you were going. It was that kind of town.