[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

San Francisco 8.75%
San Diego 9%
San Mateo 8.5%
LA 9%-9.5%

These are city limits. If you want to compare the east coast equivalent, NYC's is 8.8%. The Midwest equivalent? Chicago at 9.75%. These cities' tax rates have little to do with the general cost of living in an entire metro area.

In reference to my initial post quoting Mike, mostpeople in CA that are moving to suburban areas of CT are not from city limits of the cities you listed above. You can cherry pick all you want.

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Also, median price essentially eliminates the impact of massive estates. Similar to FFC, which clocks in at a $379,000 median price for 3Q '12

San Francisco County $755,000.
San Mateo $633,000
Marin $702,000.

SF County - again, city limits. Apples an oranges.
Marin County has 1/4 the population of Fairfield County, so naturally the prices would be higher. There is very little housing stock to choose from in Marin (we looked).
San Mateo county will naturally be expensive since a large percentage of suburban neighborhoods are waterside (both Bay and Pacific) as interior is wildlife refuge - and the northern part of the county is South San Franscisco...

I know CA well, I spent months comparing costs in the $5-700 price range in both southern CT and East Bay... it's not a huge difference when taking everything into account. Period.

[Wilton2ParkAve]

San Mateo is a wealthy suburban county so the sales tax equivalent is FFC, not NYC. Home prices are still higher in Cali and its not from low population, wildlife refuge, city limits etc.

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

These are city limits. If you want to compare the east coast equivalent, NYC's is 8.8%. The Midwest equivalent? Chicago at 9.75%. These cities' tax rates have little to do with the general cost of living in an entire metro area.

In reference to my initial post quoting Mike, mostpeople in CA that are moving to suburban areas of CT are not from city limits of the cities you listed above. You can cherry pick all you want.



SF County - again, city limits. Apples an oranges.
Marin County has 1/4 the population of Fairfield County, so naturally the prices would be higher. There is very little housing stock to choose from in Marin (we looked).
San Mateo county will naturally be expensive since a large percentage of suburban neighborhoods are waterside (both Bay and Pacific) as interior is wildlife refuge - and the northern part of the county is South San Franscisco...

I know CA well, I spent months comparing costs in the $5-700 price range in both southern CT and East Bay... it's not a huge difference when taking everything into account. Period.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

San Mateo is a wealthy suburban county so the sales tax equivalent is FFC, not NYC. Home prices are still higher in Cali and its not from low population, wildlife refuge, city limits etc.

Actually the tax equivalent would be Westchester County (7.4%, as high as 8.5% in some towns), not Fairfield County.

Home prices are definitely higher in CA. I never argued that. But if you look at the listing prices vs sale prices, the difference between the two states is shocking. Connecticut's numbers are far closer together.

Re low population, city limits and wildlife refuge - it is what it is my friend. You can't say "NY State is so expensive, look at these prices in Manhattan". You can ignore it if you want, but these are things that are behind the numbers. Any upper middle class family is not going to live in Hillsborough or San Clemente. It's all about the East Bay. Check out Crockett.

And you called it "Cali". That calls for an immediate dismissal of your opinion.

[Wilton2ParkAve]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Actually the tax equivalent would be Westchester County (7.4%, as high as 8.5% in some towns), not Fairfield County.

Home prices are definitely higher in CA. I never argued that. But if you look at the listing prices vs sale prices, the difference between the two states is shocking. Connecticut's numbers are far closer together.

Re low population, city limits and wildlife refuge - it is what it is my friend. You can't say "NY State is so expensive, look at these prices in Manhattan". You can ignore it if you want, but these are things that are behind the numbers. Any upper middle class family is not going to live in Hillsborough or San Clemente. It's all about the East Bay. Check out Crockett.

And you called it "Cali". That calls for an immediate dismissal of your opinion.

Fairfield County is a suburb of NYC. Westchester is not any more of an equivalent. With respect to the bundling of Cali, I was referring to the employment/income centers of LA/SF/San Jose.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Fairfield County is a suburb of NYC. Westchester is not any more of an equivalent. With respect to the bundling of Cali, I was referring to the employment/income centers of LA/SF/San Jose.

Westchester borders NYC. San Mateo borders SF. I'd say Westchester is more of an equivalent, especially because northern and eastern sections of FFC don't rely on NYC for employment.

There are a lot of areas easily accessible to employment centers that are not outrageously priced. But we're really nitpicking now - it's time to agree to disagree (if we even disagree, because my original statement was that utilities and property taxes more than make up for the difference in home costs).

[Wilton2ParkAve]

I agree with that Kid. Both states are painfully expensive because we elect left wing politicians who only know how to spend.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

I agree with that Kid. Both states are painfully expensive because we elect left wing politicians who only know how to spend.

In this state, yes. That's definitely true of Malloy, who I will most certainly not be voting for if he has the gaul to run again. I'll vote for Kermit the Frog before I cast a vote for him again. But it seems to be that it's the most crowded, densely populated states that have issues - politics aside, the more people a state has, the more likely that will require public services, which nobody wants to see cut. Case in point: Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-MT) is about to finish his term with one of largest surpluses in state history. It's not because he's a Democrat, it is because he's in a state that has far fewer people, and these states are always easier to manage.

Kid - I admit watching CNBC when they were talking about $5 gas in Cali, yet they were leaving out the fact that this was in select areas. Maybe there really isn't that much of a discrepency in their cost of living vs. ours, but with one of the world's largest economies it's not doing well which is why I'd be hesitant to move out there now. And I like the areas you described - I've been there myself. I didn't realize you had contemplated a move there. What made you change your mind, if you don't mind my asking?

[basehead617]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Housing prices in the Bay area are similar to, say, Fairfield town. Not cheap, but certainly not as expensive as the media and others make it out to be. One thing that has to be noted is how LITTLE people out there pay in property taxes. We looked at stats for a few homes between 5-700k and were surprised to learn that they pay half of what we do. That's huge. Also keep in mind, in California they don't need daily use of AC, heat and their electric rates are lower. They also don't pay property taxes on cars!

I agree with most of your post Kid, but as a part-year resident of Marin (including right now) let me weigh in a bit..

- Sales tax here is 8.25%, that is very significantly higher.

- State income tax is absolutely nuts. Most people in the upper middle class even if they aren't homeowners pay so much state income tax that it alone is enough to warrant itemizing deductions on a federal return!

- Car registration takes the place of some of that property taxes. i paid over $700 for registration on two cars last year.

- Housing prices are significantly higher almost everywhere in the Bay Area, and any place that's comparable to a town in FFC is, I guarantee, much less attractive than said FFC town.

- Property taxes are kept low but they've found plenty of ways around this. To keep pace with expenses (and do things in public works like repair and construction of new schools) many tracts of developments are hit with giant 'Mello-Roos' taxes that sometimes equal property taxes in that area. I myself looked at a small Marin SFH development where the property taxes were $5000 but there was another $4000/year in these assessments. Typically they last 20 years. Imagine a bond measure that does not get spread out as much.

- You mention lower utility costs:

1. It's true that natural gas helps, however in Marin in particular, you throw away all the lower unit cost because of the conservation tiers put in place by the utility companies (at the behest of county ordinances) Typically there are very low rates for extremely minimal usage and any average family's use goes far beyond these into higher rate tiers. PG&E bills are by no means cheap for the average family.

2. Many parts of Marin have little to no rain for 8-9 months a year. That means if you have a lawn and plantings, LOTS of water is required for irrigation. It's common for a modest (by CT standards) yard and landscaping to require $300/month water bills. That's 7 times what I paid for water in CT on a comparable property.

3. While the temperatures are not as extreme, do not buy into the notion that people don't need to run AC or heat. This was a line I was fed by realtors and apparently more hardy souls than I when I first came to San Rafael. There are weeks of 90s weather, weeks of 30s weather. I find myself with the heat on consistently for about 4 months a year and AC another 3-4. The people saying this are apparently far more okay with temperatures that are uncomfortable for me. (Perhaps I'm turning into nep ). And don't forget the tiers!! You won't believe the cost you can eat up on a particularly hot or cold week.. Houses also have generally far worse insulation than newer CT construction, especially since roofs here are incredibly dinky.

- As you already pointed out, the schools are horrendous in all but the absolute richest areas (like Ross/Kentfield which is nationally recognized). They are not appropriate at all for kids to attend even if you might be paying $1-2 million for a house. So add private schools cost in there. (To be honest it can even be hard to find a good one of those!)

Just wanted to give some of my own perspective...

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

What made you change your mind, if you don't mind my asking?

Schools are subpar at best in even upper-middle class neighborhoods, HOAs, income tax and distance to family.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by basehead617

While the temperatures are not as extreme, do not buy into the notion that people don't need to run AC or heat. This was a line I was fed by realtors and apparently more hardy souls than I when I first came to San Rafael. There are weeks of 90s weather, weeks of 30s weather. I find myself with the heat on consistently for about 4 months a year and AC another 3-4. The people saying this are apparently far more okay with temperatures that are uncomfortable for me. (Perhaps I'm turning into nep ). And don't forget the tiers!! You won't believe the cost you can eat up on a particularly hot or cold week.. Houses also have generally far worse insulation than newer CT construction, especially since roofs here are incredibly dinky.

Really? When I lived in LA, I never - ever - used my heat or AC with the exception of a day here and a day there. My utility bills for a condo were very low.