Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Carlingtonian, so much out of context quoting it is hilarious. Come on dude, read what I am writing, don't quote out of context its beneath you.
Did I say rising spending doesnt have an impact on rising taxes? Go ahead, find the quote where I said that. I said these particular projects, which are probably less than the annual expenditures on coffee for administrative buildings, are highly politicized, and extremely meaningless.
If you want to argue the out of control spending... maybe you should point out some cases where you think there is waste. Be specific, and dont give examples of projects that are 0.01% of the budget.
1.45 billion is the total budget this year. You are talking about artisphere 1.6M in 2013 (what is it in 2014 is it going down since it was more in 2012?). 1.6M out of 1.45 billion... now I'm just an engineer, and not a fancy pants economist or businessman, so correct me if I'm wrong: that equals 0.11%
I apologize for underestimating by 0.01%
Then you also bring up the million dollar bus stop... which you then go on to admit it wasn't 1 million ay? So which is it, is it 1 million (politically charged number used to saber rattle) or is it $200,000 (the actual amount). Then you go on to talk about other construction costs of things. I ask, what is the correct price? You must be in the construction industry since you feel confident in telling people what a dog park should cost. BTW a dog park can routinely cost a million dollars when you have to add fencing, sod/denuding, earthwork, benches, trash cans, lights, gates, drainage utilities. What was on the site before? Did it need to be demo'd? Was the site already pre-graded to current elevation?
In other words, you don't know what you are talking about when you are "enraged" by all this wasteful spending. This is normal spending, you are just enraged in it.
And then on the subject of real time data on transit. I'm not even going to discuss this with you because you are in no way qualified to discuss the benefits or lack thereof, or the publics desire for, real time data in transit.
I will however offer you some reading so that next time you bring up the subject you might actually be knowledgeable in it.
Needless to say, dear god I couldn't disagree with you more, and the fact you don't even use transit means how you think that transit should run is moot. Secondly, who said any of the garbage you are asserting I am saying? Don't put words in my mouth unless you have evidence of it. You aren't a psychic any more than you are a budgetary expert or a transit expert. I actually didn't support the $1 million dollar bus, because HOK's design used materials that were more about them being big A architects, but I DO support real time transit data being both available in public settings and on digital devices because it is an easy and effective way to REDUCE operation costs on transit lines. If you were knowledgeable about transit systems you would know that real time data allows jurisdictions to both provide data out, but also collect data on where bus bunching and poor on time routes in order to make those routes more efficient with less operation costs. Under your method of transit ridership this country built transit only for poor people. I'm sorry but our generation expects more than to just have mediocre and forgotten transit.
Lastly, on the subject of loudoun, the original point of this thread, it absolutely says in the story what is causing budget shortfalls. Loudoun officials bet on sprawl office growth to subsidize their sprawl residential growth, because afterall the type of development they have chosen, if solely residential, will not pay the bills. So yes, in fact it is those mcmansions that are completely unsustainable in a budgetary environment of non-explosive growth. In other words, you can only rob peter to pay paul for so long.
For gods sake, what more proof do you need about the inefficient design of sprawl than children can't even be transported to school with out having to pay a fee because things are too far spread apart and budgets are not covering the needs? Perhaps the fact that loudoun can't afford to build roads either because the development is so far spread apart yet traffic is so funneled and bad?
All I can say is that country folks aren't having to pay for their kids to ride the bus to school in other parts of the country, or for that matter, even this state. Richmond isn't exactly urbanized living (or Raleigh, B'ham, Buffalo, ect..) And last I checked, none of them were situated in one of the top-5 "wealthiest" counties in the country. Only argument I'm making here, is that something doesn't add up on why Loudoun is in this position, and I suspect it has a lot to do with politics vs dollars available. Didn't I read somewhere recently where some planning board member made a statement to the effect of "we're not dependent on the proffers from these developers who want to come it and develop everything anymore, our coffers are doing just fine as they are". I know I did, I just can't recall from where (maybe Loudoun RE news letter??)
On that note for the road development, I have no doubt in my mind that the Greenway is playing a dirty influence on how the surrounding roads are constructed and delivered. No doubt whatsoever. For the simple reason that if given an alternative to using the Greenway, the alternative would be used. This would result in a real problem for Loudoun and, moreso, for the state of Virginia. When you look at where the monthly income goes for the Greenway folks, nearly 85% is to service the debt, and that debt service is growing thanks to the convoluted financing structure of what is essentially a negative amortizing bond structure. Remember, the Greenway initially defaulted on it's financing almost immediately due to over estimating the usage factor (primarily due to failed attempts to develop along it's edges more commercial space). If it defaults, what nightmare position would the state be in with a core arterial roadway being shut down and locked up in the courts while the lenders work it out? Think a lender is going to maintain it? Hardly. They can't even maintain a foreclosed home properly, much less 14 miles of a 6 lane highway that runs right through the heart of all this development.
The problem with the roads of eastern Loudoun County might be masked as budget problems, but the real problem is the advantage the Greenway folks have over the county itself to make their lives suck even worse than a random dead-end street that makes no other sense....
"Now that is some kind of rant!" Yea, you can't make sense out of nonsense.
Great post. Thanks for adding to the dialogue.
In defense of Carlingtonian, the link for the article does not include the important information on budget shortfall. I thought it had. The info on why the shortfall is occurring comes from a separate news story
Carlingtonian, so much out of context quoting it is hilarious. Come on dude, read what I am writing, don't quote out of context its beneath you.
I quoted you in context; I just addressed each point you made separately (as I do here), rather than making some vague dismissal that doesn't refute any of your assertions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Did I say rising spending doesnt have an impact on rising taxes? Go ahead, find the quote where I said that. I said these particular projects, which are probably less than the annual expenditures on coffee for administrative buildings, are highly politicized, and extremely meaningless.
Saying it's meaningless or minuscule is in essence saying just that. These are examples of major spending that many consider ill-advised. They are examples of a larger pattern of profligate spending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
If you want to argue the out of control spending... maybe you should point out some cases where you think there is waste. Be specific, and dont give examples of projects that are 0.01% of the budget.
Affordable housing is the biggest one--5% of the County budget, and it's only affordable to those making almost nothing. Young couples with decent jobs, who want to buy a small SFH or condo, are screwed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
1.45 billion is the total budget this year. You are talking about artisphere 1.6M in 2013 (what is it in 2014 is it going down since it was more in 2012?). 1.6M out of 1.45 billion... now I'm just an engineer, and not a fancy pants economist or businessman, so correct me if I'm wrong: that equals 0.11%
That's the total budget, though--including debt service and lot of other non-negotiable things, rather than the portion that can be committed to new projects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Then you also bring up the million dollar bus stop... which you then go on to admit it wasn't 1 million ay? So which is it, is it 1 million (politically charged number used to saber rattle) or is it $200,000 (the actual amount).
The cost is in fact $1 million--but the County got the FTA to chip in on a big chunk. Thing is, whose taxes does that grant ultimately come from? It's not free money. It's just that $800,000 came from the US taxpayers as a whole, whereas $200,000 came from County taxpayers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Then you go on to talk about other construction costs of things. I ask, what is the correct price? You must be in the construction industry since you feel confident in telling people what a dog park should cost. BTW a dog park can routinely cost a million dollars when you have to add fencing, sod/denuding, earthwork, benches, trash cans, lights, gates, drainage utilities. What was on the site before? Did it need to be demo'd? Was the site already pre-graded to current elevation?
Take a look at the one on Four-Mile Run near Shirlington and tell me it cost more than oh, $50,000. Remember, the land was already owned by the County. It's a fence and maybe some grading done way back in the day. The one behind East Falls Church is even more basic--and wildly popular.
I'm starting to think you would defend any project, no matter how expensive or frivolous. How about $10 million for statues of trees? Come on--what's $10 million in a budget of a billion-plus?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
In other words, you don't know what you are talking about when you are "enraged" by all this wasteful spending. This is normal spending, you are just enraged in it.
Who said I was enraged? That's your term. Honestly, you sound a lot more emotional on this topic than I do. It'd take a lot more than dumb spending to get me enraged: talking in a movie theater, people driving slow in the left lane--those get me riled!
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
And then on the subject of real time data on transit. I'm not even going to discuss this with you because you are in no way qualified to discuss the benefits or lack thereof, or the publics desire for, real time data in transit. I will however offer you some reading so that next time you bring up the subject you might actually be knowledgeable in it.
The latter link touts a "benefit" that riders dissatisfied with wait times went from 22% to 18%--hardly a precipitous drop. It's just not that hard to read a paper schedule and get there early.
But even if real-time info is so great--why does it need to be on an electronic readout that costs so much? Most people now carry smartphones--even poor people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Needless to say, dear god I couldn't disagree with you more, and the fact you don't even use transit means how you think that transit should run is moot.
Who said I don't use it? I don't use it for my current commute, but I've used it a whole bunch throughout my adult life. All over the country and in foreign countries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Under your method of transit ridership this country built transit only for poor people. I'm sorry but our generation expects more than to just have mediocre and forgotten transit.
Not true; I've used just this kind of transit and been happy with it, and I would not describe myself as poor. Nor would most of the people riding the Metrobus. Have you seen me recommending to forum newbies the 3Y route that goes down Lee Highway into DC? It traverses some of the most affluent areas in the region. No real-time scheduling info--and yet it's very popular.
As to generations: I'm a Gen Xer, and I'm assuming you're a Millennial. The problem with you guys is that you want everything now, and you want everyone else to do it for you. (And then you want to post it on social media.) I hate worrying I'll be later for a bus; that's why I read the schedule and get there a few minutes early. No big deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
Lastly, on the subject of loudoun, the original point of this thread,... afterall the type of development they have chosen, if solely residential, will not pay the bills. So yes, in fact it is those mcmansions that are completely unsustainable in a budgetary environment of non-explosive growth. In other words, you can only rob peter to pay paul for so long.
I guarantee you that the residents of those Loudoun McMansions would rather pay another 5 cents per $100 of assessed value than see their SFH neighorhoods become dense, mixed-use hubs of transit-oriented street vibrancy. But if traditional suburbia is so unsustainable, how is it being sustained so easily in so many places, for so many decades? I don't know the budget situation in Loudoun, but I'd venture there are some more sensible places they could make cuts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysonsengineer
For gods sake, what more proof do you need about the inefficient design of sprawl than children can't even be transported to school with out having to pay a fee because things are too far spread apart and budgets are not covering the needs? Perhaps the fact that loudoun can't afford to build roads either because the development is so far spread apart yet traffic is so funneled and bad?
Charging families for their kids to ride the bus is a bad idea--but how much are buses really needed at all? I grew up in Sprawlville, Texas (a suburb of DFW), and the only school bus I ever rode or even saw was the bus the marching band rode on to the football games. Seriously. In grades 1-9, everyone walked to school, rode a bike, or had a parent drop them off. In high school, everyone drove or got a ride. It worked great. Parents now are so overprotective; God forbid their precious darling be without adult supervision for 5 minutes.
Now if the Loudoun schools draw from households more than a mile or two away, that won't work--but that means they need to build more (and smaller) schools.
Last edited by Carlingtonian; 11-18-2014 at 11:44 AM..
So I've gotten into this discussion before and I have to disagree completely. The total tax payment is not the important number and I will tell you why.
Considering a decision circle divided by 4 options created by 2 variables. So you have high tax and high home price, you have high tax and low home price, you have low tax and high home price, and you have low tax and low home price.
In this scenario the ranking of what would be worse value would be worst:best (2, 4, 1, 3). And even if you disagree with that you would still likely agree that #2 is the worst scenario and #3 would be the best. In other words, while tax rate is important, no one is complaining that Arlington home values have gone up 200% in the past 20 years. Much of the value increase has come from having county services that are much better than low tax low value areas. I know people complain in Arlington also about certain services, but move to a place which has literally no budget and you will see what bad schools and services are really about.
So while total tax is important, unless your home value on the market is much lower than what they are assessing it, then its really not a bad problem to have. Tax rate being higher however is a problem because it going higher has no benefit to you (where as a higher assessed, and therefore a tracking market value would).
If you disagree, I would gladly pay your taxes on your place if you sell it to me for the same price as a comparable home in Loudoun. Do we have a deal?
People with money do not care about county "services" which is code for "social services" for low income people. The reason why the houses in Arlington have risen is because THAT IS WHERE THE JOBS ARE or are better suited for commuting.
I'd like to chime in with some real-world examples of RE taxes in great school districts from other areas around the country, with homes that I've known personally.
Overland Park, KS (Johnson County, the "Loudoun" of Kansas City)
Home: 5,660 square feet / .38 acre parcel / $500k current market value / built in 1986.
Numbers: $348,000 tax assessed value (2013) / $59,980 Land Value / $4,600 RE Tax bill for 2013.
Ashburn, VA (Loudoun County)
Home: 4,500 square feet / .28 acre parcel / $700k current market value / built in 2011.
Numbers: $572,000 tax assessed value (2014) / $180,600 Land Value / $6,600 RE Tax bill for 2014.
Oddly enough, the tax assessed value (Loudoun) for 2014 is close to what I paid for the house in 2011. Both of these settings are far more similar than not. Both are suburban "sprawl" locations. Both have the same demographic profiles. Johnson County 20 years ago, is what Loudoun County is now. However, budget was never an issue for Johnson County. Schools were never in harms-way of the red ink. And, certainly nobody had to pay to ride the school bus or "tuition" for a full-day kindergarten class. Infrastructure was concrete (more expensive) and in great shape (remains so to this day as well). New schools continue to go up throughout Johnson County as we speak. Additionally, when you look at the whole state of Kansas in general, Johnson County tax contributions covered the majority of state funded projects. Furthermore, it was always cheaper to buy a car (taxes) on the KS side instead of the MO side as well.
Now, an "urban" setting example, where I lived prior to moving to Loudoun. I would put this closer to an Alexandria example for comparison purposes:
Glen Ellyn, IL (DuPage County - 20 miles straight west of downtown Chicago, with metro-rail access).
Home: 1,772 square feet / .16 acre parcel / $400k current market value / luxury renovated 2007.
Numbers: $143,820 tax assessed value (2013) / $56,750 Land Value / $12,175 RE Tax Bill for 2013.
Nickle & Dime fees all the way down to $3.50 per yard bag per week for grass clipping pick-up (had to buy stickers and have them on your bag for collection to occur). Schools were decent, but old and out-dated. Crime was low due to heavy police presence. Home prices ranged from $4m to $140,000. Glen Ellyn is a Top-5 location in all of Chicago, and likely #1 on the western side of Chicago. That being said - I sure am glad I rented while living there instead of buying. The owners of that house paid over TWICE what the house is worth today in 2007. They'll own that thing for a long long time. Well over half of the rent was to cover the taxes alone. In addition, after nearly 3 years there, when we moved here, both of my cars were looking at well over $2,000 each in repairs from the Chicago infrastructure (roads). Wheels mostly bent and damage to suspension, including to the Toyota 4Runner (they run those things through rivers for cryin' out loud!)
Great post. That Glen Ellyn tax bill is scary. (I fear that's where the Arlington County Board wants us to be in a few years.) Why do you think the taxes are so high there? What exactly is the local government trying to pay for?
Now if the Loudoun schools draw from households more than a mile or two away, that won't work--but that means they need to build more (and smaller) schools.
This, of course, won't work for rural, western Loudoun, but I doubt that is where the majority of the bus expenditures are. Just having all of the kids in Sterling, Ashburn, and Leesburg walk to schools within 1.5 miles would save a ton of money.
I, too, went to a school where anyone within a mile had to walk.
This, of course, won't work for rural, western Loudoun, but I doubt that is where the majority of the bus expenditures are. Just having all of the kids in Sterling, Ashburn, and Leesburg walk to schools within 1.5 miles would save a ton of money.
I, too, went to a school where anyone within a mile had to walk.
That would involve having non-suburban road design standards. For many, crossing roads like Waxpool are not exactly the safest thing for 8 year olds to do. Would you propose having traffic lights untimed for vehicles and instead having longer safer all reds for children crossing? Its all well and good to propose more children walk until it confronts the reality of traffic congestion ay?
One of the very best threads this board has ever seen. Great discussion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
