[joneq]

Hello to all. I live in a part of NY,close to everything, that is very desireable or so they say. It has ,in the last few years, developed an open space program whereby they tax everybody and buy up land to keep it as open space. There is not much of it left so just a select few really benefit directly from it in the form of lower noise and gas pollution, less people,less traffic, less children enrolling in the local school system , and an overall better quality of life.

I am of the opinion that these houses,surrounding the open space, will be marketed as more desireable than others and will fetch a premium price,and sell more quickly, solely due to the proximity of open space and the inability of anyone to do anything with the land. I am referring to 2 identical house in the same locality 1 being adjacent to the open space the other in a more densely populated area. We have many towns and more school districts than towns. It costs on average $13,000+ to educate 1 pupil. Teachers can and do make upwards of $100,000. Cops make $100k+benefits after 5 years and retire at 1/2 pay in their early 40's collecting like $75k for life, The chief makes $250K+. Taxes are some of the highest in the country. I give these numbers only to show that you pretty much save a bundle when you do not have to expand the services.

The issue here is should these people who currently live by the designated open space be taxed on the exess profits they will realize when they sell their house or should all the taxpayers pay each year so they can enjoy an enhanced quality of life not available to the vast majority[more than 95%maybe 99%] of the population. They are already paying less school taxes than they normally would with normal growth, since even 1 pupil enrolled is not covered by the taxes paid by the homeowner, 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 and your in deep do-do.

Even with a surtax they will keep what is not paid in taxes. This seems like it;s still a win win for them and less of a lose lose for everyone else, as in they win everything - everyone else loses all the time.

Very average houses around here routinely go for $550-$600K+++, so money is no real object, and if it is they simply bring a few familiy members with their kids with them and divey up the mortgage and taxes while everyone else pays the taxes that they don't

Another option would be to reassess the property, but this would do nothing if the owner sells at the higher price in a year or even ten years or probably ever.

For the sake of argument let's say it is feasable to somehow collect money on the profits, and that that the houses are not being sold to family members where who know what could be done to circumvent the process.