Tidd for Tat
Here's my post on Duke City Fix today wherein I opine about tax increment financing in Bernalillo County for SunCal.
Shorter version of coco's post:
In the circus it isn't called cat-herding. It's called lion taming .
« San Francisco Supervisor Ed Jew Resigns | Main | Dr. Temple Grandin »
Here's my post on Duke City Fix today wherein I opine about tax increment financing in Bernalillo County for SunCal.
Shorter version of coco's post:
In the circus it isn't called cat-herding. It's called lion taming .
Both City and County TIDDs are problematic to say the least. Both use GRT diversion to supplement property taxes in order to "fully fund" infrastructure. The implication is fairly clear that property taxes alone are not sufficient to cover infrastructure needs. This is borne out by the infrastructure backlog in both the City and County. Rather than raise property taxes to a sustainable level, or even worse reduce infrastructure expectations, both governments have voted to "pass it forward" 40 years when today's officials will likey be dead. Of course, when the tax revenues "return" to local government, they will be accompanied by 40 year old infrastructure that will require replacement, not maintenance. No problem, create new "brownfield" TIDDs to replace the original "greenfield" TIDDs.
On the County side there is another twist. The Rutger's analysis arrives at the "per capita" cost by allocating total County operations over total County population. While this is valid for true Countywide services such as MDC, JDC, Assessor, and County Clerk, it is a distortion when dealing with BCSO and County roads. According the the SunCal/Rutgers documents, the TIDDs will be fully funded for a complete level of urban services. The County continues to refuse to deal in a realistic manner with its rural/urban schizophrenia. One group wants more rural "protection" in the SWAP. Another wants to create a new "city" to preserve the "rural character" of the South Valley. At the same time, others want to spend millions to put in street lights and sidewalks on Isleta Blvd.
It costs the City $10/$1000 to pay for City/urban services. Even the Village of Los Ranchos assesses an additional $1/$1000. But the County wants to believe it can build and pay for urban density enclaves under a formula that bills 70-80% of the cost of services to the City instead of taxing (unincorporated) County residents. Sooner or later, all Golden Gooses die unless they are killed sooner. I'm betting that we will see "sooner" before we reach 40 years.
Posted by: Hunter | Sunday, January 13, 2008 at 11:30 AM