Originally posted by @Gwen Fyfe:
@Isaac S.
Out of interest, do you live in Cleveland or have investments here? From your profile, it doesn't look like you do.
Regarding your "food for thought":
First, there are a lot of properties available at absolute rock bottom prices here from tax liens. The city and county both have land banks. They do no repairs, but leave such a margin that if you're a decent flipper you'll be able to make a healthy profit. Even if you have to do lead work. That's how they're adding value. If you want the city/county to hand you a great flip property at a cheap price, and take care of some of the work on it for you first without increasing the price, I guess you'll have to go elsewhere.
Second, the city actually is offering a lot of tax benefits for big investors. Google Cleveland opportunity zones.
Third, this line actually cracked me up: "NO, but they continued to tax the asset and collect revenue." Isaac, I live in a house that is almost 4,000 square feet, sitting on a quarter acre, walking distance to nice bars and museums in the city of Cleveland. I'm even talking to the county land bank you're maligning about doubling the size of my lot for free through their homeowner side yard program. My property taxes this year? $642.62.
That's for the year, not the month. Gosh, I feel the yoke of government oppression weighing heavily on me, don't you?
1. I am not from Cleveland, I do not mean to insult the great City of Cleveland, I apologize if I have insulted you or hurt your feelings, it is not my intention. I am not interested in investing Cleveland as much as the posters original statement/assertion about hostility towards investors via city policy and then your comment, that so passionately defended these policies, got my attention. Again, I did not mean to offend, harass or insult you, merely offer an opposing opinion/view. Also, if I am not from Cleveland, should I not have an opinion on the topic?
2. I am glad to hear that Cleveland is so actively pursuing business development(since it has been on an economic decline for decades, and is only the 28th economy in the US) with large business such as google, and that they are allowing you to do what you want with your personal property, etc. Thanks for enlightening me to the great economic strides the city of Cleveland is taking. Again, I was previously speaking more generally and not directing any personal or specific attack "maligning" you or your good friends in Cleveland Government, just trying to point out that all governments are meant to serve us, the citizens, as opposed to us serving them or us being liable for things they are not liable for. Again, this was more in line with the general concepts of the discussion that was originally posted.
3. $642.62 is so low because your property values are among the lowest in the country, but the actual tax rate percentage are some of the highest in the country. The reason for this inverse relationship, is because the ratio of home owners(including investors) to government spending/debt is disproportionate, so they must tax the property owners at higher rates(some places as high as 5.5%) to make the budgetary commitments. Also, you pay that annually and lead building products have been illegal since 1978, so, theoretically your property has generated $642 x 40 years of tax revenue, that's closer to $26,000, of course this should be inflation adjusted, but the point is still the same. Furthermore, the city will be taxing the improvements you make and will continue taxing that parcel, every year, forever. Of course, I realize that money pays for schools, infrastructure, and government employee payrolls and pensions, so, carving out some of it for lead/asbestos abatement is not very realistic, hence, my reason for posing an alternative solution in the form of tax incentives for small investors to take on properties with those issues, but, good to hear that Cleveland is already doing something like that.
4. Lastly, there is no need to be sarcastic or hostile towards me. I did not mean to imply that all government is bad, merely pointing out the hypocrisy of holding investors liable today for something that the city/county could have been working on for the last 40 years, but they did not take any action or accountability for the problem, they just let it fester. Its my impression that the federal government, local governments and large corporations have done very little to help mitigate these problems, despite government and class action attorneys taking large monetary settlements from offending corporations. Again, this is not necessarily directed at Cleveland specifically, lead and asbestos is a problem in any city that has buildings that are built before 1978.
You are absolutely correct, forcing new investors to mitigate any and all environmental issue in an asset is one possible solution, especially if the bottom line makes a profit. Apparently, I was unaware of the generous incentives/policies and opportunities that Cleveland has for RE investors of lead contaminated properties, thank you for enlightening me.
If you are satisfied with the service you are getting from your local government, good for you. It's very refreshing to hear that and thanks for sharing your experience.
Best of luck with your investments and with your future and thanks again for your time and careful consideration.