Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: IYAS9YAS

Amrep, the original developer of Rio Rancho, started off as a telemarketing scheme selling retirement living to folks in the northeast and midwest. Amrep, however, had no intention of delivering on it’s promises of parks, roads, etc. They were convicted of fraud and, as part of the settlement, actually provided that which they promised. Ever seen the movie/play “Glenngary, Glen Ross?” In that movie they are working for Rio Rancho Estates.

Please understand, a large percentage of these lots are WORTHLESS. They cannot be developed because they are IN AN ARROYO! The only worth that they have is part of a larger whole.

I have actually suggested that the statues regarding property values be amended to allow the county to consider “statements of value” made by the lot owner when computing land value for property tax purposes. You can’t have it both ways - either your lot is worth the $80K you claim it is and it can be taxed at that amount, or it is work the $8K you have been currently paying taxes on.


12 posted on 03/31/2011 12:25:15 PM PDT by Crusher138 ("Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Crusher138
I have actually suggested that the statues regarding property values be amended to allow the county to consider “statements of value” made by the lot owner when computing land value for property tax purposes. You can’t have it both ways - either your lot is worth the $80K you claim it is and it can be taxed at that amount, or it is work the $8K you have been currently paying taxes on.

I would counter-argue that, unless the property sold for that $80K, the value is what it was at the last purchase, including any lawfully-authorized increase in value for tax purposes. Where I live, there is very little land abutting the arroyos. Most of what is around me is out on the west mesa (Rainbow/Southern to Rainbow/Northern). I live on a half-acre lot in that area. Again, I'd have no problem paying for a single lot I'd want to build on, but agree there has to be something done - no empty half-acre lot in Rio Rancho is worth more than $30k to me, and that would have to be with paved roads and utilities, less for dirt/utilities. I hate the fact I live on a dirt road, but that's what I chose when I went looking - price was certainly a factor, as was lot size, and I'm only about 500 feet off the pavement, so it isn't that bad.

What irks me is the willingness the mayor has to take something from someone to give it to someone else for increased tax revenues and, despite the Kelo ruling, defying the spirit of eminent domain.

13 posted on 03/31/2011 2:26:02 PM PDT by IYAS9YAS (Rose, there's a Messerschmit in the kitchen. Clean it up, will ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson