archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Enlighten me. What do those buses run on? Roads and highways - eminent domain is used for expansion of both. Oh please, you are pushing it with that one. Miles of businesses were not taken so that a bus can ride on the same road that was already there for cars. Quote
mattp Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Ahh, but roadway construction constantly requires condemnation of private property. How much land was taken by the government when they built I-5 through Seattle -- even though they already had a perfectly good highway 99? Sure, along I-5 much of the dedicated bus lane construction is taking place in what was previously the median so the current construction certainly has not required as much condemnation as the creation of a whole new right-of-way but, at the root of it, are you saying that we should consider no new rights of way? Or that they should be a last resort? Or we should compensate the property owner above market rate? Or what? (As a distraction, let me mention something that a friend pointed out to me recently regarding the bike paths we all think are so great: nobody is talking about this, but might the Burke Gilman trail and similar old rail lines actually better serve the general population if they were replaced with light rail? ) Quote
bwrts Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 That's right (archenemy) we need to study this more. Please send all donations to my company. We will provide more reports on what we think should be done to make this safe and unimpacting to everyone. Unfortunately, the city balked years ago when the US government offered the money to improve public transportation (ie train, subway, whatever). Atlanta snatched the offer, where as Seattle needed to further study the impacts. I think that all took place 30 or so years ago. Now, we are staring down a loaded shotgun. The viaduct is ready to collapse. Whatever the govt. decides for this challenge, you can be sure bus rider or not you will be affected traveling around Seattle. Then there is the good ole 520 bridge... WE as a city need more alternative transportation that does not rely on roads. And WE need to start now. Even if the monorail fails this time (4th times the charm i guess) and the gas tax gets shot down, our govt needs to pull there head outa their ass and start spending money appropriately. Quote
RuMR Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 geo engineers are completely useless, over exaggerating, over compensating punk asses that make everyone's life miserable over completely random numbers. Quote
cj001f Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 geo engineers are completely useless, over exaggerating, over compensating punk asses that make everyone's life miserable over completely random numbers. Yup Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 How the fuck should I know what the government took for I5? Show me where to look stuff like that up, and I will enjoy reading it (Google didn't give me these numbers). And yes, taking someone else's property should be the absolute last resort. And if you read what the folks were paid for their property and what the city is saying it can get for it, then you don't have to be a superstar real estate agent to see that they were robbed. Just because the gov't has had a habit of taking people's property don't mean that is what we should keep doing. And as an aside, don't you think it was maybe a little premature to start buying property before even ensuring that the project was going to go through? Doesn't that seem just a little bit fishy to you? Quote
bwrts Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 i am not a geo engineer. most engineers fit your definition rudy. I do agree tho, the geo-eng random numbers is mind boggling at times...the real world laughs at most designs but then again the new designs are prooving "safer!" now where are those figures beyotch!?! Quote
cj001f Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 And as an aside, don't you think it was maybe a little premature to start buying property before even ensuring that the project was going to go through? Doesn't that seem just a little bit fishy to you? Given the rapidly escalating property values in Seattle it seems like good planning. Those same rising values can partly explaing the spread between what the city paid for the land and what it expects to get Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 How the fuck should I know what the government took for I5? Show me where to look stuff like that up, and I will enjoy reading it (Google didn't give me these numbers). And yes, taking someone else's property should be the absolute last resort. And if you read what the folks were paid for their property and what the city is saying it can get for it, then you don't have to be a superstar real estate agent to see that they were robbed. Just because the gov't has had a habit of taking people's property don't mean that is what we should keep doing. And as an aside, don't you think it was maybe a little premature to start buying property before even ensuring that the project was going to go through? Doesn't that seem just a little bit fishy to you? Pay them the value at which they are assessed property taxes. Seems the state is really good at setting those values as high as possible to confiscate as much tax revenue as possible. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 And as an aside, don't you think it was maybe a little premature to start buying property before even ensuring that the project was going to go through? Doesn't that seem just a little bit fishy to you? Given the rapidly escalating property values in Seattle it seems like good planning. Those same rising values can partly explaing the spread between what the city paid for the land and what it expects to get According to the city official, the spread was due to the city being able to afford tearing down what was there and replacing it with spendy condos, etc. Planning a hasty exit for small business owners is not good planning. It is strong-arming. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 How the fuck should I know what the government took for I5? Show me where to look stuff like that up, and I will enjoy reading it (Google didn't give me these numbers). And yes, taking someone else's property should be the absolute last resort. And if you read what the folks were paid for their property and what the city is saying it can get for it, then you don't have to be a superstar real estate agent to see that they were robbed. Just because the gov't has had a habit of taking people's property don't mean that is what we should keep doing. And as an aside, don't you think it was maybe a little premature to start buying property before even ensuring that the project was going to go through? Doesn't that seem just a little bit fishy to you? Pay them the value at which they are assessed property taxes. Seems the state is really good at setting those values as high as possible to confiscate as much tax revenue as possible. Untrue. Tax assessments are almost always behind market value (no matter what direction the market is moving in.) Quote
olyclimber Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 compare assessed value to taxed value in Seattle I couldn't imagine how much you would bitch if they taxed at market value Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 compare market assessed value to taxed assessed value in Seattle I couldn't imagine how much you would bitch if they taxed at market value just clarifying... Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Untrue. Tax assessments are almost always behind market value (no matter what direction the market is moving in.) do you own property? my taxes are raised every year now. and the price is damn accurate. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Untrue. Tax assessments are almost always behind market value (no matter what direction the market is moving in.) do you own property? my taxes are raised every year now. and the price is damn accurate. Yes, a fair amount. My tax assessments have not kept up with the 10+% increases I have seen yearly. Maybe you invested in the wrong property, the wrong place, the wrong time. I don't know what to tell you, but sorry you have not seen the same increases almost everyone else in Seattle has. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Yes, a fair amount. My tax assessments have not kept up with the 10+% increases I have seen yearly. Maybe you invested in the wrong property, the wrong place, the wrong time. I don't know what to tell you, but sorry you have not seen the same increases almost everyone else in Seattle has. Bullshit. I live in Snohomish County where the average property appreciated 11% last year alone. This far outstrips the average in Seattle, Issaquah and many other areas in King County. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 and they raised your property taxes 11% last year? Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 and they raised your property taxes 11% last year? Yep. They used to asses once every 4 years, now they do it every year. I've lived at the same place 7 years. Quote
archenemy Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 (edited) and they raised your property taxes 11% last year? Yep. They used to asses once every 4 years, now they do it every year. I've lived at the same place 7 years. I just read Snohomish county tax assessor's site. The property taxes for that area average 1.5%. Furthermore, raising property values does not increase taxes. Taxing districts' budgets are limited by how much their budgets can increase under the 1% Levy Limit. And, if you somehow DID get an 11% raise in taxes, you can appeal. Here is the link to your information: web page Obviously, someone made a mistake. Edited September 19, 2005 by archenemy Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 (edited) And, if you somehow DID get an 11% raise in taxes, you can appeal. Here is the link to your information: web page Obviously, someone made a mistake. When you are assessed, there is a number to call and an appeals process. As far as our assessments, they have been spot-on as far as the market rate goes. In any case, whatever assessment is the basis for your property tax, it seems to me that that very same value is a fair basis for compensation in an eminent domain issue. It is in the government's best interest to keep the assessments as high as possible in general, and only to have them low for that small number of people they would have to compensate to build a road, or whatever. Separating the two makes it more likely for people to get screwed on eminent domains cases. Edited September 19, 2005 by KaskadskyjKozak Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Good point. it matches the one on the top of my head Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.