Letter to the editor in last week's Connection > FORUM

Subject: Letter to the editor in last week's Connection

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

85239

Posts:0

07/10/2007 3:18 PM	Alert
Posted By Cactus Rob on 07/10/2007 2:57 PM Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't the value of large tracts of unimproved land in the proposed annexation area increase significantly once it is annexed? Or am I just old and cynical? Rob, yes, they will increase in value. The reason is that more services will be available to the owners of that land, making it more attractive to devlelop. Suburban families don't generally want to buy houses where there isn't consistent municipal services. Once there are more services, the ability to develop and sell the land goes up. (A caveat, however, is that people also have to be willing to buy these homes and right now, that seems a pretty high hurdle to overcome with all the available housing in our glutted market). The other catch is that, as I said before, current residents of Maricopa have to take on the burden of this expansion through sacrifices in services. It is one of the reasons why I would love to see a law that requires a referrendum on annexation. Why should the new areas be the only people who get to decide if they are taken over. We, as citizens, should have more power than just "trusting" our city council to make that kind of a major decision for us.

Cactus Rob User is Offline

Posts:1041

07/10/2007 3:53 PM	Alert
I thought so. And developers are willing to pay the large landowners more since the city sales taxpayers are going to foot the bill for most of the needed infrastructure when they develop the land. Sounds like a win, win for them if they can pull it off.

poobaa

Posts:157

07/10/2007 4:39 PM	Alert
I say let Goodyear have it

"What me worry" If you don't know where you are going, it matters less what road you take

GilaGuy

Posts:789

07/10/2007 5:02 PM	Alert
Posted By 85239 on 07/10/2007 3:18 PM The other catch is that, as I said before, current residents of Maricopa have to take on the burden of this expansion through sacrifices in services. It is one of the reasons why I would love to see a law that requires a referrendum on annexation. Why should the new areas be the only people who get to decide if they are taken over. We, as citizens, should have more power than just "trusting" our city council to make that kind of a major decision for us. A very good, and important point. There are a great many people who are current residents of the city proper, who feel that annexation doesn't affect them. They really couldn't be more wrong. The decision that will be made will affect us all, everything from stretching our fledgling PD resources beyond all reason, to extending the borders of fire coverage down away from the more heavily-populated area of town...things like that do affect us all, which makes it even worse when the rest of us have no say in the matter.

DesertDweller User is Offline

Posts:2559

07/10/2007 5:55 PM	Alert
Rob, it isn't about the money, at least not always. I didn't buy my land or build my home as an investment, although I could sell it right now for much more than I paid for it. I would have to move somewhere, and I would have to take a mini farm full of animals with me. Like many others out this way, we bought in this particular area because we could have animals, we had much more privacy, and we really didn't have a desire for city services. For someone who owns a couple of hundred contiguous acres, annexation would be a windfall. A developer will pay much more for land in the city because the impact fee is lower and the value is higher. For the guy who owns 3, 5, or 10 acres, it won't be as good of a deal.

Stupid should hurt! Desert Dweller - Senior Member - Posts: 2982 - Joined: Feb 2006