Disqus - Latest Comments for brycenelson

Re: Engadget giveaway: win one of five Nexus S 4G phones with $1,000 Google Wallet credit!

brycenelson — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:43:47 -0000

Re: Renton to raise utility rates about 24 percent over two years to pay for maintenance, upgrades - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 09:59:35 -0000

I'm not sure how this thread turned into an annexation debate, but I figure it's important for people to get some accurate information. I was one of the people who went out and collected signatures to try and get annexation on the ballot. All of us were Fairwood residents, and it was not proposed by Renton or Renton employees. The reason annexation is on the ballot is because Fairwood residents wanted it to be on the ballot.

As far as funding for Choose Renton goes, it's true, a lot of it comes from Renton unions. However, it's nowhere near as much money as the King County Sheriff's Guild gave to the pro-incorporation group during the two Fairwood incorporation elections. Erin, let me ask you a question: why was it okay for your group to take a huge amount of money from a public employee union, but it's not okay for pro-annexation people?

Re: Renton Housing Authority has no plans to build 400 units of low-income housing in Fairwood - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:42:44 -0000

It's interesting to me how Vote Fairwood got to the 400 unit number -- by using transfer of development rights. That would require the RHA to buy rural properties and agree to leave them as open space in exchange for being allowed to build more on the property they own in Fairwood. This process is used by developers who want to be able to squeeze more homes onto a property so they can make more money -- not by a housing authority who isn't motivated by profit, and isn't trying to sell.

By acknowledging that they get to the 400 unit number by using TDR, Vote Fairwood is essentially admitting that they knew all along the RHA couldn't build 400 units on the property. It's unfortunate when political campaigns use scare tactics that they know aren't true, like Vote Fairwood did here. It calls into question Vote Fairwood's veracity on other claims they've made. People should think about that when they consider which way to vote on incorporation.

Bryce Nelson

Re: Fairwood study offers no conclusion - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:05:12 -0000

Blue_Genie,

The feasibility study assumes that there will be no cost increases to Fairwood due to inflation. Fairwood's proponents plan to contract with the King County Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services. Deputies have a contract with the county that increases the cost of labor by 5% a year. Other labor unions have similar year to year cost increases that Fairwood will pay for as a contract city.

How can you say that the feasibility study's reasoning is sound when it does not account for known inflationary costs?

Bryce Nelson

Re: Boundary Review Board votes 8-3 to recommend Fairwood incorporation - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Sun, 31 May 2009 19:00:32 -0000

I almost hesitate to wade into this conversation regarding property taxes, because they’re so arcane and difficult to understand. At times I feel like you need Ph.D to be able to really wrap your brain around how property taxes work around here. But in response to Dawg95, there’s quite a few statements that he’s made that aren’t correct.

In response to Dawg95’s comment about rates, King County sets assessed valuations countywide, not rates. Individual government entities (counties, cities, special purpose districts) set the property tax rate. There is a 101% aggregate limit on property tax collections, which means that a government can collect 101% of the revenue it did in the previous year. New construction is not included in that 101% number.

So it works like this: say Fairwood incorporates. And say the city collected $1,000,000 in property tax in its first year of operation in 2010. The 101% limit means that it can collect a maximum of $1,000,010 in property taxes in 2011, not including anything that comes in from new construction. The King County Assessor then goes around the area and figures out what the assessed value of everybody’s home is. Fairwood then divides that $1,000,010 against the total assessed value of all of the property in the area to figure out the rate. Then the rate is applied to the assessed value of your home to figure out your bill. The rate is set by the local government, be it Fairwod, Renton, Fire District 40, or King County.

The way you compare property tax burdens between jurisdictions is by comparing the rates. In Renton, the city’s rate is $2.36923 per $1000 of assessed valuation. Dawg95 says that’s the highest in the State; it’s not. It’s not as high as property taxes would be in the proposed City of Fairwood. So if Dawg95 thinks that property taxes would be bad under Renton, then s/he had better not support the proposed City of Fairwood, because taxes would be significantly higher.

Here’s how. Renton is a full service city, which means that it pays for its library system out of its general property tax levy. Fairwood would be part of the King County Library System, which is funded by a separate levy. So to do a true apples to apples comparison, you have to cut out the portion of Renton’s property tax levy that goes to libraries. That’s $.24 per $1000 AV, which means you use the rate of $2.12923 per $1000 for Renton when comparing it to Fairwood.

The feasibility study assumes that Fairwood would us a $1.60 per $1000 AV levy. At first glance, that appears to be lower than Renton. But again, when you do an apples to apples comparison, it’s not. You have to factor in King County Fire District 40’s levy alongside of Fairwood, since Renton’s levy covers fire services, where Fairwood’s does not. Fire District 40 has a $1.00 per $1000 AV levy. If you add that to Fairwood, you come up with $2.60 per $1000 AV.

But there’s more. FD 40 also utilizes what’s called a Benefit Charge. This is calculated by a complicated formula that takes into account square footage of your home, whether it’s sprinklered, and on and on. Fire Districts give up .$50 per $1000 AV of their regular property tax levy to use a benefit charge. My house is valued at $379,000, and I pay $153.30 in fire benefit charges this year. If you view that charge as a property tax levy, it’s effectively a levy of $.40 per $1000 AV.

Fire District 40 also has a $.16 per $1000 AV levy to pay for the construction and renovation of fire stations. Renton pays these costs out of its general property tax levy, not an extra levy to pay for bonds. Fairwood residents will continue to pay for this bond regardless of whether we annex or incorporate, but I include it so that people can understand that we cannot pay for capital projects out of our regular levies, while Renton can.

So here’s how a real apples to apples comparison of property tax levies between Fairwood and Renton would break down:

Fairwood: $3.16 per $1000 AV

Renton: $2.13 per $1000 AV

In other words, Fairwood’s property taxes would be 32% higher than Renton’s.

I agree with Dawg95 that it’s important for people to get the facts on these issues. The facts are that a City of Fairwood would have significantly higher property taxes than if we annexed into the City of Renton.

Re: Consultants release Fairwood feasibility study: Revenues exceed expenditures - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:12:39 -0000

I agree with Blue_Genie (whoever he is) that people should look at the facts to see if Fairwood is feasible. Because when you actually look at the facts, it's clear that Fairwood is not feasible. The feasibility study assumes that between 174 and 190 new homes will be sold a year and that over 1300 resales of houses will occur in order for Fairwood to have the tax revenues necessary to survive. But on to some numbers.

In 2005, there were 465 resales and 78 new homes sold in Fairwood.

In 2006, there were 450 resales and 3 new homes sold in Fairwood.

In 2007, there were 316 resales and 2 new homes sold in Fairwood.

In 2008, there were 203 resales and 1 new home sold in Fairwood.

And in 2009 thus far, there have been 6 resales and 0 new homes sold in Fairwood.

In other words, the study assumes that there will be 6 times the number of resales there were last year, and 174 to 190 times the number of new homes built last year. If that doesn't happen, Fairwood doesn't have the money to survive.

It's one thing to be optimistic. It's another thing to be completely unrealistic. Unfortunately, this study does the latter.

Bryce Nelson

Re: Consultants release Fairwood feasibility study: Revenues exceed expenditures - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 01:11:21 -0000

For those that are interested in this issue, I'd encourage you to read the new feasibility study. It drastically overinflates the number of new homes that will be built in Fairwood, claiming that between 174 and 190 new homes will be built each year between 2010 and 2015. The only way the proposed city's budget pencils out is with the revenues from those new homes, in the form of sales taxes, property taxes, and real estate excise taxes. Since 2006, the number of new homes built in Fairwood is barely in the double digits, if that. The study simply isn't based in the reality of the area.

The study also says that 1/3 of Fairwood is available for development. How does it define land that's available for redevelopment? Anything where the value of the land is in excess of the value of the structures. That includes the golf course. So if you like your view of the golf course now, enjoy it while it lasts, since Fairwood would be under immense pressure to allow a huge amount of development in the area. That's the only way the city could keep from being in the red from day one.

And it goes on. The study assumes zero startup costs and a zero budget for parks and rec. Renton's winter parks and rec catalog has 40 pages of various things that they offer, anything from swimming classes for kids, plays, or dancing classes for seniors. Fairwood would have none of that, because it wouldn't have the money. Various other services would be provided at a higher level by Renton than by Fairwood.

As I said on my blog, the reason why I and other people say that Renton could give Fairwood more with less is because it happens to be true.

Bryce Nelson

Re: Consultants release Fairwood feasibility study: Revenues exceed expenditures - Renton Reporter

brycenelson — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:58:15 -0000

Blue_Genie,

I'm not sure if you were intending to take a shot at me, but I assure you, I'm not afraid to put my name to what I write. Are you?

Bryce Nelson