Printable View
I hate it, I feel like it's an awful way for someone in a bad financial situation to make it much, much worse. Like a payday loan. Maybe it isn't as bad in other areas, but here, putting a deed restriction on a home will completely tank the value, by much more than the check that someone will get. Unless someone is just doing it altruistically.Quote:
Originally Posted by Name Redacted
An appreciation reverse mortgage.
Get too many politicians of any stripe and it's a shit show. Just think what you'd rather have - Seattle or Houston? Boston or Oklahoma City?Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Better some misguided art dollars than a chemical spill from lack of regulations or a fertilizer plant next to a daycare. Fuck, even that red state podcast guy started getting regulation happy in his own city once he actually wanted results.
You want a sustainably growing city you need money and quality of life to attract people.
But wouldn't that "tanked value" allow a person with less wealth to buy it eventually? Isn't that a good thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenboy
Where I live almost everything under 500k is pending or contingent. I think when rates dipped recently lots of people pounced.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4matic
Absolutely, for the subsequent buyer, and the community as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
But it's still a horrible deal for the current owner, IMO. If I were to slap a deed restriction on my place, I'd get a check for $100-$150K. But my place would instantly be worth $400K less, not to mention it wouldn't continue to appreciate. Plus it's way harder to sell anything with a deed restriction around here. That's a shitty deal, and I'd only do it if I won the lottery and was doing it out of the goodness of my heart. But people do take that deal, when they need money for a medical emergency or something- and that's why I honestly think it's as bad as a payday loan for a lot of people.
What exactly do these deed restrictions entail? Is it just CO or is this widespread? We don't seem to have the same thing around here, although we do have conservation easements where people get paid now for agreeing to preserve their property instead of develop it.
Benny, if you're reading this, I have figured out your retirement plan. Buy Name Redacted's neighbor's deed restricted home in Summit County for pennies on the dollar, and mortgage the shit out of it (so you die with a bunch of debt). Get a job jerking fastfred off for six months and then retire (or partially retire if you enjoy the jerking off). You can then live in the home for the rest of your life. While you can't short term the place you can rent it out for three months or more. How about a house exchange in Italy for the shoulder seasons? Hire Name Redacted to be your property manager, since you will be living next door to him. Deed restricted is all about "preserving the community." Think of how much better the Summit County community will be with Benny retired there.
https://nyskiblog.com/forum/members/benny-profane.83/
Benny is now a superstar internet personality over here.
It is mostly a colorado mountain town thing started in aspen breck mirrored aspen and it is now widespread in all mtn/resort townsQuote:
Originally Posted by ötzi
1) some houses/condos are built specifically with deed restrictions other people can opt in to a deed restriction by getting a lump sum payment
2) you must be employed locally 34 hours a week or something like that, your spouse could be a remote worker and you could work at the ski shop a qualify, the waiting lists are very long, so situations like that will be put the back of the line, once your in your in, that is where the argument about following the rules starts, I do know of some people who have been booted
3) a few different scenarios exist, some units are capped on appreciation roughly 3% on average, other units such as the people who opt in have no cap on appreciation
4) It is very widespread in summit county alot of people feel like they are doing good plus getting a check for 80k - 150k is pretty nice, if you are a family not making bank then that check can buy a van, vacations, help with home improvement projects, the rumor is that it's not "taxable" which is completely false, I heard no one is providing a 1099 misc which doesn't seem right
5) alot of people I know are in their homes here for 15-30 years, moving up or around is not an option, so the math pencils in for them to deed restrict, Goldenboy nailed it though, I feel like it is financial suicide, the town of breckenridge is also purchasing homes for cash, take mine for example, they will purchase my dumpy little home for 1 million cash, deed restrict it, then resell the property to a local for 720k
I'm confused. Goldenboy says it is hard to sell your deed restricted home. And then fastfred said there is a long waitlist to be able to buy a deed restricted home?
And I read the rules wrong. They kick you out if you stop working at least 30 hours a week. They also kick you out if you become disabled and can't work anymore.
So I guess Benny will have to jerk fred off for 30 hours a week for the rest of his life. A small price to pay to live in Summit County on the cheap. And I assume they don't audit too hard so you can still do that house exchange in Italy.
The rules say you have to work "for a business located in and serving Summit County." That one is really easy to exploit. A financial advisor, or an attorney, who makes all their money in the big city could move into deed restricted, move their business address to their house (everyone works from home now anyway), honestly accept new clients in Summit County (even though their main bread and butter is their book of clients in the big city) and satisfy this rule.
https://www.summitcountyco.gov/1365/Housing-Helps
https://www.summitcountyco.gov/Docum...ter/View/36766
Awesome. So people think they are "doing the right thing" and "helping out the little man" by cheating on their taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
What fastfred said.Quote:
Originally Posted by ötzi
I think Denver and other metros have similar programs now as well. In many cases the county or town may build the units from scratch- owners putting a deed restriction on their own home is pretty rare (here). Developers are also required to provide x% of affordable housing- sometimes they'll just buy the cheapest places they can find and put a deed restriction on them, rather than build one as part of their development.
The only other thing that I would add is that at least here, the deed restrictions are also based on income. Do there may be a deed restriction that is limited to 60% of the area's median income, or as much as 140%. So in theory anyone from the school's janitor to a professor at Western could qualify. As mentioned in comments above, however, if that janitor then gets a job working remote for Google for 500k, they get to stay, even though they would no longer qualify on both income and remote work grounds...
There’s no cap on appreciation for opt ins? If there’s no cap on appreciation isn’t this just a worker retention plan paid by the government?
theres deed restricted affordable housing Maryland (among other places)
So if it's deed restricted and capped at 3% appreciation, what is it, they determine the market value, then give you a percentage of that now, then when you sell it would be the adjusted market value at the time you restricted it (i..e. value left after the payment) plus 3% year max appreciation and that would be the new sales price?
I can kinda get my head around that I guess but I have no clue what happens if there's no cap on appreciation.
Different strokes for different folks budQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Summit is 10x larger than CB/Gunny probably not exactly but it is
the growth here is uncontrolled and massive shit is in a non stop build build build mode and has been for twenty years we can't grow fast enough
you goto cb and well it looks alot like it did fifteen years ago
I am GENERALIZING but the difference is big
cause that difference we have more people and more opportunities
at some point the market is going to check itself cause who the hell wants to pay 800k for a deed restricted beat up home that has very little invested in it the way up upgrades? I don't see it sustainable especially with a 7% interest rate and usually the people who own these don't have alot of money to burn
and yeah people abuse it ask one of my best buddies who owns a deed restricted home and a very nice house in a very nice neighborhood in the city of denver
if you aint milking the system you ain't doing it right
The way I read Summit County's example deed, the worker above would be forced to move becuase you have to serve Summit County "during the entire period of his or her occupancy of the Property." Now, of course, how does the County know the janitor has moved up in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenboy
News to me but that may be because of where we lived.Quote:
Originally Posted by dunfree
Many years ago (20+) some deed restricted condos (maybe 8-10) were built in our hood and our good friends got one, as Snapper is self employed with shitty looking tax returns. The appreciation was split it if sold before 15 years had elapsed or get it all after 15 years. They are moving soon and are pretty stoked on their good fortune.Quote:
Originally Posted by dunfree
Tax returns / W2 forms filed.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
There are too many variables at play I may be off on some of this shitQuote:
Originally Posted by ötzi
#1 bought my deed restricted home in the "wellington neighborhood" in 2004 for 450k, it is allowed to appreciate a max of 3% a year, I added a garage to my house with an accessory apt. (all legit) last I knew the gov't was deciding the added value of that garage and apartment for you
#2 I bought my home in 2002 for 280k (it's dumpy, seriously) I am now able to sell the home on the free market for 1 million. Instead I chose to take a 120k cash payment to buy my sprinter van. They deed restricted it, with no cap on appreciation, but what will the market bear? So I sell my home to a local who uses down payment assistance (gov't hand out) for 700k. The other way is in the paper work I sign when I deed restrict my house they may cap the appreciation. So the value of the home is determined by the myself and the gov't. It is stated in the paper work and I am only allowed the 3% max appreciation based on the value signed for. So maybe I can only sell my home for 580k
it happens, know a chick who worked here years ago and then got a remote job and was forced to sellQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
you have to file paper work yearly they are just getting their bigger and better audit team up and running
I know of another house that was purchased as a second home the deed restriction wasn't super clear and kind of got lost in the shuffle the people have owned it for a few years and are at a show down with the gov't they have found a loop hole in the system and until the county pursues legal action there is nothing they can do
No W-2 for self employed and tax returns wouldn't show if they are really serving Summit County. You could buy one of these deed restricted dumps in Summit County liv2ski (does not appear any income restrictions in Summit County). Get licensed in CO but keep all your CA clients. Move back and forth from SD to Breck. Sure, you wouldn't make much when it is time to sell but who cares. It's just a crash pad in the mountains.Quote:
Originally Posted by liv2ski
A coworker bought one. Somewhere between DC and halfway to Baltimore. By memory it had a ridiculously low capped appreciation- like 2%, which even donkey years ago sounded like a bad moveQuote:
Originally Posted by ötzi
Wait, you were able to continue to owning another free market property and buy at Wellington?Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
Wellington... good times! I lived there 08-09 and drove the Purple bus many a night.
you gotta work the system don't let the system work youQuote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
yes
didnt' aspen housing go after someone for having another house in the valley in an LLC and owning a deed restricted unit?
How can the city know who owns the LLC, which owns the property. If set up properly, the LLC will own the property, and the registered agent and business address will go to some attorney's office in Denver. No one will know who truly owns the LLC. This is how the rich keep their home address secret.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
i know that butQuote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
from what I read apcha could care less about anything but following the rules
https://www.aspentimes.com/news/coup...north-40-home/
feel free to give us your legal take on it all
The good news is we don’t even have to pay for his legal take - I’m sure he will even dumb it down for us. All the while he is billing some poor asshole several hundred dollars an hour to enlighten us.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Fred beat me to it. It was pretty obvious what they were doing [setting up a purposeless LLC to try to hide the free market property under their kid's names, while the mom was managing it, listed on it and doing all the financial dealings, all while claiming they "didn't remember" how any of this came to be], even if the City/APCHA's argument wasn't infinitely airtight.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
APCHA's requirements prohibit owners from owning “any other developed residential properties in those portions of Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison or Pitkin counties which are part of the Roaring Fork Drainage." Much like prohibiting owners from STRing their units, APCHA is pretty good about policing the free market ownership exclusion zone clause. However, to altasnob's perturbation you can own other properties beyond that designated zone, though it does factor into your assest number, etc.
Pray tell then good counselor: why don't you come abuse the system here like eveyone else and exploit the oasis of Leftist Populism. Speaking of...Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
What you seem to miss is that the "giant social experiment" here has been going on for 40-50+ years - before the 1% and global money flowed in here. It doesn't change the reality of what's happening, but the context is that it's different from the new wave of super progressive actions taken by the Seattle's and SF's of the world, which you seem particularly bent on blindly lumping Aspen in with . Yes, it's essentially a social experiment here, but we're a town of 7000 residents and the only real "losers" in your argument against the larger scope of the "experiment" here are 1% and .00001%ers. Are you really going to continue to simp for them and share their tears? Do you see yourself having something to gain if the "experiment" weren't happening?Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
You have an asset number up there? Here, someone could retire from a tech career in the bay area with $10M in stock options, move here and work 1 year washing dishes at night, and qualify for affordable housing with no problems at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
Sounds like that Aspen couple had loose lips and didn't set up their LLC correctly (properly hiding home ownership by using a third party address and registered agent; also using this third party to list as STR). Otherwise, I think they would have gotten away with this indefinitely. Ultimately, these programs rely on the honesty of the home owners promising they are following the rules. Since half of them are cheating on their taxes I don't know how honest these people are.
The Summit County deed restriction says if you get caught breaking the rules, you have 30 days to get into compliance and then no harm, no foul. So you can play with fire and hope you don't get caught and if you do get caught, just get back into compliance with no penalty. Suing people to force compliance is a major PITA for the city/county. And the homeowner can drag out the law suit to buy them time. The deed restriction says prevailing party gets attorney fees so there is some incentive for the home owner to try to avoid a law suit.
These deed restricted housing ideas sound like they were cooked up by some land use attorney looking for full employment
Yes, absolutely. Pretty cut and dry here: https://www.apcha.org/341/Maximum-Income-AssetsQuote:
Originally Posted by goldenboy
But once you're in you're in [as long as you still work and live locally] regardless of your income and/or assets appreciating.
post of the dayQuote:
Originally Posted by teleee
Appreciation capped? Hell fucking no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Name Redacted
Pretty sure it isn't appreciation capped. Just rental to local workers 30+ hrs a week, no STR, and probably a few other stipulations. I didn't really look into it that closely. But it would definitely reduce the salability and therefore the value when you go to sell it.Quote:
Originally Posted by summit
ETA: looked a little closer. It is basically RFR to the county if they want to purchase it and what I wrote above. You can stay there if retired. If you rent it has to be to someone who qualifies.
I think I’m going to get this as a full back tattoo to honor what’s going on in the Tetons.
Attachment 448982
So the net asset requirement is only on day 1? Then as your wealth increases, there are no net asset restrictions?Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
How do they verify total assets? Is it just on your honor? Stock options wouldn't count. Neither would a trust fund set up so that you don't get the money until a later point in time. Do 401k and deferred compensation programs count?
Do people include their sprinter van, $4k mountain bike, and dynafit setups in their total assets? I have this vision of half the people taking advantage of Aspens' subsidy as growing up rich, paying off student loans (so maybe they are not rich yet), but they will be rich soon, and then they will inherit from their parents at some point. That couple who got caught with the airbnb was planning on gifting each of their kids a fully paid off townhouse in Aspen as a graduation gift. Sounds exactly like the people who need a free government hand out, right?
All these taxes and fees imposed by places like Aspen and Summit County not only make the overall housing more expensive, they make lodging more expensive, and they make eating out more expensive. So someone like me, who might want to stay in a hotel and eat out in these communities, has to pay for all of this as well. So it's not just the 1%ers living in Aspen paying for it. No wonder the slopes in Aspen are so empty. Who in their right mind would go there for a vacation. So much better value available elsewhere where you are not subsidizing trust funders living in public housing.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
That’s fucked. Worker housing subsidized by the taxpayers should remain affordable.Quote:
Originally Posted by liv2ski
Let the next owner win a lottery drawing and be blessed.
Was that the only restriction, that they only got half the appreciation if they stayed less than 15 years? Can it sell at market rate now?