A number of comments refer to a "new user fee". At least one comment has it right, this fee will apply to the sales of all property in WL, so really it is a property transfer fee. During the sales process it will have to be disclosed as part of the transaction. Who will pay? That depends, your results may vary, depending on how good you are as a seller/buyer. Everything is negotiable, right?
This would of course affect new homeowners in Sonoma Ridge. It would also affect existing home sales...it would affect you if you wanted to buy your neighbors house on the first tier, etc., etc.
The WLIC Board has voted to move it through the court process as required, so that is where it sits, literally, now.
As two WL citizens have requested "To Be Continued".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Mike, I don't think this fee , whatever you choose to call it, applies to you if you want to buy your neighbors house. Its only for new members. If I understand it right you don't pay this fee if you are already a member and move to different houses at WL. Its only for "new" members.
Ya Mike, think you got it wrong buddy. Check with the WLIC -the fee only applies to new members, not existing ones. No one who is an existing member would pay this fee if they move to different houses at the lake.
No, but Mike is right about when you sell your house to a WLIC member that the buyer is going to negotiate the fee back to the seller. Therefore, it will cost you when you sell your house.
I am also astounded and frustrated that we are incurring legal costs associated with an outrageous legal strategy pursued by Mr. Gross. However, I am also astounded (although admittedly less so) that the vast majority of people commenting the last few days believe that we are tapping into a new revenue source that will magically shift some of the expenses of maintaining our lake community to new residents. For those who haven’t been in Economics 101 for a long time, this is what the assessment costs each of us as WL property owners from an economic perspective.
Market value of a property is the estimated amount for which a willing buyer will pay a willing seller in an arms-length transaction. If the value that a buyer is willing to pay for a home is X, and the assessment is Y, the price a buyer will pay for a property is X-Y.
It is true that the WLIC legally is assessing the fee on the buyer. Yes. The fee will show up on the closing documents as a buyer paid fee so legally the buyer will pay the WLIC the assessment. However, in economic terms the true cost will be borne by the seller. If you don’t believe me, pretend that the assessment is $100,000 per property. Will the buyer still pay the same price for your house? Of course they would not. This holds true regardless of the amount of the assessment, although we probably would agree that a nominal assessment amount would be ignored by a buyer. Will a prospective buyer ignore an assessment in excess of $2,000. Not likely. A sophisticated buyer is going to arrive at their opinion of the value of a house and discount the price that they will pay to the seller for the property by the amount of the assessment.
This is true in any financial transaction. I am amused that the majority of comments indicate a belief that the buyers will alleviate the financial burden from existing owners. Whether the WLIC can avoid an annual increase (or actually lower annual assessments) for all of us existing property owners because of the increased revenues from this new assessment, it simply means you will pay a lower annual assessment fee which will eventually be offset by the cost of this new assessment when you sell your home. Therefore, whether you want to admit it or not, the value of our property will immediately decrease when the assessment passes, and every one of us will realize less when they sell their property.
Who does this benefit then? Clearly, long-term residents will benefit at the expense of residents that own shorter term. If you ask most people, they plan to stay in their house a long time. However, many people who do not anticipate selling their homes are forced to sell because of death, disability, divorce, or job loss. Hopefully, you are one of the lucky ones who don’t face a rushed sale in this rough economy, but it should make you feel better, if you do, that you’ll be helping your former neighbors by contributing to the lake improvements here at Weatherby Lake.
It will also benefit those folks who sell to current WLIC members because those transactions (as explained correctly by comments today) are exempt from the new user fee. In the past, these transactions are usually people moving from 2nd tier to 1st tier.
Bottom line: The new user fee impacts current owners. It will not be paid by new buyers as it has been advertised.
I disagree. I've lived in neighborhoods where there were "special assessments" attached to certain homes because of street & lighting improvements. Those assessments were non-negotiable and did not impact home values. The same can be said for this new user fee. I suppose if you believe your home is now worth $2000 less, you can negotiate paying it yourself when you sell your home. Personally, I don't think it should be negotiable, and I think willing buyers WILL pay it because we have something to offer - our lake. Its the same reason willing buyers pay $15,000+ to live at Lake Quivira and $20,000+ to live at the Nationals. Buyers pay it because they want the lake community or the golfing community. In comparison, our new user fee is pretty cheap.
I happen to agree with last post. I also bought/sold houses with special assessments. My last house had over $10,000 in specials. Not every subdivision had these (this was in another state) but it didn't mean our houses sold for discounted prices. If anything they tended to hold their values more because of the improvements. People pay them because they want to live there, not because its the cheapest place to live. We have a terrific lake community here. People move here because they want lake living, and will be willing to pay a couple thousand dollars for it.
I've lived elsewhere with a home owners dues that was easily kept separate from my house sale. I think with the amenity we have, the obvious cost to keep it up, people have an understanding that those dues are there. If you want to live in a community with a special amenity like a lake, or golf course, or whatever, you have dues. And if it's kept up, it only improves our property value to get top dollar for our homes. That's why the same type of house elsewhere sell for a lot less. I'm not concerned about it.
It doesnt matter that you are not concerned . It must not concern Mr Gross . The constitution according to some protects his right to think speak and litigate for us all.
A vibrant lake keeps all of our property values higher than they'd be without it. We'll have to negotiate away a lot more than $2,000 if the lake isn't protected and kept up. All of Paul Gross's efforts over the years has compromised our ability to protect and improve this lake. His right to sue us isn't in question. Good judgment and his intentions on what he does are.
Post a Comment