HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2020, 3:22 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
It's also worth noting that it's unfortunately speaking in the financial self-interest of the current residents of upper-middle class suburbs to not do anything about the population decline. The basic reason is the single biggest cost related to local government is K-12 education. To the extent that the number of children enrolled in public schools declines, it is a boon for the taxes of local residents, since it helps keep local governmental expenses in check.
This is a huge, overlooked factor in the rampant NIMBYism in the suburban Northeast. In most states, communities aren't "harmed" by more kids. In many states, communities are incentivized to approve as many units as possible, since more kids = lower taxes.

But the localized school funding formulas in the Northeast essentially penalize localities for approving family housing. Communities generally have no issue with declining enrollment. Most states have statewide formulas that are strictly based on student counts.
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2020, 7:33 PM
RST500 RST500 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
This is a huge, overlooked factor in the rampant NIMBYism in the suburban Northeast. In most states, communities aren't "harmed" by more kids. In many states, communities are incentivized to approve as many units as possible, since more kids = lower taxes.

But the localized school funding formulas in the Northeast essentially penalize localities for approving family housing. Communities generally have no issue with declining enrollment. Most states have statewide formulas that are strictly based on student counts.
I've heard that many affluent school districts have actually seen a decline in enrollment. Some have even proposed closing schools. I can't think of a recent example but a lot of schools closed in the South Bay suburbs of LA a while back.
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2020, 5:08 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,854
Population losses of around 30% are pretty typical for neighbourhoods that experienced little new construction, or destruction of housing stock, and were built out by 1960 or so, just due to declining household sizes. That's how much the Montreal inner suburb of Outremont lost, as well as many Toronto neighbourhoods that didn't have any new condos built (or very few). Montreal has had some urban renewal in the inner core, but a lot of the more intact neighbourhoods lost up to around 50% of their population since 1931.
     
     
End
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.