Go Bottomtax money spent
 | brokenarrow
Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 1288 Wisconsin 
|
2005-02-11 105968
WOW Ya want to talk about a deal and a rip off to us tax payers. Just read a story about houses along this river in my county that floods all the time. The govt. state and fed. has pents 4.3 million to buy homes from owners of these properties since 1995. They just recieved anouther 99K from a community block grant "eap" for more and have applied for 1 million more in federal and state funds. Get this! They buy the homes for "fair market value" then they give the owners up to 25K more to buy anouther home and also $500-$1500 more for moving expenses!!!
EXCUSE ME! Let me get this right? Hmmm a person buys a house in a flood zone, the river had been flooding for a 100 years, and now the tax payers pay them for it plus extra money to boot? Ya wonder why we are in a tax hell in Wisconsin?
Damm, wonder what it would cost to dredge the river, probably alot more but in the end we would have one heck of a high taxable usable land on water front property>
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add Phototax money spent
 | Iowafun
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 955 Central Iowa 
 Pics
|
2005-02-12 105975
They did the same thing in Grand Forks, ND after the big flood. But the government kept the land and turned it into a nice public park. I look at it this way, the flood insurance program is run by the government. Granted, they take in money from the insurance payments, but a big flood easily overcomes that. So the tax payer gets stuck for the repairs. So if tax dollars go to remove people from a flood prone area, then in the long run, we might be saving money by buying them out.
I haven't done a cost analysis, but I know it sounds logical to some people. I don't understand buying a home in an area known to flood. Just down the road from me is a place that is in a spot of land next to a creek that floods every spring. They tore down teh shack that was on the place and built a really nice looking house. In spring, the creek flooded again. House was built up so it didn't flood, but they couldn't cross the driveway and the shop was under 4 feet of water. So the shop is worthless. They put it up for sale, but recently took it off the market. No buyers. Wonder why... ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add Phototax money spent
| brokenarrow
Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 1288 Wisconsin
|
2005-02-12 105987
Iowafun
Your 100% right on that (IMH). I had so much to piss and moan about last night I left out what really was the key to that post. In the last 5-7 years I can remember 5 or 6 houses that were sold to others in that area. Just last fall there was one for sale with 13 acres, (your right though it did go for a steal) My point being is that the Govt. did not and has not made it mandatory that they sell to the govt. So the story goes on! Here is the kicker, when someone finally does sell to the gov. Then we pay them fair market value+up to 25K+up to $1500 in moving expenses when we could of just bought the darn place for fair market value?
I agree in getting the houses out of those areas and never letting new one's get back, but the way they go about it is unreal!
Dams have been removed on this river (Was too expensive to rebuild) Wonder if it all has to do with ecological and diversity crap but here is what goes on in my head. Why can't they make a retention lake or spill ways out to land they already own? I should explain a bit, they done this years ago but just not enough of them and not large enough.
It eleiviated the problem a bit not not enough and all of a sudden they gave up. This river meanders thru low lands and with all the brainiacs the Govt. employs you would think they could come up with some solution. This river is not a HUGE river although it does run a long long way thru the state. It flows into anouther state and then into the "chain of lakes" So it does have a real large emtying area. Ah whats the use, I am getting tired of pissing and moaning about something I know jack shit about.LOL Hey! (AT least I am honest)??? ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add Phototax money spent
| Iowafun
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 955 Central Iowa
Pics
|
2005-02-12 105989
I can see your point about the extra $25K. I'd be sitting with the grant money waiting for homes to come on the market. Then I'd make a fair offer and buy them up. Heck, if the asking price is fair market value, then pay them. I can see offering to sweeten the pot for those that don't want to sell. But maybe they can come up with a designation for the area that removes them from eligability for flood insurance. So if they flood again, they lose everything. Hence, an incentive to sell at fair market value.
The place near me is on a pretty 5 acres of land. All low land. They dug out a pond in the back, but never lined it with clay so it's water level is below the river. The yard is mostly weeds and still has junk piles in it. Nice looking house though. Their asking price was over $300k. Way to much for 5 acres with a bad pond, a worthless shop in a flood plain, and a house that still needed to be finished. The sales listing tried to put a positive spin on it by saying you had the chance to pick out your own carpet color and tile color. Yeah, that's home I want to buy.
I don't always understand it. But when you get burocrats and politicians together... you know someone is gonna get screwed and it ain't them.
Winnipeg has a neat system around their city for diverting the Red River during flooding. Keeps most of the water out of the city by flooding drainage ditches and low lying areas around the city. Makes nice storage areas. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add Photo
Go Top
Share This