Harry, > He tells me that there is a single rate on land and improvements, but > agrees that there should be no levy on improvements - it should all be on land.
Yep. Sorry, you and your assessor friend are correct. I spoke too quickly. In high-land value urban areas, like where I live, the land-value exceeds the improvements value by as much as 10-fold - enough so that very often a parcel is bought and all buildings torn down even if only to build new house. Of course, this is not true in low-land value areas or where the "improvements" (home or business) are *very* valuable. In short, your original point stands. Thanks for correcting & clarifying. Stephen Straker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vancouver, B.C. _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
