It would appear that John and Vicky are comparing apples and oranges. Vicky is talking about commercial real estate/rental properties while John is talking about homes. A couple of big differences between the two are that commercial mortgage rates are higher than homeowner mortgages and commercial mortgages cannot be refinanced as easily as homeowner mortgages.
But some of John's points are worth considering, even if his examples are not quite applicable to Vicky's complaints. The Business section in the 2/17 issue of the Strib featured an article on how mortgage interest rates are affecting rental properties. "Low rates helping owners of rentals" - http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/4380405.html The article supports Vicky's claim about how insurance rates have risen, with the descriptive word being "skyrocketed" but refutes her claim about utility rates have risen, citing a 10% increase rather than the doubling that Vicky claimed. As far as insurance goes, how much of this can actually be attributed to Minneapolis? Is there anyone out there who can compare rates for Minneapolis vs. say, Eagan or Maple Grove? I know from my homeowner example, my premiums went up from about $400 a year in 2001 to $600 a year in 2002 and then the insurer tried to gouge me again last year with a $800 premium. That was enough to make me shop around and find a different insurer who offered me $425 a year even while increasing coverage by 50% to reflect the rising market value of my house. The results on taxes are mixed. Tax rates on commercial properties were cut, but assessment values have risen, so most properties have not seen actual cuts in their property taxes, but they're still lower than they would have been otherwise, so that's something. I do know that if I were a commercial property owner in Minneapolis, the last thing I'd be doing is complaining about property taxes - especially to a bunch of homeowners. As for the quip about water bills, I don't think they're quite that high yet, but they might well be high enough to justify investing in sub-meters to monitor water use per unit. At the very least, this could be done to help catch seriously drippy faucets or other leaks that run up the water bill, or a savvy rental property owner might offer their tenant a lower rent in exchange for the tenant taking responsibility for their own water bill and thus be motivated to conserve. One way to judge the value of this would be to compare water bills chronologically to see if they've been increasing due to rising rates or rising use. There are probably similar investments that could be made to cut other utility/energy costs - upgrading lighting probably delivers the biggest return on investment. I know it made a big difference when we replaced most of the incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents at my fraternity, especially in hallways and such where city ordinances require lights to be always on. For larger commercial properties, upgrading from T-12 lamps to T-8 lamps can also make a significant difference, since they can reduce energy use by as much as 1/4 to 1/3. There are probably rebates available from Xcel Energy to help pay for conversion, too. Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
