Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Community Land Trusts

[Nathan Brown (Nathan]

Tom,

I don't know a lot about community land trusts, but this
website should provide you with everything you would
ever want to know:

http://www.iceclt.org/ (This is the website that is
mentioned in the post below from Dave).

As for the little bit that I do know about CLTs, Dave seems
to be correct.

I hope this helps.

Adios,

Nathan

Nathan [at] imailbox.com
Yahoo Messenger ID: nbrown22000
MSN Messenger ID:nbrown16 [at] hotmail.com
AOL Messenger ID: nbrown22000
ICQ Messenger ID: 137441602
In the process of gaining wealth, do not forget about Self.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Hammer" <thammer302 [at] yahoo.com>
To: <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:43 PM
Subject: [C-L]_Community Land Trusts


> 
> I searched this list's archives on this subject and
> didn't find anything more recent than 1996 or so.
> 
> One of our local members just sent us the note which
> follows.  Is his information correct?  Do any other
> cohousing communities use this model? What are the
> primary advantages/disadvantages?  If other groups
> have chosen not do use a CLT model, why not?  Did I
> ask enough questions?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom Hammer
> for Concord Village
> 
>  re: nonprofit structuring:
> 
>   Structuring decisions can greatly influence things
> down the road, I 
> think.  For example, a community doesn't have to be a
> single-tax village 
> like the Ardens to have its land held in a non-profit
> community land 
> trust (CLT).  If the CLT is tax-exempt, this might
> drastically reduce the 
> tax burden faced by individual members, since the
> value of the land 
> (and other CLT assets, which might include the
> community center) might not 
> be subject to various taxes (e.g. property tax).  This
> might be 
> especially true in a place like PA, where large
> community expenses like 
> schools enjoy relatively low state support (compared
> with Delaware, for 
> example).  In many CLTs, the residents maintain
> fee-simple ownership of 
> their houses and other land improvements while the CLT
> holds the land; 
> their houses sit on a 99-year inheritable leasehold. 
> The premiere source 
> in the US for CLT info (and below-market-rate
> financing for startups) is 
> of course the Institute for Community Economics in New
> England 
> (Springfield, MA, I think -- I'm sure they have a
> website, which maybe you've 
> discovered)?  For some years I was a depositor in
> their revolving loan 
> fund, which now holds and manages several hundred
> million dollars, I 
> think.
> 
> A signal advantage to CLTs is that they can boost
> affordability.  With 
> a reduced tax burden, lower interest rates, and
> especially since only 
> the improvements change hands (you are buying the
> building, not the 
> relatively expensive land under it), purchase prices
> and operating costs 
> can drop dramatically over the lifetime of the CLT. 
> Many CLTs in the 
> past have had to choose to make voluntary donations to
> local governments 
> since their land, like that of hospitals and other
> public/nonprofit 
> institutions, is not conventionally part of the tax
> base!
> 
> One lesser-known issue affecting any preservationist, 
> democratically-controlled property holding (including
> CLTs) is that over time, 
> surrounding development may raise the value of
> neighborhood property so much 
> that initiatives may arise within the group to sell
> the land for 
> development and relocate elsewhere.  This isn't
> necessarily an unhealthy thing, 
> but it certainly can change the aspects of
> "permanence" and 
> "sustainability".  In such a situation, it may also be
> appropriate to sell or 
> donate development rights (for the open space at
> least) to a local 
> conservation trust; and this can in turn help reduce
> whatever assessable value 
> the property(ies) face for tax purposes.
> 
> It's worth ascending my soapbox one more time to
> underscore how 
> important it is for the group to surface and solidify
> its core values bearing 
> on these points.  I think that once a structure is
> chosen, a group is 
> pretty much confined to its parameters unless you want
> to undertake the 
> much harder (and more limited as to options) task of
> restructuring 
> further down the road.
> 
> Pardon me for spouting off about this if you've heard
> it all already.
> 
> Cheers --
> 
> Dave Nuttall
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
> http://companion.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list
> Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L
_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L