I've mentioned before that I dislike the East/West dichotomy that seems to have developed in Bend over the last 20 years or so. I've doubted whether it's all that true; or based more on false pretenses (such as the often claimed advantage of being able to "walk or bike" to all the wonderful westside amenities, when it appears to me that westsiders jump in their cars to do errands just like everyone else...)
Pretense seems to be the right word. There is s snobbish quality to the "West is Best" claims that puts me off. (I live in the Williamson Park neighborhood of Bend -- nice big lots, nice homes, nicely maintained.)
So I was all ready to argue with the map of "two cities" that the Bulletin published this morning.
But those red colors saturating the east side would seem to be hard to argue with.
But...is it really a meaningful measure? Land values compared to property tax values?
It seems to me the real measure of pain is whether the house buyer can afford the house he or she lives in. In other words, the foreclosure rate would seem a more accurate gauge. And the last time I saw a foreclosure map, it was spread pretty evenly.
As someone said in the article, values are "neighborhood" specific. For instance, I noticed that the most expensive part of all Bend -- the northwest hills, was saturated with almost as much pink and red as the east side.
Is it painful to the average homeowner that "vacant" lots on the east side have dropped significantly?
Like I said, I'm just not sure how it matters to the average homeowner whether the assessed value of his home has dropped.
It matters whether he can pay for it.
3 hours ago