The way you've written this is a bit misleading. I can own undeveloped property in a school district and pay the property taxes for it, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to someone owning a home in that district. The residency requirement would mean you're paying enough property tax since you've clearly developed the property if you are living there.

▲

lotsofpulp 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Then the government should advertise an explicit minimum amount of tax paid annually in order to register for the school, or switch property tax to land value tax only.

▲

dylan604 an hour ago | parent [-]

The residency requirement is that minimum. It's not a minimum in monetary limits. It's a minimum that you have to actually live there. The fact you are living there means you are paying a higher tax amount than for an undeveloped lot. There's a difference on having a house on a lot vs just some field. You have some skin in the game as they say compared to just owning land while living somewhere else completely.

	▲	dec0dedab0de a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		What if you lived in a tent in the field?