The problem with the whole thing is that the fox is watching the chicken coop. The exemption should not apply to those who make a certain amount in income. It probably was meant to help protect historic homes and to keep them visible for the public to appreciate. But when you have an owner that has the income to maintain such a home, the question of the financial ability to do so should be a factor. If the reasoning is so that the owner will make his home visible to the public, then it becomes a cost issue. Is it worth $6,000 for us to give this owner a tax exemption just so that we can SEE his home? Frankly, I don't think it's worth that much a year for us to be able to see his historic home. There are more pressing matters in the typical household that bears more value such as being able to put food on the table after paying the high property taxes than being able to see a historic home. This exemption is unfair to the rest of the taxpayers many of whom live on a fixed income.