Austin or Sonoma County for a job relocation? (Reno, West: homeowners insurance, home)

[scully2010]

I'm going through interviews for a job that wants me to move to a state where they do business. Once I'm in that state I will be able to work remotely 100% of the time. The two places that appeal most to me on the list are Austin, Texas and Northern California, specifically Sonoma County in the wine region.

I'm trying to suss out the pros and cons of each place and do a spreadsheet on costs. Does anyone have any personal feedback on which area they prefer and why?

As for the type of work I do, I'm in marketing for tech companies.

[Need4Camaro]

Sonoma County seems to average $800k avg home prices which is more expensive than Austin @ $500k avg home prices, however; I'm not sure how 'apples to apples' home comparisons will be.

California has a high income tax which exponentially increases with higher income earners. Texas has no income tax but high property taxes which can act as a balloon bill at the end of the year.

Sonoma County appears to have a higher risk of wildfires (but that isn't to say that this risk isn't present in Austin) and has potential for Earthquakes thus higher home insurance rates. Sonoma County however will also likely be more appealing to the eyes overall, although Austin Hill Country can be considered quite dynamic. If you're working remote you could deal with living out there and not have to worry about traffic, but if you ever have to commute then it will be a bear. That isn't to say that 101 won't be either though. Outside of Hill Country though, Austin won't look like California.

San Francisco is an iconic town rithled with bad politics. Austin is a boom town new age city with constant political clashes between local and state politics. Neither are moderate. San Francisco will however have more civil amenities than Austin. Austin however will probably be more tailored toward young adult social lifestyle than San Francisco.

Fuel, Groceries, Energy and just about all day to day necessities are more affordable in Austin than Sonoma County.

Weather, Sonoma County wins hands down in weather moderation. Sonoma County remains more temperate in the summer and has tolerable winters. Austin gets HOT during the summer and likely more humid than Sonoma County, and the heat season can last between May and late September / Early October. Both are prone to wind storms. Austin is more prone to hail and violent Thunderstorms / Tornadoes than Sonoma County.

It all depends on what you're willing to accept or compromise.

[ashbeeigh]

Didn’t you hear? Austin is closed.

Kidding. Why not visit both and decide that way?

[scully2010]

Thanks for the input from everyone. I've been to both cities but only as a tourist, not as a potential resident. I'm trying to see if there's data I'm missing - the insurance cost is a good one that I hadn't thought of.

[CarnivalGal]

Sonoma will definitely be more expensive. But if that weren't an issue, I would go there for sure. That part of the country is just beautiful. But a lot of that is personal preference. You say you have visited both. I have to ask, have you visited Austin in August? The summers are pretty brutal here.

Politics may come into play a bit as well, depending on how you lean. I've been in Texas for over 30 years now, and my husband is a native Texan, but we will probably be leaving in a couple years, largely due to the politics here. I don't know if that will be a factor for you.

As mentioned, property insurance in California is high, but Texas is catching up fast. Ours just went up pretty decently, and we haven't had any claims. Between the freezes here, wildfires, and stronger and more frequent storms, Texas homeowners insurance is getting up there too. And it's are only going to get worse.

[WVNomad]

Originally Posted by CarnivalGal

Sonoma will definitely be more expensive. But if that weren't an issue, I would go there for sure. That part of the country is just beautiful. But a lot of that is personal preference. You say you have visited both. I have to ask, have you visited Austin in August? The summers are pretty brutal here.

Politics may come into play a bit as well, depending on how you lean. I've been in Texas for over 30 years now, and my husband is a native Texan, but we will probably be leaving in a couple years, largely due to the politics here. I don't know if that will be a factor for you.

As mentioned, property insurance in California is high, but Texas is catching up fast. Ours just went up pretty decently, and we haven't had any claims. Between the freezes here, wildfires, and stronger and more frequent storms, Texas homeowners insurance is getting up there too. And it's are only going to get worse.

For all of the reasons above, if money were not an issue, I would absolutely choose Sonoma. It is markedly more expensive than Austin (which isn't cheap) but the weather and scenery are (I think) objectively better than Austin, and the politics and food are (in my opinion) subjectively better than Texas. Good Luck wherever you end up.

[DCtoTejas]

If you like NorCal but don't want to pay California taxes consider east slope (Nevada) lake Tahoe or even Reno / Carson Valley. Is it as nice as wine country? Reno definitely not, up at the lake yes but very different. But both are relatively short drives to it and even to SF itself. Or maybe southern Washington state? Austin is a nice place but the weather here is awful for long stretches of the year, and the city has grown way too fast. Property taxes are also high in Texas although we did just pass some relief and you could possibly find a lower priced home out in the hill country proper, which is a more accurate comparison to Sonoma anyway. The Hill Country is a pretty remote and sometimes difficult place to live though, I'd say more so than Sonoma.

[sanmiguel]

My wife and I spent 20 years living in Sonoma County specifically Sebastopol and Occidental. Upon retiring, for 10 years we owned a home in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Austin. It would be hard to say one is better than the other. Western Sonoma County is still a very rural environment whereas Austin is a big city although (at least not yet) affected by as many urban problems as its larger counterparts. For us the biggest differences were cultural. The thing I really appreciated about Austin was the proximity to the UT campus and entertainment venues. The Sonoma Coast is gorgeous and rough reminiscent more of Ireland than SoCal or Florida. We now live between San Francisco and Lake Tahoe to be closer to family in our old age. If I had to choose between Sonoma County or Austin today, I would just toss a coin knowing that we would be happy in either place.

[scully2010]

Originally Posted by CarnivalGal

Sonoma will definitely be more expensive. But if that weren't an issue, I would go there for sure. That part of the country is just beautiful. But a lot of that is personal preference. You say you have visited both. I have to ask, have you visited Austin in August? The summers are pretty brutal here.

Politics may come into play a bit as well, depending on how you lean. I've been in Texas for over 30 years now, and my husband is a native Texan, but we will probably be leaving in a couple years, largely due to the politics here. I don't know if that will be a factor for you.

As mentioned, property insurance in California is high, but Texas is catching up fast. Ours just went up pretty decently, and we haven't had any claims. Between the freezes here, wildfires, and stronger and more frequent storms, Texas homeowners insurance is getting up there too. And it's are only going to get worse.

I have been to Austin in late June but not August. It was pretty hot in late June from my recollection. As for politics, we're liberal, so that is a factor. But currently we live in Kentucky so there's not much worse than being a liberal in Kentucky.

[scully2010]

Originally Posted by DCtoTejas

If you like NorCal but don't want to pay California taxes consider east slope (Nevada) lake Tahoe or even Reno / Carson Valley. Is it as nice as wine country? Reno definitely not, up at the lake yes but very different. But both are relatively short drives to it and even to SF itself. Or maybe southern Washington state? Austin is a nice place but the weather here is awful for long stretches of the year, and the city has grown way too fast. Property taxes are also high in Texas although we did just pass some relief and you could possibly find a lower priced home out in the hill country proper, which is a more accurate comparison to Sonoma anyway. The Hill Country is a pretty remote and sometimes difficult place to live though, I'd say more so than Sonoma.

I've been to both Reno and Lake Tahoe, and I agree, Lake Tahoe is beautiful. Reno is just another gambling city to me, but with pretty scenery. We were there, however, during the awful wildfires in July 2022, so the smoke was horrid. I'm sure insurance costs reflect the fire danger.