BALTIMORE (Map, News) - Would you move to Baltimore for $4 million? That is about what the much-heralded population growth costs per person.

Sure, everybody is delighted revised Census figures show Baltimore gaining population, no matter how small an uptick. New residents mean more money for essential city services and a more vibrant community. But 897 new people is hardly a “reversal of fortune,” as Mayor Sheila Dixon said earlier this week or a harbinger of a flood of new residents. If anything, the mayor should ask: ‘What took so long?’ ‘Why so few?’ and most of all, ‘Why did it cost so much?’

One reality-based way to look at it is through the taxpayer-supported Baltimore Development Corp. Its most recent annual report said it has overseen $3.445 billion in public and private capital investment in the city since 1996.

“As a result of these endeavors, 30,000 city jobs were retained and over 25,000 new jobs have been projected (emphasis ours) from rehabilitation and/or new construction.” So, in plain English, $3.445 billion and no new jobs — yet. According to the Maryland Department of Planning, the city lost almost 46,000 jobs from 2000 to 2005.

More recent figures are not available.

So 897 new souls are nothing to applaud — at least loudly. It took $3.8 million per person to attract them here using the BDC’s investment figures.

If that is the BDC’s idea of representing “success,” then the city and its developers can look forward to filing for bankruptcy in pursuit of the next 1,000 residents.

That is not to underplay the importance of the new population figures.

Baltimore City hemorrhaged residents since the 1950s, so any positive number is a big achievement.

But as the housing market continues to cool and mortgage standards tighten, fewer residents of the type Baltimore needs — young, college-educated and highly skilled will be able to choose the city. The argument that housing prices are the lowest in the region doesn’t work since property taxes are twice as high as surrounding counties, and new and rehabbed properties attractive to those workers are way above city average prices. Every dollar in property tax squeezes potential buyers out of the market.

If Baltimore really wants new residents, it must slash property taxes in half. Doing so will be a lot less expensive than investing another $3.445 billion and has the potential to vastly surpass what the city collects right now. More than 26 percent of property in the city is not taxable because it is owned by government or nonprofits, so luring more homeowners and businesses is essential to expanding the tax base.

We have said that nonprofit institutions contributing more should be part of the plan to help the city’s tax structure become more fair. Another place to start would be by asking about each government payroll position: “If this job were eliminated, when would the first citizen notice?” Some but not all positions would survive that kind of scrutiny.

What’s clear is that Mayor Dixon should use the Census information as evidence the city needs to radically overhaul its tax structure — not praise dubious accomplishments.

She, Baltimore, the region and Maryland would be well rewarded for it.