Ideally, you'd pay your community for your land and if buying a building (house), you'd pay the individual selling it. it's fair because the one who creates the value of land or location is the community, just by being there. It's efficient because landowners feel motivated by the Land Dues to keep their sites at best use. However, bankers claim that ground rents can be raised unfairly at any time, so newcomers are wary of buying homes where they must pay site rent. http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2014/01/thousands_of_homes_cant_be_sol.php
However, shouldn't the terms of the lease handle that problem? And if the rents do rise, and if the funds come back to residents as a dividend, wouldn't that solve any putative problem?