Property taxes are voted on by property owners under the steepest moral hazard while leases are actually competitive: this is the difference between the government capturing a minimal vs maximal fraction of the land rents.

If you genuinely think there is little difference, why do you care so much about not switching to a lease system?

Chicago has relatively affordable housing purchase prices as property taxes are very high. The government has taxed away property appreciation. Unfortunately the deferred compensation promises they have made to public sector employees are coming due and further tax hikes are needed.

The most popular proposal (from Henry George) is to maintain individual land ownership, but impose a land-value tax that approaches 100% of the land rent.

The result is that real estate basically sells for roughly what it would cost to rebuild whatever is built on the land.

There is still a premium charged (in the form of LVT) to allocate access to desirable locations, but the revenue goes to the government/community instead of the previous owner. And the eliminating the incentive for land speculation should actually reduce overall costs.

I didn't say no land ownership. I said tax the gains of land ownership. Nothing changes about who decides what gets built etc.