Action Alert: Missouri Historic Tax Credit and Rebuilding Communities Programs

June 30, 2005 History/Preservation, Politics/Policy Comments Off on Action Alert: Missouri Historic Tax Credit and Rebuilding Communities Programs

From the Missouri Coalition for Historic Preservation and Economic Development (www.savehistorictaxcredit.org):

It is important that you contact the Department of Economic Development by
Friday, July 1 to express your support for the state Historic Tax Credit and
Rebuilding Communities programs.

DED has called an “incentives review committee” to review and deliberate on
the future of the state’s economic development incentives. This committee
called for public comment on its review methodology (a methodology that
called for extensive concern for “consumer” and “taxpayer” expectations and
input) in early May, but has never made a call for public input on the
incentives themselves.

Now, the committee appears to be wrapping up its work without hearing from
our broad coalition of statewide supporters. This may lead the Department
to make recommendations that would be disastrous to the future of these
programs.

Please compose your comments on the benefits of the Historic Tax Credit and
Rebuilding Communities programs to Missouri’s economy and communities, as
well as your evidence for why the programs are outstanding successes as they
are currently formulated, and not in need of change.

It is important that DED hears the perspectives of the developers, Realtors,
preservationists and concerned citizens in our Coalition.

Please fax and email your comments to:

missouridevelopment@ded.mo.gov
Fax: 573-526-7700

Please also send a copy of your comments to me at 314-621-7151 /
joehodes@yahoo.com.

Please find below some talking points on the importance of the programs
(additional talking points are at the end of the email).

Historic Tax Credit Program:

– An arbitrary state standard of “return on investment” is an unsuitable and
highly subjective manner by which to measure the appropriate amount of funds
for a redevelopment project. Given the wide differences between real estate
markets and redevelopment projects, there is no reasonable objective measure
for return on investment, and therefore it should not be used as an
evaluation method. It will also make the Historic credit subject to
political involvement that will destroy the market approach.

– The open market should determine which historic renovation projects are
undertaken. Currently, the real estate market determines the feasibility of
historic renovation projects. DED threatens to inject itself into the
market-driven process with unnecessary discretionary controls.

– From $1.00 in State Historic Tax Credits:

$1.25 is returned directly to state coffers through taxes.

$1.78 in state personal income taxes, sales taxes, corporate income taxes
and other revenue is generated.

$4.00 is invested in each project and the state’s economy from private
sources before any credits are issued.

According to studies by Rutgers University, the Missouri Department of
Economic Development, Missouri Preservation, and accountants Rubin, Brown,
Gornstein & Co., the State Historic Tax Credit is a revenue-generating
program that returns to the state far more in direct benefits than is spent
in credits.

Rebuilding Communities Program:

– This credit is the only economic incentive targeting professional and
technology start-ups like biotech and computer firms. According to a 2004
study conducted for the Missouri Economic Development Council (MEDC), the
state is lagging behind others in their incentives for these cutting edge
firms. See http://www.taimerica.com/missouri/reports.html for more details.

– Unlike other tax credits, equipment must be purchased and employees hired
before the issuance of the tax credits. Sales and payroll taxes are paid to
the state before the credits are issued. For each dollar of credit, $1.50
is invested in equipment before the credit is issued; eventually, each
dollar returns $3.00 to the state.

– The credit helps rebuild the economic engine in distressed communities.
Just as the Historic Preservation Credit helps restore economically obsolete
buildings, the Rebuilding Communities Credit fills those buildings with
tenants in the areas of the state that need them the most.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me by replying
to this email or contacting me at 314-518-1797.

Thanks you for your continuing support of these programs.

Sincerely,

Joseph F. Hodes

______________________

Additional Historic Tax Credit Talking Points:

– There is no reason to change the Historic Tax Credit Program. The credit
is the only widespread, successful economic development tool in use in
Missouri today. Numerous independent studies have determined that the
credit returns more to state coffers than it releases in credits. No
one-developers, preservationists, economic development experts,
politicians-has advocated the change proposed by the department.

– The Historic tax credit works precisely because it is a market-driven
program not subject to the state picking winners and losers. An
unpredictable move like injecting a governmental “return on investment”
evaluation into the process will bring a halt to redevelopment. Developers
and homeowners will not buy a building, pay carrying costs, insurances,
taxes and architect fees without knowing if a credit is available. Banks
and other funders will refuse to lend to buy historic properties when they
don’t know if the credit will be available.

– The Federal government recognizes that its historic tax credit must be
consistent and uncapped in order to work, and it has thus remained so.

– The open market should determine which historic renovation projects are
undertaken. Currently, the real estate market determines the feasibility of
historic renovation projects. DED threatens to inject itself into the
market-driven process with unnecessary discretionary controls.

– An arbitrary state standard of “return on investment” is an unsuitable and
highly subjective manner by which to measure the appropriate amount of funds
for a redevelopment project.

– Given the wide differences between real estate markets and redevelopment
projects, there is no reasonable objective measure for return on investment,
and therefore it should not be used as an evaluation method. It will also
make the Historic credit subject to political involvement that will destroy
the market approach.

– Multiple safeguard and levels of regulation already exist. Multiple
requirements must be met for the credit to be issued. First, a building
must be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Second, the
developer’s rehabilitation plan must be approved by the State Historic
Preservation Office as consistent with the building’s history. Third, the
developer must invest at least four times the amount of the resulting credit
for the credit to be issued at the completion of the rehabilitation work.
Injecting a governmental or political approval based on a “return on
investment” or any other arbitrary measure would destabilize Missouri’s
historic redevelopment industry (the national leader) and destroy the
credit’s many benefits to the Missouri economy.

– This approach was rejected by the legislature when the credit was passed.

– From $1.00 in State Historic Tax Credits:

$1.25 is returned directly to state coffers through taxes.

$1.78 in state personal income taxes, sales taxes, corporate income taxes
and other revenue is generated.

$4.00 is invested in each project and the state’s economy from private
sources before any credits are issued.

According to studies by Rutgers University, the Missouri Department of
Economic Development, Missouri Preservation, and accountants Rubin, Brown,
Gornstein & Co., the State Historic Tax Credit is a revenue-generating
program that returns to the state far more in direct benefits than is spent
in credits.

Additional Rebuilding Communities Talking Points:

The Rebuilding Communities Credit provides a 40% transferable tax credit (up
to $75,000 annually for up to 4 years) for the purchase of equipment by
manufacturing, technology, biomedical, telecommunication and professional
firms of fewer than 150 employees that start up or move into distressed
communities. It also provides such businesses with a 1.5% credit for
employment costs for up to 3 years, and grants a one-time credit to
companies already located in a distressed community who upgrade their
equipment (25% of the cost up to $75,000).

Rebuilding Communities is the only state credit that applies to the
expansion of existing firms. Another weakness pointed out by the MEDC study
is the lack of incentives for existing firms to expand.

The credit is the only incentive working to keep the economic benefits from
research conducted at Missouri universities here in the state. For too
long, exciting and profitable research conducted at Missouri universities
spawned firms that moved to the East or West coasts to grow. Rebuilding
Communities has helped keep those profitable firms here in Missouri and
attract world-class life sciences companies from other states.

Over 200 communities throughout Missouri are all or partly distressed under
Missouri law. This includes many rural communities as well as parts of
medium-sized and large cities. Dozens of communities have taken advantage
of the Rebuilding Communities Program, including:

Bunker – Columbia – Eminence – Hazelwood – Kansas City – Lohman – North
Kansas City – Rolla – St. Louis – Summersville – Thayer – Winona

 

St. Louis’ Website Is Behind the Times (and the Mayor’s Site)

June 27, 2005 Politics/Policy 1 Comment

Having recently upgraded my Mac PowerBook from Mac OS X 10.3 “Panther” to 10.4 “Tiger” I now have the ability to subscribe to RSS feeds (aka Real Simple Syndication for non geeks). This is simply a way of having the computer tell you when a particular site has been updated with new information. Most sites, including this blog, have RSS feeds available to notify you when it has been updated. It truly saves time when you look to many web resources.

So I find it interesting that St. Louis’ website is stuck in a late 90s time warp technologically speaking. Press releases are posted for viewing if you think to navigate and find them. Some parts are set up to register you to so you can receive email notifications circa 2002. Yeah I know, we don’t have any money. But would it really take that much?

The Mayor’s campaign site at mayorslay.com is actually far more useful and informative than the own city website. They have RSS feeds for “from the Mayor’s Desk”, “Latest News” and “Podcasts.” Given that if I had been elected to the Board of Aldermen in March I certainly would have kept a campaign website so I’m not going to suggest that Slay shouldn’t use the internet to communicate. I’m glad he is.

I’d just like to see the city website take advantage of some of the newer technology and clean up the city website a bit. It is dated and way more complicated than necessary. And please, drop the “CIN” acronym already. Why must everything in this town be an acronym?

– Steve

 

Why Not Just Eliminate The Entertainment Tax?

June 27, 2005 Politics/Policy 3 Comments

Remember last week when it was announced the Laurie’s were selling the Blues hockey team along with the lease on the Savvis center? The issue of the burden of the entertainment tax came up as an issue in their decision. Today’s Business Journal reports:

Upon request from St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, the St. Louis Board of Aldermen will consider legislation that would exempt professional boxing from the city of St. Louis’ entertainment tax. Giving the sport an exemption from the city’s entertainment tax could bring more fights that could generate more revenue for the city, Slay said in a release.

So the theory goes the tax is keeping us from having more events and ultimately we’d be better off not having the entertainment tax so we could collect other taxes such as hotel tax as well as sales tax on food and other purchases. OK, if this is the case why not just repeal the tax altogether? Why just for professional boxing and why just for 3 years?

– Steve

 

CNNMoney: St. Louis Has Higher Cost of Living Than Seattle & Portland

June 27, 2005 Books 6 Comments

A recent study by Mercer Human Resources Consulting placed St. Louis as the 102nd costliest city out of 144 cities worldwide. Seattle came in as 103rd and Portland Oregon as 112th. CNNMoney reports:

Mercer conducts the survey to help multinational companies and governments determine how much to pay their expatriate employees. The survey includes 144 cities across the world, and measures costs including housing, food, clothing, transportation and entertainment.

I’m not quite sure what to make of this. On one hand I’d say I think they are nuts but on the other I might conclude that as a region if you count transportation maybe we are more costly than Seattle or Portland. Oddly missing from the list was the Dallas-Ft. Worth region.

I think St. Louis is in good company with some important cities, a good association. Didn’t see Memphis, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Tulsa or other cites on the list. Our industrial city buddy Detroit was just before us at 101. To see the complete list click here.

What do you think? Is it good to be on such a list and thought of as more expensive than Seattle? Or do we want to keep a reputation for being affordable?

– Steve

 

Whom Do We Wish To Attract To St. Louis?

I had great conversation today with some interesting people, all part of making St. Louis the cool place that it is. The question arose about the people that are clueless to the urban life that is emerging in our neighborhood. These are namely people around us in the city that don’t get urbanity (note: many have offices at City Hall); people in our own suburbs and finally those from other cities.

I think the least likely group to get it are the suburbanites. I said I didn’t care if the suburbanites ever got it. Others disagreed. So here are my thoughts.

You will always have the East and West coast snobs that will ignore everything in the middle of the country with the possible exception of Chicago. We could have the most urban life here in St. Louis and they’ve never give us the time of day. But, I think we have a lot to offer urbanites of all ages that are more open minded. The big question is how to we get the word out to urbanites in other cities looking for a great combination of architecture and urbanity that we can offer?

I think many people in the city still think the dream is in suburbia. This is why they are so supportive about tearing down our urban neighborhoods and building strip centers and front facing garage houses. When so much of that is already available I don’t know why we need to create it here. I’m not sure if they can be reached. I can only hope that those that can’t be reached will at least be priced out of the city so they can have garage and strip mall.

But I don’t want everyone priced out of the city. I want all urbanites to be able to stay, regardless of income. Sure we need a good tax base but that will come with an increased population. I want to make sure we don’t become too focused on upper income people. The low income person that rides a bike or takes mass transit to work is making a positive contribution to our street life.

This brings me to the suburbanites that frankly don’t get the concept of street life. The idea of an active street is totally foreign to them. You see a few making their way to the city not for a ballgame other “big” events but just to check out urban life. You can see the fear in their eyes. Young and old, black and white, gay and straight all sharing the same sidewalk. Urbanity is about diversity. Suburbia is about segregating uses and incomes — the complete opposite of urbanity. Suburbanites fear life. Their environment is totally lacking of life and that gives them a sense of security. Dinner at P.F. Chang’s isn’t living.

Again, a few venture out of their safe world of equally priced atrium ranches. For some the light clicks on and they get that an alternative exists. I think people that are in their 40s or 50s that always lived in suburbia are lost. That is all they’ve known and they are now too old to change. Others in that age group that grew up in more urban environments might be able to break away from the pack. Adults in their 60s or older didn’t grow up in suburbia because it didn’t exist. We are seeing a good many of them leaving suburbia and returning to city life. Suburbanites in their 30s and younger are ripe for city life. Most are open to new and different experiences.

St. Louis needs to attract people from all ages and incomes from other cities. If that is you please come visit St. Louis and consider staying. If you live in our sprawling suburbs get in the minivan and come into the city. Bring your bike along and walking shoes and really experience the city. I think you’ll like it if you turn off those little voices in your head about the city. And to people already in the city just wake up and enjoy the energy we’ve got. Don’t fight the changes and increased urbanity.

– Steve

 

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe