Orlando developer to buy former GM plant in Doraville (Atlanta: sale, buyers)

[wasel]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Except that would be connecting the development to the Doravilla MARTA station.

You are referring to the connection from the Marta station to the development. Last I heard that is supposed to be a tunnel. I'm referring to the road that is also part of the plan connecting the west side of the development to Peachtree Industrial.


Again, you are being misleading about schools giving money to developers. That is not how TADs work.

[/quote]

If a private investor comes in, pays for the development without a TAD, and the property tax revenue goes up in year 1, the school district gets its share of the increase.

If a TAD is used to pay for the development, and the property tax revenue goes up in year 1, the increased revenue is used to pay off the development bonds. The school's revenue is the same as it was pre-development. (I have not seen a PILOT attached to this project.)

So yes, it is as if the school is agreeing to give up their share of the goods this property can bring so the developer can be paid...rather than the financier just funding it BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT FINANCIERS DO.

TADS have their place but it seems that their existence has created an expectation that shouldn't exist.

Look, we don't have to agree. But the fact is that anyone who believes that the the fate of this project is TRULY only in the hands of the school district is being mislead.

[jsvh]

You are making a very false assumption that without the TAD the same amount of development and land value / tax base increase will happen.

It's like saying "I don't want to discount tickets by 10% to attract 30% more customers because I don't want to lose that 10%"

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by wasel

You are referring to the connection from the Marta station to the development. Last I heard that is supposed to be a tunnel. I'm referring to the road that is also part of the plan connecting the west side of the development to Peachtree Industrial.


Again, you are being misleading about schools giving money to developers. That is not how TADs work.

If a private investor comes in, pays for the development without a TAD, and the property tax revenue goes up in year 1, the school district gets its share of the increase.

If a TAD is used to pay for the development, and the property tax revenue goes up in year 1, the increased revenue is used to pay off the development bonds. The school's revenue is the same as it was pre-development. (I have not seen a PILOT attached to this project.)

So yes, it is as if the school is agreeing to give up their share of the goods this property can bring so the developer can be paid...rather than the financier just funding it BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT FINANCIERS DO.

TADS have their place but it seems that their existence has created an expectation that shouldn't exist.

Look, we don't have to agree. But the fact is that anyone who believes that the the fate of this project is TRULY only in the hands of the school district is being mislead.[/quote]

The problem is you're assuming something and forgetting something at once.

You're assuming the development will be the same, it won't. There is always a reciprocal relationship between public and private investment needed to support large developments. You also seem to be assuming that the TAD pays for the private part of the development itself, it doesn't.

If the development happens without a TAD, besides being far smaller, will still put a strain on the government to fund the needed improvements around the area to support it. (ie. additional cross-roads, new bridges, sewage capacity.

The TAD primarily helps pay those cost, not for the actual private part of the development... but in doing so it sets up the public infrastructure to make much more intensive private development possible that will bring much higher values over time. This means once the TAD period is up there is tax digest windfall for the county and school board.

A financier would actually be funding the actual building of the whole development, so that is not what a TAD or the schools would be doing.

If you look at the Beltline, it would have never gotten the amount of development at the intensities and value it has without something to help drive demand to the area. Public infrastructure that makes the area desirable for high-intensive uses that didn't exist before.

If you look at Atlantic Station, nothing that intensive would have ever been built there if it was piece-mealed together through smaller developments and no 17th st bridge to connect to Midtown and the freeways. Of course, once those were built and the pollution was cleaned, it became a high-end development for intensive land uses that added hundreds of millions if not over a billion to the property tax digest of Atlanta. You wouldn't see high rise condos and office towers without that expensive public infrastructure that had to be built to support it.

Now admittedly this can't be something we ever do county wide or at any little development, but to a master planned large scale brownfield site where lots of changes have to be made to create an extremely valuable urban neighborhood that wouldn't be realized otherwise.

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by jsvh

But it doesn't mean they get less taxes. They get the same amount of taxes; and the new taxes from the increase in value at the site go to fund infrastructure improvements at the site.

Since we pay for schools with property taxes, they will be involved with land development one way or another. It makes sense for superintendants to want to ensue a stable revenue stream for the future. Not to mention even I would hope they would also want to work together to make the community they are in better, which benefits schools too.

If you don't want schools involved in land development, how are you proposing we pay for schools?

sorry, i was under the impression that establishing a TAD would impact school revenues. what's with all the opposition, then? how does the math on this come out?

[earthlyfather]

Re. Tax revenues. It is not like Dekalb officials at any level have shown they are good stewards of tax revenues. Ya' know.

The tax revenues might as well be redirected to an entity that will create jobs, whether from construction and development, or ongoing maintenance and operation of whatever development would get built.

[wasel]

See Beltline and Atlanta Public Schools:

But the school board—the one that was in place before the cheating scandal broke—didn’t want to forgo tax receipts to help the BeltLine. In order to get the board’s buy-in, the city agreed to pay a flat amount to the school system that ultimately ended up being $162 million. At the time of the deal, the TAD was projected to bring in 60 percent of the BeltLine’s funding—a rosy outlook based on then-rising property values shortly before the Great Recession. But when the market tanked, it became clear that the TAD would only pay for a third of the BeltLine’s construction costs. What had looked like a good deal for everyone had turned rotten for the BeltLine—and the city.

In late 2013, the city made an initial $1.95 million payment to APS. But the following year, the city failed to make an expected $6.75 million payment, and withheld the next year’s payment as well.

Refer to What happens now that the Atlanta BeltLine dispute is over? - Atlanta Magazine

Now, before anyone get their panties in a wad, THE BELTLINE IS A POSITIVE THING FOR THE CITY. I'm not saying the Beltline shouldn't happen. But any development project is speculative and I don't believe the school system should be a funding partner, directly or indirectly.

[jsvh]

wasel - You do seem to be saying the Beltline (And many other projects like Atlantic Station) shouldn't happen. Or at least you want to cut off it's funding.

In fact, those problems you highlight with the Beltline TAD are due to APS, not wanting to contribute to the TAD. APS demanded flat dollar amount payments to reimburse their part of the TAD.

If APS had let the TAD function as designed there would not have been any need for payments and APS could have continued to receive the same amount of revenue as before.

So again, if you don't want to schools involved in developments then you shouldn't fund them with property taxes.

Originally Posted by bryantm3

sorry, i was under the impression that establishing a TAD would impact school revenues. what's with all the opposition, then? how does the math on this come out?

Any development or lack of development will impact school revenues. The idea of a TAD is that the government / school still gets the same amount of revenue as before, but any increase in value that the development brings goes to fund infrastructure around that development for a set number of years.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by wasel

Now, before anyone get their panties in a wad, THE BELTLINE IS A POSITIVE THING FOR THE CITY. I'm not saying the Beltline shouldn't happen. But any development project is speculative and I don't believe the school system should be a funding partner, directly or indirectly.

I have to agree. The costs of a school system are constant and they have to be paid in real time. They can't wait on real estate boom-and-bust cycles or speculative investments.

[wasel]

Originally Posted by jsvh

wasel - You do seem to be saying the Beltline (And many other projects like Atlantic Station) shouldn't happen. Or at least you want to cut off it's funding.

Where the hell did I say that? I said very emphatically that the Beltline is a good thing, and I didn't even give an opinion on Atlantic Station.

You are putting words in my mouth to make some sort of point.

Look, this conversation is getting nowhere.

I'll leave with this though-- if this arrangement was such a good deal for the schools, why do they have to "approve" being a partner?

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

The costs of a school system are constant and they have to be paid in real time. They can't wait on real estate boom-and-bust cycles or speculative investments.

Then the problem is not TADs it is that we fund schools with property taxes. You would have those same issues without TADs. In fact, TADs would stabilize revenue since they lock in at the same amount as today. The Beltline TAD problems are due to APS getting greedy and wanting fixed payments based on hypothetical future tax revenue.

Originally Posted by wasel

Where the hell did I say that? I said very emphatically that the Beltline is a good thing, and I didn't even give an opinion on Atlantic Station.

You can't kill off the the funding mechanism for it and expect it to still happen.

Originally Posted by wasel

I'll leave with this though-- if this arrangement was such a good deal for the schools, why do they have to "approve" being a partner?

The same reason you have to "approve" making an investment in your 401k. Having the ability to make a decision does not mean it is a bad decision.