tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7325368034615322797.post2211228000308077086..comments2023-07-04T05:48:51.066-07:00Comments on They are Building a Wal-Mart on My Street: A 380 Got Taggednicgkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07992454859541964590noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7325368034615322797.post-10498705246129944662010-08-25T07:09:45.362-07:002010-08-25T07:09:45.362-07:00Hi Anonymous,
As I've said before, I generall...Hi Anonymous, <br />As I've said before, I generally don't engage in 'Debates' on my blog ... I'm not forcing anyone to read them. That said, I came upon your comment last night, and figured 'eh, what the hell, I'll try and give an answer or two a whirl here.'<br /><br />These are more or less overall concerns with '380's, not so much geared towards this deal. <br /><br />Funding for developer reimbursements are eligible to come from 'Any Revenue Source' available to the city, so while the payments out now are nil, the repayment structure later can potentially come from anywhere the city sees fit. <br /><br />Add to this a couple of holes;<br />-There are no details for phase 2 of the plan<br />-Eligible projects must demonstrate a clear benefit to the public, and stimulate business/commercial activity<br />-The Developer is responsible for the accounting<br />-380's are geared towards projects that otherwise 'might not be financially viable' (Request for Council Action - Jun 24, 1999 - Important because thats when Houston set out its ordinances for 280's (Ordinance 99-674))<br /><br />Lastly, and most importantly, this does not mandate for the creation of a feeding stable for unicorns, which I feel is extremely important in urban residential developments.nicgkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07992454859541964590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7325368034615322797.post-17539118195099524892010-08-21T19:44:51.940-07:002010-08-21T19:44:51.940-07:00Great information, Nick. But, I think you're ...Great information, Nick. But, I think you're mistaken about details; check out the Request for Council Action on page 62. The 380 agreement is explained in greater detail there. For example, the RCA includes a detail of the permitted use of funds, source of repayment and approximate total amount to be invested in infrastructure by the developer. Because no funds are being requested from or checks written by the city, the amount and source of funding (from the city) is blank ($0). Unless I am misunderstanding this deal, the developer spends the money for city owned infrastructure, the money the developer spends generates new, incremental tax revenue, the developer gets his money back from those new tax revenues and, once he gets his money back (without a profit) the city keeps on keeping the additional taxes forever. Why is this a bad deal for the city?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com