[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by BenKatzPhillytoParis

Problem is there is virtually no statistically valid evidence that the abatements are necessary to induce the new residents. Of course developers act like getting rid of them would be catastrophic, but their point of view is completely biased.

I think there should be more study before getting rid of them since they could indeed be having an effect that's worth the expense. But it really needs to be up for debate because we're potentially losing a huge amount that could be invested in our underfunded school, transportation, and parks systems and there's never been a rigorous cost-benefit analysis. It's complete speculation that the abatements have been worth the cost.

I'm pretty sure Econsult did a study on this not so long ago and found some impressive quantifications of the abatement program.