Phoenix | Skye on 6th | 285 FT | 26 Floors

[combusean]

The tax break is attached to the building, not the development team. Obviously the sales price is reflected by its tax structure but I'm not an appraiser.

I suppose the issue is whether the amount of affordable housing (the public benefits) is equal to the tax abatement they receive with Goldwater and the city at opposite ends of the spectrum. The last judge did not agree that the public benefits received were enough in tossing the last GPLET but the same incentive structure is applied here.

I'm sure the case might have merits but it's hard to take Goldwater seriously when they championship themselves against "crony capitalism" as they fight the deal that's afforded to nearly everyone who applies for it. I wish those people had something better to do with their time. Maybe the Arizona Commerce Authority should stop advertising the GPLET as some incentive if it's just going to get prospective investors sued by busybodies.

[MiEncanto]

I don't understand this legally. Didn't Goldwater win on the Derby? What does that mean for all other deals going forward? Seems bizarre for the city to simply keep going as if nothing happened considering they didn't appeal the Derby loss. Any lawyers back here care to explain?

[biggus diggus]

Are you guys into subsidizing sports stadiums, too? I'm just curious. I'm against padding the pockets of private enterprise with public money. The GPLET is a handout designed to kickstart development - development doesn't need to be kickstarted and these "affordable" units are not affordable anyway. It's a corporate giveaway! Do you want to give me some of your money as well? I'm rich and don't need it but since you're in the mood.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

Are you guys into subsidizing sports stadiums, too? I'm just curious. I'm against padding the pockets of private enterprise with public money. The GPLET is a handout designed to kickstart development - development doesn't need to be kickstarted and these "affordable" units are not affordable anyway. It's a corporate giveaway! Do you want to give me some of your money as well? I'm rich and don't need it but since you're in the mood.

Not taking =/= giving

And sports stadiums are not the same as apartment buildings. One is a much more massive project that typically over promises what it will bring to the area while doing everything it can to offload maintenance costs on the city also free land etc.

Apartments are vastly smaller projects that actually bring permanent residences to the area that spend and generate economic activity in the area on a smaller scale but a consistent and more or less permeant basis.

The property tax break we are discussing here pales in comparison to the incentives sports stadiums squeeze out of cities

[YourBuddy]

Yes I’m all for tax benefits for developers when they help creates affordable housing. Heck let’s build some public housing. That is more tangible to me than the benefits of stadiums and costs significantly less.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

Yes I’m all for tax benefits for developers when they help creates affordable housing. Heck let’s build some public housing. That is more tangible to me than the benefits of stadiums and costs significantly less.

"Heck let’s build some public housing."

Public housing has been abject failure in the past. no.

[YourBuddy]

Originally Posted by Obadno

"Heck let’s build some public housing."

Public housing has been abject failure in the past. no.

And it’s been a success in many other places.

[biggus diggus]

I think a better answer than public housing is the way Phoenix has been doing it for years, with a "housing choice" voucher. Essentially program participants are able to take the voucher to any landlord willing to participate in the program and the city pays the rent. One of the main points was to keep from having slum areas and it's debatable whether or not it worked to that degree, but at least it gives people options if they don't want to live in a project.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

And it’s been a success in many other places.

Where? Norway?

[MiEncanto]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

Yes I’m all for tax benefits for developers when they help creates affordable housing. Heck let’s build some public housing. That is more tangible to me than the benefits of stadiums and costs significantly less.

Public housing is not subject to property tax so I don't get your argument.

And privately owned low income housing has access to all kinds of special income tax credits and also is valued based on revenue, not value, which if you're not making much profit will lower your property taxes.

GPLET doesn't appear to be for anything other than market rate, save some tiny set aside for like 5 units called 'workforce housing', unless someone can correct me.

[YourBuddy]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Where? Norway?

Finland, Vienna, Singapore all have good ideas on public housing.

[YourBuddy]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

Public housing is not subject to property tax so I don't get your argument.

And privately owned low income housing has access to all kinds of special income tax credits and also is valued based on revenue, not value, which if you're not making much profit will lower your property taxes.

GPLET doesn't appear to be for anything other than market rate, save some tiny set aside for like 5 units called 'workforce housing', unless someone can correct me.

I want to go past tax breaks for affordable housing, I want to subsidize public housing. Makes more sense to me than the things the state already subsidizes.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

I don't understand this legally. Didn't Goldwater win on the Derby? What does that mean for all other deals going forward? Seems bizarre for the city to simply keep going as if nothing happened considering they didn't appeal the Derby loss. Any lawyers back here care to explain?

I don't know for sure why the City is continuing to give GPLETs, but we can read the tea leaves. First, the Derby case was not appealed--it was decided in the Superior Court and became a final judgment. The City's decision not to appeal may have been in part because they did not want to create binding precedent--they could have thought they were likely to lose on appeal, at which point there would be an appellate decision likely binding in future cases. By leaving the decision in the Superior Court, it does not create precedent, and is limited to the facts and parties of that specific case.

Second, Englehorn/Goldwater won the Derby case under the AZ Constitution "gift clause," which to put it simplistically requires the state to receive equal benefits for any public money, including through tax breaks/subsidies, that they give to private parties. The Court found that GPLETs in a vacuum are still constitutional under the gift clause. But under the specific facts of the Derby case, comparing the benefits given/received by the City, the Court determined that the City failed to show equal benefits. I don't know the specifics of the Skye GPLET, but it could be that the City felt that they were on surer footing with the Skye GPLET in being able to pass muster under the Gift Clause. This would make sense if for no other reason than that the Derby GPLET was a 25-year GPLET, whereas Skye is 8 years. It's also possible the City just hoped that Englehorn/Goldwater would lose interest in this issue and allow the status quo to continue.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

GPLET doesn't appear to be for anything other than market rate, save some tiny set aside for like 5 units called 'workforce housing', unless someone can correct me.

You and I have the same understanding. It's a god damn public handout. Conceptually it's the same as funding Sarver's sports stadium.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

Finland, Vienna, Singapore all have good ideas on public housing.

Yes hyper homogenous hyper wealthy small states.

Vouchers work much better in places like the united states.

[YourBuddy]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Yes hyper homogenous hyper wealthy small states.

Vouchers work much better in places like the united states.

The state has $5B surplus, with $1B set aside for freaking desalination, let’s not pretend the money isn’t there to even get started.

[combusean]

Ridiculous this conversation has turned to the notion of public housing.

This project is privately run, temporarily mixed-income. Phoenix no longer even builds government-run public housing and is pretty much looking to get out of that business.

[biggus diggus]

Seems like several of us are enjoying having the conversation, would you mind not neutering this one so we may continue?

I don't find it "ridiculous" that humans are conversing.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

The state has $5B surplus, with $1B set aside for freaking desalination, let’s not pretend the money isn’t there to even get started.

It has nothing to do with the cost. The USA has an asset value of like 200 trillion.

Public housing becomes a den of violence and criminality. its a Socioeconomic issue in the USA that you also get in other mutli-ethnic societies like France, UK etc. Ghettoizing

In Austria and Singapore they don't have those problems so their tiny examples of nice public housing are simply not going to work at scale in the USA

You are better off giving vouchers to help offset rent and let people live where they choose instead of centralizing public housing, we tried it in the 1950's and it was hell by the 1960's, most were torn down by 1990

[biggus diggus]

You and I often disagree but I am 100% with you on public housing. I do find something really interesting about vouchers, though; I have 7 houses in Laveen scattered around but mostly 35th and Baseline area. Every single time one of them is vacant an overwhelming majority of the calls I get are from section 8 (housing choice voucher) participants. So my train of thought here is that we don't do public housing but people end up self-segregating anyway. It's really interesting to me. There's no other neighborhood in the valley that gets me as many section 8 calls.