Atlanta OKs public funds for studio expansion

[gtcorndog]

Does the city still own this property and if so, why not sell it and get themselves out of a business they have no reason to be a part of?

[Atlanta_BD]

But why use public funds to give incentive to a private business to use the property? If they wanted the property, sell it to them and make them property taxes. Is there a code or ordinance on the books state that unused city property can't be sold to a private buyer?

And yes I can read and you trying to shut me up or insult me isn't making it make sense. Why can't people in the Atlanta forum present their points without insulting those who don't agree with them? If it is already goverment owned and the city doesn't pay taxes on it why pay someone to use it? I doesn't make sense so enlighten me.

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by Atlanta_BD

Another thing to note is that while businesses may be coming here because of tax incentives, they are also NOT hiring locals. They are bringing in transfers or hiring people from out-out-state. They are already not giving back to the area by not hiring local talent.

People are only looking at businesses moving here as a bragging point while glossing over the fact that while more businesses are coming here there is still no real job growth.

Yes the benefits of the economic multiplier is still there, even if this true in the most extreme case.

Lets pretend 100% of the jobs are from out of state (this isn't the case, but I'll go with it).

These people are either living here temporarily or permanently.

It temporary alot of money is being pumped into hotels, food, transportation, and rental cars which plays smaller parts in producing many more jobs.

If permanent, those people become residents. They live and spend their money here! They buy homes helping our housing market a little bit with each new resident. They buy things from stores and restaurants. Each dollar they make and spend here has a ripple effect.

It isn't as if you spend a dollar and it vanishes. (it might seem that way to a single person, personally)... but that dollar goes somewhere else and is respent by another person or company for other goods and services. The multiplier is important.

Now the reality of the situation.... and this is true for most new industries moving into an area... There is a large mixture of bringing in existing employees with skills that will provide stability to the company and hiring new people locally.

Existing employees have skills, reduce odds of failure, it is known how they perform, and they help transfer skills to new employees.
However! They are also extremely expensive to relocate, whether it is temporary or permanent. I work a job thats 100% travel and has to be... the company I work for spends nearly as much money moving me around, housing me, and feeding me as they do paying me. The same would be true for a temporary employee. A permanent transfer still incurs heavy moving costs, which companies often offer sizable incentives to over come.

So most companies look for a ratio of existing employees to new employees that fit their needs. New local hires are cheap to introduce, but they need to be hired to work alongside seasoned employees.

The other even bigger side to this is... the company itself spends money locally. They need materials, utility services, transportation resources, etc... Most of that has a local impact.

A sound stage might increase the business of a local lumber supplier 0.1%. Easy to ignore as no big deal, but that is a tiny bit in one of many different businesses and it gives that business more stability and indirectly makes it easier for them to hire 1 or 2 more people.

In reality economists know that assumption and they just analyze how much $$ is spent where.

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Does the city still own this property and if so, why not sell it and get themselves out of a business they have no reason to be a part of?

That isn't a bad question.

yes they own it, but it is in the middle of a larger campus.

I think the root of the reason is it is still the city's traditional fairgrounds. They still want to have some future civic use for it and control how its used. (aka we don't want polluting factory to move onto the site if the property was sold).

The site still has an amphitheater, open ground-convention space, a lake, a stadium, and a few other city maintenance facilities on site. It is apart of a larger campus. If the city's population exploded over 50 or 100 years they might want that land back without paying a heavy cost to a single uncompetitive seller.

The other side to this is... I don't know what GEMS studios position is. They might not want to buy and the city saw a rental opportunity on half-used city land that help shore up a drain on the budget.

[onemanarmy]

Originally Posted by Atlanta_BD

But why use public funds to give incentive to a private business to use the property? If they wanted the property, sell it to them and make them property taxes. Is there a code or ordinance on the books state that unused city property can't be sold to a private buyer?

And yes I can read and you trying to shut me up or insult me isn't making it make sense. Why can't people in the Atlanta forum present their points without insulting those who don't agree with them? If it is already goverment owned and the city doesn't pay taxes on it why pay someone to use it? I doesn't make sense so enlighten me.

Really? I'm done here.

[cwkimbro]

I found an old AJC article that isn't half bad compared to this incomplete one they recently printed.

Ready for your close-up ATL? Lakewood film studio deal up for Mon | www.ajc.com

It adds a few interesting details to what I was saying and gives an interesting description story of the area

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by Atlanta_BD

Another thing to note is that while businesses may be coming here because of tax incentives, they are also NOT hiring locals. They are bringing in transfers or hiring people from out-out-state. They are already not giving back to the area by not hiring local talent.

Mostly incorrect. I am a stagehand in Atlanta. This means that I know a lot of other stagehands. When Screen Gems opened up, and as other movie companies have come here, a LOT of people I know have seen their workload grow exponentially. They may not be full-time jobs, as this business is almost all freelance, but the movie and television studios are creating a LOT of work for people. Some of those I have worked with in the past have gone from living paycheck to paycheck or with massive debt to living very well, as they have gotten so many jobs through the movie studios. I, myself, have worked on several television shows. This is not a small deal.

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

And you know I'm critical of the film industry because it tends to bring low level, low paying, temporary work to the city.

Seriously? The day rate for even a lower-level electrician can be $500 or more a day. A friend of mine is making $600/day just for helping out with lighting on a current production. Get into programming and such, the rates go up from there. Last time I checked, that is not low-paying.

Originally Posted by Atlanta_BD

Great! Then let's see how many permanent jobs it actually creates for locals, especially since it is in a poor part of town.

As mentioned above, the movie, TV, and even stage industry is a largely freelance-based industry. You're not going to have full-time jobs in something like that. It's like saying "let's see how many full-time jobs selling popcorn the new stadium will create".

I don't have issues with the studio being here. I have issues that property tax money was given to a major studio when the APS budget is being cut and teachers laid off. Keep property taxes for our schools, not a rich Hollywood studios.

Maybe laid off teachers can start new careers working for Screen Gems.

They most certainly could.

I think it's already been explained that the city owns the land and buildings, and the investment goes towards that. It's not quite the same as, oh I don't know, giving billions to oil companies. They are investing in their own property.

Originally Posted by tikigod311

But for the sake of argument, is this not the game we have to play to get the jobs and industry here? If we don't do it, another city will. They will get the jobs and in the long run they will benefit from the investment.

Indeed. There are a lot of folks out there who are big time states'-rights supporters. All that "it's unconstitutional for the federal government to do so and so, but each state should be able to do what they want!" As long as you support state-to-state competition, you are going to have states giving incentives for companies to move there. I, for one, am NOT a states' rights champion. In fact, I think the idea is stupid. States competing against each other within one country...terrible.

[tonygeorgia]

GEORGIA FILM AND TV FACTS

http://www.georgia.org/industries/en...ia-movies.aspx

While movies can be the stuff of make believe, the film and television industry in Georgia provides more than 25,000 real jobs for real people. And those are just the jobs directly involved in production. Other film-related jobs include hair and makeup stylists, caterers, truck drivers, electricians, painters, construction workers, accountants, security guards and many more. The direct economic benefits of film production in Georgia came to nearly $2.5 billion in 2011 and positively impacted thousands of businesses, from hotels, restaurants, grocery stores and rental car companies to hardware stores, lumber yards, garden nurseries, heavy equipment rentals and office supply companies.

By working hard to attract film and television production to Georgia through tax incentives, Georgia’s Camera Ready program, and by encouraging private partners to build sound stages, post-production facilities and additional infrastructure to support large-scale productions, we’re strengthening Georgia’s economy and providing jobs and economic stability for families all over the state. Here are some film and TV production facts that show the positive impact filming in Georgia has had on filmmakers, Georgia residents and cities and towns throughout the state.

[tonygeorgia]

Study: Georgia added almost 800 movie jobs as work left LA

A new study by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. says the motion-picture industry has lost more than 16,100 jobs in Los Angeles County since the peak year of 2004, and that tax incentives offered by Georgia and other states could be to blame, reports Reuters.

The study says that the motion-picture and video production sector of the entertainment industry - the largest segment of the industry in Los Angeles County - was responsible for 118,200 jobs in the county in 2004. In 2011, the number had dropped to 102,100, Reuters reports. Georgia added nearly 800 jobs in the sector, while New York State added 14,100 during that time, the study said. Other states that have added movie jobs include Louisiana, which has added more than 2,200 jobs since beginning a tax-credit program in 2002, Reuters said.