Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the building stay, but not for Avalon Bay to takeover. They don't have the best record of quality housing around the country.
The fact is that GC would have to take on a big chunk of the tax burden on property that isn't currently taxed. Why can't we just turn it into a Community Center so that our kids, seniors, etc. can use it for meetings and events?
It doesn't strictly have to be rentals. As you can see from Sean's photos above, GC has plenty of rental property. It's not like there is a real shortage of it in GC.
The fact is that GC would have to take on a big chunk of the tax burden on property that isn't currently taxed. Why can't we just turn it into a Community Center so that our kids, seniors, etc. can use it for meetings and events?
I don't get your logic here at all....
Right now, it's costing village taxpayers $200,000 a year. It already cost $8.5 million to purchase back in 1993. In the estimates just to "mothball" the property, it would cost the village $13.9 million dollars on top of $200,000 yearly from here on out....if just simply boarding up the windows is going to cost $13.9 million how much do you think it would cost to have the village pay out of pocket to convert it into a Community Center? BTW, as far as I know, according to the current proposal the first floor of the building would be available to GC residents to use as they like, at no cost.
To demolish the building is going to cost village taxpayers $6 million at the very least, not including cleanup...and also not including costs of construction of athletic fields. That's six million bucks (at least) to have a vacant lot and an utter waste of the over $10 million already invested in preserving the property by the Village of Garden City and it's taxpayers.
The only way to get it on the tax roll whatsoever is to sell it to a private development company. Yes, Avalon Bay will get a discount on their taxes - BUT THEY WILL STILL BE PAYING TAXES! Taxes that will more than cover the increased "burden" on the schools and infrastructure and - most importantly - taxes that will prevent the village taxpayers from having to shell out several million dollars in the other two proposed scenarios. How are you not seeing this?
I don't see how you can express concern over GC residents picking up the "tax burden" for AvalonBay's discounted tax bill, yet express desire for GC residents to pick up the tax burden on what would be an immensely more expensive community center, athletic fields or demolition. What am I missing here? Am I just losing my mind?
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the tax due on AVB for the first 20 years would be a total of 30 million....and they would only pay 6 million of that in PILOT payments. So, aren't the taxpayers burdened with the rest of the 24 million over that time?
If so, then I'd rather the money go into destroying it and rebuilding something useful.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the tax due on AVB for the first 20 years would be a total of 30 million....and they would only pay 6 million of that in PILOT payments. So, aren't the taxpayers burdened with the rest of the 24 million over that time?
If so, then I'd rather the money go into destroying it and rebuilding something useful.
No, absolutely not. Let me try explaining this again more thoroughly...
Currently, you have a situation where this building and property are owned by the Village of Garden City, a municipal corporation. According to the reports, residents have been paying $200,000 (collectively) yearly in upkeep fees since it was purchased in 1993 in addition to paying for it's $8.5 million purchase price as a portion of their village tax bill. Since the property is owned by a municipal corporation, it is entirely tax exempt in terms of Town, County, School and other special district taxes. Obviously, the village also isn't paying taxes to itself. Now, just because the property itself is "tax exempt" doesn't mean that it's assessed portion of the respective County, Town, Village, school and other special district's operating budgets disappear - it only means that these expenses are currently passed on to the taxpayers in the village.
Under the redevelopment proposal, Garden City would continue to own the property/buildings and allow Avalon Bay to pay for it's restoration/conversion to apartments and lease the space out to them. When it's said that Avalon Bay will be making "Payments in Lieu of Taxes", it simply means that this is the money AB will be paying towards deferring the current exempted costs of the property away from the tax payers who are solely shouldering the burden at present.
So, for instance....St. Paul's property taxes were assessed at $583,483.31, and school taxes assessed at $2,438,798.04 last year for a total cost of $3,022,281.35 to the taxpayers, in addition to village taxes that I do not have data available for. Now look at that figure and consider that the $1,000,000.00 PILOTS payment scheduled from Avalon Bay in it's first year would result in a 33% lower burden on the taxpayer in regards to what they are currently splitting on the exempted property. Of the three apparent options outlined by the Board of Trustees, this is the only viable option that effectively lowers taxes instead of increasing them. Were the building to be mothballed or demolished, that $3 million dollar/year figure wouldn't disappear, it'd only be compounded by the costs of maintenance, demolition, cleanup and construction of athletic fields. On top of that, Avalon Bay would be providing another $1 million dollars to the village for improvement of the athletic fields that already exist on the property, the two outbuildings used by the village for public functions and providing residents with a community center (paid for by Avalon Bay) at no cost within the main building at St. Paul's.
So are they getting a break on taxes? Technically, they're not even "paying taxes" directly since they're tenants of the village, but like renters in all properties - their rent (PILOT) is contributing to considerably soften the burden on all taxpayers in the village. It's very important to keep in mind, this is not a private sale. It's a unique agreement that allows the village and residents of Garden City to have a considerable amount of oversight over the use and preservation of the premises while still collecting a large chunk of change towards the tax bill. If it were privately sold, there would be no opinion polls or other controversy and the new owners could build whatever they want there and pay full rate taxes (which, by the way, Avalon Bay will do after 20 years....while still having to operate according to the rules GC and it's residents set forth).
So if you wanna sell it privately to someone who's gonna tear it down, I still hope they build an illegal immigrant hiring center or concrete factory there.
But aren't the PILOTS fixed over time? I don't think they are indexed to increase with reassessments. If so, and that property is reassessed, the burden to the village may actually increase over time vs. the assessed value of an empty lot with a few ball fields on it.
But aren't the PILOTS fixed over time? I don't think they are indexed to increase with reassessments. If so, and that property is reassessed, the burden to the village may actually increase over time vs. the assessed value of an empty lot with a few ball fields on it.
Nah, that's not the way it works either. If it's an empty lot with ballfields and the assessment decreases, the operating budget for those several layers of government doesn't decrease - it's only made up with a higher tax rate for properties within it's jurisdiction, namely the Village of Garden City. If that were the case, everyone's taxes would effectively stay exactly the same as they are now, which is to say they would be higher than if the Avalon Bay proposal goes through. The PILOT are fixed over 20 years and then the property is assessed and taxed at full rate.
edit: It also appears, from that article, that the village will be entitled to some sort of profit sharing agreement from the Avalon Bay rentals.
Quote:
PILOTS are payments in lieu of taxes. In October, 2007, AvalonBay initially proposed a 35-year PILOT term and projected that $29,500,000 would be paid over the period of the 35-year term. However, in their enhanced proposal, the PILOT term has been shortened to 20 years, after which property taxes are to be paid at full market rate, so that the Village and school district would garner the benefit of 15 additional years of taxes at the market rate.
The $3,900,000 present value for the PILOT program in the first 20 years does not take into the account the benefit of years 21-99. If the ensuing years are taken into account, using the Mayor's Committee's assumptions of a 4 percent discount rate and a 5 percent tax growth rate, the new breakdown is as follows:
Sum of PILOT payments years 1-20:$6,130,317.00
Present Value of the 20-year PILOT payments: $3,910.580.00
Sum of tax payments years 21-35: $53,064,752.00
Present Value of 15 years taxes (21-35) $17,322,559.00
Sum of payments years 1-99: $2,278,823,815.00
Present Value of Years 1-99: $130,718.087.00
of which approximately 60 percent would be distributed to the Village, 30 percent to the school district and 10 percent to the county.
The Village would also share in the net operating income of the project and receive a percentage from a sale or refinancing after AvalonBay achieves the agreed upon return on its investment. (See page 16, Mayor's Committee Summary Report, July, 2008)
AvalonBay has offered to pay for $1,000,000 of improvements to Cluett Hall and/or the Field House and do the work.
This is the first chance I have had to weigh in on this situation. I was one of the last students in St. Mary's in Garden City. This was the sister school to St. Paul's. The two schools combined to become co-ed in the end. Both buildings were beautiful. It was like living in a different time. There were parts of the buildings that were considered " unsafe " for us, however we were always peeking around. I was heartbroken when the tore that building down to make way for homes. I truly believe that they should restore St. Paul's and open it to the public for viewing. People would not believe what is there. At one time we had a beautiful pool, apartments for the teachers etc. On one of our ventures we unearthed dance shoes, pots, pans, and old graduations dresses and LENOX dishes from the 30's or 40's. I have often wondered what happend to all of that stuff. To loose that building will be a crying shame. DO NOT LET THEM TAKE IT AWAY FROM YOU ! Just my thoughts!
1. It doesn't take into consideration the increase in costs to GC from having Avalon Bay there (school, sanitation, roads, etc.)
2. Avalon Bay's portion of their tax burden during the PILOT period will gradually decrease. If the PILOT payments are fixed, then as the property increases in value and the town passes bigger budgets, the "tax help" (ie. AB's portion) to the community through PILOT payments will be shrinking.
You might argue that is better than nothing, but I'm not sure that small PILOT help (6 million only for 20 yrs) is worth losing control of St. Paul's to a company that doesn't always have the best track record.
To me, it looks like a sweet deal for AB....for GC, not so much.
1. It doesn't take into consideration the increase in costs to GC from having Avalon Bay there (school, sanitation, roads, etc.)
2. Avalon Bay's portion of their tax burden during the PILOT period will gradually decrease. If the PILOT payments are fixed, then as the property increases in value and the town passes bigger budgets, the "tax help" (ie. AB's portion) to the community through PILOT payments will be shrinking.
You might argue that is better than nothing, but I'm not sure that small PILOT help (6 million only for 20 yrs) is worth losing control of St. Paul's to a company that doesn't always have the best track record.
To me, it looks like a sweet deal for AB....for GC, not so much.
1: If you read the article linked in my last post, it says that Avalon Bay would privately contract a sanitation company, and that the village fire and police departments have been contacted, thoroughly reviewed the potential impact and stated that no extra personnel or equipment will be required. The village board has already approved the construction of additional parking spaces, so I doubt they're seeing any additional "cost" in that regard". Now with the schools, I was incorrect earlier when I was assuming that Avalon Bay would pay full tax rate because I didn't know about the 20 year PILOT payments....however, that article also states that the 900+ rental properties currently in the GC school district only yield around 35 school age children, and that an analysis by an independent firm and an assessment of Avalon Bay's other Long Island properties estimates that the total number of school age children residing in St. Paul's should be around EIGHT, which would be a negligible cost over that 20 year period.
2: It's 5 million for the first five years and then the remainder over the next 15 years. I'm assuming they changed it to a front-loaded deal because they're expecting the taxes to increase sharply over the next year or so. Don't forget that after 20 years, they pay full tax rate in regards to property and schools....on a building that the village still owns! You're still thinking about the "burdens" completely wrong. The village/town/county and school district are still going to raise their taxes regardless of what the assessment is on the St. Paul's property. No matter what way you look at it, whether it's demolition or mothballing, it is costing village taxpayers more money than having Avalon Bay there. If the assessment increases, that's a good thing and just means that AB will be paying more taxes come year 21 of their lease. Garden City doesn't "lose control" of the building - they still own it! Avalon Bay has to listen to the village in regards to everything they do with the property. They are a tenant, they will not own the building or property.
It's a good deal for both from where I'm sitting. Beats the heck out of the two alternatives. Seems to me that you and other village residents are just reaching for straws at this point and have some other, strange underlying motive for not wanting it done.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
