FBI HQ relocation decision postponed yet again. (Greenbelt, Clarksburg: to rent, transfer)

[G1..]

Originally Posted by bufflove

DC doesn't want it, PG wasted over a million to try and get it, and the FBI is completely screwed over in their attempt to consolidate. Elections have consequences, folks.

I do disagree that DC doesn't want it but I agree with you on the elections.

[bufflove]

Originally Posted by G1..

I do disagree that DC doesn't want it but I agree with you on the elections.

Hoover Building is one of the highest value square blocks in the city and it currently pays $0.00 in taxes. Its redevelopment would net the jurisdiction ten million+ in annual property taxes, alone. DC absolutely doesn't want the FBI staying put.

[MidValleyDad]

Well the current plan I heard on the news yesterday is just to refurbish the Hoover building.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by bufflove

Hoover Building is one of the highest value square blocks in the city and it currently pays $0.00 in taxes. Its redevelopment would net the jurisdiction ten million+ in annual property taxes, alone. DC absolutely doesn't want the FBI staying put.

And the FBI doesn't care, nor does any governmental agency at any level, about how much local property tax a jurisdiction loses.

[bufflove]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

And the FBI doesn't care, nor does any governmental agency at any level, about how much local property tax a jurisdiction loses.

Of course. Who said they did? The FBI's goals were to consolidate their scattered headquarters operations into one HQ and for that HQ to be in an area with far fewer security risks. Neither of which will occur now. DC is screwed, PG is screwed, FBI is screwed, and the $20.5M the GSA spent on the search was just tossed into the garbage.

As a side note: the GSA does very much care "about how much local property tax a jurisdiction loses." That's why they lease buildings whenever feasible, rather than own.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by bufflove

Of course. Who said they did? The FBI's goals were to consolidate their scattered headquarters operations into one HQ and for that HQ to be in an area with far fewer security risks. Neither of which will occur now. DC is screwed, PG is screwed, FBI is screwed, and the $20.5M the GSA spent on the search was just tossed into the garbage.

As a side note: the GSA does very much care "about how much local property tax a jurisdiction loses." That's why they lease buildings whenever feasible, rather than own.

Local property tax impact is a very small part of GSA's decision on lease vs. own. More important are other aspects of the lease such as maintenance and expansion.

Besides, they use the same arguments as have been postulated here, that any drain in property tax is more than made up by future ancillary development related to the facility.

The is, for some federal facilities, what's called a payment in lieu of taxes, which never really comes close to what the property tax load would be. That's why when your kid brings home the census form from school in September it's important you fill it out and return it. That's what the payment in lieu of taxes is based upon.

[adelphi_sky]

Hmmmm. I find it interesting that the three remote sites the Trump Admin is shipping 2500 FBI employees are in Red States.

I mean none of these remote sites sound pleasant for someone coming from the DC area; Clarksburg, WV, Huntsville, AL, and I Forgot Where, Idaho. Is that the Trump Admin's way of culling federal employees? BEcause I doubt a good number of those employees would relocate to those areas.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Hmmmm. I find it interesting that the three remote sites the Trump Admin is shipping 2500 FBI employees are in Red States.

I mean none of these remote sites sound pleasant for someone coming from the DC area; Clarksburg, WV, Huntsville, AL, and I Forgot Where, Idaho. Is that the Trump Admin's way of culling federal employees? BEcause I doubt a good number of those employees would relocate to those areas.

You're probably right:

https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en...B2IQoioIrwEwCg

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Hmmmm. I find it interesting that the three remote sites the Trump Admin is shipping 2500 FBI employees are in Red States.

I mean none of these remote sites sound pleasant for someone coming from the DC area; Clarksburg, WV, Huntsville, AL, and I Forgot Where, Idaho. Is that the Trump Admin's way of culling federal employees? BEcause I doubt a good number of those employees would relocate to those areas.

The Clarksburg site was built back in the early 1990s, when WV was a deep blue state. Sen. Byrd (D) pork project if I recall. Either way, Clarksburg and nearby Fairmont are nice little cities. Not for everybody (neither is D.C.,) but relocating for jobs are a part of life, federal employees included.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

The Clarksburg site was built back in the early 1990s, when WV was a deep blue state. Sen. Byrd (D) pork project if I recall. Either way, Clarksburg and nearby Fairmont are nice little cities. Not for everybody (neither is D.C.,) but relocating for jobs are a part of life, federal employees included.

I'm well aware of federal employees having to relocate for work. ANd I'm pretty sure that Clarksburg is a nice area. So is Huntsville, and Idaho. But federal employees aren't compelled to relocate like the military. And I can assure you that the pill is easier to swallow if you are moving from Huntsville to DC than vice-versa.

If my job asked me to relocate to one of those areas, I'd be looking for another job. I'm sure that's the sentiment of a lot of the 2500 employees who are tagged to relocate to these less desirable areas. I can't imagine a young 20-something recruit excited about Clarksburg, WV.

Yes, your retort will be preferences are relative. But come on.