urbanSTL

pat wrote:I don't really think the Aerotropolis Credit and Historic Tax Credit compare. The historic tax credit goes towards rehabbing a building which can in bring in some type of commercial residential business. It makes the city look prettier. The Aerotroplis credit goes towards building a warehouse or doing business with China (A billion person country). There's quite a difference. The potential with the Aerotropolis credit vastly outweighs that of the Historic Tax credit. I'd much rather see new industry and new businesses than a rehabbed building.

Agree that their is a difference; however, their is a general goal involved and that is to increase economic activity. The Historic tax credit certainly helped the Central business district as reflected in the Census.

The question going forward, what will help the north city and north county the most which faired badly on the last census, last decade. I think the answer is bringing economic activity in and around the Lambert as much as possible, which is building stock that businesses will want. In that context, their has to be some willingness to throttle back the historic tax credit if that is what is going to take to get Aerotopolis tax credit passed.

doug wrote: In an era of austerity I would prefer to keep the HTC if the Hub credits means others will be cut in response.

In an era of globalization, I'd take the hub. Historic buildings aren't going to put us on the global map nearly as quickly as this hub might. New York, Chicago, and Los Angelos, the three biggest cities in our country, are known for sky scrapers, big business, and cargo/passenger hubs, not hundred year old buildings.

Furthermore, buildings can be built/rehabbed whenever. We may only have one shot at this hub.

doug wrote:

pat wrote:I don't really think the Aerotropolis Credit and Historic Tax Credit compare. The historic tax credit goes towards rehabbing a building which can in bring in some type of commercial residential business. It makes the city look prettier.

It also brings a lot of jobs! Have you read the Rutgers study?

In an era of austerity I would prefer to keep the HTC if the Hub credits means others will be cut in response.

Another perspective, what will drive market that will not only fill existing building stock, build new infill downtown and gives the best chance to bring growth to north city and north county, I mean growth in terms on the short term and above national average. Not below national average for the region as a whole where the biggest gains are in the exurbs.

No doubt that HTC has helped downtown and pockets downtown immensely. However, their hasn't been the growth nor the jobs to support much beyond - think the of the stalled projects that can't get the finance with or without HTC (Cupples warehouse and Railway Exchange building come to mind). In the end, I realistically think that a big influx of HTC or even the capped rate of $140 million a year will not help unless a bigger market can develop, a better market means jobs and growth of population. Not bulges in the central core and exurbs.

the count wrote:

stlwriterman wrote:

Dredger wrote:I say all the above. I doubt several air cargo flights a week from China is going to fill out capacity at Lambert. The more conections the more the merrier!

Just as important, I understand that St Louis is essentially along the great circle route to South America from China (shortest route). In other worlds, an ideal stop to fuel planes. If anything, Chinese might be looking at the big picture far beyond what is going in St. Louis. In other words, Brazil and the rest of South America is rich in resources and just as productive in agriculture as the midwest. Then throw in the fact that Caterpillar and John Deere, world leaders in equipment manufacturing, are based just up the road whiile leaders in mining are located in St. Louis itself, Peabody and to a lesser extend Patriot.

Yes. My understanding, too, is that at least some people involved in this see opportunity for STL as a transit point between China and South America. It's apparently just too far to fly direct, but St. Louis is well-located in the middle. Gateway from the Far East to the Southern Hemisphere. Doesn't sound like a bad place to be.

And if this project somehow ever fills out capacity at Lambert, well, isn't that what they built Mid-America for?

My post from May 7, 2009 (19 months ago):

The Count wrote:When we think about distances between China and the USA we tend to think East-West. Almost instinctively we presume the West coast is the best way to go to China.



In aviation, great circles are used, e.g.: the shortest direct distance between two points on the globe.



Look at these examples:



Shanghai-LAX 5635 NM or 12:31 hrs

Shanghai -STL 6254 NM or 13:54 hrs

Shanghai - JFK 6424 NM or 14:17 hrs



Beijing- LAX 5432 NM or 12:04 hrs

Beijing-STL 5862 NM or 13:02 hrs

Beijing-JFK 5942 NM or 13:12 hrs



Chengdu-LAX 6262 NM or 13:55 hrs

Chengdu- STL 6581 or 14:37 hrs

Chengdu-JFK 6542 or 14:32 hrs



Shanghai-Lima,Peru 9256 or 20:34 hrs

Shanghai-STL-Lima 9379 or 20:51 hrs



Shanghai-Bogota,Colombia 8475 NM or 18:50 hrs

Shanghai-STL-Bogota 8475 NM or 18:50 hrs



As you can see, the differences between LAX, STL or JFK are very small. The difference between ORD and STL is negligible. ORD is about 20 min shorter but with their traffic and weather issues, STL will be faster most of the time.



When we throw South America in the mix, STL is right ON the great circle. No airplane can make it non-stop from South America to China and St. Louis is perfectly positioned for a fuel stop/cargo hub on this route. Better than LAX or JFK.



The Chinese are smart. They're not wasting their time and money. We just need to find a way to fill up the planes going back to China. I suggest sending a delegation to South America, ASAP.

I can assure you that the China Hub Committee is and has been looking at connecting China to at least some South American countries through St. Louis.

New developments.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2 ... e-deal.htm

Their was also some state legislative progress on the Aerotopolis tax credit as reported on KWMU's website

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/mo- ... polis-bill

the count wrote:

stlien wrote: New developments.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2 ... e-deal.htm

From the article:

The International Trade Commission estimates Colombian tariff reductions will expand U.S. exports by $1.1 billion and the U.S. economy by $2.5 billion a year. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said “the impact on American jobs should be creative and positive.”
U.S. farmers will be among the top beneficiaries. More than half of current U.S. farm exports to Colombia will become duty-free immediately. Other big winners: heavy equipment manufacturers, such as Caterpillar.
The deal comes as nations such as China and Argentina have expanded their exports to Colombia.

and

Among signs of progress:
•The revised trade deal with South Korea, the seventh-largest U.S. trading partner, is intended to increase exports by $10 billion a year and support about 70,000 U.S. jobs.
•New business deals with China are worth more than $45 billion in increased exports and 235,000 U.S. jobs.

Even if only half of the above was true, the China cargo hub is a fantastic opportunity for the St. Louis region, Missouri and the Midwest to become a global player in the trade between Asia and South America - both regions that experience tremendous growth. We cannot afford to miss the boat on this one. It could potentially create thousands of jobs and opens up some of the largest markets in the world to our regional economy. We need to get this thing done.

Not to mention that the dollar is decreasing in value, making it cheaper to buy our goods.

I hope this gets done. The St. Louis area and Missouri certainly need it.

We can't make China stop growing, so we'd might as well ride the wave.

It's so frustrating reading articles like the one below. I've read a number of such articles in which the author seems to believe that the state's budget would take a $480 million hit if the legislation is passed. I don't know what is so hard to understand about the bill; no company would receive tax credit unless operations begin. Additionally, only exports are subsidized, and these companies would pay taxes in full after 7 years. This is a no brainer!
It's particularly frustrating because this initiative, in my opinion, has the potential to transform the regional economy, and it appears that there is considerable opposition to the bill in the state senate.

The idiotic article:
http://www.showmeinstitute.org/publicat ... tives.html

Colby wrote:It's so frustrating reading articles like the one below. I've read a number of such articles in which the author seems to believe that the state's budget would take a $480 million hit if the legislation is passed. I don't know what is so hard to understand about the bill; no company would receive tax credit unless operations begin. Additionally, only exports are subsidized, and these companies would pay taxes in full after 7 years. This is a no brainer!
It's particularly frustrating because this initiative, in my opinion, has the potential to transform the regional economy, and it appears that there is considerable opposition to the bill in the state senate.

The idiotic article:
http://www.showmeinstitute.org/publicat ... tives.html

The narrow, rigid and frustrating ideology of Show-Me Institute researchers aside, I think the concerns about this tax credit bill are rather valid. It offers up $360 million to developers to build warehouses, and to borrow money to do so. That's it. Warehouses, and interest to bankers. Plus uncountable income and franchise tax breaks for the companies that fill those warehouses.
Yes, this would be "new" economic activity. And, yes, a certain percentage of the goods in the warehouses have to be traded internationally. But there's loads of empty warehouse space in St. Louis. And loads of empty land where one could build more. Is finding proper industrial space really such a burden that the free market can't take care of it? Isn't the whole point of the China Hub project to generate economic activity? (also known as "demand for real estate.")
So why subsidize the real estate right off the bat? Why not, you know, use economic growth to broaden our tax base, instead of giving yet more of it away before the thing's even a done deal? Do you think the Chinese really care about tax breaks for the St. Louis developers who own this land?

Yeah, I understand. It’s a lot of (potential) money. However, from what I’ve read, I think the salient point is that credits would only be disbursed to companies that participate in the hub project, and they would only receive credits to the extent that they advance the initiative. Believe me, as a St. Louis resident since 1983, I think your skepticism toward major regional projects is well founded. I just think this is an opportunity we can’t let pass.
You are right that other programs are certainly worthy of state funding/tax credits. However, as you are well aware, purse strings are tight and political tempers are hot at the moment. Given this reality, and the fact that companies would not receive any tax credit unless new jobs and new investment are brought into the area, I think the China hub is a sound bet.
I don’t completely understand the specific ways in which companies will use the tax credits. However, I imagine that many would companies would utilize existing buildings if doing so is financially justifiable. In doing so, some of them might need to use these tax credits in order to renovate existing structures to accommodate the demands of a world-class trade hub. Additionally, much of these credits would go toward attracting freight forwarding companies, which is an industry the stl area largely lacks. Although St. Louis developers would certainly benefit, they would do so in the context of attracting necessary skills and investment to the area. Seems reasonable to me.
It would be nice if the free market would just take care of al of this, but the reality is that we are at a competitive disadvantage relative to other cities vying for this kind of a hub. At this point, it seems like the Chinese are simply unwilling to commit unless we offer them something along the lines of the package outlined in the bill. The Chinese leaders themselves, not just some stl developers, have said that the package outlined in the bill is a necessary step in the establishment of a hub.
Importantly, more than just being a transportation hub for another major economy, this would be a hub for what will almost certainly be the most powerful economy of the 21st century. As such, I think St. Louis is at another crossroads right now; we can either adapt to the changing realities of an increasingly globalized world, or we can idly watch other cities (Chicago, again) take advantage of our shortsightedness.

Colby wrote: I don’t completely understand the specific ways in which companies will use the tax credits.

That, I think, is the concern. The bill is rather vague.

Colby wrote:Additionally, much of these credits would go toward attracting freight forwarding companies, which is an industry the stl area largely lacks.

Actually, only $60 million of the $480 million would go to freight forwarders. The other 7/8ths of the credits would reimburse the construction and borrowing costs of warehouse facilities. Then, an additional, unknown, sum would go to the companies that occupy those facilities - the ones who actually make and store the stuff getting traded.

I don't think many people disagree with the freight forwarder piece. Nor with the tax breaks for the companies that actually do the trading. This is a potentially-huge deal for the region, people recognize that, and they don't want to kill it with short-term nickel-and-diming.
But the bulk of this bill goes to pay real estate developers and their bankers, to build buildings that we already have plenty of sitting around empty. We as a region do a whole heck of a lot of that already. I think that's what gives people pause on this. It doesn't seem unreasonable.

The free market no longer exists. Everything must be subsidized! Except poor folks.

the P-D just released a short breakdown of the bill:
http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... 0f31a.html

Count, you definitely seem very knowledgeable about issues related to the hub. If you haven't already, maybe you should write the P-D a short message urging them to make a correction. The P-D arguably shapes public opinion in stl more than any other publication. I would hate for misleading info printed in the P-D to affect public sentiment about the issues involved in the hub initiative. I would write them a short message myself, but I am not nearly as informed as you are

I hate that the Show-Me Institute's seemingly confused perspective is getting so much attention:
http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/aer ... -committee