Owner should get fair market value and maybe 10-20% more but in most cases the owner wants 500-1000% more than FMV. When I was at modot a guy wanted $50,000,000 for some land where new Page Ave extension was going. Modot offered 1.5m. He said a hospital or a hotel can be built there he should get $50m. Neither could, entire land constantly floods. It went to court and he got $2m.
Are you really bemoaning the loss of an underused parking lot?framer wrote: ↑Jun 25, 2020I'm strongly opposed to the use of eminent domain to benefit private developers. This one falls somewhere in between, I think. Tough call; I really don't know how I feel about it.
^No. I couldn't care less about the parking lot. But I do care about private property rights. Kelo vs. The City of New London was one of the all-time worst Supreme Court rulings, IMO.
I wouldn't call the owner of that parcel a developer, and it would likely remain a parking lot for their nearby office building (1831 Chestnut) as long as they own it.pattimagee wrote: ↑Jun 25, 2020Agreed, someone's home is much different than some developer's empty lot. IMO, I'd be okay if the city issued a warning to any land bankers that they'll be subject to the same if they squat and someone is ready to build...
The owner is Stonemont Financial, a nationwide office and industrial real estate investor and portfolio manager. They have done some build-to-suit development, but all suburban.
Remember, folks; the stadium may seem like a major public works project, but it's not. It's a privately owned business venture that has already received millions in tax breaks and other public assistance.
How much are we up to right now?framer wrote: ↑Jun 27, 2020Remember, folks; the stadium may seem like a major public works project, but it's not. It's a privately owned business venture that has already received millions in tax breaks and other public assistance.
"Its privately funded and owned by the never ending monies from the Enterprise family"
And it will look so pretty!
has already received millions in tax breaks and other public assistance.
More stadium scam!
And it will look so pretty!
has already received millions in tax breaks and other public assistance.
More stadium scam!
How much public money is going to this stadium project? What should my level of outrage be?
KSDK- STATE BOARD OKS $5.7M IN TAX CREDITS FOR MLS STADIUM PROJECT
"The Missouri Development Finance Board on Tuesday approved $5.7 million in tax credits toward construction of a Major League Soccer stadium downtown.
The approved figure is significantly less than the $30 million in tax credits originally sought for the $461 million project."
https://www.ksdk.com/amp/article/news/l ... 4f4fbc6d51
"The Missouri Development Finance Board on Tuesday approved $5.7 million in tax credits toward construction of a Major League Soccer stadium downtown.
The approved figure is significantly less than the $30 million in tax credits originally sought for the $461 million project."
https://www.ksdk.com/amp/article/news/l ... 4f4fbc6d51
I think they are seeking-
3% sales tax through CID, TDD, and Port Improvement.
Sales tax exemption on construction materials
5% ticket tax cut in half
Some amount of property tax abatement
3% sales tax through CID, TDD, and Port Improvement.
Sales tax exemption on construction materials
5% ticket tax cut in half
Some amount of property tax abatement
1, or maybe a 2, depending on your underlying level of outrage...dweebe wrote: ↑Jun 28, 2020How much public money is going to this stadium project? What should my level of outrage be?
From what it sounds like we're sinking a lot of public money into this MLS stadium and are being hoodwinked by the team. Why isn't there more anger and why can't anyone give a dollar amount and/or percentage?
^^ It’s mostly sales tax exemptions and special taxing districts that are only levied on stadium purchases, and some state tax credits that were awarded the other day. Don’t want to pay? Don’t go to games. The last plan had almost $60 million in actual city funding going to it, not for this plan.
I’d hardly call this a hoodwinking. The various taxes have been laid out in local reporting, so I’d probably start there.
I’d hardly call this a hoodwinking. The various taxes have been laid out in local reporting, so I’d probably start there.
Right but it seems like the only acceptable MLS stadium involvessc4mayor wrote: ↑Jun 29, 2020^^ It’s mostly sales tax exemptions and special taxing districts that are only levied on stadium purchases, and some state tax credits that were awarded the other day. Don’t want to pay? Don’t go to games. The last plan had almost $60 million in actual city funding going to it, not for this plan.
I’d hardly call this a hoodwinking. The various taxes have been laid out in local reporting, so I’d probably start there.
-no exemptions
-no special districts
-no tax credits
-no eminent domain
and that anything that involves these even a little bit is cr*p.
^ Well in a perfect world that would be the only acceptable plan for any stadium project. But this isn’t a perfect world. Some people might be more upset than others about the breaks they got...let em complain. It’s really all anyone does here anyway lol. I don’t mind kicking in a few extra bucks on stadium purchases if it means the city isn’t kicking in general funds or is on the hook for future improvements.
- 474
In addition, the state tax credits were meant to offset the cost of removing the ramps and other infrastructure left behind by MODOT, work that tax dollars would have paid for eventually whenever they get around to rebuilding the Jefferson/64 interchange.
^ That was my impression of the credits, too. Most (if not all) of that is for the surrounding infrastructure, which was going to happen regardless. But it was framed as something specifically for the stadium and people lost their minds.
But as was said, even if it was just for the stadium and team facility, this is relatively peanuts compared to other stadiums or even the one here that was denied. And the fact it's turning a desolate 30 acres of downtown into something vibrant, shiny and new makes whatever small cost or tax break worth it.
I wonder when the drop dead date is for that last parking lot?
But as was said, even if it was just for the stadium and team facility, this is relatively peanuts compared to other stadiums or even the one here that was denied. And the fact it's turning a desolate 30 acres of downtown into something vibrant, shiny and new makes whatever small cost or tax break worth it.
I wonder when the drop dead date is for that last parking lot?
- 1,794
Although we must remain vigilant of imminent domain abuse, I am not worried about it here. I agree that New London v. Kelo was a terrible decision, but the fact is that New London wanted to destroy people's homes, not a parking lot. That's an important factual distinction. There is big difference between one's homestead and a parking lot investment property.
- 805
Although in this case, the eminent domain is imminentquincunx wrote:Eminent
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doesn't take much brain space, Rachel.
WIM Portfolio refers to William Isaac (Zack) Markwell. The owner address is the address for Stonemont Financial in Atlanta.