Couldn't find a good thread that covers all the bases, so I made one. Mods, do with it as you please.
Urban Redevelopment Strategy: Leadership, Goals, Plans, Codes and Incentives
Urban Redevelopment Strategy: Leadership, Goals, Plans, Codes and Incentives
The tax incentives argument is utterly wrong and misguided when framed in terms of geographical boundaries, neighborhood vs. neighborhood, us vs. them. It is futile and self-defeating unless the discussion includes all of the above in the thread title.
Stltoday - St. Louis aldermanic development chiefs wary of new mayor’s stance on incentives
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 64a8f.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 64a8f.html
Stltoday - Tax credit expert, nonprofit leader Neal Richardson tapped to lead St. Louis development agency
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 4d14c.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 4d14c.html
- 9,563
Best hire by Jones to date and it will be hard to top.
- 3,766
^ I’m not that familiar with Mr. Richardson’s Philosophy and views on development. Can you give us a rundown of what to expect?
I can't speak to his personal views and whatever his philosophy may be...but he brings some good experience to the job.
Richardson, who earned an MBA from Webster University, has spent the last 10 years at U.S. Bank in St. Louis, leading underwriting for projects using federal New Market Tax Credits and historic tax credits. More recently, he has led the bank’s financial education strategy and since 2019 has been director of the bank’s Business Impact Group, which helps people of color, women and low-income communities obtain capital.
He also co-founded with Michael Woods Dream Builders 4 Equity, a nonprofit organization that hires minority contractors and city high schoolers to rehab derelict properties in north St. Louis, where Richardson grew up. Proceeds from the sale of rehabbed properties are put into college savings accounts for participating students.
Definitely sounds like an extremely qualified person for that kind of position, ticks all the relevant boxes in my opinion:
1) Financial sector experience
2) Experience in dealing with govt/legal system
3) Familiar with the reality of North STL
1) Financial sector experience
2) Experience in dealing with govt/legal system
3) Familiar with the reality of North STL
- 9,563
Long term on the City’s new policy towards incentives and a profile of a 28 and 34 year old that will lead it. https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... urce=login
Less than three weeks after taking office, Tishaura O. Jones put developers on notice.
The city’s new mayor vetoed two developer tax breaks that she said were too generous. And then she held up final approval of incentive packages for two other projects that had long enjoyed almost unwavering political support — the City Foundry food hall complex and another phase of development in the Cortex tech district.
- 1,614
Very interesting read. I have to say I'm impressed by the tone and responses of both individuals.
I especially appreciated this position from Mr. Richardson:
“We may be an exception, but as we think about the overall financial industry as we underwrite deals, we want to look at it in the same way,” Richardson said. “We are willing and able and active partners in finding how we can help close those financing gaps. We want to be the gap filler. We don’t want to be the first ones into the transaction.”
I especially appreciated this position from Mr. Richardson:
“We may be an exception, but as we think about the overall financial industry as we underwrite deals, we want to look at it in the same way,” Richardson said. “We are willing and able and active partners in finding how we can help close those financing gaps. We want to be the gap filler. We don’t want to be the first ones into the transaction.”
So I heard that since the city removed the tax incentives for Downtown no new proposals have been made and all the ones been worked on were from the previous administration.
How true is this?
And it feels like is real the little momentum we had is gone.
Can someone verify this and explain it?
Not personal opinion la please. People with actual knowledge.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How true is this?
And it feels like is real the little momentum we had is gone.
Can someone verify this and explain it?
Not personal opinion la please. People with actual knowledge.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Check the article DB posted above. It might be the origin of some of what you're hearing.
Stltoday - City Hall pushes to provide clear guidelines for incentives to ‘keep development moving’ in St. Louis
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/cri ... a6e59.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/cri ... a6e59.html
- 9,563
For those that can’t see it
ST. LOUIS — Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant to produce an incentive framework that officials hope will offer more clarity to developers and spur new investment.
The move for clearer policies comes amid a major shift in the city’s approach to development tax breaks under Mayor Tishaura O. Jones, whose administration has sought to renegotiate many development deals and leverage the subsidies in exchange for developer contributions to affordable housing or public schools.
Jones’ shift followed complaints from some in her political base that not all projects needed subsidies, most of which reduce future taxes property owners would pay, adversely affecting public schools.
But privately, those in the development community have complained the shift has led to uncertainty over what City Hall will agree to for their projects, which many argue wouldn’t ever get built and generate the new taxes without incentives.
People are also reading…
Neal Richardson, executive director of the St. Louis Development Corporation, said the incentive framework will provide consistency to move away from “deal-by-deal” incentive negotiations. The goal is to “keep development moving,” Richardson said, while also sticking to the administration’s policies aimed at expanding the benefits of growth by requiring public goods such as affordable housing in exchange for public tax breaks.
“It’s to set some clear lines and guidelines for the development community as well as the public at large about how the city will be making decisions around incentives moving forward,” Richardson said in an interview. “The feedback we’ve received from the development community is, ‘we just want to know what the expectations are.’ And so this is really going to get us to a place where we can communicate, ‘this is the city’s position on incentives,’ and if you’re seeking public investment there has to be a public benefit.”
SLDC in recent years established a new model to analyze developer incentive requests, giving the city a better negotiating position to minimize the cost of the subsidies. Developers grew accustomed to that model and the staff on the city’s end of the bargaining table, many of whom have left since the transition in mayoral administrations.
Some in the development community now say they’re not sure what they can expect from the city and that the mayor’s director of policy and development, Nahuel Fefer, negotiates many deals on a case-by-case basis.
The number of new projects planned in the city appears to have fallen. Last year, the number of development agenda items at the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority, which facilitates property tax abatement, was about half the number it saw in 2020. At a regularly scheduled board meeting Tuesday, the LCRA saw only one private development item.
Richardson said there’s a misconception that the Jones administration is anti-development, and developers he’s spoken to just want a better understanding of the larger vision to “align their investment.”
“I wouldn’t say it’s slowed down,” he said of the city’s development pipeline. “I would just say there’s been deeper conversations about how do we align investment to the overall vision for the future.”
The plan for a framework was originally supposed to be part of a new “economic justice action plan” SLDC is paying $150,000 to consultants to develop. But a December rollout was pushed back to March. Now, SLDC wants to break out the incentive policy into its own subcontract, expediting that portion of the plan even before the action plan draft is released.
“It’s part of a broader plan, but this particular piece is about the incentive model,” Richardson said.
The $36,000 contract with Chicago-based accounting and consulting firm Baker Tilly would have a quick turnaround, with an initial framework out for public comment by March. A final framework could be in place by May, Richardson said, and Baker Tilly could be retained to provide third-party incentive analysis on future projects.
Comer Capital
At an SLDC board meeting Tuesday morning, though, members pushed to limit the involvement of one subcontractor who had previously worked for the St. Louis Treasurer’s office when Jones was in charge.
Though the contract itself would be held by Baker Tilly, a major national accounting firm, Mississippi-based Comer Capital Group was listed as a subcontractor in a staff report. It was unclear how much of the $36,000 it would have received.
Alderman Jeffrey Boyd, who is on the SLDC board and has sparred with Jones for years, asked why Comer was involved.
“They have some baggage behind them,” he said.
Comer served as a financial adviser to the Treasurer’s office for bond financings connected to the city parking division. In an unrelated case, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sued the firm in 2019 over what regulators said was bad advice and an improper relationship with a bond underwriter for a Chicago-area library district bond issue. That case is still pending; Jones has said many financial advisers and underwriters face civil actions from regulators.
Richardson said Baker Tilly, not SLDC, presented Comer Capital as a subcontractor and he “trusts their judgment.” He said Baker Tilley was including Comer Capital “to bring in a social equity lens” to the project. It wouldn’t be an issue, Richardson said, if they chose someone else for that piece.
The SLDC board ultimately amended the resolution to enter into the contract solely with Baker Tilly and require any subcontractors be approved by the board.
“Regardless of who’s doing this work, it is critically important,” board member Sean Spencer said. “There’s a lot of uncertainty in the development community, and with that uncertainty, we’re not going to see the number of projects that we want to see.”
ST. LOUIS — Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant to produce an incentive framework that officials hope will offer more clarity to developers and spur new investment.
The move for clearer policies comes amid a major shift in the city’s approach to development tax breaks under Mayor Tishaura O. Jones, whose administration has sought to renegotiate many development deals and leverage the subsidies in exchange for developer contributions to affordable housing or public schools.
Jones’ shift followed complaints from some in her political base that not all projects needed subsidies, most of which reduce future taxes property owners would pay, adversely affecting public schools.
But privately, those in the development community have complained the shift has led to uncertainty over what City Hall will agree to for their projects, which many argue wouldn’t ever get built and generate the new taxes without incentives.
People are also reading…
Neal Richardson, executive director of the St. Louis Development Corporation, said the incentive framework will provide consistency to move away from “deal-by-deal” incentive negotiations. The goal is to “keep development moving,” Richardson said, while also sticking to the administration’s policies aimed at expanding the benefits of growth by requiring public goods such as affordable housing in exchange for public tax breaks.
“It’s to set some clear lines and guidelines for the development community as well as the public at large about how the city will be making decisions around incentives moving forward,” Richardson said in an interview. “The feedback we’ve received from the development community is, ‘we just want to know what the expectations are.’ And so this is really going to get us to a place where we can communicate, ‘this is the city’s position on incentives,’ and if you’re seeking public investment there has to be a public benefit.”
SLDC in recent years established a new model to analyze developer incentive requests, giving the city a better negotiating position to minimize the cost of the subsidies. Developers grew accustomed to that model and the staff on the city’s end of the bargaining table, many of whom have left since the transition in mayoral administrations.
Some in the development community now say they’re not sure what they can expect from the city and that the mayor’s director of policy and development, Nahuel Fefer, negotiates many deals on a case-by-case basis.
The number of new projects planned in the city appears to have fallen. Last year, the number of development agenda items at the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority, which facilitates property tax abatement, was about half the number it saw in 2020. At a regularly scheduled board meeting Tuesday, the LCRA saw only one private development item.
Richardson said there’s a misconception that the Jones administration is anti-development, and developers he’s spoken to just want a better understanding of the larger vision to “align their investment.”
“I wouldn’t say it’s slowed down,” he said of the city’s development pipeline. “I would just say there’s been deeper conversations about how do we align investment to the overall vision for the future.”
The plan for a framework was originally supposed to be part of a new “economic justice action plan” SLDC is paying $150,000 to consultants to develop. But a December rollout was pushed back to March. Now, SLDC wants to break out the incentive policy into its own subcontract, expediting that portion of the plan even before the action plan draft is released.
“It’s part of a broader plan, but this particular piece is about the incentive model,” Richardson said.
The $36,000 contract with Chicago-based accounting and consulting firm Baker Tilly would have a quick turnaround, with an initial framework out for public comment by March. A final framework could be in place by May, Richardson said, and Baker Tilly could be retained to provide third-party incentive analysis on future projects.
Comer Capital
At an SLDC board meeting Tuesday morning, though, members pushed to limit the involvement of one subcontractor who had previously worked for the St. Louis Treasurer’s office when Jones was in charge.
Though the contract itself would be held by Baker Tilly, a major national accounting firm, Mississippi-based Comer Capital Group was listed as a subcontractor in a staff report. It was unclear how much of the $36,000 it would have received.
Alderman Jeffrey Boyd, who is on the SLDC board and has sparred with Jones for years, asked why Comer was involved.
“They have some baggage behind them,” he said.
Comer served as a financial adviser to the Treasurer’s office for bond financings connected to the city parking division. In an unrelated case, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sued the firm in 2019 over what regulators said was bad advice and an improper relationship with a bond underwriter for a Chicago-area library district bond issue. That case is still pending; Jones has said many financial advisers and underwriters face civil actions from regulators.
Richardson said Baker Tilly, not SLDC, presented Comer Capital as a subcontractor and he “trusts their judgment.” He said Baker Tilley was including Comer Capital “to bring in a social equity lens” to the project. It wouldn’t be an issue, Richardson said, if they chose someone else for that piece.
The SLDC board ultimately amended the resolution to enter into the contract solely with Baker Tilly and require any subcontractors be approved by the board.
“Regardless of who’s doing this work, it is critically important,” board member Sean Spencer said. “There’s a lot of uncertainty in the development community, and with that uncertainty, we’re not going to see the number of projects that we want to see.”
- 805
This is a really good step. Creating frameworks to be consistent and logical will build confidence with developers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Big fail by City Hall. Maybe better to start with the clear framework, instead of the opaque deal-by-deal negotiations that contribute to your city's development pipeline drying up.
Fantastic opening line from the article: "Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant...."
Fantastic opening line from the article: "Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant...."
That is encouraging. Not only would have an upfront framework set expectations for the developers, government officials, and the public, but I think it would also reduce the risk of actual and the appearance of pay-to-play deals, favoritism towards politically connected developers, etc. Deal-by-deal negotiations with the mayors office on top of the alderman, neighborhood groups, etc. is not sustainable. Hopefully this gets moving quickly.
- 9,563
You do realize that what you’re asking is that the current admin go back in time 15-20 years, you know when deal by deal negotiations started (in case you haven’t been aware that’s how things were done during Krewson and Slays admin) and insert a framework and then fast forward to todaywabash wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022Big fail by City Hall. Maybe better to start with the clear framework, instead of the opaque deal-by-deal negotiations that contribute to your city's development pipeline drying up.
Fantastic opening line from the article: "Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant...."
What I'm asking for is a system that encourages development in the City of St. Louis. Unlike prior administrations, this one is struggling with clearly and consistently managing the incentive negotiation process, to the extent that it may be discouraging development. The administration is now turning to consultants to develop a framework to help address those shortcomings. Hopefully it works.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022You do realize that what you’re asking is that the current admin go back in time 15-20 years, you know when deal by deal negotiations started (in case you haven’t been aware that’s how things were done during Krewson and Slays admin) and insert a framework and then fast forward to todaywabash wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022Big fail by City Hall. Maybe better to start with the clear framework, instead of the opaque deal-by-deal negotiations that contribute to your city's development pipeline drying up.
Fantastic opening line from the article: "Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant...."
I don't see projects drying up like the Post says. There's so much in the pipeline that has yet to start construction that, in my view, keeps developers from proposing more. I think some developers want to get the ball rolling on their existing projects and see how others fair before proposing new ones. The incentive issue might have caused a slowdown but in no way has the planned/not public pipeline dried up.
- 9,563
The free for all buffet line of incentives did not work. Projects that didn’t need it go (probably well over half of projects that got incentives didn’t need it) and that has hurt SLPS. We can have the freaking Dubai building style but we aren’t growing until SLPS rebounds.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022What I'm asking for is a system that encourages development in the City of St. Louis. Unlike prior administrations, this one is struggling with clearly and consistently managing the incentive negotiation process, to the extent that it may be discouraging development. The administration is now turning to consultants to develop a framework to help address those shortcomings. Hopefully it works.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022You do realize that what you’re asking is that the current admin go back in time 15-20 years, you know when deal by deal negotiations started (in case you haven’t been aware that’s how things were done during Krewson and Slays admin) and insert a framework and then fast forward to todaywabash wrote: ↑Jan 26, 2022Big fail by City Hall. Maybe better to start with the clear framework, instead of the opaque deal-by-deal negotiations that contribute to your city's development pipeline drying up.
Fantastic opening line from the article: "Faced with a dwindling pipeline of new projects, the city’s economic development office is moving quickly to hire a consultant...."
Well bringing up how things were done during Slay's tenure is relevant considering Nahuel Fefer was/is part of his inner circle. I was very interested last year when I read about him now being so tied in with Jones and given authority over development incentives, something that seems to be quite important to her agenda.
Another aspect of this conversation is that their is real material inflation when it comes to building costs on any project that hopes to break ground. Somehow the city has to balance the idea of trying to dial back incentive while building costs go higher resulting in no ground breaking which result in no one winning. I would only assume that increasing construction costs has played into recent discussions on Cortex M.