Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Of Holcim and Property Taxes

Jamie Larson's coverage of Monday night's informal Common Council meeting in today's Register-Star takes a different focus: "Holcim seeks 64% tax shaving." It seems that Common Council President Don Moore may have exaggerated when he said that Holcim wants its property taxes reduced to zero. According to Larson, Holcim wants the property tax they pay to Hudson to be reduced to $19,520--hardly an adequate sum to compensate for the negative impact Holicm and O&G's activities have on the city and the waterfront. 


  1. The taxes Holcim wants to pay are absurdly low either way.

    If you picked almost any two houses on Willard Place, for instance, their combined assessments would be close to or exceed Holcim's desired valuation. Has anyone else even attempted to get a 64% reduction?

    This company doesn't want to pay its fair share of taxes, subjects residents to unnecessary truck traffic, has screwed up the Waterfront Plan for another five years, and subjected us before all that to another nearly 7-year controversy -- which cost residents and government millions as well.

    This foreign company seems to think they are a law unto themselves. What benefits do its intransigent cheerleaders Scalera and Mussmann, feel anyone gets from coddling them?


  2. Indeed. The City -- that is to say, its citizens and businesses -- are being played the patsy for this poor neighbor. Its "cheerleaders" -- which seems to include some members of the Common Council as well as the aforesaid mayor (though I'm not clear on Linda Mussman's angle yet) -- are intransigent at best, complicit at worst with Holcim's plans. The bottom line is that Holcim would never attempt to behave as they do here in their home country (indeed the entire Eurozone) as such poor behavior would not be tolerated. In Hudson, however, they feel no such qualms -- likely in response to the veritable "wink and nod" they get from the City.

    It's almost like a bad joke: either Holcim is serious in their dual-strategy of "pay no taxes" and "keep running a money-losing port operation" or, worse, they think it's a joke, too. Either way, it's high time this stopped.

    As that oft-quoted philosopher, Kyle of Southpark, might say: "I call shenanigans!" Indeed.

  3. cted
    (Missouri) -- Pike County and Holcim Inc. are approaching a tentative settlement in a dispute over tax payments.
    A Pike County official has announced that the settlement was likely to be signed within days.
    In September 2009, Holcim had filed an appeal with the Missouri State Tax Commission against Pike County’s claim that Holcim owes Pike County hundreds of thousands of dollars in property tax revenue for its now-closed Clarksville cement plant.

    Holcim made the announcement last November, but the county and the school district claim the firm still was doing business at the 3,600-acre Clarksville site on Jan. 1, 2009.

    Under state law, any firm that’s open on the first day of the year is subject to local tax assessment.

    Holcim had announced the closing of its Clarksville cement plant and the elimination of 181 jobs more than a year ago. However, the two sides had then started to work out a deal.

    Holcim had earlier issued a statement saying it “had to protect our interests” in the case.

    “Holcim remains optimistic as negotiations continue that an agreement can be reached in the near future,” the statement read.

    Holcim had also offered a one-time payment of $350,000, which Clopton Superintendent Terry Robertson had called unacceptable.

    At issue is more than $750,000 in revenue. The Clopton R-3 school district stands to lose more than $660,000.
    By: Rashmi Kalia (ARI-C NEWS)
    Source: www.cemweek.com

    Destroying the environment and expecting the local taxpayers to underwrite this behavior is Holcim's standard corporate operating procedure.

  4. These guys seem to be operating true to form. Bad actors, bad neighbors, one nasty company. We saw all of this during the SLC fight.

    Why would it be any different now?

    -- Jock Spivy