- This project has a pilot that is 30 years--far too long.
- It is too large--too tall--& too expensive for the taxpayers of Hudson. No one pays $1,000 a unit here in taxes for both city, school & County taxes. (not even some of our shabbiest properties).
- Right now these 77 units paying $77,000 for decades is unsustainable
The Common Council needs to get real numbers on this project and think about the reality of "paying for affordable housing" it may not be affordable for the tax payers of Hudson and end up bankrupting the city.It's not entirely clear if the proposed PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) is for 30 years. The original proposal was for a 40-year PILOT. The Benjamin Center study suggested the City might want to extend that to 50 years, the period of time the building is required to remain affordable housing by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credits program, because, at the end of a 40-year PILOT, Galvan might just take the building off the tax rolls altogether. When asked to commit to not taking the building off the tax rolls, Dan Kent said Galvan "was completely on board with entering into another PILOT when this one is up." At the informal meeting of the Common Council on July 13, Kent made passing reference to a 30-year PILOT, but whether the PILOT is for 30 years or 40 years, it seems the PILOT will be in perpetuity, since the alternative is Galvan taking the building off the tax rolls because it fulfills its not-for-profit mission.
At the July 13 meeting, Kent announced that they had been able to increase the PILOT to $80,000 in the first year--an increase of $3,000. (Some homeowners in Hudson saw their property taxes increase by close to $3,000 in the past year.) He also announced that they had eliminated the studio apartments in order to create more three-bedroom apartments, so the total number of apartments in the building has probably decreased. As a consequence, what Galvan would be paying in taxes for each unit has increased slightly. For example, $80,000 divided among 70 apartments is $1,143 a year. To echo Mussmann, "No one pays $1,143 a unit here in taxes for city, school, and county taxes--not even some of our shabbiest properties."
COPYRIGHT 2020 CAROLE OSTERINK
I'm paying over 16k in combined city/county/school taxes this year. My building at 344 Warren is 4 units so that's 4k per unit per year. So yes, there are people who pay more than 1k per year per unit. Mark Heidorn
ReplyDeleteI think Linda's point (and certainly mine) was that no one pays that little. Every property owner pays considerably more to the commonweal than this building will.
DeleteBut isn't that the point of the PILOT -- to artificially reduce the tax burden on a particular project. It's supposed to be an investment in the future -- but the City has no money to pay its bills let alone invest. It's terrible timing, bad design, an untrustworthy counterparty and likely to be shoddily built (based on prior projects from the same developer).
DeleteAlways count on you John, for clarity and TRUTH
DeleteJohn K, Carole O, and Linda M agreeing on any issue is like the stars being aligned. Watching this Galvin PILOT spectacle is like watching a dirge wind its way through our pandemic ravaged town.
ReplyDeleteJust out of curiosity, in addition to the additional tax burden on Hudson homeowners that would be caused by the additional school taxes from this development, who would be paying for the infrastructure work such as water and sewer? I thought Hudson already had capacity issues in that regard; and last I checked, Hudson's residential water use wasn't individually metered per house or apartment. Does that mean that Hudson taxpayers, rather than Galvan, would be on the hook for all the additional infrastructure and water/sewer capacity this project would entail? And if so, are those costs spelled out in the estimates provided in the plan?
ReplyDeleteI assume that Galvan looked at the job she's been doing for Colarusso and said 'no thank you.'
ReplyDeleteAnother boodoggle brought to you by Galvan. We are going to get screwed yet again. Why do we even entertain these projects? Do the powers that be have no memory?
ReplyDeleteIt does seem utterly wasteful, to demolish perfectly good houses and erect a giant building that will change the character of the neighborhood, when a block away there is a giant empty factory building that could be converted to apartments, and a couple blocks from that John L, that could also be converted, not to mention multiple other buildings sitting empty. Did anyone even ask the neighbors on Washington or Prospect what they think of the idea? A few years down the road, if this building is built, then another, then if John L is converted to apartments, OOPS!- now we need another elementary school, but it's full of people living there and we have to pay to build another one.
ReplyDeleteThe question is, with so many people in Hudson already in need of assistance with food, housing and childcare - what is the point of building housing to attract even more people to Hudson? What is the benefit to people living here to create space to bring even more people in? Smaller is better, why not focus on things that will improve the quality of life for the people who already live here, rather than complicating things by adding residents?
The property and school tax burden could be lowered by using economies of scale, but only if used to attract residents and businesses that produce revenue.
DeleteWe need a better housing affordability plan than the one we have now, but that certainly doesn't mean this project, with so many questions unanswered, and at so much cost to existing residents, is the right solution for our community.
I'm confused by your statement "[t]he property and school tax burden could be lowered by using economies of scale . . .."
DeleteHow? Neither the City nor the SD levy an income tax. The only taxes it can levy are the property taxes and the lodging tax. Yes, it gets a portion of the general sales tax but that would have to be increased significantly to offset the property tax loss from the requested PILOT. Or am I missing something (again)?
I was speaking generally about building for more density, certainly not in favor of the 7th St project, which has been a mess by every conceivable measurement.
DeleteThis project should be stopped in its tracks. This will bankrupt the City, while Galloway rakes in the cash and residents are left holding the bag. How it got even this far deserves investigation. NYS will be struggling for years under the crush of the economic impact of COVID. PILOT? Ridiculous and iut of the question. Get on this people. All of the complaining in the world is a waste of time. This should be nixed right now. Action action action.
ReplyDeleteDo any of you offer affordable housing? I think that’s what’s being missed as you all make this about you. Linda Mussman owns several properties none are affordable unless it’s money coming directly from the government. No one bat and eye when she said she was helping in the mist of covid by giving away dinners but in fact was selling them. Good grief
ReplyDeleteWhy does a billionaire need tax breaks to create affordable housing?
ReplyDelete