Kudos to the City Council and County Commission for beginning thoughtful discussions about housing PILOTs. A growing number of citizens from across the political spectrum hope you continue your good work by calling a time-out on housing PILOTs until you adopt policies and procedures about how these tax breaks are evaluated, monitored and enforced.
I suggest an immediate moratorium because these applications keep on coming. Two have been approved already in 2015 and two others are slated to go before the Health, Education, and Housing Facilities Board this week.
Since the program began, this bond board has waived about $5 million in future property tax collections.
I hope the Council and Commission will decide to reserve housing tax breaks for projects where the applicant can demonstrate significant public benefit and that the subsidy is really needed. Please review the boundary. Remember that the public purpose in state law allows housing PILOTs only for projects that benefit low and moderate income, elderly or handicapped. Your current program permits applicants to charge high rents for some very small units in order to get a 14 or 16-year tax break on projects they would probably do anyway.
Please refine the mechanism for income monitoring and verification. The most recent housing PILOT mentions a "rent roll." Is this a new offering from Neidlov's Bakery?
Last month the developer of the Chit-Chatt project off Main Street asked the housing bond board to terminate his 2011-2027 PILOT. He said that most of the five apartment units will be sold to the tenants. I hear that rents there are as much as $1,500 per month, which is double what the wealthiest low-mod person could be asked to pay. We could use this example as a wake-up call that we need to pay more attention to how PILOTs benefit low and moderate income people. That, after all, is the primary justification for housing PILOTs.
Helen Burns Sharp