Same Time Next Year
-
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the problems that come from
having 11 bosses who are not on the same page about anything, as well as
suggestion...
4 months ago
September 23, 2010
Jahn takes Nick K to task
I am sorry but I have to take Nick K. to task for lack of a more detailed analysis of the Clark pilot payment (CCP) agreemetn. Nick, please, you're touting this CPP as 262k the city will take in every yr plus the 2.5% annaul increase in the payment over the 20 yrs term of. You re not doign even the most basic deatiled analysis here. By your own writing on Tuesday yuo state the CPP will allow Clark to remove "some 20 properties" from teh city tax rolls. According to my 1/2 hr of research, Clark owns 21 tax paying properties in Worc ranging from the rrestaaut at Downing and Park Ave (former site of Pipins?) to 3 deckers to MT lots to nicely refurbished store fronts on Main St. Total taxes paid by these 21 properties now is 156k. Thats 156k the city will not receive in the future Bottomline that is not being said here is the city will only realize the 262k CPP LESS the 156k loss in property tax revenune. Net to the city in thsi deal is therefore 106k per year plus the 2.5% increase over the 20 yrs. of teh CPP.........one hell of far cry from teh 262k news stories of late. Nick if you doubt me please go to city website for the treasurer's office and enter Clarks name then click on every property listed as being owned by Clark and if it is a taxable property note the amt of tax they pay annually & then tally up the lost taxes....156K by my count. I mean to call thsi 262k to teh city is like saying a 120M$ powerball win is really 120M$ to the winner...The reality is it's more like about $35-40M$ to the winner. Money paid out over time has a decreasing value every year. Similarly, money not paid out every yr. (Clark's Property taxes) has an increasing value every yr. Why do you think Clark agreed to the 2.5% increase each yr........b/c thats the maximum amt their property taxes that will not now be paid woulda gone up every yr. on average. Then take the 106k that remains and assume the lions share of that will go to fix up Clark and its immediate area.......and it's even more of a win for Clark. And gee i almost forgot, whats that stretch of real esate called Downing St the city will hand over for free to Clark really worth........i'd argue it's pricless to Clark. kinda how that stretch of Putnam lane is Pricelsss to CSX (a tax paying entity).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I meant to add in Nicks defense, maybe he is aware of the reality of this situation but Bill's pal, the editor, wouldnt let it run in the T&G?
One never knows.
Bill I thought I broke that piece down into nice paragaphs, just like my nice transposed spelling. Space constraints?
JAHN'd if you do...
JAHN'd if you don't...
Harry T
Worcester,MA
Let me demostrate this concisely w/o the above verbiage:
Clark pays Pilot Pymt 262,000
Clarks forgone RE tax (156,000)
_______
Clarks net Pilot Paymnet 106,000
Simple enough for even Cheesesteak Harry, the SJ boyz, and the Slummerville crowd to comprehend.
AHHHHHHH another beautiful autumn Friday. TGIF two awl
Here's a sentence I pulled off from T&G today about the inauguration ceremony for the new Clark president, Mr Angel.
From the T&G: "The event capped a week of good news for Clark: Monday, the university announced it would give the city $6.7 million over the next 20 years in payments in lieu of taxes"
Mr President fails to tell the whole truth about the Pilot payment deal. I guess that 23 years of working on the Clark Campus yields this result. Shameless. Disingenous or a 1/2 truth at best at best.
This is like the low income housing advocates telling us their 44 apts on a 1 acre lot will produce 66,000 (for example) in new tax revenue for the city...yet they fail to tell you it will cost the school dept another 266,000 to educate the kids living in their new apts.
Myself, i will be expecting more 1/2 truths from Mr President.
This si gross mispresentaion the good peopel in Worcester who pay property taxes and I have not heard a peep form any city councilors about this deal to eliminate 156,000 of tax revenue that the city gets from Clark as part of this deal. The city has esentially paid Clark 156,000 a yr forever and also handed them a 300 ft section of city street in the process.
Shouldnt this go out to bid. Selling off a city asset
In spite of my criticism of how the story of this pilot paymnet is being touted, I do have to say afer reading Nick K today that CM Mike Obrien is really taking the high road by foregoing salary increases and picking up the tab for some of his benefits.
The city council should also lead by example in these troubled econ. times.
Post a Comment