Below is a draft of a resolution co-sponsored by council members Wood and Yorko to be brought before City Council.
What does it do?
This resolution declares the earlier tax abatement given to Niowave to be null and void since the City Council entered the agreement under false pretenses.
City Council agreed to give Niowave their tax abatement under the conditions that (1) Niowave would complete all the negotiated changes to their property to make the building try to fit into the historic character of the neighborhood (2) and the tax abatement would be rescinded if they did not complete the work.
Why is this resolution needed?
Neighbors report that the agreed-upon work has not been completed and asked for the tax abatements to be rescinded.
However, the economic development entity that brokered the negotiation between Niowave and the neighbors failed to inform the city that earlier changes to state law do not allow tax abatements to be rescinded for developments in low income areas.
Therefore, council members Wood and Yorko argue that the initial resolution is null and void since the agreement was based on misinformation.
Without this resolution there does not seem to be a way to rescind the tax abatements given to Niowave even though they did not complete all the items on the negotiated scope of work.
Niowave claims they have already spent more than was agreed to spend in getting the work done and claims most of the works has been done anyway.
What else has been done to prevent these problems in the future?
Council members have already changed procedures for granting special land use permits to prevent another manufacturing facility to accidentally get permission to be built in a residential area.
State representative Andy Schor has also proposed a bill to correct the flaw in state law that does not allow municipalities to rescind tax abatements for companies who are out of compliance with the conditions for having received the tax abatement, but even if this passes it will not be retroactive.
What does it do?
This resolution declares the earlier tax abatement given to Niowave to be null and void since the City Council entered the agreement under false pretenses.
City Council agreed to give Niowave their tax abatement under the conditions that (1) Niowave would complete all the negotiated changes to their property to make the building try to fit into the historic character of the neighborhood (2) and the tax abatement would be rescinded if they did not complete the work.
Why is this resolution needed?
Neighbors report that the agreed-upon work has not been completed and asked for the tax abatements to be rescinded.
However, the economic development entity that brokered the negotiation between Niowave and the neighbors failed to inform the city that earlier changes to state law do not allow tax abatements to be rescinded for developments in low income areas.
Therefore, council members Wood and Yorko argue that the initial resolution is null and void since the agreement was based on misinformation.
Without this resolution there does not seem to be a way to rescind the tax abatements given to Niowave even though they did not complete all the items on the negotiated scope of work.
Niowave claims they have already spent more than was agreed to spend in getting the work done and claims most of the works has been done anyway.
What else has been done to prevent these problems in the future?
Council members have already changed procedures for granting special land use permits to prevent another manufacturing facility to accidentally get permission to be built in a residential area.
State representative Andy Schor has also proposed a bill to correct the flaw in state law that does not allow municipalities to rescind tax abatements for companies who are out of compliance with the conditions for having received the tax abatement, but even if this passes it will not be retroactive.
RSS Feed
