A gift too generous
North Troy needs a shot in the arm. It needs investment, new housing and more places to shop.
Yet there’s a right way for development to occur and a wrong way. A housing development planned for Cemetery Avenue is most definitely the wrong way.
The problem is the tax breaks the Rensselaer County Industrial Development Agency wants to give the project, which would bring 90 units of multi-family housing to Lansingburgh.
Actually, the term “tax breaks” isn’t right. The IDA isn’t merely giving the developer a break. Its planned deal is as magnanimous as an early, lavish Christmas gift, the equivalent of a new BMW sitting in the driveway with a bow on its hood.
Under the proposed payment-inlieu-of-taxes, the developer, Gurley Avenue Property LLC, would pay no property taxes whatsoever on the construction for 10 years. Instead, the corporation, owned by David Kwiat and William Dorrough, would pay as if the land was still vacant.
Not until the 11th year would the owners begin to pay just a sliver of their share, and they wouldn’t be responsible for taxes on the full assessed value until 21 years after construction is complete. Even in a region that has grown accustomed to seeing developers receive generous tax giveaways, the deal is eye-popping. The generosity is absurd.
Neighborhood residents and the Lansingburgh Central School District are objecting to the deal, as well they should. After all, development has an impact. It brings added costs.
Residents of the proposed complex will drive on roads, need occasional help from police and fire departments, and send their children to local schools, among other uses of public resources. If the owners of the complex aren’t helping to defray those costs, the burden falls on existing residents.
That isn’t all that’s unfair. Imagine being an existing Lansingburgh landlord, paying your fair share of school and city taxes, and learning that a nearby development that will compete for tenants is getting a free ride. Wouldn’t you be a bit miffed?
And you can bet more developers will want the same treatment. The deal sets a terrible precedent.
The IDA has attempted to justify the PILOT by saying the complex’s new residents would pay sales taxes and
help local businesses thrive. While each might prove true, neither justifies such a generous giveaway.
The IDA also claims the development won’t impact local schools or roadways. But how can that be so? Do the developers intend to ban children? Their application to the IDA says nothing about the units being reserved for seniors.
And are we to presume residents will be helicoptered to their apartments or use public transit? If so, it’s odd that the developers are planning 135 parking spaces. How will those cars arrive without using roads?
The weakness of its arguments suggests the IDA and its executive director, Robert Pasinella, are attempting to justify the unjustifiable. A more responsible course of action would be to tear up the proposed agreement and start from scratch.