We’re forced to accept reality of IDA policies

Dear Editor:

“The optics weren’t the best,” the CEO of Ulster County Industrial Development Agency said as she was explaining to county legislators a last-minute policy change that ensured $26 million in tax breaks for The Kingstonian. (“Ulster County IDA members defend rule change that allowed approval of Kingstonian tax breaks,” March 4, 2021).

In the same article, IDA board Chairman James Malcolm concurred the optics were poor but said the board’s actions should not appear suspect. Yet sorting out reality from appearances in this case is not as straightforward as one wishes.

The IDA appears to have unfairly pivoted on its own rules regarding taxing authorities. The reality is the IDA’s policies allow the agency to change from seeking approvals for tax breaks from the taxing authorities to merely seeking input. Section 2 of the rules lists strict definitions of housing, creating the appearance of tough rules. Yet the last paragraph of Section 2 clarifies the reality that the IDA may grant financial assistance to “any housing project” that has received prior approval of county, municipality and school district.

Section 8 complicates matters as it downgrades these approvals by all taxing authorities into input only. Section 9 seals this exercise into a new reality that directs the IDA to review each January its policies and “adopt any modifications or changes that it shall deem appropriate.” Although the timing was terrible, that is what the IDA board did. By policy, the IDA has carte blanche to do what it will with assigning public assistance to new businesses.

Like it or not, that is the reality of the IDA, no matter how it appears to us.

Regis Obijiski Town of Ulster