The weekly link roundup is a collection of links related to Newburgh, revitalization, urban planning and anything else that might inspire change or create dialogue. Photo by Michael Lebron.
The death of malls will fuel ‘degentrification’ [YF]
Tax exemptions sought for Regal Bag site in Newburgh [THR]
It’s Time to Change How We Measure Affordable Housing [CL]
Newburgh school district proposes new facilities, renovations [THR]
10 years after US housing crash, remnants accompany recovery [DMUK]
Add your own photos depicting city life to the Newburgh Restoration Flickr pool to be used on the blog, or email me. **Flickr users please do not forget to remove disabling of downloading of pictures otherwise, I can’t use them** Please do not take photos for your own use without consulting the photographer.
-Regal Bag is a MidBdy Project with a view. Who new? The tax exemption is an ‘opportunity cost’ for Newburgh. Either the ‘City agrees or they risk no development. To state that “we’re not losing anything” is spin. I don’t think the housing development excludes children. How does this tax exemption balance with the school’s district bond proposal to build ‘a world class educational experience’? I didn’t read that there was a balloon payment in taxes payable after ten years. The edu tribe thanks you in advance.
-fuel degentrification…Just how do rents come down if demand increases for ‘shop space’?
-10 years after…I always get a kick out of the ‘gentrification’ fear mongering, especially when related with Brooklyn. When we moved up, our neighborhood was predominantly Irish & Polish. Later it was Latinos. Now it’s Korean. So at which period was it “gentrified”? Our brownstone wasn’t tagged at $mil + in ’71.
The tax exemption for the Regal Bag project tax exemption, available to anyone who wishes to develop in the city, is different from the very specialized PILOT that has been requested for the midBway project. Truly, there are ways in which smart and considered development can occur without rushing to put the G label on it.. It’s really time to stop and assess these development projects realistically, look at ways in which they may benefit Newburgh in the long term, and do it without polarizing the community. There are ways to negotiate for things that will bring good to the city as a whole. Let’s hope there is a shared vision and some common sense leadership.
I haven’t seen the details, but I think Hannah is correct. The Kaplans seem to be availing themselves of the same tax breaks that anyone who is rehabbing property in Newburgh – as I myself am doing with 9000 sq ft of space over three small row houses – can avail themselves of.
I’m a veteran of the NYC loff tenant movement, an early steering committee member of the Lower Manhattan Loft Tenants Association (now NYC Loft Tenants), for what it that is worth.
‘Availability’ for the 485-a exemption is “reserved exclusively for non-residential real property that is converted to a structure used for both residential and commercial purposes.” It still requires the municipality’s approval. https://www.tax.ny.gov/research/property/assess/manuals/vol4/pt2/sec4_06/sec485_a.htm
Credibility doesn’t lend itself to availability by proxy. Yes, the mechanics differ but the end result is the same for these tax deferments in that the development is not sharing in the carrying costs of the benefits that the host municipality and/or collective school district provides. One could consider approving the exemption as reciprocation for Mr. Kaplan’s philanthropic affects toward the ‘Burgh. At least he’s looking to house parolees and sex offenders (those ‘no-match’ grants the city accepts don’t come without a caveat). As this is the 21century, there’s a practical reason why Regal Bag isn’t planning to restart a manufacturing facility. Beyond this project and going forward, I’d be wary of soft pedaling this exemption along side a PILOT. They’re both rentier capitalism and require oversight ‘else…https://fee.org/articles/frdric-bastiat-on-legal-plunder/
Any “shared vision” without acknowledging this is blind faith steered by the rear view mirror.
edit…
‘Availability’ for the 485-a exemption is “reserved exclusively for non-residential real property that is converted to a structure used for both residential and commercial purposes.” It still requires the municipality’s approval. https://www.tax.ny.gov/research/property/assess/manuals/vol4/pt2/sec4_06/sec485_a.htm
Credibility doesn’t lend itself to availability by proxy. Yes, the mechanics differ but the end result is the same for these tax deferments in that the development is not sharing in the carrying costs of the benefits that the host municipality and/or collective school district provides. One could consider approving the exemption as reciprocation for Mr. Kaplan’s philanthropic affects toward the ‘Burgh. At least he’s NOT looking to house parolees and sex offenders (those ‘no-match’ grants the city accepts don’t come without a caveat). As this is the 21century, there’s a practical reason why Regal Bag isn’t planning to restart a manufacturing facility. Beyond this project and going forward, I’d be wary of soft pedaling this exemption along side a PILOT. They’re both rentier capitalism and require oversight ‘else…https://fee.org/articles/frdric-bastiat-on-legal-plunder/
Any “shared vision” without acknowledging this is blind faith steered by the rear view mirror.
Walt, thank you for the additional information and perspective.
Your link leads to a page with the following: “According to Bastiat: ‘There are only two ways of acquiring the things that are necessary for the preservation, embellishing and amelioration of life: PRODUCTION and PLUNDER.’”
Karl Marx’s himself had more nuanced views of the owning class: it is clearly arguable that Frédéric Bastiat is a classical-liberal relative to Marx’s dialectical materialism, which at least tries to attribute economic activity and actors in a more rational and a less subjective and vitriolic manner.