As Promised, More on Newman

I make no claim to understand the details of tax policy, PILOTs, or economic development in a rural region. However, the PILOT negotiated for the Newman Hillside Commons up above Blodgett Drive still doesn't make sense to me.

I understand that industries choose sites for facilities wherever the environment is most conducive to profit, and tax breaks go a long way to create that environment. And I understand that the IDA is legally empowered to negotiate tax breaks. So far, so good.

Here are the things I don't understand:

• Why Newman needed a massive PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes, or a tax break) to site a very specialized facility next to the already-specialized facility (SUNY Oneonta) it was specifically designed to serve. Sure, without a big enough tax break, they could go to Delhi instead, but – please. Delhi is much smaller, and, really – they could do both. Would they really give up on SUNY Oneonta forever if the PILOT was smaller?
• Why was the PILOT so big? A PILOT is a gift, tribute provided to a large corporation which is going generate profits by building a facility in your town. The Newman project will be particularly profitable. Again, were they going to walk away from all that because the PILOT was too small?
• According to the Newman representative, the project will create six (6) permanent jobs. Are six jobs (three which may not be local) worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax breaks?
• Does anyone else get their back up when they hear the phrase, “Well, that's the way it's always done”?
• Why did the IDA give the City the authority to negotiate the whole deal? The answer provided by our Economic Development Department is that the IDA generally gives the negotiating authority to the municipality which is affected by the construction and the resulting facility. So far so good, except for one effect: taxes. As a result of the negotiation, done only by the City, the school district and the County lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes; their share of the PILOT was 68%. That's a pretty big effect. As a County Representative, I'm a little unhappy – OK, a lot unhappy – that I knew nothing about this until it was a done deal.
• Why did the IDA vote unanimously to approve the deal after a two-hour-plus public hearing during which they heard almost unanimous opposition to the PILOT and to the project itself? Why didn't they consider renegotiating the deal? What in the world was the public hearing for?
• Why wasn't there an economic impact statement? Hundreds of students will live in the project when it's done – where will they come from? Unless it's filled with the overflow from an growing student body (which noone was able to show was the case, least of all the SUNY Oneonta administration), it will come from the student rentals in the City. Given the lack of an effective plan to encourage transition of center city houses to single-family occupancy, it's hard to think of a way that this can't have a negative impact on the neighborhoods I represent.

When I first saw those yellow yard signs protesting the development, I rolled my eyes and said, “Oh, please.” I've come to understand the problems, however, and I haven't heard the solutions. I agree with Celeste Brown Thomas of Hudson Street, who, after showing how this project could – but doesn't – reverse the school district's continued staff cuts, said: “Negotiate a better deal.”

Too late.