Central York committee hears hours of public comment on Inch and Co. LERDA request; members decline to forward recommendation

At a Business Operations Committee meeting Feb. 19, Inch and Co. asked the Central York School District committee to recommend a 10-year Local Economic Revitalization Tax Act (LERDA) abatement for a proposed sports complex. The developers said the abatement would help incubate operations after a roughly $34.5 million construction cost and asked that the committee send the request to the full school board.

The request matters because Inch and Co. asked to abate about $2.5 million in taxes over 10 years on improvements, while projecting that the property — which generated about $11,223 for the district in 2024 — could generate $562,385 annually by year 11 if the complex and operations succeed. Developers described the abatement as a tool to offset early operational losses while the complex ramps up and to attract tournaments that they say will produce regional economic activity.

Inch and Co. representatives, identified in the meeting as Joe (Inch and Co.) and Matt (Inch and Co.), presented a proposal that described local partnerships (including a naming-rights relationship with WellSpan), permits in hand (NPDES, stormwater reports, traffic work), and economic projections: roughly 51 new direct positions (39 part time and 12 full time), a reported average salary of $49,720 for those positions, an estimated first-year economic impact of $19.3 million and a projection of more than 300,000 annual visitors at maturity, with more than half nonlocal. The developers said they have secured some state assistance (a referenced $1.5 million RACP award and $150,000 for demolition) and that roughly $1 million of project funding remained to be closed by private lenders and investors.

Speakers who identified themselves in public comment questioned the financial and community trade-offs. Eric Wolfgang, a resident and former school board member, said the district would receive little near-term benefit and noted that previous LERDA awards to the district were tied to speculative development. Other commenters — Tom Shadle, Marie Damiano (speaking on behalf of her mother), Ben Walker (taxpayer, parent), Kathy Long (Manchester Township resident) and Amy Milston (board president, speaking as a citizen) — raised similar concerns about the developer’s reputation, the likelihood that tax breaks would shift short-term burdens to residents, lack of written guarantees for student or resident discounts, and traffic and safety impacts. Multiple public speakers asked for a commissioned crime study and specific written commitments on reduced or free access for Central York students or low-income families; developers said such community-access models were under discussion but not finalized.

Developers responded to criticisms by saying a traffic study had been commissioned and reviewed by PennDOT and that event traffic would be managed under a traffic-management plan approved by North York Borough; they also said the project includes security and stormwater improvements, and they cited a previously reported child death near the site as a hazard the project would remove. Inch and Co. representatives disputed characterizations that the project was merely speculative, noting WellSpan’s planned presence and tenant interest. They said past committee meetings produced miscommunications about timing and documentation and that they had worked with Explore York and state legislators to secure letters of support.

Committee members repeatedly told developers and the public they had heard comments and concerns. Multiple committee members said during closing discussion that they would not recommend moving the LERDA request to the full board for consideration. Committee members did not record a formal roll-call vote during the meeting; the transcript records several members saying they would not forward the request.

The business operations committee then moved on to other agenda items. Inch and Co. asked to reserve the right to respond to public comments; developers said they still seek an opportunity to work with the district and are open to alternative abatement structures and timing.

Key numbers and documents discussed at the meeting include: the developer’s stated construction cost (around $34.5 million), the requested 10-year LERDA abatement estimated to total just over $2.5 million, 51 direct new positions (39 part-time, 12 full-time), projected first-year economic impact of $19.3 million, current district property tax receipts from the site ($11,223 in 2024), and a projection that district receipts could reach about $562,385 annually by year 11 if the project materializes as proposed. The developers reported a remaining funding gap of about $1 million and said they have secured a mix of local private investors and state assistance to date.

The committee did not formalize a motion or record a vote in the meeting transcript; several members stated they would not forward the request. The proposal could be returned to the committee or placed on a subsequent full-board agenda through standard district procedures if a committee member makes a motion at a future meeting.