Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning committee advances 15‑year, 100% CRA abatement for Raymond James; councilors press for job and revenue details
Summary
The Planning, Annexation and Codes committee voted to call legislation out of committee to grant Raymond James Company a 100% tax abatement on improved value for 15 years for two downtown parcels, and to remove the parcels from the city’s TIF district. Councilors asked for more detail on projected jobs, abatement value and school revenue impacts.
The Planning, Annexation and Codes committee on Oct. 6 moved to call legislation to the full Baberton City Council that would grant Raymond James Company a 100% Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) tax abatement for 15 years on improved value for parcels 01.12849 and 01.03928, to support a downtown expansion and job creation.
Director Carr presented the request and told the committee that, without passage of the 100% abatement, the company could receive a 75% tax rebate but “he cannot start work until this is passed,” according to meeting remarks. Committee members repeatedly asked for more details before a final council vote, including the number of new jobs the company expects to add and the estimated total abatement value over 15 years.
Councilor Garrett Hart asked whether the expansion depends on the abatement and was told the project could not begin at full scale without the 100% CRA approval. Committee members noted the schools had voted in favor of the abatement at a prior meeting, but that the city had not yet received a schools’ letter for the council packet; Director Carr said she would forward the school’s letter and other requested numbers.
Committee members pressed for an explanation of fiscal impacts. As presented, the abatement would apply only to increased (improved) taxable value; Director Carr said the schools would forgo a portion of future revenue on the improved value during the abatement period. One councilor suggested a shorter or renewable abatement cycle that would require the company to reapply periodically; members asked staff to provide comparable figures and the estimated abatement amount before the full council takes a vote.
The committee also moved forward an ordinance amendment to remove the same parcels from the city’s tax increment finance (TIF) district (ordinance 91‑20‑19). Both items were requested for one reading with emergency wording and were called out of committee by voice vote.
Discussion vs. decision: The committee’s action was to call the items to the full council agenda for consideration; no final adoption of the abatement or the TIF amendment occurred at this meeting. Staff committed to provide job counts, estimated abatement values and the schools’ letter prior to the council vote.
