Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Tax Incentives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge local spending, decry scale of Amazon tax breaks during Redevelopment Commission public comment
Summary
Public commenters at the Redevelopment Commission meeting asked that community enhancement funds be spent in New Carlisle and Olive Township and questioned press-reported estimates of the tax breaks tied to the Amazon project; staff did not provide a county fiscal model at the meeting to confirm the figures cited by speakers.
During the Redevelopment Commission's public-comment period several speakers urged that the community enhancement funds negotiated with a proposed Amazon project be targeted to New Carlisle and Olive Township and raised concern about the size of tax incentives reported in the press.
Steve Francis of Clay Township criticized the size of the tax breaks reported for Amazon — citing a South Bend Tribune figure he described as $4,184,000,000 and saying that even accounting for depreciation the amount would still total more than $3 billion over the life of the incentive. Francis called the community enhancement amounts "peanuts" in comparison and said they would not compensate the community for the scale of abatement being discussed.
Dan Caruso of New Carlisle said the town will bear major impacts from the development and urged that a large majority of enhancement funds be applied to local needs (recreation and other community amenities). Joe Thomas, a county council member appearing online, echoed that enhancement dollars should remain in Olive Township/New Carlisle.
Staff response and record: staff answered procedural questions during the meeting about the geographic scope of the student-success fee (stating the first three enhancement fees are not geographically restricted and could be used anywhere in the county, with likely early focus in Olive Township/New Carlisle) and confirmed figures included in the enhancement agreement packet. No independent county fiscal model to reconcile the specific $3 billion–$4 billion figures was presented during the meeting.
Ending: Commenters said they would submit written comments; the commission took no additional formal action during public comment, and staff reiterated that the tax-abatement and enterprise-technology exemption proposals would be considered by the County Council.
