Developer asks City of Perry to restore earlier tax-abatement timing to unlock Phase 2 financing for Prospect/Greater Apartments

Representatives for Prospect/Greater Apartments told the City of Perry council on April 28 that a timing change to the city’s previously offered real-estate tax abatement is blocking their ability to refinance Phase 1 and secure construction financing for Phase 2.

Michelle Dawn, who identified herself as part of the project team, and the project’s presenter (speaker 9) described a project launched in 2016 that suffered storm-related delays and moved to construction in 2022. They said Phase 1 (160 units) is roughly 74% leased and that they have used concessions such as waiving application and administrative fees and offering multi-week move-in concessions to boost lease-up.

The presenter said the developer expected the city’s abatement to operate similarly to a County exemption that already applies to the project, but that a subsequent administration changed the city’s timing so the city portion of relief does not kick in until a later phase. “I need that real estate tax savings to be able to get my permanent loan,” the presenter said, describing the exemption as necessary to refinance their construction loan, release land collateral for Phase 2 and avoid repeating prior expensive short-term private financing.

Why it matters: The developer said without the city exemption they cannot obtain the permanent financing needed to start Phase 2; that could delay construction for years and would affect local housing supply and the developer’s planned workforce-rental strategy.

Council members asked for written accountability and tradeoffs before any relief is granted. Multiple councilors pressed the developer on performance provisions and whether the savings would be reinvested into the property. The presenter agreed to annual reporting and wrote commitments into the record: he said the abatement receipts would be reinvested into the property, and told councilors he could provide documentation showing how funds were used.

After debate about whether to require completion benchmarks for the originally envisioned 344 units, councilors coalesced around staff drafting a revised agreement. The council directed staff to prepare a contract consistent with a compromise the body discussed: 100% city real-estate-tax abatement for five years followed by 75% for five additional years, with accountability provisions and annual reporting on reinvestment of abatement savings. Council members said the contract and any ordinance would return for formal vote at a later meeting.

What was not decided: Council gave direction to draft terms but did not adopt the abatement or rescind prior ordinances at the meeting. Specific performance milestones, enforcement mechanisms and the precise contractual language were left to the staff-drafted document.

Next steps: Staff will draft the contract/ordinance reflecting the 5-year/5-year structure and report-back requirements and place it on a future agenda for formal approval.