Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sullivan County Council advances preliminary resolution to begin abatement process for proposed Heartland power plant
Summary
After a Baker Tilly briefing on projected taxes and economic-development payments, the council voted 4–3 to approve a preliminary resolution launching consideration of an economic development agreement and tax abatement for a proposed MV Energy/Heartland peaking plant.
The Sullivan County Council voted 4–3 at its regular meeting to approve a preliminary resolution authorizing staff to pursue an economic development agreement (EDA) and consider a seven-year modified tax abatement for a proposed MV Energy (Heartland) peaking power plant.
Developer representatives and financial adviser Jason Stemler of Baker Tilly briefed the council on project plans and fiscal models. The developer said the plant will be privately financed and sold to American Electric Power on commercial operation; the presenter described it as "a peaking facility" and said, "It operates intermittently and, you know, it's really meant to, operate only when, you know, there's a peak power demand." Baker Tilly's Stemler presented an illustrative $506,000,000 investment, roughly $500 million in utility property and $6 million in real property improvements, and walked the council through a seven-year, gradually phased abatement model.
Councilors raised procedural and substantive concerns, including late notice of meeting materials, responsibility for cost overruns and whether an entity that plans to sell the facility within a year should trigger an abatement process. One councilor asked whether ratepayers would ultimately bear any infrastructure cost; staff emphasized the EDA is preliminary and that final approval follows a public hearing and further review. Stemler said the EDA can bind successors and protect the county from future tax-law changes, and provided an estimate of roughly $15.6 million in economic development payments over five years and an approximate $2.8 million annual property-tax impact under the illustrative scenario.
The motion to approve the preliminary resolution was made by the chair (speaker 1) and seconded; the council recorded the motion as passing 4–3. Councilors said the preliminary vote allows staff to continue negotiations and that the body would review detailed EDA and road-use agreement language before any final, binding action.
