Brutus_buckeye

^ No, my point is that the NFL and sports entities will always play cities off each other even it if means downsizing from a large market like LA to a small market with eager owners willing to throw money at it (or an eager city council) like st. Louis or Nashville. Leaving the large market void is helpful because it creates the threat that a team can easily move back there because it is a known entity and has the population and wealth to make it there. THat is not the case for small markets like Columbus. Point being, If Philly moves, it will be taken care of down the line and they will eventually end up with another team again. Columbus being a small market does not get the favored treatment. That is my main point.

If the NFL has taught anyone anything (and NBA) market size is irrelevant for moving teams. LA moved to Oakland and St. Louis leaving htat market void; Houston moving to Nashville; Cleveland move. In the NBA you had Seattle moving to Oklahoma City of all places. The difference between what Garber says in dealing with Columbus vs Philly is that being committed to the Philly market means that if Philly loses their team, they will receive first priority when another team wants to move to the market or in the next expansion phase if they have their act together. Being committed to Columbus market is just posturing to continue to sell tickets and not burn the bridge until they are completely out of town. If Columbus leaves, they are not getting a team back (especially if there is a team in Cincy)

^ That is very true. 30 years ago there were less people moving in and out of the region and people stayed in the area they grew up in. There are now a lot of people who move between both states more freely.

The thing is, all these developments can negotiate down the taxes. CPS had the power to demand this because they owned the land the stadium and had a much bigger say in whether the deal got done and more control over a negotiated tax payout. As for Citi-Rama, the school board does not control the land. The school board can be cut out of negotiations with developers of that site (or at least their influence strongly muted) if politicians in the city/county/ and in Columbus decide the school board's opinion of value does not matter in this case and the economic development is much more important in this project. Not saying it will happen but the school board has less power over the land it does not own in this case.

The school board's stubbornness on this $2 million number using the 1999 agreement is just maddening. They act like they took a hit and need to be made whole yet, by giving the property tax abatement in 1999 they actually come out much better than they would have if they did not give the abatement. It is pure lunacy on their part. The number $ 2million was an artificial number that essentially caused no development to occur. The FMV of the taxes to make the school board whole was $750k. How do I know this? Because that is what FC was willing to pay on the open market through negotiations, That was their max. The people advising them on this $2 million figure are just not realistic.

' Uber can get you there quicker.

^ Jake how I would love to have a beer with you to hear your stories.

The old system was a disaster. They mayor had zero power and was only a figurehead. People wanted a central point of contact and under the old system the mayor had really no more power than any of the other 9 members of council. The mayor had some ceremonial functions and was able to appoint committee heads, but really they were just one vote out of 9 and nothing more. When you have factions in small groups, it was easy to see how there was not a central voice setting policy and keeping people on task. Council was just a group of individuals with competing interests without anyone to keep them on task. It made it much harder to accomplish larger projects. Things like 3CDC could not have been accomplished under the old system. Same with the Streetcar. In addition, there were 2 year terms so there was a lot of turnover which created frustration and uncertainty. For 2 years you could have Luken, then Tillery, Then Qualls, then who knows. The new system is much better than the old one.

he had no control. This was solely a school board issue. They owned the land. Nothing city council could do about it until the school board agreed to sell

you have a $200 million investment in the city. The school board was stupid. We elect our leaders to use wisdom to do the right thing, not just kowtow to a mindless mob. School board officials have proven to be a bunch of feckless individuals. It is no wonder why they are on the school board instead of running the businesses that actually make a difference to the city.

if it takes 10 years to get a development like this done, the county is out a ton of tax money. If it takes 10 years to get $2 million in taxes on a project chances are it is still worse off because of the present value of today's money.

It is pretty easy to file an appeal and fortunately, from my personal experience. Hamilton County is one of the more reasonable counties (Montgomery is one of the worst) to appeal taxes. I would recommend you complete the form with what you feel the valuation should be or what you want it to be now. It needs to be filed no later than March 31 so don't miss that deadline. You can provide supporting evidence later up until your hearing. Generally, you will probably want an appraisal, especially since you are dealing with land prices. An appraisal should cost a few hundred dollars. You will want to tell the appraiser the purpose of the appraisal so he knows to value things on the low side. Hamilton County uses a computer program to come up with its values so it is very much a blunt instrument. Therefore, a specific appraisal will garner much more weight than the county auditor would. The biggest challenge is how big of a discount you would ask for and if the school board would get involved. If it is significant enough, they will do their own appraisal. It is typically not as strong as the land owner's appraisal but it is another set of evidence to demonstrate FMV. From past experiences, the County often will give some property tax concession even if it is less than what you ask for. IN general 80% of the cases filed in Hamilton County get some reduction (I don't remember where I got that stat from) I do about a dozen of these appeals a year so if you have some specific or mechanical related questions as to filing it, please feel free to PM me.

What CPS seems to have forgotten is that 100% of 0 is still 0. The only question that should have been asked is would the district have been better off if they took the deal or worse off. I don't think anyone can reasonably say they would be worse off. Financially, they would be getting $750k more a year plus other incentives like a new Stargal. There were no other developers looking to do anything with the land and realistically, was there anyone who in the foreseeable future to come along and provide a better offer? Of course not. Even if 15 years from now a developer would come and pay $2 million plus to the schools, they are better off taking the $750k now from FCC. I know I will be remembering this the next time CPS places a levy on the ballot

sounds like they wanted to make a deal, but there was a certain part of their constituency that could never been appeased no matter how common sense the deal was.

I remember back 20-30 years ago, people talked about gentrification, it was spoken about as a positive thing for neighborhoods. Now gentrification is a 4 letter word. The funny thing about diversity and gentrification the housing advocates forget or wont ever realize - You wont be able to get people in poor urban neighborhoods to ever move to wealthy areas and create diversity that way. The economics of it will never work. Putting a housing project in Indian Hill for example would be completely asinine because you effectively put it on an island and cut them off from social services and ability to get to and from jobs, etc. It makes a lot for sense to achieve diversity by moving the wealthy into poorer neighborhoods than the other way around.

^ A REIT is going to be nearly impossible to do a 1031 given the classification of what a REIT is. While still complicated, a syndication is a much better vehicle to try and do a 1031 in this capacity. With a REIT you are going to run into asset classification issues that make it hard to do a like-kind exchange.

Any enemy of Cranley is a friend of theirs. If they can give a black eye to the mayor they will take every opportunity to do so. Especially Young and Seelbach, ESPECIALLY Seelbach. Seelbach wanted to fire Black a few years back because he was not happy about him firing the old police commissioner and has had spats with Black and Cranley in other areas over the last 4 years. Personally, I think this whole Black thing is blown out of proportion and he should not be fired, but it is disgusting that someone like Seelbach cant make a decision that does not highlight his pettiness and selfishness in the process.

^ not to get too off topic but you are absolutely right. The riverfront arena is nice but it is better served connected tot he convention center with a hotel on top or Casino 2nd. I will be fine keeping it on the riverfront if that is the most cost effective option, but the arena needs to be done as it is much more than a sports stadium.

WHo cares if the guy goes to a strip club. As long as he is using his own dollar bills instead of the city's to stuff in the stripper's G-string, I don't see a problem with this. If anything, it should be appreciated that the guy has a personality and is not some self righteous prick.

As much as I like the West End, I do think Newport may be the right location for this. THe main reason is that the money the state, city and county can save on infrastructure can be used for other purposes including the possible renovation of USBank Arena which although it is a sports arena, is much more than that and important to attracting high level conventions and concerts to the city in addition to sports and is a lot more multifunctional than an outdoor stadium.

You swore up and down that everybody's property was going to reset to recent sale prices, no exceptions. But there obviously are exceptions. Which is why your stadium commentary doesn't have any credibility. Jake in theory he is right, however, Hamilton county is sometimes a bit slow to re-value upon a sale and they do not always do it in the tax year. THis does not mean that they are not supposed to do so under the law

It depends at where the leverage is and who has it. CPS - Has land the team desires as the preferred site. Does not need to sell the land and is happily using the land in its current operations theoretically would not be disappointed if the sale did not happen. Conversely - CPS needs revenue to build and sustain its programs. The extra $750k per year coming in can hire additional staff and provide facility maint. They will get a new stadium with additional amenities and not have to worry about the upkeep (FC will provide that). The neighborhood will continue to gentrify and bring in additional revenue over time if they cut FC a break. They are also under pressure to answer to tax payers about being responsible stewards of their assets. There is pressure on them to make a deal for this reason. FCCincy - While they prefer the site, they have other options in the area They are going to build it somewhere in the city regardless of the CPS and this is CPS option to be a partner. This option would be the most expensive for FCC even though it is preferred (they will save money going to other places) Conversely - They want WE and are willing ot pay more for it. The ownership has an aversion to NKY and wants to be in Ohio and it is the best site available. FCC is trying to purchase a site that is not for sale and from a party that does not need to sell it, so CPS has the ability to better name the terms. Both parties have their strengths in the negotiation, but in the end, I feel FCC has a stronger position as CPS ultimately needs to answer to the taxpayer about why they turned down a solid revenue stream.

That is the problem when private equity does a buyout, it sucks everything out of the company saddling it with unreasonable debt and if anything does not go as projected, the company goes under. Cant say this was not expected.

^ Not quite. A board of revision complaint can be filed at anytime. Yes, you may only file a complaint once within a 3 year period unless you can show that there was a condition that has occurred that has harmed the value of the property. I once represented and won a complaint by a Hyde Park 4 family owner who filed 2 appeals in consecutive years because the 2nd appeal alleged the property decreased In value because a tree crashed into the roof making the property uninhabitable for a number of months reducing the rental value. All the team has to show is that revenues are not what was expected to reduce the property taxes and CPS will be screwed. Also, they could sell the property in a "FMV" transaction (I use that loosely) to someone else and get the prices reduced that way. Point being, there are many games that can be played if the school board wants to play hardball

The school board is spinning the numbers on you. They were being greedy. Being a community partner requires 2 parties and the school board was trying to stick it to the team. Partners try and find win/win solutions. With this solution the school board was better off and FC was better off with its stadium. The school board was trying to tell FCC that we know you want the land and you need to pay us a premium for it, much more than it is truly worth on the market. This is not acting as a partner. If you want to see a partner, look at their deal with HUD. CPS got greedy and in the end got screwed. ^My question would be, and I'm not being snarky at all, but what about setting the precedent that FC Cincinnati get preferential treatment vs. any other development? Lastly I'll add, and the reason I feel this is a complete bluff by FCC (I'll eat crow if I am wrong), is why the heck did they say: We have to make a decision by 5 pm today so here it is at 10 am now tell us if you take it or leave it? And then, why did they put out a statement that said: "We didn't purchase the property in question", like someone else was sitting there ready to buy it or they couldn't extend it? Then, why did they not say "We are turning our focus to Newport and Oakley" I reject that CPS was being greedy, they were saying "Everyone else does it this way, you can give us the market rate, otherwise we won't make a deal with you on this". That said, they really didn't have enough time (talking CPS board) to make an informed discussion and informed counter offer. There are so many variables that could happen that agreeing to a fixed amount could technically be really good or technically really hurt them, but principally they do not cut deals with any developer on the market tax rates of properties so why would they do it now? I'm happy CPS stood up for what is right here. FC is not getting treated any differently than a large developer. They are trying to negotiate a reasonable deal for everyone for a long term period. Now I agree with Tasteall in the fact that FCC did not manage the timetable appropriately here by waiting until the last minute to get this worked out. The arguments I hear from CPS is that they want the market rate because someone said the project is worth $200 million in their minds. Also, the other thing is they should pay their fair share. That argument is complete non-sense and whenever someone uses it, it shows that they have no idea what they are talking about. I would expect better from a group of educators. Fair share is what is agreed to between the parties. In this case CPS feels anything less than 100% of what they deem the value is what they expect. IN reality, the value of the property is much less than what CPS thinks. FCC will be paying their fair share, CPS is just not realistic.