I can't believe we're being penalized for actually being successful at this thing. If the rest of the state wants a better share, they should get their stuff together.

I'm hopeful that regional parity is just one criterion for scoring the project, rather than quotas for each region or recalculating after projects are scored. The Ohio Environmental Education Fund, for instance, provides additional points (I believe either 5 or 10 out of a possible 100) for projects in counties where few previous grants in the program have been made. Obviously, this makes it disproportionately harder for Cuyahoga County (and most other urban counties) to obtain the funding, but Cuyahoga County proposals that are able to score very high still have a chance for funding. Compare that to any system that would establish a quota for distribution or that "corrects" for distribution and you can see how we could get totally screwed.

From what I've heard there was discussion of having the regional parity be a significant part of the equation.  But what they settled on it, while still taken into account, it is not a significant factor.  I think bases these credits based on "spreading the wealth" would be crazy. They just need to judge these on which projects will have the most significant economic impact.  Where the project is should be irrelevant (imho).

So I took a look at the redistributive portion of the scoring formula: http://development.ohio.gov/cms/uploadedfiles/Urban_Development/Ohio_Historic_Preservation_Tax_Credit/Round%203%20Criteria%20Summary%20and%20Self%20Scoring%20Document%20-%20Ohio%20Historic%20Preservation%20Tax%20Credit%20Program%20-%20June%202009.xls. It appears that 20 of 100 points is "regional balance", while the remaining 80 are "economic impact". Going to break this into a couple of posts so it's a little more readable ... There's a lot of material here, but I think this is interesting material and is worth a little review and debate.

 

 

 

 

Economic impact includes:

- Whether financing is secured (up to 10 points).

- The amount of leverage beyond threshhold requirements (10)

- The number of non-construction permanent jobs projected (10)

- The length until completion, with preference given to projects that can be completed within two years (10)

- The square footage of the rehabilitation, with preference given to larger projects (10)

- The multiplier effect, which basically gives preference to commercial projects followed by retail/hotel followed by residential followed by institutional (5)

- The percent of square footage that was previously vacant (5)

- Certification that the project will achieve LEED standards (you either get 5 or 0 here)

- Whether a municipal strategic plan is in place for the neighborhood where the rehab is to occur, with preference given to projects that are specifically named in that plan and plans that are 3 years old or younger (5)

- The poverty level of the census tract within which the property is located, with preference given to projects in more economically distressed areas (5)

- Whether the property is within one mile of a four-year university, public hospital or nonprofit research center not owned by a hospital or university (either 5 or 0).

As for the regional distribution points:

- Up to 6 points based on the number of Ohio preservation tax credits previously distributed in your ODOD Economic Development Region, with preference given to regions with fewer previous tax credits. There are 12 such regions in the state.

- Up to 7 points based on the number of Ohio preservation tax credits previously distributed in your municipality or township, with preference given to jurisdictions with fewer previous tax credits. If no previous projects have taken place in your municipality, you automatically receive the full 7 points.

- Up to 7 points based on previous per capita tax credits awarded within your county. This is the number of previous tax credits received divided by the 2000 census estimate of the population for your county.

 

What does the regional distribution section mean?

 

- A project within the city of Cleveland will receive 3 of 20 points. The maximum total score that a Cleveland applicant can receive is 83.

- A Cincinnati project will receive 7 of 20 points, with a maximum total score of 87.

- In Columbus, you would receive 17 of 20 points, with a maximum score of 97.

- If you apply for a project in Ashtabula, you automatically receive 19 of 20 points, with a maximum score of 99 (no project in the state can get 100, as no economic region qualifies for the full 6 points).

 

 

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. An argument could be made that this will encourage greater attention to preservation in communities that currently undervalue it as a revitalization strategy and will increase the capacity of developers to work on such projects statewide. It's also more likely to receive future political support and a higher likelihood of expansion of credits if funds are distributed more evenly across the state.

 

Of course, this may be at the expense of some very promising projects in Ohio's larger cities; for a number of reasons, urban centers tended to be the main winners of the awards, with Cleveland leading the pack by leaps and bounds. The point system here, as a result, has a definite pro-rural, pro-exurban bent.

 

That being said, some of this might be offset by the economic impact points. If the technical expertise to carry out these projects is greater in the cities where they've already been awarded, those areas are probably going to continue to submit proposals with more secured funding, more promise of permanent jobs, more LEED attention, faster completion, etc. They may also benefit from lots of potential projects being near a university or a hospital or within an impoverished census tract.

 

The poverty scale, however, presents some interesting questions. If they are using 2000 U.S. Census estimates, my understanding is that the Census tends to undercount individuals in group housing (including dormitories, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, etc.). If that's true, then downtown estimates would largely be based on the influx of higher income individuals, and the 3 Cs' city centers would be at a disadvantage for "poverty points", despite their obvious roles as providers of social services for low-income groups. This would be an absolute shame, given the number of downtown properties ripe for preservation efforts in our larger cities.

 

Overall, I find this depressing as a Clevelander. For a project from Cleveland to garner a tax credit, it needs to make up an immediate gap of 16 points over most rural towns and exurbs. That means it needs to score 20% better than such projects within the Economic Impact section, which seems a big feat. Over time, this hurdle may lessen, as more municipalities across the state receive credits, and the regional distribution scoring starts to even out. I think some are going to sneak through from Cleveland and Cincy, just based on the strong technical expertise and size of efforts in those cities. But I would anticipate we'll see a lot of very worthy projects miss out, and the cities are more or less being punished for their ability to carry out this type of project and the volume of available properties and developers interested in preservation. Ugh.

Well the good news is that the rest of the state doesn't seem to have the technical expertise with this sort of program to "eat the whole pie" so there should be a good chunk left over for us, but we've been moved to the back of the line.

Quick FYI - If anyone has questions on this they would like to ask directly of the Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit point person with the Ohio Department of Development, you might come on down to Columbus for our all-day workshop on September 15. Its only $50, with lunch, and qualifies for continuing education for attorneys, architects and real estate professionals.

 

Here's a link: http://www.financialincentives.eventbrite.com

I think the tax credit program is a great idea. Having said that I wish the state would come up with a program greared towards Historic Restoration of Homes in "blighted" areas.

 

As someone trying to help turn around a neighborhood with great architecture, it is frustrating to not have any incentives to get other people willing to come into this area and restore homes. Maybe something as simple as a 5000 Urban pioneer credit. Of a Historic Facade tax credit,to encourage people to come into urban areas of Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus and make the leap into neighborhoods with great architecture and assume the financial risk of doing restoration where you know, you will be upside down on your house for years to come.

 

The tax credit program is great and certainly helps many "high dollar" projects but the Historic preservation community needs more help at the neighborhood level.

Looks like Cleveland is doing a good job snagging historic tax credits:

 

http://www.progressohio.org/page/community/post/daveharding/CqCN

 

When does the next bunch come out??

late june... its the final round of credits unless we can get some new legislation passed.

Oh wow I had no idea....for some reason I thought it was an annual thing.

Any idea who the applicants are this round?  I couldn't find anything on the ODOD Historic Preservation Tax Credit website.

Is there any movement afoot to extend the tax credit program?  It seems to be a very good economic stimulus and an excellent way to fund inner city redevelopment at the same time.  It should be a natural program to be expanded in a recession.

I heard from someone with HO that they are hoping that new legislation can be passed at the lame duck session that would have a new version of the tax credit available as soon as this fall.  I think people are starting to see how important this and what it can do.

i wasn't sure where this should go, but:

 

House, Senate keep historic tax credits in Ohio budget, but boosters worry about $25 million cap

Published: Tuesday, June 07, 2011, 9:00 PM

By Michelle Jarboe, The Plain Dealer

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/06/general_assembly_appears_likel.html

 

A state program that promises new life for historic buildings appears likely to survive a bruising budget battle.

 

But proponents of Ohio's historic preservation tax credit program say limiting the awards to $25 million each year - a cap outlined in language from the House and Senate - will severely curb the state's ability to attract developers, revive little-used properties and create jobs.

 

Since 2007, the state has awarded nearly $246 million in tax credits to 108 projects. Those credits, which property owners receive after their projects are done, complement a longstanding federal tax credit program and help developers attract investors.

In a challenging economy, the state credits have been a lifeline for property owners filling historic buildings in Cleveland with apartments, hotel rooms, classrooms and offices.

 

Now a study prepared by researchers at Cleveland State University shows that Ohio gets back roughly a third of its investment - 31 cents on every dollar - before developers even finish construction and receive the tax credits.

 

The study provides concrete evidence that Ohio's historic preservation tax credit program is working.

 

Based on four rounds of awards from 2007 to 2010, researchers predicted the projects would generate $10 billion in total economic activity and support an annual average of 7,000 jobs through 2025.

 

And the state would recoup its investments, parceled out over several years, between 2021 and 2022.

-------------------------------------------------

The article has some nice pictures of Tudor Arms.

Round 7 of the State Tax Credit gets announced tomorrow at 7am.

Round 7 of the State Tax Credit gets announced tomorrow at 7am.

 

wow...thanks for the heads up!

 

Any speculation or known projects who applied??

Looks like the official announcement is at 10:30 at the Gothic Building in Akron ... Which is probably good news for that building :)

 

Round 7 Award Announcement

 

Thursday, December 22, 2011

10:30 a.m.

Gothic Building

102 South High Street (High and Mill Streets)

Akron, Ohio 44308

 

 

The Ohio Department of Development and the Ohio Historic Preservation Office invite you to join Christiane Schmenk, Director of the Ohio Department of Development and other guests for the announcement of the approved Round 7 Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit projects. The Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit assists in the redevelopment of historic buildings across Ohio.

 

The Ohio Department of Development and the Ohio Historic Preservation Office reviewed 17 applications for 26 buildings in Round 7 of the Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit program. Together, the applicants requested a total of $26.6 million in tax credits with planned investments of more than $185 million in the state.

 

For those who are not able attend, information will be available through a press release issued shortly after the announcement.

 

http://www.development.ohio.gov/Urban/ohptc/

 

The awards were announced.  Here's a run-down of NEO projects getting credits.

 

Northeast Ohio projects win bulk of $14 million in state tax credit awards for historic buildings

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/12/northeast_ohio_projects_win_bu.html

 

Among the CLE winners:

 

Victory Building on Euclid

Rialto Theater (the Moda space)

Park Bldg (ongoing residential conversion)

Gifford House (Prospect Ave mansion; office conversion).

State Senate votes to gut #historic tax credits & funding for affordable housing! The Ohio House has better numbers in its version of the state budget. A conference committee will resolve differences. Contact your state lawmakers TODAY and let them know how you feel about this....

 

OhioHouse.gov

OhioSenate.gov

What tax credits? Didn't the state just expand the historic preservation credits for catalytic projects. Some more info or links would help...

It's something that emerged in Ohio Senate budget deliberations yesterday. Follow Councilman Joe Cimperman on Twitter. He's all over it. Cleveland media is aware of it but I've yet to see any coverage yet.

Ohio is not anti-urban.  Certain members of a particular party are.

Ohio is not anti-urban.  Certain members of a particular party are.

 

But because they're in charge, Ohio is effectively anti-urban.

Ohio is not anti-urban.  Certain members of a particular party are.

 

You forget that the governor and legislature were under Democratic control in the 1980s. Even so, many of the legislative leaders (starting with powerbroker Ohio House Speaker Vern Riffe) were from rural areas.

Here is the PDF of the House appropriation bill. It'd help having some more detail if you plan to email your representatives.

 

http://www.gongwer-oh.com/public/130/hb64sensub.pdf

 

Specifically this line from page 4:

 

* While honoring all previously issued tax credits, imposes a 2 year moratorium starting July 1, 15 on the issuance of new Historic rehabilitation tax credits. Restarts the program in FY 2018 as a grant program. Eliminates the proposed ability to claim credits against the CAT

Ohio is not anti-urban.  Certain members of a particular party are.

 

You forget that the governor and legislature were under Democratic control in the 1980s. Even so, many of the legislative leaders (starting with powerbroker Ohio House Speaker Vern Riffe) were from rural areas.

 

It's more that the three major metro areas dislike each other and are relatively evenly balanced. 

 

But what's specifically anti-urban about these proposals?  I can't take Cimperman's word, his definition of "anti-urban" means anything against his particular vision of same.

 

Historic tax credits sounds like it could benefit Marrietta as much as Collinwood, and "affordable housing" depends on the beholder and can be interpreted as anti-gentrification more than pro-urban.

^ Gutting historic tax credits is definitely an anti-urban move. Regarding your example: Marietta, while a small city, was still built in an urban fashion. Take a walk down Putnam St. or Front St. and tell me it's not urban. Just because a city has a small population, that doesn't mean it's not urban. Before the subsidization of automobiles and suburban living, that was the natural way to develop a city/town. Therefore, most historic structures are located in denser, urban areas. Instead of building on greenfields out in the suburbs (which is detrimental to the environment), we could be re-purposing old, neglected buildings.  It is often very expensive to redevelop old neglected buildings, and the Historic Tax Credit program has thus far been a resounding success in helping these projects come to fruition.

I wonder why this was added when historic rehabilitation projects have been so successful?  Does giving subsidies to property owners make the Governor look unfavorable in any way since he's running for president (at least supposedly)?  There has to be a reason for putting a moratorium on a successful program for two years.

The historic tax credit metric gives weighted advantages to projects in the smaller cities in towns.  However it also gives more points to larger buildings, and the larger old buildings tend to be in the 3C's cities.  Something like The Ridges in Athens would be a shoe-in for the tax credits if it wasn't already publicly owned. 

^^Because this program is direct spending (despite the "tax credit" in the name), and when reducing taxes is priority uno, and you aren't quite Kansas batsh!t crazy, spending on non-core services is vulnerable.

Got this email at work today from Heritage Ohio:

 

Yesterday, the Ohio Senate proposed to eliminate the Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit (OHPTC), with the possibly of transitioning it into a grant program several years from now.

 

This highly successful economic development program, without prior discussion, is in jeopardy of disappearing. Without the OHPTC Program, Ohio would not have had more than $1.4 Billion invested in the state, with over 100 abandoned or blighted buildings transformed into income-producing, taxpaying, and neighborhood-contributing buildings. Look at these numbers since the program's inception in 2007:

 

    8.7 million square feet of redeveloped buildings.

 

    3,429 new housing units created.

 

    A return on investment of 6.7 to 1, while paying the State of Ohio back.

 

To help save the Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit Program, we need you to do this TODAY. Please email Senator Oelslager, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Peterson, Chair of the Senate Ways & Means Committee, and your Senator to tell them why this will be detrimental to Ohio's economic growth!

 

We have only a few days to reverse this action!

Ohio Senate budget proposal sparks panic over loss of state preservation tax credits (photos)

By Michelle Jarboe McFee, The Plain Dealer

on June 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A single sentence slipped into the Ohio Senate's version of the two-year budget bill set off a statewide panic in real estate circles Wednesday, as developers and preservationists realized that a popular tax-credit program was in peril.

 

The language – a mere two lines in a 4,000-plus-page document – could halt hundreds of millions of dollars worth of development across Ohio, including major historic-building conversions in downtown Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. And the fallout wouldn't be limited to proposed projects. The wording also throws financing into limbo for buildings where developers are wrapping up construction but haven't yet received tax credits pledged for the work.

 

"It would be a nightmare," said Nancy Recchie, a historic preservation specialist at Benjamin D. Rickey & Co. in Columbus. "I think it will create chaos. ... This has put every project at risk."

 

MORE:

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/06/ohio_senate_budget_proposal_sp.html

 

 

Senate budget 'disastrous' for Music Hall

Jessie Balmert, [email protected] 12:54 p.m. EDT June 11, 2015

 

A $25 million tax credit to help renovate Music Hall would disappear under Senate Republicans' state budget plan.

 

Supporters say the money is critical to the $123 million renovation of the Over-the-Rhine building. Music Hall proponents have struggled to find money for the renovation after it was dropped from a county-wide sales tax.

 

That's one of many projects promised about $1.4 billion since 2007 through Ohio's historic tax credit, said Joyce Barrett, executive director of Heritage Ohio, which supports historic preservation across the state.

 

MORE:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/11/senate-budget-disastrous-music-hall/71067154/

Testimony re: potential Ohio historic tax credit moratorium under way now. Watch here: http://t.co/VWkOqHoFNy

I expect this credit to be salvaged at this point, due to the uproar.

Has anybody looked at the appropriations bill in detail? I thumbed through it looking for the language about the tax credits. Nobody in State House is stupid enough to think the tax credits would actually be nixed. Heck, the program was just expanded last year for the catalytic project award ($25 mil).

 

There has to be something ridiculous they don't want people to pay attention to. A diversion. Like asking for the stars when all you wanted was the moon.

 

There was a line item to allow people to claim political contributions as a tax deduction. Nothing else really stood out but I didn't look that carefully.

^I'm pretty sure the "catalytic" piece just came out of the previously budgeted money and wasn't really a program expansion.

Has anybody looked at the appropriations bill in detail? I thumbed through it looking for the language about the tax credits. Nobody in State House is stupid enough to think the tax credits would actually be nixed. Heck, the program was just expanded last year for the catalytic project award ($25 mil).

 

There has to be something ridiculous they don't want people to pay attention to. A diversion. Like asking for the stars when all you wanted was the moon.

 

There was a line item to allow people to claim political contributions as a tax deduction. Nothing else really stood out but I didn't look that carefully.

 

If you keep being that cynical, you're going to have to register as a Republican.  :evil:

Ohio Senate considers ending historic tax credits, gripping real estate developers, preservationists

By Brian R. Ball, Columbus Business First

Updated: June 11, 2015, 1:26pm EDT

 

Real estate developers and organizations that attempt to preserve historic buildings have quickly banded together to oppose a proposed last-minute change to Ohio's biennial budget that would take away tax credits for renovating or redeveloping historic properties.

 

Vorys Sater Seymour and Pease attorney Scott Ziance on Thursday afternoon will testify on behalf of Columbus-based Casto and an ad hoc statewide coalition of developers, preservationists such as the Columbus Landmarks Foundation and economic development groups to preserve the tax credit.  A two-year moratorium for the state Preservation Tax Credit “has been slipped into (the biennial) budget,” Ziance told me. “What’s important is to persuade them this could have serious and immediate consequences,” he said.

( . . . )

A 2013 annual report from the state Development Services Agency shows a combined $385 million in historic tax credits supported $2.6 billion of projects from 2008 to 2013.  Some of those projects in Columbus awarded tax credits include the renovation of the landmark LeVeque Tower in downtown Columbus in which Casto is an investor.  Other tax credit-supported redevelopments in Columbus include the Yankee Trader property at 463 N. High St.; the Atlas Building at 8 E. Long St.; and the former Welsh Presbyterian Church at 315 E. Long St.

 

MORE: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2015/06/11/ohio-senate-considers-ending-historic-tax-credits.html

Good to see this is getting lots of press and opposition. I emailed my reps.

Local Preservationists, Developers Fighting to Keep Historic Tax Credits

By Brent Warren, Columbus Underground

June 13, 2015 - 8:00 am

 

A proposal from Republicans in the State Senate to impose a two-year moratorium on the popular state historic tax credit program has spurred a coalition of preservationists, architects, and developers into action.  An online petition posted Thursday by the Columbus Landmarks Foundation opposing the proposal has quickly garnered over 1,300 signatures, and a steady stream of calls and emails in support of the program have been received by Senate Finance Committee members.

 

Nancy Recchie, who has utilized the tax credits for dozens of projects in Columbus and throughout the state as a historic preservation specialist at Benjamin D. Rickey & Co., said that the proposal to suspend the program has “taken everybody by surprise,” especially given the bi-partisan support the program had received in the past and the fact that the tax credit was made permanent just two years ago.

 

MORE: http://www.columbusunderground.com/local-preservationists-developers-fighting-to-keep-historic-tax-credits-bw1

I'm attaching some information about the tax credit status put out this morning.

 

I'll summarize some highlights:

 

- There is time to save the program and we can have an impact

- Making phone calls in support of the program TODAY can really have an impact. The attached document has details including phone numbers of relevant members of the Senate Finance committee. It's also suggested we call our own state senator.

 

Thanks to all for helping to save this valuable aid to historic revitalization.

 

 

Could city councils across the state pass resolutions in support of the historic tax credit program?

Not soon enough, probably

Sounds like public outcry at least delayed the elimination of the program for two years while they study how to "improve" the program.

 

Freeze on historic-preservation tax credits to be removed from state budget

 

Senate GOP leadership said last week that the tax-credit program, which gives out about $60 million a year in credits, needs to be more efficient, and it needs to be reviewed.

 

But after hearing feedback, Jason Mauk, chief of staff for Senate President Keith Faber, R-Celina, said leaders decided there was not enough time to have the needed discussion. The Senate plans to place language in the budget to study the tax credit and explore whether it should be turned into a grant process.

 

“That’s something we’ve had a lot of requests to explore,” Mauk said. “It’s a complex issue and obviously it has a lot of people across the state wanting to provide input.”

 

A tax study committee already is part of the two-year budget. “We did not want to rush it given the amount of feedback and questions we received,” Mauk said.

^ They can "improve" the program by expanding it. It is a hugely successful program that has had significant return on investments, and has led to new jobs and increased property values. Only an idiot would want this program removed or reduced.

 

I'm glad they came to their senses though. It would have been a huge loss.

The PD's take on it....

 

Preservation tax-credit moratorium pulled from Ohio Senate budget proposal

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/06/preservation_tax-credit_morato.html#incart_river