TIFs

UPDATE: What’s going on with promised Apartment Complex behind 8th and Railroad?

Last Tuesday the City Council got a presentation on RFP’s vs. Negotiated Sale. The topic came up because a negotiated sale is what the city is apparently still in the process of negotiating with the developer, Christensen, for the proposed development behind 8th and Railroad. I find this a little alarming. Back in June of last year the council got a presentation on the development. The developer told the council then that they planned to break ground in the Fall of last year or Spring of this year, now the planning department says it is is still in the ‘negotiating stage’. How can you be in the negotiating stage when the Planning Commission approved the TIF last July? Now there was a statement made by the proposed developer in June when they made their initial presentation; they said they would coordinate their build out with how fast the properties at the Steel District and more specifically Cherapa II would lease out. One wonders if those properties are having trouble being leased, and coincidentally slowing investment in the Christensen development? But we know how these games are being played in town. Years ago a franchise motorcycle repair shop tried to come to town and a major competitor with their wrench in city government convinced banks and other investors to back away from this franchise essentially shutting them down before the doors even opened. Funny how a TIF gets approved before a land purchase is even signed. We got some real clowns running the city these days . . .

SPEAKING OF A CIRCUS

There has been a lot of talk lately between constituents about how light and meaningless the city council agenda has been lately. The story is the lame duck mayor is telling council no new policy initiatives will be allowed on the agenda. I told someone, “The only reason you would shut down the only function of your policy body is because you have someone bigger then you riding your ass.” More to come on this.

UPDATE: Mike Zitterich sent me this;

I wanted to see how many ordinances and resolutions that get posted to the City Council Agenda by the mayor or city councilors, and in 2024, here is what I came up with: 

Out of 354 Ordinances/Resolutions sponsored from January 1, 2024 to December 30, 2024 — 

Mayor………………………….183……52%……………………5.1 Per meeting

Private Applicants…………..97……27%……………………2.7 Per meeting

City Councilors………………74……21%……………………2.1 Per meeting

36 Meetings in 2024 

HIGH: 

Mayor sponsored 13 total on August 13, 2024 

City Council sponsored 9 twice on May 14th and May 7th of 2024 

Private Applicants sponsored 8 total 3 times during the 2024 season.

Fargo rejects TIF for expensive condos

Finally a body of government has figured out TIF’s are a joke and just a handout to developers;

The Cass County Commission on Wednesday, July 5, rejected a developer’s request for public funding to finance the redevelopment of a property near Island Park, a financial boost that was already approved by the Fargo City Commission just last week.

The Fargo City Commission actually approved the TIF with only one dissenter, and he was doozy;

The project itself is a fine idea, Strand said, but he questioned if the city should be financially supporting it.

“I just don’t know if it’s our job as a city to partner to do that,” Strand said. “I just don’t know that’s our role, or what we should be doing… there’s lots of folks buying properties, remodeling and demolishing, but they don’t always come to us to have a 300,000 dollar investment in that.

Unlike Sioux Falls where the counties and school board just rubberstamp the city’s TIF proposals, Cass County said, NO WAY!

Strand is correct, it is NOT the responsibility of taxpayers to help fund condos. Maybe Sioux Falls needs to learn this. Just a few years ago we gave out over $50 million in TIF’s for attached parking garages to condos. While the developers are seeing millions in tax breaks and benefits there is very little ROI for taxpayers.

I actually wouldn’t be against TIFs if they helped with affordable housing and were much shorter;

“Coming at this with $300,000 (taxpayer) dollars for five units, the math for me is not even close to working,” Peterson said, adding he’d support a cheaper, five year TIF for the project.

That is what often cracks me up about TIFs, they last so long there really isn’t an ROI for taxpayers. By the time the TIF expires the property has probably changed hands a few times and the developers of the project are laughing all the way to the bank.

$200 a day rent for Downtown Sioux Falls Loft Apartment

Yes, that is the daily rent, for the month it will cost you $5,950. I purchased my home 20 years ago, before I bought the house the rent I paid for a nice 1-bedroom behind U-Haul in Pettigrew Heights was $350 a month which included gas and garbage service. For $5,950 a month you could pay a mortgage on a 1 million dollar home. You can rent a decent hotel room in Sioux Falls for about $100 a night. Heck even Hotel Phillips only 2 blocks from this loft charges between $140-$220 a night. An VRBO or Air BNB is even cheaper. This 3 bedroom short term rental in McKennan Park will run you about $162 a night. Even if you had 3 people renting the loft, they would still have to pay $2,000 a month in rent. In fact what you would pay for rent in a year for this place ($70K+) was more then the original purchase price of my home.

Normally I wouldn’t give two rips about what a wealthy property owner/developer in DTSF charges for rent, I’m a free market person and if they can get that kind of ‘rent’ money, good for you. Where I take issue is that this building received a facade easement grant* (basically the city gives private developers money to fix up their historical facades with little oversight). I asked a councilor recently if the half-Inch faux brick that they glued on the front of Lucky’s facade was considered historic? Faux brick has been a trend lately, but I still think it looks fake. I thought one of the requirements of historic restoration was for it to be actually historic, you know, like the fiberglass bulstrades on the Pavilion’s new roof.

Besides the atrocious monthly rent, this really doesn’t make the city look very good when they are handing out TIFs for condo parking ramps and facade grants DTSF but on the other hand are promoting(?) affordable and accessible housing.

*The facade easement program was mysteriously and suddenly re-instated by the urging of Central District Councilor Curt Soehl. No surprise the 1st recipients for the grants were the former campaign treasurer for Soehl (for the 9th and Grange coffee shop that he is restoring) and the investment group that owns the Lucky’s loft who has given thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Mayor TenHaken and his various supported candidates. The program is nothing but a pay to play payback to these campaign contributors. The program was originally ended because there really is NO need for taxpayers to be propping up these private developers.

The city really needs to get out of the wealthy developer welfare program business and start incentivizing affordable housing DTSF with programs that help build housing density while focusing on the individual property and small rental owners. Instead the city’s solution is to build slab on grade tract homes in a cornfield in Southern Brandon. Even a chicken playing tic-tac-toe is smarter than that.

UPDATE: In 2017 Rapid City used a very small TIF to support affordable housing (H/T Mike Zitterich). It was 5 years ago, but for a $26,500 TIF the developer was able to build 5 Town Homes – the cheapest with the price tag of $109K. Even with inflationary adjustments, that same place would only be about $130-150K today. It was built on a blighted empty lot.

We could legally do this in the core of the city, and we could do it for multiple properties.

Here is a video of the project;

Does the City of Sioux Falls vet credit when handing out goodies and TIFs?

Well we know the answer to that question when it came to the Bunker Ramp, but have we learned from that experience? Apparently not;

A planned housing development backed by a first-of-its-kind tax break from Sioux Falls City Hall is on track despite market uncertainty placing challenges on the project developer.

The Sioux Falls City Council in mid-October awarded a $2.1 million tax increment financing package to Nielson Construction in support of a 65-unit residential development. In exchange, the company promised to sell the home at “accessible” pricing that reflects first-time homebuyer levels.

But an email sent days later by the company to dozens of its vendors and subcontractors alerting them of cash flow issues raised questions about whether the project would happen.

“Unfortunately, with that, cash flow is short and there is going to be some delays on being paid for invoicing,” the correspondence read. “We promise that we will pay you for work completed but getting that payment in a timely manner like you are accustomed to won’t be the same.”

I was made aware of this email over a week ago and was also aware that Joe and Jon were digging around on it. While all businesses seem to endure some cash flow issues from time to time, you wonder what kind of financial vetting the city did? If any? Maybe the director of finance is too busy running multiple departments?

Mayor Paul TenHaken’s chief of staff, Erica Beck, said Tuesday that City Hall isn’t concerned that Nielson won’t be able to deliver on the project. The city is not on the hook if it doesn’t happen though, either, she said.

“We have no reason at this time to be concerned with Mr. (Kelly) Nielson’s ability to advance the project in which he was approved for tax increment financing,” she said. “Additionally, it is important to note that this is a developer funded TIF, meaning he is using private financing to fund the project.  There is no financial risk to the city.”  

Yes there is! If the city is using the TIF to build up infrastructure in the affected development, and the developer bails after the infrastructure is in place and before a house is built, we would be on the hook as taxpayers for it, just like the unfinished Bunker Ramp.

With all the six figure+ staff we have working for the city, you would think we could get at least one of them to do credit checks for these projects.

Besides being tipped off about the email, I was also told that Nielson construction was the ONLY developer willing to do this project. It wasn’t a matter of the city vetting multiple construction companies and multiple ideas and sites (like building density in the core) but a matter of picking the cheapest beer on the lowest shelf.

It would be enlightening to see if any councilors ask the planning department if anyone else bid on this project.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Neitzert lone vote against SW Brandon housing development

Greg decided to vote against the project because he questions the state legality of the TIF,

Sioux Falls attorney Brendan Reilly, retained by the city as independent counsel to advise it on TIF legalities, told the Council that its members have “wide discretion” about what qualifies for a TIF. And though state law prohibits TIF funds from directly paying for the construction of housing structures, the tax incentive program can be used for infrastructure directly related to housing.

Councilor Greg Neitzert, the lone dissenting vote, said he struggled to square state law that prohibits TIFs from being used to subsidize housing with the request coming from the mayor’s office.

I think the bigger question is NOT legality, I think it is legal, but TIF definitions are so wide that this would have given the council the authority to deny it. I just don’t see this benefitting lower income people in housing. Will it help people? Sure. But it does nothing to build density and bring the core back up to snuff and address our housing crisis. We can do this thru community development loans and federal grants and don’t have to issue ONE SINGLE TIF.

While I support Greg’s NO vote, his reasoning misses the mark.