News-Record.com

Mr. Gibson, should you decide to hold your breath waiting for Roy Carroll to ask Jim Melvin and the Bryan Foundation for the funds, please do so near someone trained in Rescue Breathing/CPR! I am sure that you will need it! Roy Carroll asking The Melvin/Bryan Foundation for the funds makes robbing a bank look easy!

Shalom

I agree Greg. This project will be done with or without money from us. Carroll is just trying to see what he can get, in my opinion.

Why is 2.1 million out of a 37 million project critical? If the project is economically viable then lenders and investors could come up with the extra $$ no?

Bottom line is that Carroll wants the taxpayers to personally fund his proposed 16th floor luxury penthouse.

I'll agree to it so long as he hosts an open house at his new pad with drinks and heavy hors de ovours (Horse de oovers as we say in the country) the first Saturday of each month for the next 30 years.

That's a fair swap, isn't it?

According to the BizJournal, the unrenovated tower generates $40,000 per year in tax revenue for the city and county.

Renovate it, and the annual taxes are $433,000.

So: put in some money now, get it back in the form of increased tax revenue within several years, and enjoy the increased cashflow for years to come...

...or let the deal die, and the empty low-tax-generating building can stand as a monument to bad math skills and missed opportunities.

That's assuming Carroll wants a cash subsidy. He may ask for some other form of help, such as tax breaks or loan guarantees.

The guy is taking an enormous risk, and it's a great thing for this city. I hope our elected officials support this project.

Ed, I am surprised! I would have never thought of you as one who would EVER support corporate welfare! That is so republicanisk. Give to the rich and take from the poor!

Shalom

I judge incentives on a case-by-case basis.

But I don't see this as an incentive deal, much less corporate welfare.

It's an investment that, unlike many other worthwhile public investments, should have a direct cash payoff.

Are there any guarantees if the project goes belly up after the city & county pony up Ed?

Fair question, Dan, and one that should be understood going in to any deal struck with Carroll.

Again, we don't know any details of the proposal yet, so there's no certain answer. Obviously the building and property represent some value, but we don't know where the city and county will stand among possible creditors.

My guess is that in any cash subsidy (vs a tax break) there would be risk involved.

Based on Carroll's record and the trends downtown, as well as the upside for the city in terms of both $$ and downtown development, and the downside of losing the project, I think a well-structured deal would be worth the risk.

Ed,

"a well structured deal".

Key words.

I just don't like the idea of a cash subsidy in any form. Why should one guy's business get free money from the city when other businesses don't? If Carroll gets $2,000,000, then why shouldn't the local drycleaner get 50,000?

There is a truck down at Rice Toyota that I REALLY like but I'm $2,000 short on the purchase. Since my taxes on the truck will be a future income for the government, it would really be in their best to give me the money to buy the truck.

I'd love for you to get the truck, YD, and I could use new car, too...but the taxes would not result in a large and enduring stream of income for the city and county that would (if the project is successful) repay any investment many times over, nor would our vehicle purchases remove a drag on downtown revitalization that has stood empty for 16 years.

That said, here's an idea for an indirect investment that would support the project, from the comments at my blog, where this is also being discussed:

http://edcone.typepad.com/wordup/2006/05/carroll_tower.html#comment-16888045

Okay, Ed. You got me. But if I just asked for $200, then that should repay their investment many times over (considering the tax on a new truck) over the next 5 years.

:)

Seriously, though. If the city wants to fork taxpayer money over to Carroll, that's their choice to make. I left the city limits because of the tax rate. That may be one of the opportunity costs for them.

Like you said, though, in this case it may be worth it. I just think it sets a really bad precedent.

i'm with you yellowdog. Why not just ask for $1000.00 donations or sell shares in the deal. After the deal is done and the place begins to make money and share holders have made a set amount then he can do a buy back of the stock. If it gets shaky he can sell his place on top of the building which will probably be worth close to the amount of shares sold and the shareholders get their money back or at least most of it. This way only those who can afford to take the gamble are taking the chace and not the tax payers. It works in other business ventures.

Let's set the stage: Developer wanting to revamp GSO asks city for money.....returns far outweigh the risk of the amount of funds being sought.

The last guy who pitched such a deal to the city died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. That was after the city began to investigate the organization that was receiving all of the $$$.

I grew up in the rural part of NC where old sayings were pleantiful. This scenario brings yet a couple to mind: "Once bitten, twice shy;" "Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me!"

I think it would be in the best interests of the City of GSO to not invest any taxpayer $$$ into "development" projects.

If Carroll wants taxpayer $$$, then let him have the issue presented to the taxpayers and let them decide whether they want him to have their $$$.

Shalom

Ed,
Your objectivity on this would be more credible if you could point to a private/public development project in town that you have not been a cheerleader for.

For others perplexed over why Carroll needs that last little $2 million from the city on a $37 million dollar project, let me offer help:

Just like a gang member who has to prove to his fellows that he can still pull the trigger when necessary, Carroll has to prove to his private backers that he has the muscle to successfully hold up the city for a few bucks on the front end of the project...Important for establishing precedent ahead of the next inevitable taxpayer stick up coming on this scheme.

The project deserves to be judged on its merits.

It's not Homestead.

It's not a case study in political theory.

The particulars are stark.

Carroll is trying to do something that needs to be done.

One of the largest structures in downtown Greensboro has been empty for 16 years.

JP couldn't make a deal work. Cherokee couldn't make it work.

Carroll not only plans to fix this longstanding problem, he's doing it in a way that should end up being revenue-positive for the city and county.

Is success assured? Of course not.

But doing nothing would be a guarantee of failure.

Ed, Project Homestead could be used in each of the merits listed. In the end, the taxpayers got grierended...oops, fruedian slip there. I meant rear-ended tax wise.

With the problems facing the leaders of GSO right now, I would not even consider giving away tax dollars like that. If Carroll does not like it...let him do business elsewhere.

If the building has been vacant for 16 years, we need to be asking the so-called leadership for a progressive GSO, "WHY?" It appears that they have sat on their duffs and done nothing! What will happen when the current former JP building becomes vacant?

You see, there are far too many varibles to consider. This is not the best time to be throwing money at moneypits again!

Shalom

Why not sell shares in the deal Ed? Or do you have a problem with doing business in the old fashion way rather than the new-fangled way of "let the government do it" way.
The only people who would have anything to lose, in case of a flop, would be those who could afford to invest and lose and not the taxpayers, who of course bear the brunt of any failed venture of the city/govenment.

"Let him do business elsewhere."

I'd rather not. The building won't be elsehwere, it will still be a white elephant in the middle of downtown. Thank goodness we have a homegrown talent like Roy Carroll who is willing to take considerable risk on a project that is so vital to Greensboro.

Jawing about woulda shoulda coulda on the building's history may be interesting, and even productive for future projects, but it's not really germaine to the issue at hand.

Yes, I'd prefer a deal with all-private funding, but that's not the deal on the table.

I think the proposal -- which seems to be for tax breaks, not cash -- is a good deal for Greensboro, and great boost for downtown, and I support it fully.

Looks like it's going to happen, too.

Ed, if it happens, it will be what most of these "incentives" are; something for the upper echelon paid for by those who will never have the benefit of even partaking of it.

I stand by my view of giving NO incentives of any kind to any company/person/corporation. If the aforementioned want to come, the door is open. Otherwise, prostitute yourself to someone willing to pay!

Shalom

"Yes, I'd prefer a deal with all-private funding, but that's not the deal on the table."

Ed, that is the deal if the city/county refrain from letting the taxpayers pay for Carrolls's luxury Penthouse.

He can get a mortgage just like the rest of us. I don't see where he deserves special consideration.

anyone else remember right after they built the wachovia building that it was described as looking like the box the jefferson building came in?