Couple of things
- It's worth noting that Sunday's Athens Banner-Herald was chock full of great reads. Joe Johnson's look at Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway and the challenges it faces is very interesting. Blake examines the University of Georgia's plan to take over all of the Naval Supply School property, something which I'm not terribly thrilled about. Finally, Don Nelson's column attempts to break the misconception that Athens-Clarke County is 'anti-business', and I think he does a good job.
- What's interesting about this pretty good editoral from the Banner-Herald is considering all of the University's plans. Understandably, UGA wants to expand, but the problems this poses is that it, in some instances, forcibly removes students and puts them into the community at large, which the editorial discusses. But also it should be noted that UGA's desire to keep expanding, particularly in light of its plans for the Naval Supply School, means more and more of this community's property is gobbled up and removed from its property tax rolls. Now, this isn't earthshattering by any means, but it's an issue we kinda dance around, and it's going to be a pretty big one in years to come ... and the struggle for the Naval Supply School property is just one example.
- I thought this was a nice letter.
- On Wednesday, the committee studying TDRs is meeting in the Building Inspections Conference Room at the Planning Building at 5:30 p.m. We've chatted about those here a bit, so I wanted to plug the meeting. There's no public input, but it does give you a chance to see what they're working on.
- In career development news, C. Trent has taken over the Reds beat for Marc ... who has moved to cover the Devil Rays. The upside? Living in Tampay-St. Petersburg. The downside? Covering the Devil Rays. Oh, and Marc just got engaged ... so congrats to that fella.
- Matthew Yglesias breaks down some semantics regarding health care coverage.
- No conversation regarding last night's 24. Missed it. Hoping I can find it somewhere ... perhaps iTunes.
- What's interesting about this pretty good editoral from the Banner-Herald is considering all of the University's plans. Understandably, UGA wants to expand, but the problems this poses is that it, in some instances, forcibly removes students and puts them into the community at large, which the editorial discusses. But also it should be noted that UGA's desire to keep expanding, particularly in light of its plans for the Naval Supply School, means more and more of this community's property is gobbled up and removed from its property tax rolls. Now, this isn't earthshattering by any means, but it's an issue we kinda dance around, and it's going to be a pretty big one in years to come ... and the struggle for the Naval Supply School property is just one example.
- I thought this was a nice letter.
- On Wednesday, the committee studying TDRs is meeting in the Building Inspections Conference Room at the Planning Building at 5:30 p.m. We've chatted about those here a bit, so I wanted to plug the meeting. There's no public input, but it does give you a chance to see what they're working on.
- In career development news, C. Trent has taken over the Reds beat for Marc ... who has moved to cover the Devil Rays. The upside? Living in Tampay-St. Petersburg. The downside? Covering the Devil Rays. Oh, and Marc just got engaged ... so congrats to that fella.
- Matthew Yglesias breaks down some semantics regarding health care coverage.
- No conversation regarding last night's 24. Missed it. Hoping I can find it somewhere ... perhaps iTunes.
posted by Jmac at 7:17 AM
12 Comments:
Is it a problem for state property to be off the local tax rolls? Explain fully. When the university has academic property, it is under state jurisdiction where it does not burden county services.
I'm going to blog a piece about this soon as far as tax-supported services go.
My point isn't that they would burden services by any means - though an argument could be made with regard to their understandable use of local law enforcement during Georgia athletic events, particularly football ... as well as some indirect impact on the community - but that we have the potential to gain, somewhat marginally, some property back for our tax rolls.
Just because the property goes from local control to state jurisdiction doesn't necessarily mean that the need for services decreases in the community.
I'd be interested to see your work.
"But also it should be noted that UGA's desire to keep expanding, particularly in light of its plans for the Naval Supply School, means more and more of this community's property is gobbled up and removed from its property tax rolls."
I'm getting very tired of people talking about UGa using the Navy School property resulting in that property being "removed from [the county's] property tax rolls." The property, currently owned by the federal government, is not now subject to A-CC property tax. It skews the legitimate debate whether there's more benefit to a use that might bring good jobs to the community at the expense of some property tax to describe University use of the property as "removing" the property from the tax rolls.
Darren
Something I'd like to point out about Athens's property tax issues:
1. UGA makes a payment in lieue of taxes -- which, to be fair, isn't necessarily equal to taxes, but it's something. They also pay rent for property they use and don't own -- like the Franklin House.
2. ACC is small and has a ton of government and non-profit uses. 35% of the county is not taxed -- UGA is 1/7th of that. So, an increase in UGA's land would result in fewer taxes for ACC, but so would an increase in First Baptist's proprty, or the CDC's, or whatever. Personally, if we're planning to do something about so much of our property being off the rolls, I'd rather see nonprofits required to use the property they own or be taxed on it. And I completely disagree with the recent referendum results, which decreed that for-profit functions of non-profits are also now exempt from taxes 'cause they support non-profit functions.
I think everyone is sorta missing the point, and that can be attributed to a poor choice of words on my part. My concern was more about the larger picture, which is that UGA has an understandable need to expand and, using the example of its desire to gain the property at the Naval Supply School, that this could be something that defines some aspects of our town-gown relationships.
My attempt was not to suggest that they're taking more county land off the property tax rolls since, as you both have rightfully noted, it isn't on there anyway. It was more of a way of getting us thinking that UGA is growing, and this growth is going to impact our community. We need to have an honest dialogue about how to balance these separate, yet essential growths.
And I, for one, think that UGA should get a large portion of that property. But I also want to see some go to anti-poverty organizations, as well as some go for mixed-use, private development. With 58 acres available, it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that 40 to 45 could be devoted to UGA, 2-4 for anti-poverty and the balance going to private development.
... that this could be something that defines some aspects of our town-gown relationships ...
Or, perhaps, will be the first discussion of what could be several discussions involving the growth of both the community and UGA.
Oh, and Nikki, I disagree with you entirely about removing the tax exempt status for non-profits. Organizations which are working to provide necessary and worthy services in town, and are doing so without the intent to generate a profit, shouldn't be included on the property tax rolls.
Yeah, but why just UGA? They're only 1/7th of the problem. I agree that the tax issue is one we need to discuss (though with regard to UGA, I don't, honestly, think we can do much beyond prevail upon them to make decisions with some thought to how those decisions affect Athens). I don't agree that it's a UGA-only issue.
And JMac, "necessary" and "worthy" are in the eye of the beholder. I, unfortunately, have encountered several incidents of blighted church property -- I also tend to feel that services for which religious instruction is a prerequisite can be as much a coercive situation as a helpful one. And finally, nonprofit-sponsored commerce is still commerce -- why is it not on the same playing field as the businesses it competes with?
... And finally, nonprofit-sponsored commerce is still commerce ...
This is a logically incompatible statement. An organization that operates in a non-profit capacity is doing so with an expressed desire to not make a profit. It may offer some services that mirror those in the private sector (non-profit hospitals, for instance, come to mind), however the private sector is seeking to make money. And this money is then used to either expand its services, invest in new resources or reward its leaders and investors.
A non-profit doesn't do those things. It sets a budget and then raises only enough funds to meet said budget. Organizations which have the ability to turn a proft and keep said monies for the use of the owners' discretion are operating like a business and should pay taxes. Non-profits, however, don't have the same flexibility, and shouldn't be required to pay taxes.
As far as taxing religious instruction, not only do I have personal reasons for thinking this is, with all due respect, a ridiculous idea, but it goes right back to my initial argument - that these groups are operating on a budget which offers them no profit and every dime goes into the operation of their programs.
You're basing your desire to tax them solely on a disagreement or dislike for the message being taught at some of these organizations, and I don't see that as something strong enough to remove their tax-exempt status. I'd also suggest that you're misunderstanding how some of these non-profits work ... even many of the more openly fundamentalist religious organizations in town don't incorporate evangelicism into their charitable actions.
Regarding UGA, I think it's a tad misleading to say that they're 'only 1/7 of our area' ... primarily because it's a unified effort which controls that 1/7. It isn't as if the non-profits or area religious organizations march lockstep and are buying property left and right in this community. They each act separately. So while UGA may be in the minority of the 'off-the-tax-rolls' club, it's clearly the biggest fish in that pond.
As a result, that 1/7 could turn into 1/6 ... and then 1/5. Again, UGA expanding its campus and offering more services is a very good thing. However, I'm just suggesting that we enter into dialogue with them about how best to do so.
Organizations which have the ability to turn a proft and keep said monies for the use of the owners' discretion are operating like a business and should pay taxes. Non-profits, however, don't have the same flexibility, and shouldn't be required to pay taxes.
I continue to disagree. The IRS requires nonprofits to pay taxes on many for-profit activities (for example, a non-profit owning property that is in and of itself profitable would pay property taxes on that portion of its property), and we should require the for-profit, separately located functions of non-profits to do the same regardless of the nature of that profit.
As far as taxing religious instruction
I didn't say this regarding religious instruction in general. I simply question we the taxpayers subsidizing coerced religious instruction. Particularly since we now do so to a greater extent under the various faith-based initiatives.
You're basing your desire to tax them solely on a disagreement or dislike for the message being taught at some of these organizations, and I don't see that as something strong enough to remove their tax-exempt status.
You're mischaracterizing my position. I would expect the same standards to apply to UGA, to churches, to Project Safe, and to the Athens Area Humane Society. And to be perfectly clear, I am not suggesting they be taxed in general -- I want them to be taxed on nonessential functions and property which does not fulfill their central missions.
I'd also suggest that you're misunderstanding how some of these non-profits work ...
Nope. If you'd like, I can do a more extensive blogging of what I'm talking about at some point in the near future so we can discuss specifics.
Regarding UGA, I think it's a tad misleading to say that they're 'only 1/7 of our area' ...
I think UGA is a part of it -- but UGA didn't create the mechanism that is our problem, UGA isn't alone or even primary in its impact, and it's not productive to turn this into a UGA vs. Athens thing when it's UGA + our tax structure + our land use + every other nonprofit and government agency in town vs. Athens. Government works in concert to some extent -- and some of the larger nonprofits are large enough to have a fairly significant impact. The other colleges, for starters. So I welcome a dialogue...but I don't support the terms of the dialogue as you've drawn them.
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on some aspects of this thing Nikki, which is unusual since we typically line up more often than not.
And forgive me for mischaracterizing your position as that wasn't my intent. Though I am still sorta befuddled on that point, particularly when I read your original statement ...
I also tend to feel that services for which religious instruction is a prerequisite can be as much a coercive situation as a helpful one.
I take it to be that you have, to some extent, some concerns about faith-based organizations offering assistance. I reached my conclusion because there was no other charge from you regarding equal application of this to something like, say, Project Safe.
I also see that your calling for 'non-essential' aspects to be taxed, which I still disagree with, but can now understand more clearly where you're coming from.
Again, one of the central component of my argument against this is that non-profits operate on razor-thin budgets that generate no profit and provide some sort of community worth (however objective the worth may be to some). To add an additional expense to their load isn't something I'd condone.
I think UGA is a part of it -- but UGA didn't create the mechanism that is our problem, UGA isn't alone or even primary in its impact, and it's not productive to turn this into a UGA vs. Athens thing when it's UGA + our tax structure + our land use + every other nonprofit and government agency in town vs. Athens. Government works in concert to some extent -- and some of the larger nonprofits are large enough to have a fairly significant impact. The other colleges, for starters. So I welcome a dialogue...but I don't support the terms of the dialogue as you've drawn them.
I can respect your disagreement over the system itself, as that's what I take your criticism to be primarily. However, I'm calling for a dialogue set up to the realities of the situation and, for that matter, not couching this as a 'UGA vs. Athens-Clarke County' kind of thing. You appear to be calling for a dialogue which would require a massive - and probably pretty unpopular - overhaul of our tax-exemption system.
I also think we're just going to disagree over how much impact some of the non-profits in town have on our tax rolls. Combined, as you note, it appears quite large. But these entities act independently, as I said before, and are not actively expanding. Rather, what happens more often than not, they move from one location to another, fold and are replaced by another or a new non-profit starts up and gains the existing tax-exemptions.
This is distinctly different than UGA which is growing and expanding and thriving. As a result, its future land use plans have a substantially greater impact than the collection of non-profits we've discussed here (and I avoid lumping government into this mix because I'm assuming they'll be counted by the Athens-Clarke County side of the dialogue).
My two barely relevant cents worth:
1) Nicki said...
I continue to disagree. The IRS requires nonprofits to pay taxes on many for-profit activities (for example, a non-profit owning property that is in and of itself profitable would pay property taxes on that portion of its property), and we should require the for-profit, separately located functions of non-profits to do the same regardless of the nature of that profit.
Actually, as of this last election, ANY property owend by a bona fide 501(c)(3) charitable organization is now exempt from ALL property taxes regardless of it's use, as long as the proceeds from it's use are used for the purpose of the charity.
Technically, this could've allowed Prince Avenue Baptist Church to develop their old campus as a 500 unit student apartment complex and still not pay property tax, as long as the rent proceeds go into the church's general fund. It's an interesting new development .
2) Jmac said...
A non-profit doesn't do those things. It sets a budget and then raises only enough funds to meet said budget. Organizations which have the ability to turn a proft and keep said monies for the use of the owners' discretion are operating like a business and should pay taxes.
Well, that's what a non-profit SHOULD do... But keep in mind there's different kinds of non-profits out there. Take the Red and Black, for example. A 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation. Doesn't pay taxes, but sells advertising, competing directly with at least two for-profit entities here in Athens. While it's student workers are essentially volunteers, it's full-time staff are paid salaries competitive with for-profit newspapers. It's rates are "competitive" too, they're not cheap, as they have an interesting and signifigant market share, being available all over campus.
So, why should they be exempt from property taxes when Flagpole or the Banner Herald is not?
The Red and Black is not exempt from property taxes. Tax-exempt status does not coincide with non-profit status generally.
Post a Comment
<< Home