Property Tax Rebate Cut to Cover Stadium Debt

[HoosierCat]

Great news for Hamilton County homeowners (not).

/>http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121205/NEWS01/312050087

Apparently this only makes the nut until 2014 then they will have to find more money. Hmmm...maybe they can ask AJ Green for a loan, he should be flush about then.

[Earendil]

What IS property tax in Hamilton County these days? Amazingly enough it's pretty cheap out here.

[Sea Ray]

Great news for Hamilton County homeowners (not).

/>http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121205/NEWS01/312050087

Apparently this only makes the nut until 2014 then they will have to find more money. Hmmm...maybe they can ask AJ Green for a loan, he should be flush about then.

I don't understand why they'd only do it for two years. This means they'll have to go through the political pain again two yrs from now. Too bad they have already spent the casino tax money

[HoosierCat]

I don't understand why they'd only do it for two years. This means they'll have to go through the political pain again two yrs from now. Too bad they have already spent the casino tax money

My guess is that they hope that things change (economy recovers, revenues increase, etc) over the next two years so that either the gap closes or it narrows so they can use some other band-aid that doesn't involve directly increasing taxes.

[ArmyBengal]

The sad part about it is that while the tax payers had to vote for the initial property tax increase to keep the teams here in town, there was no representation for the tax payers this time around even though this was something promised with the initial vote.

I still don't understand how only a single county has to foot the bill for this either.

It's not like the only people attending games at either ball park are from Hamilton County.

It's not a huge amount, as it equates to $70 dollars a year for me, but still.

[Sea Ray]

The sad part about it is that while the tax payers had to vote for the initial property tax increase to keep the teams here in town, there was no representation for the tax payers this time around even though this was something promised with the initial vote.

I still don't understand how only a single county has to foot the bill for this either.

It's not like the only people attending games at either ball park are from Hamilton County.

It's not a huge amount, as it equates to $70 dollars a year for me, but still.

The media is making a big deal about "the promise" and all but there's nothing in politics that can be promised for 30 yrs. If they feel a need to raise taxes in 2013, who cares what was promised in 1996? They can't be expected to project accurately where we'd stand in 2013. If they need to raise taxes, so be it.

[ArmyBengal]

The sad part about it is that while the tax payers had to vote for the initial property tax increase to keep the teams here in town, there was no representation for the tax payers this time around even though this was something promised with the initial vote.

I still don't understand how only a single county has to foot the bill for this either.

It's not like the only people attending games at either ball park are from Hamilton County.

It's not a huge amount, as it equates to $70 dollars a year for me, but still.

The media is making a big deal about "the promise" and all but there's nothing in politics that can be promised for 30 yrs. If they feel a need to raise taxes in 2013, who cares what was promised in 1996? They can't be expected to project accurately where we'd stand in 2013. If they need to raise taxes, so be it.

I don't know much about the deal back then, as I wasn't here. I moved into the county just a couple years ago.

However, I would say that if the people funding this were told this is what would happen, then that is what should happen. That should be protected. Especially seeing as how this "solution" is only until next year. What then ??

Like I said, I really don't care about the extra $70 this coming year, but if that number climbs again the following year, that's going to be a real source of contention. From my own perspective, I can't say that I would have been in favor of voting for that measure all those years back, but that's just me and it's neither here nor there.

[Sea Ray]

The sad part about it is that while the tax payers had to vote for the initial property tax increase to keep the teams here in town, there was no representation for the tax payers this time around even though this was something promised with the initial vote.

I still don't understand how only a single county has to foot the bill for this either.

It's not like the only people attending games at either ball park are from Hamilton County.

It's not a huge amount, as it equates to $70 dollars a year for me, but still.

The media is making a big deal about "the promise" and all but there's nothing in politics that can be promised for 30 yrs. If they feel a need to raise taxes in 2013, who cares what was promised in 1996? They can't be expected to project accurately where we'd stand in 2013. If they need to raise taxes, so be it.

I don't know much about the deal back then, as I wasn't here. I moved into the county just a couple years ago.

However, I would say that if the people funding this were told this is what would happen, then that is what should happen. That should be protected. Especially seeing as how this "solution" is only until next year. What then ??

Like I said, I really don't care about the extra $70 this coming year, but if that number climbs again the following year, that's going to be a real source of contention. From my own perspective, I can't say that I would have been in favor of voting for that measure all those years back, but that's just me and it's neither here nor there.

The vote in 1996 is a long story but my shortened version is this: There was nothing wrong with the vote itself; the problem arose with the lousy deal the county gave to the Bengals thereafter. Mike Brown played Bob Bedinghaus like a used car salesman plays a teenage girl.

But be that as it may, when a gov't needs money, they have to find it somehow and I don't think promises made in 1996 should have to be kept for 30 yrs (the length of the lease). Things change, as do tax rates, and they should make the best decision today that they can based on today's economy and not based on what Bedinghaus said back then

[jjakq27]

The sad part about it is that while the tax payers had to vote for the initial property tax increase to keep the teams here in town, there was no representation for the tax payers this time around even though this was something promised with the initial vote.

I still don't understand how only a single county has to foot the bill for this either.

It's not like the only people attending games at either ball park are from Hamilton County.

It's not a huge amount, as it equates to $70 dollars a year for me, but still.

I think a "regional" tax or some other fund-raising mechanism was discussed during the early stages and the surrounding counties did not want to provide support since the stadiums and their secondary benefits would not be realized by those taxpayers. Other ideas since then were performance taxes on visiting musical acts and sports teams. That has been dismissed as something that would drive the musicians away thus drying up that revenue stream.

I think they've also floated the idea of a ticket tax but the benefit is somewhat limited. So there is no clear or easy solution unless the teams begin chipping in some.

[ArmyBengal]

So there is no clear or easy solution unless the teams begin chipping in some.

How about a bake sale ?? I love brownies !!

Seriously though, from what I got from the original deal, Mike Brown made out like a bandit.

That probably plays into why people hate him so much as well.

I think he's given a little in return, but not as much as some might think.

I will readily admit, i'm not as up to speed with this as I probably should be.

Feel free to chime in.

[Sea Ray]

So there is no clear or easy solution unless the teams begin chipping in some.

How about a bake sale ?? I love brownies !!

Seriously though, from what I got from the original deal, Mike Brown made out like a bandit.

That probably plays into why people hate him so much as well.

I think he's given a little in return, but not as much as some might think.

I will readily admit, i'm not as up to speed with this as I probably should be.

Feel free to chime in.

He did make out like a bandit but the folks I know don't blame him. They blame the county for being pushovers in giving in to him. Bedinghaus is a vile word in those parts...

[COB]

I'm not a Hamilton County resident, so the finer points of the whole thing escape me.

That said, I do see one glaring misstep on Mike Brown's part - His stubborn refusal to sell the naming rights to the stadium. The tax burden the county has to bear could be offset by the amount they'd get for the naming rights. Mike seems to think it's important to honor his father's memory by naming the stadium after him. What I think he's missing is that he's not honoring his father's memory, the taxpayers are. And they're being forced to do so due to language he undoubtedly drafted himself in the operating agreement he has with the county. He's a crafty old bastard.

[COB]

Straight up, Mike is a black-hearted, stone cold pimp. It's all about the Lumina.

[TJJackson]

Straight up, Mike is a black-hearted, stone cold pimp.

+1

[HoosierCat]

IIRC, Mikey bought the naming rights for like $5 million.

[Sea Ray]

I'm not a Hamilton County resident, so the finer points of the whole thing escape me.

That said, I do see one glaring misstep on Mike Brown's part - His stubborn refusal to sell the naming rights to the stadium. The tax burden the county has to bear could be offset by the amount they'd get for the naming rights. Mike seems to think it's important to honor his father's memory by naming the stadium after him. What I think he's missing is that he's not honoring his father's memory, the taxpayers are. And they're being forced to do so due to language he undoubtedly drafted himself in the operating agreement he has with the county. He's a crafty old bastard.

I don't think we can assume the county would get the naming rights money. It may be set up that Mikey gets that.

[HoosierCat]

In the original stadium deal, the county got the first $5 million from any naming rights deal. So Mikey paid them $5 million to name it PBS. That was competitive with deals at the time; for instance, the Cinery Field naming rights cost $6 million. In 2010, with the county facing a previous deficit, the Bengals agreed to pay $7.4 million in rent over the next five years. In return, one of the concessions the county made was giving up any future naming rights revenue.

[Sea Ray]

In the original stadium deal, the county got the first $5 million from any naming rights deal. So Mikey paid them $5 million to name it PBS. That was competitive with deals at the time; for instance, the Cinery Field naming rights cost $6 million. In 2010, with the county facing a previous deficit, the Bengals agreed to pay $7.4 million in rent over the next five years. In return, one of the concessions the county made was giving up any future naming rights revenue.

Yep, that sounds right. So the county negotiated themselves out of any further namiung rights money. Par for the course

[COB]

Naming rights are something Mike could do for the County. The Bengals have made statements to the effect that they are looking for ways to help the county. Here it is. Mike gives up nothing tangible, the County just gets paid for producing, and doing, nothing. Just let some mega-corp slap their name on the stadium and let some announcers say it on tv.