What's new
By:

Millers want more money

My2Cents said:
I don't know. How many people do you employ at your home? Do a million people come to your home every year? And when they do, do they buy things from all of your neighbors? Because if they do, that would create jobs and tax revenue and I think you should get a tax break.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhh. Duped into trickle down I see.
 
Seems like the city has a no-brainer decision to make on this one. Millers could have asked for (and probably would have received) much more.

BTW, unlike an increasing number of voices around here, I continue to believe that Jazz management is working hard toward the goal of winning a championship, and I also believe that their strategy has been good. Tax incentives are not going to be tied to their success at that, though. I don't think the city would ever ask for that and I don't think the Millers would ever agree to it.
 
mellow said:
I appreciate your desire for fairness, and compassion for the poor, but I think you don't understand how the rda tax increment works.

The story that SLC is taking 22 million out of a fund for homeless or hungry and handing it to Greg Miller is completely false. To suggest anything close to that narrative displays a complete misunderstanding of how a tax increment rda operates. The 22 million does not come out of an existing budget, no SLC program will be cut, no program for helping the poor or any member of the citzenrary will be cut.

From the sltrib..."The plan, which will be presented to the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency (RDA) on Tuesday, calls for Larry H. Miller Sports (LHM) to initially foot the entire bill for the renovation. But then LHM is asking the city to funnel 40 percent of new property taxes the company pays for the arena — up to $22.7 million — back to it over a period of 25 years." https://www.sltrib.com/news/3993285-155/utah-jazz-will-ask-slc-for

The 22 million will never exist if the arena expansion doesn't happen.

If the millers spend 100+ million to improve the arena they will pay more in taxes because of the increased valuation of the property. Roughly 56.75 million more in taxes over 25 years, this in addition to the taxes they already pay on the Arena. The rda allows the millers to revive a refund of 40% of the taxes they will pay on the increased value. They still pay 60% of the taxes.

The city will participate because it recognizes that increasing the property value of the arena keeps the property values high in the area around the arena. Again, a reminder property taxes are based on property values, so higher property means more tax revenue. Also, property values have two components 1- land value and 2- building value.

Now suppose the rda does not exist, and the arena is left as is. The value of the building will actually begin to decrease as it goes deeper into its useful life. The land value might increase, but it might also decrease depending on valuations and land sales in the area. The overall tax revenue for the arena and the area is very likely to decrease. The rda investment actually protects the tax revenue in the area by keeping land and building valuations high.
Click to expand...

mellow said:
I agree with green, if the millers need more money, they should raise chickens.

Foolish.
Click to expand...
Which side of this are you on? Both?
 
My2Cents said:
I don't know. How many people do you employ at your home? Do a million people come to your home every year? And when they do, do they buy things from all of your neighbors? Because if they do, that would create jobs and tax revenue and I think you should get a tax break.
Click to expand...

Are the Millers doing all this as a do-gooder community employment project? Or is this an attempt to make a greater profit? I think that it is the latter myself. Aren't maintenance and upgrades part of a normal business expense? Why do the taxpayers have to foot some of the bill? Would the Millers not do this without the 40% tax break?
 
zman1527 said:
Are the Millers doing all this as a do-gooder community employment project? Or is this an attempt to make a greater profit?
Click to expand...
I can't speak for the Miller's motivation. Could be a little of both. LHM was a big community guy. I'm just saying the Jazz have a positive economic impact on the community. I'm not one of those who think the Jazz should be run as an altruistic non-profit enterprise. It's a business, and I think the Millers should get a reasonable return on investment, keeping in mind they have made a bundle on capital appreciation.
.
Aren't maintenance and upgrades part of a normal business expense? Why do the taxpayers have to foot some of the bill? Would the Millers not do this without the 40% tax break
Click to expand...
Yes, they are. I have no idea if they would do it without the tax incentive or if they would spend as much. They're just taking advantage of something that has become common practice. It's just getting publicity because it's the Jazz. States and communities offer tax incentives all the time to businesses who expand or re-locate. How about Start-Up New York? No taxes for 10 years.
 
Last edited:
mellow said:
I am strongly FOR the RDA.

I was angry and trying to be funny when I responded to Green. But I'm not funny and I should never post what I type in anger.
Click to expand...
Ahh. Now I understand, and I strongly agree with your original post. On a side note, message board sarcasm is fraught with dangers and should only be attempted by trained professionals.
 
Aaron Falk: Salt Lake City has approved up to $22.7 million in tax breaks for the Jazz's arena renovation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top