Historical November 1984 report or notice. Original dates, prices and contacts describe the source period; current availability has not been established.
Dear Editor: Mr. Don Fitz wrote an article, which appeared in your October issue, entitled “Commentary On Tenants Rights.” My purpose is to set the record straight on certain issues raised by Mr. Fitz. Mr. Fitz enumerated eight points of government doles for the rich; certainly this is a perverted view of the facts. Mr. Fitz listed Real Estate tax reductions and twenty-five year tax abatements. Blighting must be the issue he is referring to as a means to tax reduction.
The facts are that when a property is blighted it enables the owner of the blighted property to obtain tax abatement. Tax abatement does not reduce current taxes but rather creates a tax incentive. Tax abatement encourages the property owner to invest money in his or her property for improvements and freezes his real estate taxes at their current level for a period of 10 or 25 years.
This blighting, or tax abatement scenario, is available to everyone and is an incentive for each to improve their property, without increasing their taxes.
It is not a tax reduction vehicle and may be used by individuals and developers. Low interest loans are available to individuals through MHDC bonds, County and City Housing bond programs, the Urban League and others. Certain low interest loan programs are targeted to individual first-time buyers, some for individual home improvement and some to multi-family housing.
Each has its own set of qualifications. Rent subsidies are all but a thing of the past with the federal budget cuts to the Section 8 housing programs. Purchase subsidies still exist to first time buyers under the For Sale Incentive Program, administered by the Community Development Agency.
These FSIP funds, as they are commonly known; are available to first time buyers; within the city, as an incentive to become homeowners. FSIP funds may be used to write down interest rates on loans and/or defray closing costs. “Tax credits” is a very general term. Perhaps Mr. Fitz is referring to the Tax Credits afforded every citizen in the United States who owns rental property, i.e. depreciation, operating expenses, etc. Tax shelters are vehicles contained in the IRS codes which give certain favorable tax credits to individuals who invest in real estate.
These favorable tax shelter incentives are designed to promote the expansion of safe, affordable housing; certainly, a worthwhile community program. Tax exempt bonds represent one favorable financing tool to encourage the production of multi-family residential housing. Tax exempt bond financing is also used to promote commercial and other types of beneficial construction.
In the case of residential housing, one of the requisites to obtaining tax exempt bond financing is that 20% of the number of units financed must be set aside for low to moderate income families.
The Community Development Agency is a branch of the government whose purpose is to assist and promote safe, affordable housing in all sectors under its jurisdiction. Mr. Fitz has enumerated these eight points and labeled them as vehicles or loopholes for the rich and the government to rip-off the poor. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Without these agencies and programs, the flight of people from the cities of America could not be stopped. St Louis is a great example of what can be done when private enterprise and government cooperate.
The rebirth of the neighborhoods that has taken place within our city over the last decade is a direct result of these types of programs. Certain allegations by Mr. Fitz deserve special attention. Mr. Bearden has not requested that any of his buildings be blighted; therefore, NO TAX ABATEMENT. Mr. Bearden has not sought, nor is he receiving, any special funding from the City, State or Federal Government for the development of his properties. Yet, he has promoted a fair relocation program for tenants of his buildings. Tenants were informed many months in advance of the legal notice to vacate, that the buildings were going to be closed for rehabilitation because they were running at substantial deficits. Steve McClendon stated he had not been paid moving expenses by City Equity, and “does not believe in City Equity’s promise to pay after this eviction either.” Steve McClendon was asked to relocate earlier this summer from the Randolph Apartments, in Pershing-Waterman, not the Skinker DeBaliviere neighborhood.
After repeated requests from City Equity’s property manager, Mr. McClendon submitted his paid bills for moving, at which time he was reimbursed $120. Unfortunately, Mr. McClendon did have to relocate again, for which he was reimbursed $500.
Copies of the cancelled checks are on file with this newspaper. Perhaps an apology, Mr. McClendon? Mr. Fitz’s direct attacks, inuendos and half truths directed at real estate developers are erroneous and not in the best interest of the neighborhood. Real estate developers play a vital role in the positive growth or rehabilitation of a neighborhood.
The positive effects of risk-taking developers working with the cooperation of neighborhood groups and government raise the quality of life style for all residents of a neighborhood.
—Phil Delkeskamp
City Equity Corporation
Originally published in The Times of Skinker-DeBaliviere, November 1984.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times1984_11.pdf, printed page(s) 2; PDF page(s) 2.
