I don’t get it. Why was Mitch Harper the only one who questioned the propriety of the tax abatement given to the new Harrison Square condo owners and had the wherewithal to vote against the proposal? Why would buyers who can afford the condos need a tax abatement?
I have always supported Harrison Square, but this goes too far. Councilman Pape mentioned that we need to be sure we can draw new development to the downtown. Pardon me, but I thought the condos had already been purchased. I also thought we were well on our way to building Harrison Square. Sounds to me like development is already being created.
Why would City Council need to give an abatement after the fact? Did the purchasers agree to buy the condos with the understanding that a tax abatement was in the air? Or am I missing something here?
First, Council provided tax abatements to such illustrious businesses as fast food restaurants which pay paltry wages and do not do much for the community, and now, it appears that certain lucky private property owners will get the benefit of a tax abatement. Okay – where is my abatement? Why shouldn’t I have the benefit of a 10-year abatement?
The following YouTube video is of Councilman Harper explaining why he voted against the tax abatement. And, you know what, he makes perfect sense.
