Heard in the Hall

15-year tax abatement in poor neighborhoods?

Philadelphia City Hall and political coverage from the Philadelphia Inquirer City Hall bureau.

23 comments

15-year tax abatement in poor neighborhoods?

POSTED: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 5:02 PM

Jeff Shields

City Councilman Frank DiCicco said Wednesday he will propose extending the city's 10-year tax abatement to 15 years in some neighborhoods bypassed by private development.

In a bill to be introduced at Thursday's regular Council meeting, poorer areas would qualify for the extended tax abatement. Such factors as median income would determine which parts of the city qualify, DiCicco said.

The current 10-year tax abatement applies citywide, but some neighborhoods have seen only publicly subsidized development. Critics say it has benefited large developers and Center City at the expense of the rest of the city.

"Even though we've seen a lot of development in some neighborhoods as a result of the 10-year-tax abatement, we hope this will give other neighborhoods a chance to develop," DiCicco said.

DiCicco's bill would require authorization by the state legislature, which is never a simple task. Anything Philadelphia seeks from the General Assembly is likely to become a bargaining chip for Senate Republicans against the Democratically controlled House and Gov. Rendell.

The abatement program was introduced in 1997 to spur development in a moribund real estate market. It covers all new construction or substantial renovations. .

Councilman Darrell L. Clarke last year proposed a gradual scaling back of the 10-year abatement. Mayor Nutter opposed that bill and it has yet to gain any traction.

Click here for Philly.com's politics page.

23 comments

Previous Story: Pew Poll finds Philadelphians are somewhat optimistic about city's future

Next Story: A DROP bill in City Council? This one might fly

Comments (23)

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 5:30 PM, 02/24/2010

What a joke! Raise my taxes and give everyone else a 15 year tax abatement. Is there any wonder why there is such a defecit in the city budget? If you want a property pay your taxes just like I do.

— SpeakPhilly.com

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 5:50 PM, 02/24/2010

How can you build a house in the poorest area and expect to sell it for 200K. The idea was to build in the Norteast, were the most money is give a property tax break and gain on a lawyer making 175 k a year for wage tax. who would by in the hood

— BushisGood

Comment removed.

Comment removed.

Comment removed.

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:07 PM, 02/24/2010

How about abating it in ALL neighborhoods? Now that would be a real stimulus plan.

— digitalowl

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:12 PM, 02/24/2010

They must be joking. Some of the "poor" neighborhoods already pay so little in taxes for the ENTIRE YEAR, that it does not even pay for their trash removal, or if just one of their kids rides a SEPTA bus to school for 9 months. How about an abatement for those of us who HAVE been paying our share AND THEIRS, or just end the abatement all together. Too much money has been "forgiven" already. And let's not forget how much the snow removal will have cost "the city", (and who they will be looking to recoup it from).

— dee99999

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:12 PM, 02/24/2010

I think Dicicco And his cronies need to be VOTED OUT of council. How about the people who pay their bills and taxes. cut me a break no wonder this city is broke.

— cecelia

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:16 PM, 02/24/2010

This is wrong on so many levels. People who buy in poor neighborhoods already get a tax abatement (taxes might be $500 per year) and they pay very little for the property on top of it. Why would anyone overpay in an already affordable neighborhood simply for the tax abatement? If neighborhoods are properly assessed there would be no need for this. The lower prices should be a draw enough. If it isn't, then it's because of the crime and poor schools. Fix the schools, and improve neighborhood security and people will gladly move to these neighborhoods. The tax abatement should be phased out, not expanded. Diccico needs to be censured for this idea.

— p.e.poole

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:39 PM, 02/24/2010

I agree that this is a bad idea but some of you misunderstood what this program is. Tax abatement is for new housing, not tax amnesty for existing housing. It was used to promote new housing development over the last ten years or so and did not provide tax relief for existing owners.

— hopster

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 9:47 PM, 02/24/2010

They should do away with ALL tax abatement. The city is broke and they're still giving things away and making those of us who have bought older homes pay for those who aren't paying taxes and those who are getting abatements. If you can afford to live in the condos that have been built recently, you can afford to pay the tax bill.

— Centrist