Tax Incentive for Downtown Office Construction?

To encourage residential development in the downtown, the city of Regina offers a tax abatement that can be applied either to new construction or the conversion of an existing downtown building into condos or apartments. The Leader Building on Hamilton St. and the Willoughby & Duncan Building on F.W. Hill Mall are two recent examples of the latter.

Now, according to CBC, the city is considering a similar tax break to encourage the construction of new office space in the downtown.

Author: Gregory Beatty

Greg Beatty is a crime-fighting shapeshifter who hatched from a mutagenic egg many decades ago. He likes sunny days, puppies and antique shoes. His favourite colour is not visible to your puny human eyes. He refuses to write a bio for this website and if that means Whitworth writes one for him, so be it.

14 thoughts on “Tax Incentive for Downtown Office Construction?”

  1. P-doggers – Can you please dig up a previous p-dog story about a low-income/seniors apartment bldg. on Broadway and Winnipeg (I think) that was denied a tax break for renos? And link it to this story so we can see the comparison? My memory is too foggy on the details to search it out, but I think it happened earlier this year, and someone said there was a p-dog article about it.

  2. We covered the Milton Heights story in the first segment of Ultrasonic Alarm Call No. 8: Don’t Eat The Salmon, Moose.

    http://www.prairiedogmag.com/?p=29193

    (We also talk about one of the city’s lot draws and how it excluded the sale of land to developers planning to build affordable rental properties.)

    Martin’s blog post covers the story pretty damn thoroughly, though.

  3. This proposal affects, among other entities, the two school boards and the library board.
    The use of tax breaks, as an incentive for development or re-development or business location, has a spotty history at best, and not just in Regina.
    This recommendation comes from a city administration that has slowed down the adoption of a city-run curbside recycling program by failing to give fair consideration to the role of private companies. Where’s the consistency?

  4. Hell yeah. What Barb said.

    FTR, personally, I’m undecided on whether the recycling program should be handled privately or by city staff. But that that wasn’t figured out during the public consultation is ridiculous.

    And, it’s worth noting, both the local recycling companies are seemingly so disgruntled with the terms of the collection Request For Proposal that neither will be bidding on it. So… either our recycling will be getting picked up by a firm from away, or the job will wind up back in the hands of the City as originally recommended and we’ll have lost X more months to dilly dallying…

    … and shilly shallying.

  5. Well, I won’t lose X months, because as long as Crown Shred and Recycling Inc. is allowed to stay in business, I will continue to use their sterling services. I have my own opinion on why the admin dragged its feet and arrogantly ignored the private sector, but that’s for another time.
    Paul, can you confirm the possible no-bid situation?

  6. I found out about the companies not bidding from the Leader Post…

    http://www.leaderpost.com/life/Companies+union+react+vote/5480620/story.html

    Although, when I spoke to John Barker from Go Green, long before this recommendation went before Executive Committee, he told me there was no way his company would ever bid on collection if they were required to sort recyclables at the recycling facility. (Go Green expects you to have your recyclables sorted at the curbside.)

    So, there’s no way that council and admin didn’t know that at least Go Green would balk at the RFP terms.

  7. Yes, I recall reading that article. I’m wondering if that’s still their position (it’s probably still Go Green’s, as they disagree with commingling, as do I).
    Anyway, this has slid a bit OT.

  8. It’s mentioned in the article, but Crown & Shred is planning on bidding on the material recycling facility and not the collection. And I have reason to believe that’s all they ever wanted to bid on. So, it’s possible/likely that council and/or staff had good reason to possibly/maybe expect that no one local would be bidding on their collection RFP the way it’s written.

  9. Hunh. A little surprised that isn’t up yet. Still, council only directed staff to send out the RFP a few weeks ago. Must take longer than that to draw one of those up and get it past legal and whatnot.

    You can, however, read the report that set the guidelines for the RFP at

    http://www.regina.ca/Page5789.aspx?DateTime=634544694000000000&PageMode=View

    It’s CR11-124.

    And you might want to read the meeting decisions as well because the recommendations from Executive Committee were modified. (The decisions are at the top of the page.)

  10. Thx Paul & Anna. I was also wondering where the recycle RFP was. Not going to bid on it, just wanted to see it. And where is the Expression of Interest (EOI) for the new stadium the Mayor keeps talking about? Its also not on that RFP/EOI page that Anna links to.

  11. Still veering OT: the RFP is supposed to be released “mid-November 2011”. I got that from Crown Shred’s website.

Comments are closed.