ny-brownfields.com

Chart #7: 

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES

NY

(1994)

MD

(1997)

MA

(1998)

MI

(1995)

NJ

(1998)

PA

(1995)

 

* No specific financial incentives for private BF sites or for VCP sites.

* Environ-mental restoration funding (75%) is available for municipal BFs under the 1996 Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act.

*The $200M made available under the Bond Act was fully expended between 1996 and 2002.

* Property tax abate-ments are available for properties (not limited to BFs) in designated “Empire Zones.”

* Municipal-ities are authorized by General Municipal Law §970-o to issue tax increment bonds and tax incre-ment antici-pation notes funded by anticipated future prop-erty tax revenues from appre-ciated prop-erties.

 

 

 

Creates 3 types of financial incentives for “qualified” BF properties:

* Local Property Tax Credit equal to 50% of the property’s increased assessed value.  Local taxing jurisdiction can increase credit by up to an additional 20%.  5-year credit can be increased up to an additional 5 years in a desig-nated “enterprise zone.”

* Property Tax Abatement – may be granted by the county or municipality against the overdue property taxes imposed on the property.

* Brownfield Revitalization Incentive Fund loan guarantees – to be granted by DBED based on statutory criteria.  (Local taxing jurisdiction must elect to participate; property must be “eligible” to participate in the VCP or be an oil-contaminated site subject to an MDE-approved corrective action plan; and the property must either be in a “densely populated urban center” and be “substantially underutilized,” or be an existing or former ind-ustrial or com-mercial site that “poses a threat” to public health or the environ-ment);  Fund will be self-replen-ishing by receiv-ing from partic-ipating juris-dictions 30% of the post-cleanup increment in property values.

* Also BF Site Assess-ment initiative for owners and prospective owners.  (Note: the grant converts to a loan if the project does not proceed to the VCP prog-ram.)[1]

* BF financial incentives are “very modest” by the standards of most indust-rialized north-east and mid-west states.  (Paull & Bartsch, 2001).  But other state economic development and transportation programs have also been used to support BF and other urban redevelopment projects.

* Karl Kalbach believes the most effective financial assistance program is the free (EPA-funded) Brownfield Site Assessment program--because it lets owners and prospective developers know what's there (with no risk to non-PRPs).

 

* BF Redevel-opment Access to Capital (BRAC) prog-ram—backs private sector loans with environmental insurance to ensure repay-ment and that the collateral is res-tored to its clean value.  Available for loans on any contaminated site in the Cwlth.  The insurance prog-ram has issued 77 policies and covers 45 projects.

* BF Redevel-opment Fund (BRF)—provides low-interest loans and grants for site assessment and cleanup in Economically Distressed Areas (EDAs).  Includes sites of former manufactured gas plants.  Applicant must be “innocent” owner/ operator or third party.  $30M loan fund has paid for 250 site assess-ments and 30 cleanups.

* BF Tax Credit—Credit of 25% of cleanup costs available in EDAs; 50% for a more thorough cleanup.  Tax-payer must be an “eligible person.”  Credit can be carried over for 5 years.

* Abatement of municipal back taxes—municipalities can enter into agreement with “eligible person” to abate back taxes, interest and penalties at contam-inated commercial or industrial sites.

* Economic Development Initiative Program (EDIP)—for projects in “Economic Target Areas” (ETAs).  Includes aban-doned bldg. tax deduction.

* Predevelopment Assistance for early-stage economic devel. projects in ETAs.

* Demolition of Abandoned Buildings. Program—priority for areas with >1,000 residents per square mile.

* Municipal BF Grant Program—administered by A.G.’s office to assist municipalities interested in participating in the CNTS program.

*After ~2 yrs., financial incentives programs have resulted in some 430 new redevelopment projects.

 

 

* Site Recla-mation Grants (SRGs)--$45M, incl. $10M for Site Assess-ment Grants.  Ultimately funded at $55M.  Supple-mented by CMI.

*Clean Mich-igan Initiative (CMI)--$255 in loans and grants for site assessment, demolition & cleanup (can-not benefit a true RP).

* BF Redevel-opment Zones —admin. by municipal BF Redevelop-ment Authori-ties (funded by proceeds of tax increment bonds and notes, etc.)

* Single Business Tax Credit (SB 924)—for eligible invest-ments at eligible property (BF “facility”).  Eligible expenses are response activity costs.

* Revitali-zation Revolv-ing Loan Program

* Tax-free renaissance zones.”

 

 

* BF Redevelop-ment Reimburse-ment Program   (with NJ Com-merce and Eco-nomic Growth Commission and NJ Dept. of Treasury)  reimburses up to 75% of remedial costs.  State uses tax revenue from operations at the redev-eloped site to pay a portion of the reme-dial costs.  Site must receive NFA determination from DEP.

* EPA-funded BF Assessments.

*Environmental Opportunity Zone Act - allows for tax abatements for up to 15 years..

*Hazardous

Discharge Site Remediation Fund--$75M in loans and grants for site assess-ment and clean-up.  ($10M set aside for inno-cent current owners who acquired prop-erty pre-1983.)  May also benefit RPs who cannot obtain financing for a required clean-up.  Created in 1993.  Has been an overwhelming success in providing municipalities with funds to assess risks at sites to make them attractive to a developer who can address those risks.  Has provided over $40M to ~125 communities.  This Fund is only available for sites where the community has a vision for redevelopment.

 

* BF Inventory Grants (BIG).

* BF Tax Incentive.

* Industrial Sites Reuse Program –loans and grants for site assess-ment, clean-up (not pri-vate parties), and site preparation.

* Financial Resources for the Environ-ment (FRE) —formed by a consortium of 40 banks, utilities, and corporations to evaluate increased lending and venture capital opp-ortunities (self-sust-aining finan-cing source).  First of its kind in the country.

* Growing Greener

Initiative (1999)—open space preser-vation, etc.

* Individual Land Recy-cling Fund—to help “inno-cent” people conduct vol-untary clean-ups.

*Key Sites Program - 4 consult-ants put on retainer to do interim responses and cont-ainment for sites.

*The most successful financial assistance program has been DCED's grant program to munici-palities and non-profits for site assess-ment and remediation.  $51 or $52M have been dis-bursed under this program.


[1] In California, the reverse is the case.  Site assessment assistance is provided as a loan “that converts to a grant if the recipient does not proceed with the project.”  Paull and Bartsch, 2001 (citing: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/docs/admin/uclp/docs/uclpfactsheet.pdf ).  These authors believe that, from the developers’ point of view, the California model is superior—because “the State is sharing the risk that the project will not proceed.”