WASHINGTON CO. COMMISSIONERS DIVIDED IN APPROVAL OF REBATE FOR PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER
A majority of the Washington County Commissioners court is in favor of the county’s participation in a sales tax abatement for the planned retail development on Highway 290 in Brenham.
Commissioners issued a 3-1 vote at their meeting this (Tuesday) morning, with Commissioner Kirk Hanath voting against the agreement.
This agreement, which was entered into by the City of Brenham in January, will reimburse developer Baker Katz $6 million in sales taxes from its planned shopping center on Highway 290 and Chappell Hill Street.
By the county issuing approval, it will be responsible for roughly $2 million of that reimbursement, with the City of Brenham contributing $4 million.
Hanath said this item has become a bit of a “political hot potato”, but stressed that everyone on the court appreciates Baker Katz bringing this project to Washington County. He reiterated this vote was not concerning whether or not the court wants the project here, but merely a tax abatement for the project.
Hanath likened these types of economic development projects to playing chess, saying “you have to be several moves ahead of your opponents” when it comes to attracting and getting development to the community. He continued by saying future growth lies upon the working class, saying it “oils the wheels of economic development”.
Hanath said the term “progressive” has been used as a label for the project, which he didn’t necessarily understand, citing stats from the U.S. Census Bureau showing heavily increasing Internet sales. He said, if this project were truly progressive, it would take into account the Internet process.
Hanath thanked County Judge John Durrenberger for his handling of this situation, which he said has been “quite phenomenal”. He said Durrenberger gave the court time to review documents, ask questions, and to get all of its concerns answered.
Hanath also offered a suggestion for Brenham city officials: inform the county early on of projects like this, so time doesn’t have to be spent working on a “Plan B” in case the plan does not follow through.
Commissioner Joy Fuchs said the court has done its due diligence in research, and expressed frustration at how the final agreement was given to the court just before session began.
Fuchs said the “bickering and non-communication” the county has been accused of goes both ways between the city and the county.
Fuchs said the county doesn’t want to be “the stepchild included at the end”, where the city approves the agreement before the county even sees it. She said, while some people may think the city taking over economic duties is a “wonderful thing”, it isn’t when people don’t work together. She said she wants this county to progress, and believes the county moved beyond the “bickering” years ago.
Fuchs added she was only in favor of signing into the agreement because of just the sales tax being rebated. She stated the value of the vacant land purchased by Baker Katz at $1.19 million, and the tax the county would receive each year is $6,193. According to Fuchs, if Baker Katz built $20 or $30 million buildings, property taxes would be heavily increased. If the property tax were being abated, she said she would likely say no to the agreement.
Commission Don Koester said the county will benefit from this development in the long run, as while it may not get much in the way of sales tax revenue, it will collect property tax revenue.
A member from the audience, Alan Hudson, argued that this development won’t bring in “meaningful jobs” to the community, as these jobs will likely be lower-paying and catered towards high school and college students. He added these incoming stores won’t have the same choice or variety in their inventory as they would in bigger cities.
Hudson also said he was in favor of government equality, believing if the county offered a rebate to this company, it should have offered one to any other company.
Also in court, commissioners:
- Approved a memo of agreement between the county and Baylor Scott and White Medical Center – College Station, to supply Washington County EMS with blood products during patient transport. EMS Director Kevin Deramus said the county had a similar agreement with College Station Medical Center which had been in place since 2012, before it ceased in January.
- Approved the bond for Reserve Deputy Sheriff Damon Wegner. Washington County Sheriff’s Office Chief Deputy Jay Petrash said Wegner will stay on as a reserve until the Sheriff’s Office trains a replacement for him. Wegner is retiring from the Sheriff’s Office, effective on the 31st.
- Appointed John Barton as co-chairman of the Washington County Historical Commission.
- Approved the County Engineer to accept the 2019 annual seal coat bid.
- Approved Natural Gas Pipeline’s crossing of Old Mill Creek Road (near Hohenwalde School Road), Boehnemann Road (near Hohenwalde and Willow Springs Roads), Adamek Road, and Beckermann Road, as proposed by AMP Intrastate Pipelines, LLC.
- Approved the County Information Resources Agency services agreement for technology services from CIRA
- Approved the Affordable Care Act Reporting and Tracking Service 2019 Renewal Confirmation Program Agreement.
- Heard a series of monthly reports from the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, EMS, E-911, Veterans Service Officer, Road and Bridge, and Information Technology.
- Approved a subdivision variance request for land on Spreen Road in Precinct 3.
- Approved an amending plat for Zionsville Estates, a subdivision fronting Helm Road and Maass Road in Precinct 3.
Many thanks to “Get the whole story”for a thorough and clear explanation. And thanks to council for negotiating a great deal. Hoping the naysayers don’t mind reading a bit to comprehend the complete picture. The average citizens critical thinking skills have been dulled by a social media storm of brief tweets and instagrams. They have their place, but it tends to dull our reading and thinking skills. Life is in the details.
I for one am glad that the city has taken over economic development functions and couldn’t care less what the county commissioners think about it. The city has been growing and improving so much and that impacts both city and county residents positively. The old and/or out of touch commissioners need to go retire to their large lots of ag exempt land where they hardly pay taxes and let people who actually know how to grow our county take the lead. The sales tax alone from these projects will pay for themselves in the long run
Thank you Commissioner Hanath!
I’m with Hanath
Good for the person in the audience. Why should a huge developer get a tax break for building a strip mall but other local business don’t get tax breaks for starting businesses. Brenham is booming, if franchises want to build here they should have to pay the same amount of tax everyone else does. It’s not going to keep people away, if the profits are here for them, they will come here. If it’s not worth their investment then move along.. You think anyone in Houston or Dallas is getting a tax refund for opening another strip mall?
Have you talked to our County Judge or commissioners, or even City council members and asked them how and why they came to this decision? It’s not one they came to lightly. But ultimately, the benefits of the rebate grossly outweighed the cost. Also, please understand: this is a REBATE of SALES TAX. This is NOT an ABATEMENT of property tax. What that means for our commissioners court is the 1/2 per cent of county sales tax collected by the businesses who open their doors there is refunded back to them (the developer I believe) for either a period of time or up to an agreed upon amount. So instead of that $2 million going back into our county budget, it goes back to the people who developed the land and the property value of said land, thereby raising the property taxes collected on that land. The increased property tax income will be MUCH MORE than the $2m rebated here.
Another important thing to note (because I know your next comment is going to be “But that’s $2million we could spend on our county road improvements!”): no, it’s not. The ONLY THING sales tax money can be used for by our county is to lower ad valorem taxes. So really, all it would do is lower your property tax bill on average about $11. Over 12 years (or whatever the time is.) [somebody from the city or county can correct me if that’s inaccurate but I think it’s close.]
And another thing, as The Spectator pointed out a few days ago – you say businesses are coming to Brenham, well they haven’t come yet! It’s called playing nice with the new neighbors. And finally, yes, Houston and Dallas ABSOLUTELY give abatements and refunds on new development. See https://www.houstontx.gov/housing/eec-incentives.html and https://www.dallasecodev.org/251/Programs. And even to residential property owners! https://dallascityhall.com/departments/sustainabledevelopment/historicpreservation/Pages/tax_incentives.aspx
I really encourage people to not just go on the headlines or just the articles… it’s hard to concisely write every detail into a story here. We get the highlights but if it makes you have questions or think something isn’t “fair” (whatever THAT word means today) ASK SOMEBODY. Our council members and commissioners are approachable! They don’t mind answering your questions or filling in the holes! Learn the WHOLE STORY. It can be quite interesting when you hear it and who knows…. you might learn something new! OR — it might encourage YOU to run for office yourself so you can make the decisions!
yes all the time,theyhave entire business development grant divisions. As does every major city in the US. Building costs are extremely high, these grants make th costs work while they get the facilities built and occupied. The later tax revenues more than reimburce the county for the short term loss of potential revenue.
Remember the county will be getting more revenue with the grant than they are now. it is not a total tax wavier just a short term reduction. In the end it means more revenue for the county and a larger tax base for our schools. Win Win.