School District: Air Base Impact Aid Set
Hatboro-Horsham School District officials said its annual disbursement from the federal government in lieu of taxes on Willow Grove air base is ‘guaranteed’ for a few years.
Photos
Calling it a “significant victory,” Hatboro-Horsham School District officials shared that for the next few years, administrators will not have to fret about how much – if any – federal aid will be received for Willow Grove air base.
Robert Reichert, the district’s director of business affairs, said the district has been working for the last few years to “streamline the funding formula” in order to help stabilize payments. During Tuesday night’s school board meeting, Reichert said the district did just that.
For this year, Hatboro-Horsham will receive $1.2 million, he said. For 2014 and 2015, the district is “guaranteed” $635,000 or $640,000 minimum.
“We were able to get the past years payments that were due us,” Reichert said of the higher funding amount for 2013.
The subsequent payments are based on what the district received in federal dollars, on average, the past four years, he said. An additional 10 percent is possible the next two years, but is not certain.
If the largely talked about 8 percent to 10 percent across-the-board federal cuts – also known as sequestration – become reality, Reichert said the reduction would likely wipe out most, if not all, of the potential additional impact aid for 2014 and 2015.
Looking ahead, Reichert said the district is concerned about the “gap years” when 862 acres are transferred from the federal government, but not yet developed and thus not netting tax revenues.
Federal impact aid is only paid when properties are federally owned. At a minimum, officials have said the former military base would take 20 years to build out.
“The redevelopment plan, as proposed, will certainly meet and exceed these levels,” Reichert said. “There will be some significant tax revenues.”
The big question, Reichert said, is “when will that be?”
“How long is it going to take … to where it’s actually generating tax revenue,” Reichert asked. “We’ll have to see how it all plays out.”
In This article
-
Hatboro-Horsham School District
229 Meetinghouse Rd, Horsham, PA -
NAS-JRB Willow Grove
Route 611, Horsham, PA -
Mike Shortall
9:01 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
Good news for now
David Pitcairn
10:32 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
“The redevelopment plan, as proposed, will certainly meet and exceed these levels,” Reichert said. “There will be some significant tax revenues.”
True, but the current impact aid revenues require minimal services in return. While buildout could match or exceed those revenue levels, there will be services needed in return, especially for the high density housing planned to be built first.
Therefor, it will no longer be pure profit to the district and more likely will be an overall loss. Expect taxes to go up or services to be cut eventually.
Mike Shortall
3:00 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Of course there will be services required for whatever development goes into the base, as would be the case whenever you develop any property.
But services are pooled and paid for by those new residents and businesses, occupying the redeveloped base property, that will be paying school taxes, property taxes, and income taxes.
Saying that people should "Expect taxes to go up or services to be cut eventually." is just a red herring attempt to scare people on a future you're no better qualified to judge than anyone else.
In the end, in whatever form it takes in the distant future, it will almost definitely generate more township revenue than the $5,000./yr your pet project, a BCCC-run airport proposal was offering.
Anyone who really cares about reasonable tax revenues should be able to recognize just how far in the hole the Township would be in if an airport proposal had been approved ($600K - $5K = a $595K hole every year, give or take a few K for minimal jobs an airport might have created).
And let's not forget that a municipal airport would have been required to pay ZERO in taxes to the local community!
Arkansas Dave
2:13 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Well Mike, you wrote exactly what I was going to write, so great point my friend.
David Pitcairn
4:50 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Yes Mike, services would be required by any developemnt but an airport requires very little in the way of services compared to the current HLRA plan.
I agree with you that services for the HLRA development plan would likely be covered by the taxes since the HLRA has said their goal is to break even on taxes for that property. In other words, the land pays for itself. But that equates to a tax loss compared to the current situation where most of the impact aid is not returned as services to the Navy. No utilities, roads, students etc.
I still stand by what I said until you can make a better argument.
David Pitcairn
4:52 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Agreed also Mike that, the current HLRA plan will generate a lot of revenue but, given my point above, how does that benefit taxpayers? Maybe marginally by spreading the cost of top officials over a bigger tax base. It does also mean more police, fire and teachers would be needed so that would help employ the new township residents at least.
As far as your airport comments, you obviously have not read the airport feasibility study, otherwise you would know that the HLRA talking points you are parroting here are false and misleading. The BCAA proposal offered $15,000 the first year while the airport was being prepared for operation, with minimal services required in return. The numbers were only projected out 3 years but by then, that number swells to $106,000. It would grow over time, not happen on day one. Not a huge amount to start off but it does not include the tax revenue generated from employment taxes and by taxes on companies that would be attracted by the airport. In addition, that number is compared to what?
When the current plan is put into operation, how many years will it be before there is tax revenue from the land after the impact aid stops?
Mike Shortall
9:19 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
I think most Horsham residents would readily accept a tax-neutral outcome from any redevelopment. And when you factor in the possibility of an airport, those same people would rather pay moderately more taxes than see an airport operating here.
Yeah ... Horsham could be heading into some tough years budget-wise. Comes with the responsibility ... Still think it's worth it.
David Pitcairn
6:44 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
One more thing I should have mentioned. The airport would have only used a portion of the base, leaving the rest of the land for other uses such as business uses. Combining businesses with homes does make sense compared to just homes because, according to the DVRPC, businesses pay more in taxes than they receive in services while homes pay less. In the case of an airport where there would not likely be homes other than homeless housing, the remaining off airport land could be business use so that tax revenue would exceed services and be a net gain, further offsetting the loss of impact aid.
Mike Shortall
9:23 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Thanks, but no thanks ...
No airport exists without growing and growing. Eventually that airport would become so busy, it would push everything else out.
And an airport would severely limit what development could take place there.