Left, Mayor Andrew Halverson listens as residents object to a $500,000 incentive offered by the city. (City-Times photo)

By Brandi Makuski

A 182- bed apartment complex is one step closer to reality, thanks to the approval of $500,000 in developer incentives by the Finance Committee Monday night.

About half a dozen residents spoke to the committee in opposition to the incentives the city offered to CCFS Group LLC during private negotiations for the development, would includes 40 apartment units at the current site of Point Motel, 209 Division Street. Current owners of the motel, Vinubhai and Chandrika Patel, say they’re anxious for the sale of their property to go through but declined making any further comments to the media.

Mayor Andrew Halverson said the location was an excellent fit for both university students and also local business owners.

“It would generate a million (dollars) more than what the Point Motel would generate in terms of taxes, so the incentives would be paid back in about four years,” Halverson said. “We can pay for part of the Business 51 project with that. We’re taking the responsibility of paying for the Business 51 project, from Fourth Avenue north, off the taxpayers.”

Most who spoke against the incentives were area landlords who said the city was in the wrong by offering incentives to an out-of-town developer who would compete with their own rentals.

“I am a small business owner, and there are a lot of us who helped build Stevens Point to what it is today,” said landlord Henry Korger. “You’re taking our business away. You’re taking our livelihood away. This is my retirement. The city has no business in this business.”

Stevens Point resident Mary Ann Laszewski told the committee the city unfairly favored the developer and would never truly get the $500k in incentives back.

“Considering the TIF’s that need bailing out, and the need to increase our borrowing for Bus. 51, our city staff has apparently recognized the choice location of Point Motel to invite a developer who would be interested in intercepting student rentals there,” Laszewski said. “To reel them (the developer) in, incentives, parking and landscape variances, a new, reduced setback, were all offered. These are perks that were not previously available to any of the competition.”

Laszewski added no other developer has shown interest in building at that location, which to her made the deal suspect.

“The only one who will (build) is someone who gets incentives so he can afford to build new, get a choice location and then be in a position to siphon off tenants,” she said. “With none of the Point Motel’s transitions made public, we don’t know if the motel’s owners were asked to hold out. If no one else is willing to pay full price for the Point Motel, why are we stepping in?”

Alderman Jeremy Slowinski

According to city documents, the new student rental will begin bringing some profit to TIF District 5, which encompasses much of the north side business district along the Division Street corridor, by 2016 with annual taxes of $122k which will remain in a separate fund for TIF 5 improvements through 2031.

Alderman Randy Stroik initially said he was voting against the incentives because it unfairly competed against local landlords, but later changed his vote once Mayor Halverson explained the $500k in incentives wasn’t being drawn from the tax base.

“There’s a very interesting misunderstanding, I think, when we talk about TIF Districts, that TIFs don’t pay taxes. They do pay taxes, and in fact this developer will be writing checks on the whole tax value, which is somewhere between $5.5 and $6 million,” Halverson said. “We’re not using any of your tax money; the $500k won’t be there unless the developer starts writing checks on this development.”

Alderman Jeremy Slowinski was the sole no vote on the incentives deal, saying he was “sick and tired” of repeated attempts to fund housing projects inside a TIF.

“It’s a very attractive thing to see- if this project goes through- how much revenue the city could collect based on its increased value,” Slowinski said of the development. “But all we’re doing is shifting students around, we’re just moving them from one place to another with this rental property.”

Slowsinki also referenced past housing proposals which were turned down because of public objection- including a student apartment complex proposed for the former Cooper Motor Site- and reminded the committee of the overwhelming public objection to those projects for similar reasons.

“We’re basically proposing pulling money from student housing already within the community. I just don’t see the need (for additional housing),” he said.

Halverson said he didn’t understand the resistance.

“When you’ve got a multimillion dollar opportunity for a community of this size, you do whatever you can to make it a reality,” Halverson said. “I’ve got a different perspective that some of the Council Members, and obviously from the public who spoke tonight. People are getting sick and tired of it and are worried about the message it’s sending; my worry is about the message we’re sending to potential developers who are trying to spend millions in our community that will benefit everyone when that TIF District closes in terms of tax base increase and tax rate reduction. My role as mayor, when I take that oath, is that I don’t represent just one interest group, but the entire community.”