City grants tax abatement for third residential project

Residential tax abatement is now three for three in the City of Greencastle.

On a 6-1 vote at its August meeting, the City Council approved five-year tax abatement for the four-building, eight-unit duplex project being developed along Tennessee Street by Chris and Rashell Harcourt of C&R Quality Rentals.

Tax abatement on residential property has been allowed by the state since a 2012 state statute went into effect. While Greencastle only approved its first two requests last year (Woodshire Place and Northview Apartments), the economic development instrument has been widely used in places like Hendricks and Hamilton counties and even in Montgomery County, it was noted.

After a contentious July City Council session, more fireworks were expected at the August meeting. However, Councilman David Masten, who cast the lone dissenting vote on abatement, initially resisted comment on second reading of the ordinance providing a economic target area for the Harcourt project, explaining that he said everything he needed to say at the July meeting. A 5-2 vote ensued on the target area with Masten and Vince Aguirre again opposed.

However, when discussion moved to Resolution 2024-11, granting tax abatement on a project that represents $1.2 million in real estate improvements, Masten expressed his disdain for the procedure.

Stressing that the developers were acting in their own self interest, Masten scoffed at the abatement idea, adding “nobody does anything unless some form of government incentives them.”

“I just find it immoral from an economic standpoint,” the First Ward councilman added.

From the City Hall podium, Greencastle/Putnam County Economic Development Executive Director Kristin Clary said it was unfair to say the Harcourts were not doing anything unless they received a break to do it.

“They have already built things without requesting anything,” Clary pointed out.

Attorney Jeff Boggess, representing the Harcourts, advised that they have agreed to cap the rent on one of the units at $1,000 per month and plan to donate $5,000 to the Putnam County YMCA project for a name sponsorship there. In all, the Harcourts have made donations to local concerns in excess of six figures over the past 10 years, Boggess added.

“I applaud him for it,” Masten responded, “but I can’t understand why nothing is going to happen without some type of government incentive. I don’t care who it is. It can be the Lord himself sitting there and I would feel the same exact way as a guy who has risked his capital.”

Boggess stressed that the Harcourts were “not asking for anything more than any other developer would.”

Using another local builder as an example, Clary said the man is doing work in another city and the mayor there keeps asking what he needs to get the project done.

With Masten asking again why the city would need to provide any incentive for the project, Boggess suggested an answer.

“When our Community Foundation did their needs assessment, among the top five needs identified in our community by your constituents, was housing,” Boggess pointed out. “There is a need in our community. I understood from other realty folks here that people are leaving for Hendricks County or Clay County,” Boggess said of departures ostensibly to find available housing.

Saying she hears from people about the need for housing at all price points, Council President Stacie Langdon noted, “For me, this is eight new families paying local income taxes. This is eight new families supporting our local schools. Eight new families supporting local businesses.

“I just feel like if people want to live in Greencastle and they cannot find apartments or rental units, it is my responsibility as a Council person. ... And this is my opinion, that I need to do everything I can to make that happen,” Langdon added.

She said she would be open to the five-year abatement, calling the 10 years the Harcourts sought for tax reduction “too much of a leap out of the box.”

Langdon asked for an explanation on the project timeline, knowing that work has already been done on the duplex project at the west end of Tennessee Street, south of Veterans Memorial Highway.

“As I understand it,” Boggess responded, “there was a significant delay in getting one of the committees (the then-dormant Greencastle Economic Development Commission) together to make a decision. That was on the city’s end and I think my clients had to make a business decision to go forward with part of their project due to costs and maybe gave away part of their leverage to do so. The project is only partially completed and only half done. Whether they go forward with the other half depends a lot on what happens tonight.”

What happened was a 6-1 vote for approval of the tax abatement resolution with Councilman Aguirre, who voted against the ordinance, voting in favor of the resolution. He previously said he wasn’t anti-abatement but also called it “corporate welfare.”

Aguirre told the Banner Graphic he voted in favor of the resolution “because of the rent caps” Harcourt promised.

Mark Hammer, Darrel Thomas, Stacie Langdon, Katherine Asbell and Tina Nicholson all joined him in voting in favor, while Masten was opposed, adding he just doesn’t like the idea of residential tax abatement.

The next regular session of the Greencastle City Council is set for 7 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 12 at City Hall.