Re: [UC] Upsettingly biased article about Bill 040003

[Lillja]

Brian,

Couple of things:

You say that "this change (the Blackwell bill) adds a much-needed element of public review to the process".

I doubt it will do anything of the kind. Look at how Ms. Blackwell recently blocked Councilman Kenney's public hearings about the Historic Commission. Her bill hasn't even been voted on and already she's politicized the process AND prevented public discussion. Her bill doesn't democratize the process, it puts it solely in the hands of politicians. How many decisions do you think are made by Council behind closed doors? How many "public hearings" are merely window dressing to appease "the people" when those decisions have already been made?

For further insight into why this bill was introduced at all (and why she intoduced her previous bill) see today's Inquirer opinion written by Representative Nix as to the tie-in between Blackwell's bill and the Mayor's NTI initiative in West Philly. Lots of money being thrown around for demolition (and future development) if HD and the Historic Commission are moved out of the way. I've said it before and I say it again this has nothing to do with "democratizing the process", "helping out the little people", "giving neighbors a voice" or any other spin. It's all about $$$$$$$$$$$

Now, about the tax credits:

I'm not an expert but here is my understanding -- The Federal Government offers 20% tax credits to anyone who owns an "income-producing" property in a National Register District (of which Spruce Hill is one) when they perform renovations according to the Interior Department guidelines. Pennsylvania is considering a similar program (the bills currently being debated/voted on in the House and Senate). If passed, Pennsylvania's program would add an additional 20% on top of the Fed's 20%, meaning someone with a legitimate tenant apartment could potentially qualify for tax credits totaling 40%.

For more info on the PA bills go to www.uchs.net


Jim Lilly