Downtown Hartford development.

[Ha Who]

Part of it is also a need for apartments that are both nice and affordable. Any decent apartment complex in Hartford is absurdly expensive, and there's no good reason to live in Hartford unless you're getting a good deal compared to places like West Hartford or Glastonbury. I'd be interested in living in Hartford, but it's the same price as objectively nicer places

I agree. They are pricey. Kind of like hoops tickets. They need to price things right to maximize demand.

 

[UC990411]

Until hartford starts taxing, nothing significant will happen. Hartford should charge city workers a 0.5 city wage tax. They could go to 1%, but start slow. Enough of having folks drive in, drive out and contribute little. Once you get a revenue stream away from taxing the hell out of residents and the city can grow. Until then they’re completely dependent on shady developers to build a city that lacks cohesiveness

This statement reflects everything that is wrong with the state. If you start faxing people they’re just going to continue to move away.

 

[August_West]

I’m as big of a booster of making Hartford great again, but I am taxed plenty by the state and it goes to the city and their schools. Also, I know part of West Hartford’s high taxes goes toward needing to pay for increased crime coming over the city line. Getting more businesses to Hartford is the trick. If there are more companies, some of those workers will live in Hartford and the demand for apartments and foot traffic will increase making it possible to make the short stroll from Front Street to the dunk plausible.

If you want to make a city like Hartford successful the tax base needs to be regionalized . Hartford has one of the smallest square mile foot prints in the country. Other areas that people point to for smaller city up and coming successes have this. Think if Glastonbury and West Hartford were actually metropolitan Hartford and you would realize the square mileage areas other comparable cities are drawing from.

Problem is the idiot nimbys in this state only care about their little fiefdoms. Way too many small towns in this state.

 

[Palatine]

Until hartford starts taxing, nothing significant will happen. Hartford should charge city workers a 0.5 city wage tax. They could go to 1%, but start slow. Enough of having folks drive in, drive out and contribute little. Once you get a revenue stream away from taxing the hell out of residents and the city can grow. Until then they’re completely dependent on shady developers to build a city that lacks cohesiveness

Yeah, more taxes, that should help. If you want companies, jobs and growth, more taxes should solve all problems.

 

[Ha Who]

If you want to make a city like Hartford successful the tax base needs to be regionalized . Hartford has one of the smallest square mile foot prints in the country. Other areas that people point to for smaller city up and coming successes have this. Think if Glastonbury and West Hartford were actually metropolitan Hartford and you would realize the square mileage areas other comparable cities are drawing from.

Problem is the idiot nimbys in this state only care about their little fiefdoms. Way too many small towns in this state.

Regionalism of certain services is fine but why should Glasstonbury and West Hartford sacrifice their school systems for mediocrity and a population that doesn’t care?

 

[August_West]

Regionalism of certain services is fine but why should Glasstonbury and West Hartford sacrifice their school systems for mediocrity and a population that doesn’t care?

Like I said. Nimbyism rules in CT. Not judging you.

But that thinking will never ever allow the challenges of Hartford to be overcome.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I get the proximity I have just never heard them associated together in the same way the other cities are.

That's why I kept them & Baltimore-DC separate as a bit if an afterthought., to allow for an alternative to seeing Hartford & New Haven as twin cities like the others.
From New Haven the under-an-hour (or just a bit more) access to attractions, venues, nature is amazing even without considering NYC or Boston 's relative proximity. Fairfield-New Haven-Hartford counties by themselves are like a top 20-25 US metro.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Regionalism of certain services is fine but why should Glasstonbury and West Hartford sacrifice their school systems for mediocrity and a population that doesn’t care?

This is the correct question.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Like I said. Nimbyism rules in CT. Not judging you.

But that thinking will never ever allow the challenges of Hartford to be overcome.

This is the correct answer.

 

[Palatine]

That's why I kept them & Baltimore-DC separate as a bit if an afterthought., to allow for an alternative to seeing Hartford & New Haven as twin cities like the others.
From New Haven the under-an-hour (or just a bit more) access to attractions, venues, nature is amazing even without considering NYC or Boston 's relative proximity. Fairfield-New Haven-Hartford counties by themselves are like a top 20-25 US metro.

In 2017 Hartford/New Haven was the #3o media market in the country.

2017 Nielsen DMA Rankings - Full List - Lyons Broadcast PR

The problem is that Connecticut is such a economic basket case it has been trending down for a long time.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Fact. The stadium is entering it's 3rd season. If I bought a car in January 2016 but left it in the garage with no tires on it for a year, then put tires on it and drove it January 2017, the car is still a year old.

Analogy doesn't work because the car was delivered to you and would have needed to pass inspection to get off the lot, equivalent for any building is a CofO and whenever that's issued is the year of the building.

 

[BlueMAB]

Do you feel like Front St is a success?

Yes, and it's on the way to getting even better.

I suppose they should just do nothing, and just hope the violence ends on its own.

 

[Deepster]

Yes, and it's on the way to getting even better.

I suppose they should just do nothing, and just hope the violence ends on its own.

How often are you there and what do you enjoy best? I’ve been to Bears twice for lunch and Capitol Grille once for dinner in the past year.

 

[BlueMAB]

How often are you there and what do you enjoy best? I’ve been to Bears twice for lunch and Capitol Grille once for dinner in the past year.

Around once a month. The movies, the convention center, capitol grille, bear's, the Science center, the blind pig, and the uconn bookshop.

How often was I down there before all of that stuff was built?

Never. Literally never. There was no reason to be down there. The only other places I go in Hartford are the civic center, and the ball park, City Steam, Dish or Agave.

Once a year (at most) I'll go to the Bushnell for a show.

 

[gioff23]

This statement reflects everything that is wrong with the state. If you start faxing people they’re just going to continue to move away.

No one uses a fax anymore!

Seriously, cities tax employees for the services they use. This is not a tax on companies and no one is moving out because their employees have to pay a small tax so the city can maintain basic services. If it were the case then cities like NY, Philly, Denver, Baltimore and Atlanta, among countless others would be ghost towns. I believe CT is guilty of overtaxing on several levels, but please understand how a city wage tax works, who benefits, and frankly who pays for the services now. Hartford has a lot of problems, many of which were discussed in this thread, but assuming the way Hartford gets better is for the residents there to support the services needed in a thriving city is a failing argument, and has certainly failed to date. Hartford's only choice now is to charge property taxes that are so high that people keep leaving and schools continue their death spiral.

Separately, they should set the tax on landowners based on land usage - you want to own a surface parking lot, your tax is 2-3X what we would charge for someone to develop the property. In other words, address the pockets that pervade the city with incentives for landowners to develop or sell to someone who will.

 

[uconnphil2016]

No one uses a fax anymore!

Seriously, cities tax employees for the services they use. This is not a tax on companies and no one is moving out because their employees have to pay a small tax so the city can maintain basic services. If it were the case then cities like NY, Philly, Denver, Baltimore and Atlanta, among countless others would be ghost towns. I believe CT is guilty of overtaxing on several levels, but please understand how a city wage tax works, who benefits, and frankly who pays for the services now. Hartford has a lot of problems, many of which were discussed in this thread, but assuming the way Hartford gets better is for the residents there to support the services needed in a thriving city is a failing argument, and has certainly failed to date. Hartford's only choice now is to charge property taxes that are so high that people keep leaving and schools continue their death spiral.

Separately, they should set the tax on landowners based on land usage - you want to own a surface parking lot, your tax is 2-3X what we would charge for someone to develop the property. In other words, address the pockets that pervade the city with incentives for landowners to develop or sell to someone who will.

Property taxes are also hard to charge in Hartford because a massive percentage of their occupants are non profits

 

[EROCK CONN]

Until hartford starts taxing, nothing significant will happen. Hartford should charge city workers a 0.5 city wage tax. They could go to 1%, but start slow. Enough of having folks drive in, drive out and contribute little. Once you get a revenue stream away from taxing the hell out of residents and the city can grow. Until then they’re completely dependent on shady developers to build a city that lacks cohesiveness

I don't agree with this at all. The mill rate in Hartford is 74.29 -- basically double every surrounding municipality. If the city were to implement an income tax, the businesses would just leave. Honestly, if those companies were to consider leaving Hartford, they would undoubtedly consider just leaving the state. Hartford needs to do the opposite with it's taxes -- it needs to lower that oppressive mill rate. Also, there are some shady developers out there for sure but a lot of them are the exact opposite.

RMS is an excellent developer -- Randy is extremely savvy. I'm actually surprised the numbers work (cost to build an apartment today is approximately $225k/ unit -- excluding land cost). This is why rents have to be, on average, +/- $2,000 to make money. Tough to get those rents in Hartford especially when you are blocks from the North End.

 

[gioff23]

I don't agree with this at all. The mill rate in Hartford is 74.29 -- basically double every surrounding municipality. If the city were to implement an income tax, the businesses would just leave. Honestly, if those companies were to consider leaving Hartford, they would undoubtedly consider just leaving the state. Hartford needs to do the opposite with it's taxes -- it needs to lower that oppressive mill rate. Also, there are some shady developers out there for sure but a lot of them are the exact opposite.

RMS is an excellent developer -- Randy is extremely savvy. I'm actually surprised the numbers work (cost to build an apartment today is approximately $225k/ unit -- excluding land cost). This is why rents have to be, on average, +/- $2,000 to make money. Tough to get those rents in Hartford especially when you are blocks from the North End.

UGH. Last time - a city wage tax is not a tax on employees and is indifferent to residency. It is a payroll tax that is applied to every WORKER or EMPLOYEE working in the city. Hartford is completely reliant on an obscene tax rate on residences and begging from the state for allocations. Today, the majority of folks working in Hartford live outside of Hartford. They all expect streets cleaned, police and fire, and other basic services without paying a dime directly towards the cost of such. Increasing taxes is generally a loser and is, IMO, the primary reason CT is digressing while Hartford is stagnant. But if you want to be a first class city, it costs money. So, how do you pay for the things necessary?

Also, if you are operating a paved parking lot int he middle of the city, I do not think you should be referred to as a developer. Developers develop.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Hartford's city population to metro population ratio tells an awful lot of the story.
U.S. City vs. Metropolitan Population - GeographyBase.com

 

[Hoophound]

UGH. Last time - a city wage tax is not a tax on employees and is indifferent to residency. It is a payroll tax that is applied to every WORKER or EMPLOYEE working in the city. Hartford is completely reliant on an obscene tax rate on residences and begging from the state for allocations. Today, the majority of folks working in Hartford live outside of Hartford. They all expect streets cleaned, police and fire, and other basic services without paying a dime directly towards the cost of such. Increasing taxes is generally a loser and is, IMO, the primary reason CT is digressing while Hartford is stagnant. But if you want to be a first class city, it costs money. So, how do you pay for the things necessary?

Also, if you are operating a paved parking lot int he middle of the city, I do not think you should be referred to as a developer. Developers develop.

This is totally accurate. Hartford is forced to shoot itself in the foot with ridiculous property taxes. The city needs revenue and a small payroll tax would do wonders. You can’t create a vibrant city without good schools and good services.
You can’t fund those things with property taxes alone when property values are low due to bad schools and services. So, you have to double property tax rates just to makes ends meet.

It makes growth impossible and leaves you with mostly low wage earners living in rental property. Money to enhance services, increase safety and improve quality of life would help solve the problem. Once people start moving back to the city, tax rates can be lowered as values rise.

 

[Padutch5]

If you want to make a city like Hartford successful the tax base needs to be regionalized . Hartford has one of the smallest square mile foot prints in the country. Other areas that people point to for smaller city up and coming successes have this. Think if Glastonbury and West Hartford were actually metropolitan Hartford and you would realize the square mileage areas other comparable cities are drawing from.

Problem is the idiot nimbys in this state only care about their little fiefdoms. Way too many small towns in this state.

I don’t disagree about the need for regionalization. Watch what happens when regional voting, the next logical step comes up. The big city pols want nothing to do with regional voting but they are fine with regional taxation( read that as a wage tax), They might lose their automatic election they enjoy in Hartford.

 

[JeepCSC]

Hartford's city population to metro population ratio tells an awful lot of the story.
U.S. City vs. Metropolitan Population - GeographyBase.com

This is neither here nor there, but I never understood why the census split up Raleigh’s metro from Durham’s.

 

[BlueMAB]

UGH. Last time - a city wage tax is not a tax on employees and is indifferent to residency. It is a payroll tax that is applied to every WORKER or EMPLOYEE working in the city. Hartford is completely reliant on an obscene tax rate on residences and begging from the state for allocations.

They don't rely on obscene tax rates on only residences, they also rely on obscene tax rates on companies. Most if not all of the largest 25 taxpayers are companies, and they don't only pay taxes on the land and building, but also the personal property inside. Imagine also paying taxes on your laptop, TV and kitchen appliances. Now multiply that times the tens, hundreds, or thousands of employees at your building. Hartford got 3/4 of a billion in personal property taxes alone last year. It's one of the reasons Eversource paid $12 million in taxes in one year.

I know, the wage tax would just be passed through to the employees, but a) try selling that to the employees and b) how do you tax someone who telecommutes? You're creating an advantage for the employees who work from home by giving them an artificial raise. What if the amount of time they spend in the office varies week to week? You're creating an administrative nightmare for the company in terms of tracking and fairly applying that tax. And that's going to be an additional expense you can't pass along to the employees. Instead, it's one more reason not to do business in Hartford.

I don't have the answer, but it almost certainly isn't new taxes. Companies are leaving Hartford and Connecticut in general due to high taxes. We have so many buildings for lease it's sad. If we lowered the tax rate, but were able to build up the occupancy, we could (could) see increased revenues. If we raise taxes, we almost certainly won't encourage anyone to come here, and will likely drive more companies out.

Eversource, Insurance Companies Among Top Taxpayers In Hartford

 

[Robertelamin]

They don't rely on obscene tax rates on only residences, they also rely on obscene tax rates on companies. Most if not all of the largest 25 taxpayers are companies, and they don't only pay taxes on the land and building, but also the personal property inside. Imagine also paying taxes on your laptop, TV and kitchen appliances. Now multiply that times the tens, hundreds, or thousands of employees at your building. Hartford got 3/4 of a billion in personal property taxes alone last year. It's one of the reasons Eversource paid $12 million in taxes in one year.

I know, the wage tax would just be passed through to the employees, but a) try selling that to the employees and b) how do you tax someone who telecommutes? You're creating an advantage for the employees who work from home by giving them an artificial raise. What if the amount of time they spend in the office varies week to week? You're creating an administrative nightmare for the company in terms of tracking and fairly applying that tax. And that's going to be an additional expense you can't pass along to the employees. Instead, it's one more reason not to do business in Hartford.

I don't have the answer, but it almost certainly isn't new taxes. Companies are leaving Hartford and Connecticut in general due to high taxes. We have so many buildings for lease it's sad. If we lowered the tax rate, but were able to build up the occupancy, we could (could) see increased revenues. If we raise taxes, we almost certainly won't encourage anyone to come here, and will likely drive more companies out.

Eversource, Insurance Companies Among Top Taxpayers In Hartford

Yeah I don't see how it would work. Most of the insurance and finance people would just stay home as much as possible. It would certainly hurt the bartenders and wait staff though. Hartford doesn't have the resources to even try this anyway.

 

[BlueMAB]

Yeah I don't see how it would work. Most of the insurance and finance people would just stay home as much as possible. It would certainly hurt the bartenders and wait staff though. Hartford doesn't have the resources to even try this anyway.

The owner of Bear's voluntarily upped his base wage to $15-16/hour. I can see Bronin saying thanks, now give us 2% back on a wage tax. For someone working 25 hours a week, that's almost $400 a year. Not life-altering, but it's 2-4 months of car payments. That adds up.

If you're making $25/hour (roughly $50k) it's around $1k a year. Ouch.