Administrator Pay/ Residential Development Deals
by Alex Saitta
February 23, 2023
Adminstrator Pay:
I want to respond to the story, “Roper Get Extension, Big Raise”. I want to give my full explanation of why I voted “No” on the contract, which passed in a 5 to 1 vote.
I think Ken Roper is going a good job. I supported extending his contract, but I opposed two things.
One, I opposed the excessive pay raises built into the contract. Last year the county administrator was paid $168,557 with his car allowance. This year $176,724. They just voted to give him a raise to $194,397. The end of this year, the contract will boost his pay to $213,837. Who is getting pay raises like this?
The council majority passed was a historic tax increase for roads, on top of the annual fire tax increases, and now this? I didn’t support any of that.
Administrator Contract:
Plus it is a 3 year contract. Four of the six councilmen terms end in less than 2 years. Whenever the term of the administrator is longer than the terms of the sitting councilmen, it incentivizes the administrator not to listen to the councilmen. A county administrator is an unelected and is unaccountable to the public already. For him to have a longer term than a majority of the council too is a bad idea. I thought at 2 year contract was a better choice.
Arial Mill:
The council also voted 4 to 2 give a 15 year property tax cut to the private developers of the old Arial Mill, who will turn it into 205 apartments.
The developers had already secured a 20% federal tax credit, a 10% state tax credit, and 25% textile building tax credit. That’s over 55% off their construction costs. It is also an opportunity zone, so there is no capital gains tax if they hold the building 10 years or more and then sell it.
And they asked for a county tax cut on top of it too?
This developer is going to renovate the building, the value of the building will sky-rocket to a value of tens of millions, they will collect oodles of rent (about $5 million a year), and their property tax will be frozen at this abandoned building rate for 15 years.
I voted “No” to this excessive give-away.
Hundreds People/ Cars:
Residential construction like this will bring in hundreds of people with hundreds of cars. All these new residents will use county services. The county must charge them full taxes like everyone else has to pay, in order to pay for the additional services these he new residents will require.
There is a residential development boom. Well beyond the county’s ability to manage it. Why is the council majority still giving tax cuts to spur even more growth that the county government can’t manage? Irresponsible.
Woodside Mill:
On the bright side this gave-away wasn’t as bad as the 2019 Woodside Mill in Easley deal. The Easley Woodside Lofts has 137 units. The rents range from $1,500 to $2,100. That’s about $3,000,000 a year in revenue and they pay only $2,827 property taxes to the county. That tax rate is frozen for 20 years! One house in Easley that is 2,500 sqf and generates $26,000 a year in rent pays that amount of county property taxes. These residential developer gave-aways need to end.