By: koln on 3/28/08
How could the IDB board establish the parameters for such a study before they even receive “the Bible park’s economic impact statement, which would include the specifics on what kind of TIF’s the park’s developers are requesting”? The attendance numbers used in this report appear to be seriously inflated based on the empirical data from the similarly themed park in Orlando. What is the basis for the estimates used in this study? Who furnished them and with what justification. That should be directly addressed in an accompanying project risk assessment. Has one been prepared? The most troubling question is how could the IDB board rationalize releasing any of their data, whatever the conclusions, before the developers have made their formal presentation?
Finally, if the deal is so “sweet” (investors have been solicited with a promised return of 40% to 50 % on their investment over a 5-year period) and no other area is competing for it – don’t subsidize the developers, let them risk their own money. If the park then gets built let the county collect 100% of any tax revenue, avoid issuing any bonds and conserve the maximum TIF options for a situation desirable enough that we have to compete with other areas.

By: bota on 3/29/08
If you jack the attendance predictions up or down the projections change. As P.T. Barnum said"There's a sucker born every minute" Now all that remains to be seen is how many of them did we elect.

By: koln on 3/29/08
The objectivity of the study is questionable because the developer’s attendance numbers were used as the basis for what amounts to nothing more than a simple arithmetical extrapolation. The starting point for an independent study should be objectively analyzing the efficacy of attendance numbers not the uncritical acceptance of those proffered by a financially interested party seeking to justify a tax subsidy.

By: oldriverdawg on 3/29/08
koln - you took the words out of my keyboard. I'm somewhat disappointed in the Post for not pointing this out. Such circular logic should be recognized and challenged. If it's a truly "independent study" it should look at not only the developer's estimates but at other possible estimates e.g. what if attendence is only half of the developer's expectations. What is the economic impact if it closes after 5 years?

By: diddlede on 3/29/08
koln,bota and olddriverdawg,

You are all correct in what you have posted.
The Tax Increment Financing is a one time deal for the County, as I understand it. The developers have said in the past that they can "money was no problem". Now they are asking the County for support. Something is fishy here. Evidentially the developers and their investors are not as sure about this project as they want us to believe. The taxpayers of Rutherford County did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday, but the developers seem to think we did.

If you are a Rutherford County Taxpayer
attend the following meetings:

l. The Rutherford County Future Development
Committee meeting April 3 - 1:00 p.m
at the Courthouse.

2. The Rutherford County Regional Planning
Commission meeting April 14 - 5:00 p.m.
at the Courthouse.

3. The Rutherford County Commission meeting
May 15 - 6:00 p.m. at the Court House

BE THERE AND BE COUNTED IN OPPOSITION TO THIS TRAVESTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!