My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 4187
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Resolutions
>
04000 - 04499 (1990-1994)
>
Resolution 4187
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2019 10:16:17 AM
Creation date
1/30/2007 3:20:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
Resolutions
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
252
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
K_ :._ _ r----.. . _ _-- - --- - n _ _ _. <br />The Application of Local Economic <br />Development Incentives in Georgia <br />Specifically, what types of incentives are being offered by local entities in Georgia? <br />As shown in Table 5, indush•ial development bonds, tax incentives and Quicic Starl are the <br />most repoirted incentives offered. On the other hand, few communities reported waiving <br />regulations or providing utilities at little or no cost. <br />TABLE S. P RCENT RESPOND NTS R PORTiNG US OT PARTICULAR INCEN'IIVESN=148 <br />Percent Of Respondents <br />Whose Community Has Offered <br />Th'rs Incentive In The Past <br />Indushial development bonds 75.0% <br />Tax incentives 74.3 <br />Quicic Start 73.6 <br />State grants and loans offered through local entity 669 <br />Training or education programs 61.5 <br />Expedited peimitting 61.5 <br />Reduced cost land 58.8 <br />Low interest or deferred payment loans 50.0 <br />Federal grants and loans offered through local entity 46.6 <br />Commitment of additional local goverrunent services 41.2 <br />Local grants or subsidies 40.5 <br />Waiver or reduction of required fees or assessments 40.5 <br />No cost land 40.5 <br />ICAPP (Intellectual Capital Partnership Program) 25.0 <br />High technology infrastructure (e.g. broad band access) 23.0 <br />Utilities at little or no cost 19.6 <br />Waiver of regulations 18.9 <br />In addition to the above, s uvey respondents indicaled that they also offered lease- <br />free buildings, and other assistance in locating properties, u cluding housing. <br />Finally, one-quarter of respondents indicate that they normally chaige a financing fee <br />when offering incentives, although most are willing to waive or reduce the fee as an incentive <br />in itself. Of those charging a fee, most are a one-time up-fiont fee, with most reporting it as <br />1/8'' of 1 percent. Communities without economic developers, rural counties and communities <br />outside the Atlanta metropolitan area and those from Tier 1 or 2 counties tend to be less lilcely <br />to charge a financing fee. <br />Respondent comments reflected some caution in regard to incentives in some <br />instances. As one respondent noted: "We choose not to offer tax abatements and everyone <br />agrees that our local efforts have worked and until they don't work or we lose a big project, <br />27
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.