Whole Foods Tax Break Doesn’t Provide the Whole Story
Does a highly profitable, high-end supermarket chain really merit an $8 million tax break to encourage it to open a store in a development-rich area of the District? That’s the question that will be posed to the DC Council when it considers a property tax abatement proposal, reported last week by the Washington Post, to bring a Whole Foods near Nationals Park.
The city should be investing in economic development to create jobs, attract businesses and residents, and revitalize neighborhoods. However, the District’s elected leaders have adopted a slew of tax abatements in recent years with no process to differentiate the worthwhile projects from the not-so-worthwhile. In the case of Whole Foods’ proposal, it’s perfectly reasonable to wonder why the project would need any subsidy in the first place, given the amount of development that has already been attracted to the area. And it is perfectly reasonable to ask what benefits the developer will provide the city in return.
Proponents of this proposal need to explain why it makes sense for the District to continue putting money into an area that has seen tremendous public investments and is already on the cusp of development. The recently released Unified Economic Development Budget (UEDB) illustrates that Ward 6, where the proposed Whole Foods would be located, received 39 percent of the District’s economic development expenditures in 2010. That includes the baseball stadium and a number of nearby projects that were supposed to provide the stimulus for the area to develop. Why should the District invest more in the ballpark area, when areas such as Ward 7 have gotten less than 5 percent of economic development expenditures?
And why does this project require a special subsidy to move forward in the first place? This Whole Foods already would qualify for a set of tax incentives for grocery store development, including a 10–year property tax break on the store itself. Moreover, while some projects near Nationals Park have languished in the recession, this area is likely to be part of the emerging rebound, thanks in part to prior public investment by the District. Finally, if a Whole Foods will revitalize this neighborhood as it did in Logan Circle, why won’t private market interests step up to make it happen?
What benefits will the developers behind Whole Foods provide the District in exchange for a taxpayer subsidy? Last fall, the developer of a boutique luxury hotel in Adams Morgan committed that a majority of construction hours and permanent hotel jobs would be filled by DC residents, in return for a substantial tax break from the city. The Whole Foods developer has made no such commitments.
Before passing yet another commercial property tax break, the Mayor and Council should take a moment to consider the sorts of questions we have raised here and in the past. Passing Councilmember Michael Brown’s Exemptions and Abatements Information Requirements Act would be an important step toward helping the Council to ask the right questions about the Whole Foods project and other abatement proposals. A careful consideration of the costs and benefits of the Whole Foods project will help the Council determine whether investment in the project would be worthwhile or wasteful, and give District residents greater confidence that their money is being spent wisely.





[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Susie Cambria and Jonathan O'Connell, DCFPI. DCFPI said: Should DC give a tax abatement to a developer so he can attract Whole Foods? DCFPI's take: http://goo.gl/LVgxT [...]
fancy grocery stores — bad! waaah. yes, let’s keep them from coming and bringing in tons more revenue and instead have all the folks with money keep driving out to virginia to shop. that’ll help all the poor folks. some of you liberals are just nuts. who cares what ward this is in? it will be a welcome addition to the folks who live there and to those who live in other wards nearby.
No one is proposing to “keep them from coming,” they’re just proposing that Whole Foods doesn’t need a 10-year tax break to set up shop in an already gentrified neighborhood.
[...] [Cross-posted from DC Fiscal Policy Institute's The District Dime.] [...]
[...] * The D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute urges District officials to pause before offering Whole Foods “an… [...]
Mr. Boadi makes a sound statement; “…why can’t investment banks finance the development for Whole Foods..?
Your city council has gotten into the business of the corner store Cash Right-Now. This council should stop using our annual budget of $9 billion dollars to finance development. A good business plan is all that is needed.
If a bank denies any business an investment loan to set up shop in the District; does that NOT TELL THE COUNCIL that the business is a HIGH RISK?
Then why does the Council finance a business that the Banks turn down???
This is a free trade country. Allow the Business to qualify for a business loan to set up shop.
A 10 year property tax abatement for any business causes DEFICITS, LAY-OFF OF CITY EMPLOYEES-including Police and Fire fighters, teachers and etc.
D.C. residents should boycott these stores and not buy from them, so when they close – their 10 year tax abatement will ceased.
Residents can not continue to have their taxes increased TO OFFSET BUDGET DEFICTS BECAUSE THIS COUNCIL is not BUSINESS-MINDED.
WAKE UP…TRUSTING CITIZENS
GURLEY
[...] 2011, an $8 million tax break for a new Washington DC Whole Foods development raised questions of return on public investment and why public money was even [...]