Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

johnsonutah t1_iwruak3 wrote

Agree with almost everything but we should clarify that:

  • Hartford does receive significant state funding to help make up for its small footprint and the fact that government buildings take up a sizable chunk of taxable land

  • CT has an equal or higher tax burden as Massachusetts with none of the economic strength (except for maybe in Stamford). Taxachusetts is a misnomer nowadays, at least when comparing MA to CT

3

Whaddaulookinat t1_iws28zp wrote

>Hartford does receive significant state funding to help make up for its small footprint and the fact that government buildings take up a sizable chunk of taxable land

PILOT has been underfunded by the state basically since the beginning of the programme, and even at reimbursement obligated would only cover about 60% of the grand list tax value

3

milton1775 t1_iwsfpmr wrote

In addition to PILOT, cities like Hartford receive Education Cost Sharing (ECS) and municipal aid funds from the state to bolster their education and general operating budgets, respectively. Cities also receive state and federal grants for specific programs and capital improvement projects. Last I checked, roughly 50% of Hartford's yearly budget was supplied from state coffers.

1

Whaddaulookinat t1_iwsghyk wrote

And Hartford takes on the entirety of the responsibility of handling the second busiest downtown in New England, and vendors collecting an absolutely insane amount of sales tax. I seriously cannot fathom how the anti city crowds think they can throw out numbers not thinking we don't already know how the state works.

Oh and PS ECS helps all municipalities in the state to a significant degree... It's not a freebie that Hartford gets. Ffs.

1

milton1775 t1_iwsh0qt wrote

> And Hartford takes on the entirety of the responsibility of handling the second busiest downtown in New England, and vendors collecting an absolutely insane amount of sales tax.

Any business in Hartford is either paying property taxes or rent which in turn had a property owner paying taxes to the city. And the sales tax goes to the state...part of which goes back to Hartford.

> Oh and PS ECS helps all municipalities in the state to a significant degree... It's not a freebie that Hartford gets. Ffs.

Yes, and Hartford receives a disproportionate amount (both overall and per capita) compared to other municipalities.

2

Whaddaulookinat t1_iwssqa3 wrote

>Yes, and Hartford receives a disproportionate amount (both overall and per capita) compared to other municipalities.

When you account for the shortfall in pilot promises in previous decades it honestly pales. I really do not see your continued point... Hartford gets help for getting a distressed community much like many others including the state fund dependent rural areas. Yet you never see such attention to the minutia detail of their funding sourcing. Just get fucked mate.

1

Kraz_I t1_iww1hv7 wrote

Hartford has incredible economic strength. It's GDP per capita is one of the highest in the world. I couldn't find data for the city alone, but just for the "Hartford, East Hartford, Middletown Metropolitan statistical area", aka the "Greater Hartford Area", which includes all of Hartford, Middlesex, and Tolland counties. In 2013, the Greater Hartford Area had the 4th highest GDP per capita of any metropolitan area in the world, behind only San Jose, Zurich and Oslo. It even beat out Boston, New York, Paris, London and San Francisco. The economic powerhouse of the area is the city of Hartford, with its insurance industry, which means its GDP per capita is likely much higher than the area as a whole. The economy of the region has been pretty static since then, with only a minimal change in population or GDP since the insurance industry has been shrinking a bit; so it has fallen a bit on the list as a few other cities have become insanely wealthy in the past 7 years. But it's still one of the most productive cities in the US.

Per capita income on the other hand is much lower, because most of that GDP goes to stockholders of Hartford's companies. The only town in the Hartford Area with a per capita income higher than the GDP is Glastonbury, only by a small amount and it's not a very large town.

In contrast, the Bridgeport area, being a suburb of NYC, has since surpassed Hartford only slightly, and has several towns with per capita income higher than its gdp per capita.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Connecticut_locations_by_per_capita_income

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-metro-monitor/

And yet the city struggles with its finances and it somehow needs government welfare programs like PILOT and ECS to survive.

They damn well should get ALL that state funding and more. They ought to have their municipal budget funded ENTIRELY through state and federal grants instead of local property tax. After all, they produce the highest value for the state.

1

johnsonutah t1_iwxp9mg wrote

Hartford’s a melting ice cube. The state of CT budget is too broke to fund Hartford like a proper city because the state is heavily indebted to legacy pension debt.

I fully expect New Haven and Bridgeport to grow faster than Hartford and to be more impactful to the state economy.

1