O
Guilderland
← Community
Taxes BudgetCommunity discussion

Proposed Hotel and Resort Tax Exemptions

Guilderland

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Supportive (1)Opposed (5)Concerned (5)Neutral (1)

At a glance

Public comments
12
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Jul 28, 2026.

Public comments (12)

ConcernedWilliam JohnsonJul 28, 2026

Expressed concern that the project has tripled in scope since zoning board reviews, relies on questionable gray-water plans, and creates mostly low-paying jobs not worthy of a $3 million public investment.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 12:26 →
OpposedTara Molloy-GrockiJul 28, 2026

Warned that the nearly $1.8 million property tax exemption will negatively impact school taxes and shift financial burdens onto local homeowners and renters.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 19:58 →
ConcernedRobin GrayJul 28, 2026

Criticized the lack of public transparency about IDA financing, questioned why the developer needs mortgage tax relief on a property already purchased, and noted local water and retail qualification concerns.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 23:03 →
OpposedHarvey VlahosJul 28, 2026

Argued that subsidizing one local business picks winners and losers, potentially harming existing local wedding venues that received no public grants.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 31:00 →
OpposedJoe BreitbeckJul 28, 2026

Maintained that building 30 extra units and cabins on 14 steep, environmentally sensitive acres with a ravine and cemetery is completely unfeasible.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 34:16 →
SupportiveJeff PerleeJul 28, 2026

Supported the project, stating that Altamont needs hospitality venues to bring in outside visitors and support local businesses without resorting to endless single-family housing sprawl.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 38:20 →
ConcernedDave BurkeJul 28, 2026

Raised concerns about intensive mountain development, low-wage jobs, water shortages, and the poor timing of the hearing which conflicted with zoning board meetings.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 47:18 →
ConcernedKristen CaseyJul 28, 2026

Described finding tree clearing and burning near the ravine while investigating the cabin site, and asked if detailed site plans are available for public review.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 52:00 →
NeutralRichard AlbertonJul 28, 2026

Suggested that if tax breaks are granted, a portion of the funds should be directed toward solving Altamont's long-term water infrastructure issues.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 56:28 →
OpposedKaren WhiteJul 28, 2026

Read comments on behalf of Deborah Barnes Breitenbach warning that leaving the building gutted while threatening inaction unless approved is coercive, and that 30 cabins will ruin wooded viewsheds.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 57:44 →
OpposedTed NewmanJul 28, 2026

Compared the developer's stalled progress to past corporate tactics that leave towns holding the bag if projects fail.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 1:10:40 →
ConcernedJoel SlackJul 28, 2026

Questioned why a project expecting $1.35 million in net operating income in its first year requires public tax assistance from Guilderland residents.

Industrial Development Agency - Jul 28, 2026 · 1:14:00 →