Resolution approval needed to rescind IQT tax incentive deal

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 4:39pm

To undo giving New York-based IQT Solutions tax incentives for previous plans to relocate to Nashville, the Metro Council will have to approve a resolution to rescind the prior agreement.

Council attorney Jon Cooper told The City Paper a resolution has been filed that would officially renege on the $1.61 million in tax incentives offered to the call center company, a plan that blew up after Mayor Karl Dean and others learned of the abrupt closing of three IQT offices in Canada.

In June, the council unanimously voted to approve the tax incentives, which came with the promise of IQT’s creation of 900 jobs in Nashville. The mayor’s office of economic and community development had orchestrated the agreement.

But in light of the company’s unexpected mishaps, and Nashville’s dead deal, the council will now have to approve a resolution to retract the previous agreement. The resolution is to go before the council at its Aug. 16 meeting.

“It’s basically just repealing the prior resolution and rescinding the council’s prior approval,” Cooper said.

The resolution is certain to clear the council. The real question is whether council members decide to use the vote to question members of Dean’s administration on the level of vetting prior to making the deal with IQT.

“I think it’s a good opportunity for us to look at this agreement, unwind it, and then if council members have questions about the deal, it will give everyone an opportunity to have more transparency to what the deal was,” said Megan Barry, who chairs the council’s Budget and Finance Committee. 

8 Comments on this post:

By: titansjoe on 8/3/11 at 8:15

Vote out Dean and all the council members that voted for the convention center. This IQT fiasco is just one more bad mark against the Dean machine. The mayor and the council should have checked this company out prior to giving them a 1.6 million tax incentive.

Also vote "For Ratification"

Vote Keeton for mayor

Ken Jakes council at large

By: boyer barner on 8/3/11 at 10:07

You could have simply done twenty minutes of Googling, checking out some names involved with IQT, then followed some paths and links. Red flags would have become readily apparent.

Our council members should have conducted some due-diligence. (And much more than a simple Google search, but it's pretty pathetic that when the IQT news broke, I sat watching Leno and found a half-dozen red flags).

By: Carol Williams on 8/4/11 at 7:02

Did our city leaders learn anything from this decision now having to be rescinded?

By: Einstien62 on 8/4/11 at 8:20

I wonder if Ms. Barry is a democrat. If not I find it ironic that a republican would be talking about transparancy, considering Haslam's very first act as governer, which was to repeal Bredeson's sunshine laws. Which I thought was in the Tennessee constitution by the way! Cand a governor supercede the constitution?
It would seem democracy is less democratic every day. It is amazing what starts to jump out at you after the fall of the soviets, is it not?

By: breathofdeath on 8/4/11 at 9:46

Megan Barry needs to get off of her high-horse because the time for asking questions should have been BEFORE the council blindly approved the deal, not after. It is particularly ironic that Barry is crying foul over the transparency/lack thereof on this deal when you consider that it also had to be approved by the council's Budget and Finance committee, which she chairs!

By: MusicCity615 on 8/4/11 at 9:54

PLEASE-

Hindsight is 20/20. Is for you guys to say, "Council should have done their due diligence" "All you had to do was google" LOL.

If this was so easy, where were you guys when this was initially announced?

I am voting for Karl Dean. Thank you for everything you have done.

By: Magnum on 8/4/11 at 1:10

MusicCity, the question isn't where were these "hindsight is 20/20, holier than thou people" when the deal was announced. The question is where was the "mayor’s office of economic and community development" when the deal was announced. It is their job to perform the due diligence, not ours. Well not knowing the timeline, that's unfair, but it is a much more valid question I would think.

By: JohnGalt on 8/4/11 at 1:14

Take off your blinders MC615...you may actually learn something.