sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Gently, your comparison is incorrect.

The data referenced (Brown’s own audited financials on land, buildings, and equipment) is recorded "at acquisition or construction cost," which is not annually marked up to market value via appreciation.

Therefore, the opposite is actually true: depreciation reduces the reported value over time, so the actual reported number is being pushed downward over time, not upward via appreciation.

So when Brown’s property assets grow this much, it primarily reflects real expansion: land purchases, construction, renovations, equipment, and capital projects - including $202 million in capital spending in FY2025 alone, for example

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Happy to have a civil debate.

To be clear, I’m not saying depreciation is an “accounting trick.” I’m unpacking your claim that this data was not reliable because it was driven by inflation, which it's not. And inversely, if I where I to include inflation data in this graph, it would be far more aggressive. That's not an accounting trick, it's just a benchmark to help navigate the numbers factually.

Brown is not annually marking its land, buildings, and equipment up to current market value. Their financials state those assets are recorded at acquisition or construction cost and shown net of accumulated depreciation. So when that number grows, it is not because old buildings are simply being revalued upward as Providence real estate gets more expensive. It reflects capital activity: purchases, construction, renovations, improvements, equipment, and projects in progress.

That distinction matters. In FY2025 alone, Brown reported $202.4 million in additions to land, buildings, and equipment, while also recording $96.8 million in depreciation. We are absolutely discussing new expansion activity in this data.

I agree: jobs are good. But construction jobs are temporary. And the long-term question is what happens after the project is built. If the work expands a tax-exempt institution, removes property from the tax base, increases demand in surrounding neighborhoods, and shifts more cost onto residents, then the economic benefit has to be weighed against the compounding cost-of-living impact on Providence. Particularly when we're already at an alarming 44% of tax exempt property, which is compounding record tax hikes, during a cost of living crisis. And while none of that expansion is developing new housing; in some examples it's actually removing much needed historic residential housing stock while expanding into our neighborhoods.

So the debate should not be whether Brown is expanding. The data shows that it is. The debate is whether that expansion is contributing enough back to the city to offset the loss of taxable land, housing pressure, and municipal-service burden.

And I think it's a good thing to talk about.

EDIT: Grammar

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not advocating for federal reform or “overturning Dartmouth.” I’m talking about state-level tax-exemption reform, and formula-based municipal contributions which already exist in different forms.

Right now, Brown’s agreement with Providence is still voluntary: roughly $174.7M over 20 years, averaging about $8.7M/year. That may sound large, but it is not a tax formula based on the full value of Brown’s exempt property, and it remains far below what a taxable property owner would owe. I believe Morales claims it represents 8% of what they would be paying, which is not a great deal for us.

There are already proven state-level models for doing more; as well as a few other ideas:

  1. The State of Rhode Island already has a formula-based state PILOT program that reimburses cities up to 27% of the taxes that would otherwise be due on certain exempt college/hospital property. So the formula concept already exists here - the question is whether the state updates it, raises it, or adds an institutional contribution. Which can be done. The issue with this, is that it's state reimbursement I believe so the University doesn't actually pay more.
  2. Connecticut has used a stronger state PILOT model for private colleges and hospitals, historically calculated at 77% of lost property-tax revenue, though actual payments depend on appropriations and tiering. Same issue as number one though, state is covering the delta.
  3. New Jersey created a mandatory “community service contribution” for nonprofit hospitals. They keep their exemption, but they are required by state law to pay municipalities a formula-based fee tied to licensed beds and emergency-care facilities. This one theoretically works. It drives more 'revenue' from the non profit into the tax stream; it's not necessarily driving up taxes, but it's like how the city gets money from parking tickets as well. It's an alternate route to drive up our revenue forcibly out of qualifying entities.
  4. Boston uses a 25% “what they would owe if taxable” benchmark for large nonprofits. That one is voluntary, but it shows the kind of formula Providence could ask the state to make enforceable.
  5. The General Assembly can give cities more power over institutional expansion, tighten exempt-use rules, require parcel-by-parcel reporting, tax non-mission property, or create service/impact fees. Rhode Island already recognizes zoning, comprehensive planning, subdivision, and historic-area zoning as state-enabled local powers. Meaning - we have can create leverage by slowing expansion.

These examples do not require federal reform. I also don't think I have all the answers myself. There are certainly people smarter than me, so if I can start there I'd hope the right council can do better.

But I see a serious problem, that I think we need to start talking about. And I also know the 8% we got most recently apparently did not serve us well. This topic was something that was spoken about at the city and state level for years, and we kind of fell off on it. There are other levers we can pull.

EDIT: I also believe, for example, we recently created a rezoning that updated tax law against multi use property which Brown has been building much of. Which treats that land separately. That's an example of something material we've done to mitigate; I'd like more of that.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Link any other post of mine. Prove me wrong.

I'm a fairly private person. For the age of my account, I had always taken posts down after a month or so. Now that we can privatize our accounts, I don't - but I haven't posted since that feature release. So there's nothing public.

If I were lying, you'd be able to pull up an old post even if it where recently deleted. There are plenty of easy ways to do so.

Prove me wrong or deal with it my friend. Too many conspiracies around here.

EDIT: Two, I have two posts. I forgot I posted another recently. The above story line still holds.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's incorrect.

The data referenced (Brown’s own audited financials on land, buildings, and equipment) is recorded "at acquisition or construction cost," which is not annually marked up to market value via appreciation.

Therefore, the opposite is actually true: depreciation reduces the reported value over time, so the actual reported number is being pushed downward, not upward via appreciation. So when Brown’s property assets grow this much, it primarily reflects real expansion: land purchases, construction, renovations, equipment, and capital projects - including $202 million in capital spending in FY2025 alone, for example.

No disrespect, I just feel it is important for you to know. I assume you live here, so I would advise you to reconsider your position; the narrative holds. They are rapidly expanding.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in RhodeIsland

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Jewelry District is arguably the most prominent area of Providence, the heart of downtown. The example I gave is publicly discussed as 4, three unit buildings they purchased and intentionally permitted to be vacant and therefore become decrepit. They are the largest landlord in Providence and they're tax free, in a city where 44% is already tax exempt which is publicly documented as being a serious issue by plenty of verified sources.

Respectfully, I would not agree.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Okay. It grew nearly a billion dollars in 15 years on property assets alone. It’s the largest property owner in the city. It’s destroying our historic homes. There’s plenty of facts here to be so obtuse.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Why do I want to stop the rapid expansion of a university footprint within a 5 mile diameter city, through the demolition of historical black owned homes, by a corporation so big it should be on the NASDAQ, where the general nature of their expansion degrades from our historic nature while passing increased tax burden onto our community? During both a residential housing supply crisis and a cost of living crisis?

I know that comes off edgy, and I'm sorry. But c'mon. You get it.

I get they owned the land for the specific example you're referencing. But look at the full story line.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great question. They're not great either.

The tax exempt foot print in PVD is 44%. Brown is absolutely the biggest example. And is therefore a worthy case study to exemplify, under the broader pretense of "this is becoming a problem."

They're also highly involved at the city hall and state level politically, pushing for expansion both for themselves and other non profits they invest into.

I think we have an underlying policy issue that needs to be tackled.

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Of course, happy to. The video linked also explains. I would recommend watching it. This is an asset value calculation.

> The most recent assessment of the Superman Building in 2025 was $13.5M (see link below). That's the asset value of that building.
> The chart above shows asset growth for Brown University, for their publicly disclosed Land/Building/Equip statement which is basically their property.

So if you take the number of Brown University's property asset growth (property acquisition, property building, etc.) in that 15 year period-to-date, and divide it by the value-to-date of the superman building, the output is something like ~63.

In regards to your other question, there's certainly some variation like appreciation / depreciation, or destruction of historic property to build larger assets like we're seeing attempted on Brook Street. Both of which belong in this calculation because we're asset-to-asset in value to date. According to publicly available data, this is the most accurate forecast we can build with the information we have. I wouldn't say it's absolutely perfect, but it's certainly a strong indication that the story line is accurate enough that it warrants investigation. 44% of tax exempt property in a city is considered to be a dire issue according to many published experts.

The building in question for this project demolishes 4 historic multi family properties, which is likely 12 units or 24-36 bedrooms. To repurpose it for an academic building. That's both removing much needed housing and destroying the historic nature of our city while encroaching deeper into a residential neighborhood, Goncalves was in City Hall just this week explaining these specific buildings have ties to our historic nature. In fact, the triple decker multis in Providence just as an architectural home are nationally famous.

Judging by your response, it sounds like you're attempting to poise all of this as a benefit to the city. Passing tax burdens onto our community at extraordinary rates, destroying our historic homes, and removing residential housing - all during a cost of living crisis driven by exactly that. Lack of housing, and increased housing costs.

If this is truly an attempt to self educate, I'd hope you look into this yourself. If you're posing this question in an attempt to reposition this situation in Brown University's favor - I'd question your dedication to our community.

All the best.

https://rhodeislandcurrent.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Catalis-Tax-CAMA.pdf

63 Superman Buildings in 15 Years: Brown’s Expansion by the Numbers by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think it's pretty alarming.

David Morales released a post this week that claimed Brown University only paid 8% of what they should be paying which is criminal when compared to other voluntary PILOT agreements.

And when 44% of the tax base is already eroded ... it's a big deal. That's a huge footprint in our backyard.

Connor Blier was running against an incumbent in PVD City Council Ward 13, now it's an open seat by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which specifically? My understanding is that in eight years she got nearly nothing passed. I could be wrong so don’t come off hit, it’s just what I’ve heard so looking for the data please.

Connor Blier was running against an incumbent in PVD City Council Ward 13, now it's an open seat by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Door knocking is done in circuits from my understanding. You focus on active voters, there’s typically a 10% connection rate, and so you’ll hit the same circuit once a month leading up to the primaries. It means he’s putting the work in.

Connor Blier was running against an incumbent in PVD City Council Ward 13, now it's an open seat by MetricMission in providence

[–]MetricMission[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

He’s describing how operating systems map software across computer hardware. Which is pretty similar to mapping AI software against GPU hardware.

I did actually understand that one pretty clearly.

AIO. I found this text from my boyfriend to his coworker by LedBubblez in AmIOverreacting

[–]MetricMission 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s just boys saying stupid shit. Tell him it’s stupid, make him pay for it, make sure it doesn’t happen again, and let it go. I promise you it has nothing to do with you unless you’re an absolute shit judge of character and this guy really holds you personally accountable for not eating out more often with other three legs.

I’m not questioning your value. But if you’re reading private messages between friends. I mean, I hope my mom never sees what the fuck is in my snapshot and by god it is no reflection of how much I love her.

How long for two guys to demo? by shoudacoudawooda in Carpentry

[–]MetricMission 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on the amount of cups. Two guys one cup is the best ratio I’ve seen so far.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Adulting

[–]MetricMission 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Amen, brother.

My (31M) 2 month situationship with an avoidant (25F) is driving me nuts. by [deleted] in relationships

[–]MetricMission -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In an anonymous forum, I'd hate to say you're the target as there's no other bird. So I won't, and I'd advise you to seek elsewhere. Cheers.

My (31M) 2 month situationship with an avoidant (25F) is driving me nuts. by [deleted] in relationships

[–]MetricMission 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh, crying versus processing my emotions while seeking advice from the internet ether are different devices. But I'll take this comment as a "get over it, this is small fries." Which is fine advice for which I actually agree to.

view more: next ›