Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> I <br /> I <br /> .1 . In addition to existing authority under the tax increment financing law, cities should <br /> I 2 be given authority for property tax abatements as another economic development tool. <br /> I 3 . The state should establish a new grant program that would provide funds to cities to <br /> 4 establish a Revolving Loan Fund targeted to..g;ijl financing for manufacturing <br /> I 5 projects. The funds would be awarded to cities thorough a competitive grant program <br /> I 6 in which the award is based on community need, local development capacity, as well <br /> I 7 as past experience and expertise in managing a Revolving Loan Fund and the general <br /> 8 ability/experience of the individual community to get the job of economic development <br /> I 9 completed. The approved applications would be funded strictly on the aforementioned <br /> I 10 criteria as well as the city's development program and development priorities. The <br /> 11 State would not be in the business of reviewing projects with respect to specific <br /> "2 companies and specific loans, These grants would be in the range of $200,000 to <br /> I 13 $250,000 and would facilitate four to five initial local loan projects. Local <br /> 14 governments should be given the flexibility to utilize these funds throughout the city <br /> I <br /> 15 without any geographical restrictions. The funds to the communities would be used to <br /> I 16 develop subordinated mortgages that are integrated with the primary financing of a <br /> I 17 particular manufacturing project. The loan could be utilized for retention as well as <br /> 18 new jobs. The respective community would be required to "recapture" the funds and <br /> I 19 also to develop the appropriate collateral to protect the integrity of the Revolving <br /> I 20 Loan Fund. In the event that the LGAfHACA penalty is not eliminated, a portion of <br /> 21 the revenues should also be contributed to the Revolving Loan Fund. <br /> I <br /> 22 . Congress should remove the caps that have been placed on Industrial Development <br /> ~23 <br /> Bonds and acknowledge that the extensive eligibility requirements now adequately <br /> I 1997 City Policies 13 <br />