CCP 10-28-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 LE-17. TIF District Deficits (ABH) 2 3 Issue: The 2001 Legislature cormnitted significant state resources on an ongoing basis to 4 the TIF grant program in order to address the impacts of property tax reform on existing TIF 5 districts. The 2002 Legislature repealed the entire TIF grant program and eliminated all funding 6 in order to help address the state budget deficit. A significant number of existing TIF districts 7 may experience future deficits due to property tax reform. 8 9 Response: The Legislature should reinstate the TIF grant program with funding 10 adequate to allow deficits caused by property tax reform to be addressed. The Legislature 11 should also authorize municipalities to elect to extend the durations of TIF districts, at 12 their discretion, as another mechanism to address TIF district deficits. 13 14 LE-18. Business Subsidies (ABH) 15 16 Issue: Business subsidy grantors are still getting accustomed to the relatively new 17 Business Subsidies Act. The 1999 Business Subsidies Act was clarified and modified during the 18 2000 legislative session. In order for development agencies to effectively implement the 19 amended law, the law should be allowed to operate without further substantive legislative 20 change. 21 22 Response: Without thorough study, the Legislature should not make any 23 substantive changes to the 1999 Business Subsidies Act during the 2003 legislative session. 24 25 LE-19. Business Development Programs (ABH) 26 27 Issue: The Minnesota Investment Fund is not adequately funded. Additionally, the 2002 28 Legislature's $12 million appropriation for the new Greater Minnesota Business Development 29 Public Infrastructure Grant Program was line-item vetoed by the governor. In light of recent 30 legislative action, local governments increasingly may need to rely on these types of state 31 programs in order to enable them to effectively compete nationally and internationally for 32 business development. 33 34 Response: The Legislature should fund the Greater Minnesota Business 35 Development Public Infrastructure Grant Program. Additionally, more state resources 36 should continue to be contributed to the Minnesota Investment Fund. 37 38 LE-20. Land Recycling Programs (ABH) 39 40 Issue: Communities across Minnesota are faced with expensive barriers to reusing 41 property. These roadblocks include deteriorating, obsolete, and vacant structures as well as 42 varying levels of contamination. Such barriers pose significant problems for cities seeking to 43 reuse existing infrastructure, maintain and improve the property tax base, provide jobs and 44 housing opportunities, and preserve historic structures. While land recycling activities have 45 always been particularly costly as they usually encompass multi-phase projects of extensive 46 duration where site assemblage, demolition, relocation or pollution cleanup must occur before 16 . . .