Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Table 4. Simulation Results Using Various Probabilities of Development without the Use of TIF <br /> <br /> <br />distribution of the potential risks and <br />rewards of using TIP. For exalnple, Table <br />3 shows that there is a 50/0 chance of a <br />loss greater than $9.4 million and a gain <br />greater than $3.3 million. There is <br />slightly more than a 900/0 chance of a <br />negative net present value. Figure 1 <br />presents a histogranl of the results for a <br />project's net present value. The distribu- <br />tion has a high peak and is positively <br />skewed, with the greatest probability <br />falling around the mean and the vast <br />majority of results falling within a range <br />fron1 -$10 million to +$2.5 Inillion. <br />One of the questions that motivated <br />this study was, under which conditions <br />would the local governlnent stand the <br />greatest chance of reaping a positive <br />financial impact from TIF? My theoret- <br />ical model indicates that one of the <br />most inlportant variables in deter- <br />mining the financial effects of TIF is the <br />probability that the parcel will be devel- <br />oped without the use of TIP. For the <br />second siInulation, I varied the proba- <br />bility of developlnent. It appears that <br />overoptimisnl about the financial effects <br />of 'I'IF should be a larger concern among <br />policy makers. Table 4 shows the shnu- <br />lation results assuming various probabil- <br />ities of development. There are at least <br />two striking results from these simula- <br />tions. First, even if there is a zero proba- <br />bility of development without the use of <br />TIF, the nledian net present value is <br />negative (approximately -$2.7 million). <br />Even when there is no chance of future <br />development, there is only a 30(Yo <br />chance of a positive financial outcome <br />for the local governnlent. Increases in <br />the probability of development up to <br />10% produce additional expected finan- <br />ciallosses. However, another interesting <br />result is that the point estinlate of the <br />loss converges toward a stable amount <br />with probabilities of development <br /> <br />6 CURA REPORTER <br /> <br />greater than 109'6. This means that after <br />the likelihood of development exceeds a <br />certain amount, the negative financial <br />effect becomes somewhat constant. <br />Therefore, the most likely range of <br />losses on a $15 million TIF project is <br />somewhere between $2.5 million and <br />$6.5 million.3 <br />Another area of potential policy <br />importance is the length of time that <br />the TIF district is allowed to capture <br />incremental revenue from the properties <br />in the TID. As stated earlier, redevelop- <br />ment districts in Minnesota that use TIF <br />are allowed to capture increment for a <br />period up to 25 years. However, in other <br />states (and for other types of districts in <br />Minnesota), the time limits differ. The <br />impact of this policy decision on local <br />government financial condition is <br />shown in Table 5. Table 5 presents the <br />results for the base case of a 25-year TIF <br />capture and an alternative 10-year TIP <br />capture. The mean and median results <br />are significantly greater for the 10-year <br />capture limit. This suggests that time <br />limits might be an effective tool for <br />easing the financial burden of TIF <br />inlposed on local governlnen ts. <br /> <br />Conclusions <br />This study illuminates at least four <br />important points about the effect of TIF <br />on local governnlent finances. Pirst, <br />given a realistic set of policy assump- <br />tions, TIP most likely produces a net <br />financial loss to a local governn1.ent. <br />Only when the probability of develop- <br />ment without the use of TIF is low and <br />the positive effects of TIP on property <br />values both inside and outside of the <br />'TIP district become extremely high can <br /> <br />3 The point net present value estimate at a 500/0 <br />probability of development is -$5.4 rnillion, which <br />is not statistically significant at accepted levels <br />(p::: .06). <br /> <br />a TIP project be justified in financial <br />terms. <br />Second, although the first conclu- <br />sion holds, there is nonetheless a <br />nonzero probability of a positive finan- <br />cial impact. A single point estimate <br />simply does not capture enough infor- <br />mation for local decision makers to <br />form an opinion about the financial <br />effects of TIP. If events work in its favor, <br />the local government can expect a small <br />financial gain from TIE In short, TIP <br />may be best thought of as a large finan- <br />cial investment by local governments <br /> <br /> <br />1:7 <br />::r <br />o <br />8" <br />~ <br />~ <br />([) <br />< <br />([) <br />V) <br />("\ <br />::r <br />:J <br />([) <br />a.: <br />~ <br /> <br />Burnsville~ Heart of the City project, a <br />mixed-use commercial and residential <br />development on Nicollet Avenue, is <br />being constructed through the use of <br />TIF funds. <br />