CC_Minutes_2004_0927 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Why shouldn't the developers pay the costs of environmental clean- up? This would give them an incentive to get payment from the polluters and other legally responsible parties. If the city agrees to pay, there is no reason for the developers to spend any time, money or effort doing this. 3. Grantint?: public subsidies would pose sit?:nificant financial and let?:al risks to the city. The city will face very significant financial risks if we agree to pay for unknown costs of environmental clean-up. The city will face very significant financial risks if the council agrees to pay for the unknown costs of environmental clean-up using our current tax revenues (under hazardous substances sub-districts). This could put our budget in immediate, serious jeopardy, and make it impossible to provide necessary services without raising property taxes. The city should not give away its future tax revenues to private developers - this will put the stability of the city tax base and budget at risk for the next 25 years (the length of time it would take to generate the additional taxes needed to pay for tax increment financing). The city should not issue any bonds to fund the project, even if the bonds are backed by the tax increment from the development instead of general obligation bonds backed by all of the taxpayers. Any bonds issued by Roseville will potentially impact the city's credit rating. If the project fails, or does not produce the expected tax revenue, and the bonds default, this will harm the city's credit rating. There will be great pressure on the city to keep the bonds from going into default (by allocating additional public resources to cover the debt, even if the city is not legally required to do so.) If the city agrees "in principle" to the proposed public subsidies, we put ourselves at increased risk that we the developers will continue to pressure the city for more public money - (see, for example, the recent [Wed, Sep. 22, 2004] Pioneer Press article about Arden Hills and the TCAAP developers: Pact with developer may chant?:e. [If this link breaks e-mail webnlaster(ii)rosevillcl.orf! to report it] The council will also put the city at increased risk of lawsuits over the extent of the public subsidies we have agreed to provide (as is happening in Oakdale - see "City Sued Over Tax Breaks: Developers' Lawsuit Seeks $2.7 Million", by Hank Shaw, St. Paul Pioneer Press, August 28, 2004, Page BII, City sued over tax breaks Developer seeks $2. 7 million~ City says it never at?:reed to t?:ivebacks. [If this link breaks e-mail webmaster(iiJrosevillcl.orf! to report it]