Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />IS <br /> <br /> <br />e. The risk that the revenue from this Project will be insufficient to meet all <br />Project obligations, including TIF bonds, is extremely small. Rottlund, Ryan, <br />Welsh, and Roseville Properties are relatively conservative developers. They <br />have a history of successful projects, not failures. And all previous TIF <br />projects in Roseville have been successful, at least from a financial standpoint. <br /> <br />f. Most people who oppose TIF say they don't want their taxes used as part of a <br />TIF subsidy for a redevelopment project, especially if that project includes <br />certain features they don't like. But TIF is not a grant of tax funds from (a) <br />current Roseville taxpayers or (b) currently collected tax funds. That isn't <br />how TIF works. TIF does not use other people's taxes to finance <br />redevelopment. Instead, TIF is based upon the taxes that the future property <br />owners within the redevelopment area will pay on the new tax base that the <br />developers' create with their project - tax dollars that would not exist but for <br />the new development. Hence, when current residents say they don't want <br />their city property taxes used as part of a TIF subsidy for this project, they can <br />be assured that their taxes will not be used to subsidize Twin Lakes or any <br />other project. That isn't how TIF works. <br /> <br />i. The question is not whether the City will use current residents' property <br />taxes to help pay for Twin Lakes. Residents' property taxes won't be <br />used that way because that isn't how TIF works. <br /> <br />ii. The question is whether the City will use the taxes that the Twin Lakes' <br />Project will create to help pay for some of the extra-ordinary upfront <br />redevelopment costs for this Project. <br /> <br />i. Properly used, TIF does not subsidize developers and certainly does not create <br />windfall profits for developers. Properly used, TIF subsidizes brownfield <br />redevelopment and makes it competitive and doable in comparison with <br />greenfield projects. Greenfield projects are much less expensive and less <br />risky to build because greenfield projects do not have the same environmental <br />clean-up and the same demolition costs as brownfield projects. <br /> <br />i. Some people say that, once built, brownfield redevelopment projects <br />may be more profitable than a similar greenfield project. Under this <br />argument, those supposedly higher profits from a brownfield project <br />ought to be used to finance the higher front-end brownfield <br />redevelopment costs. This argument says there is no need to level the <br />playing field between greenfield and brownfield projects because higher <br />brownfield profits can be used to finance higher brownfield <br />redevelopment costs. <br /> <br />ii. In response, Twin Lakes surely appeals to Costco and other retailers <br />because of the strength of the Roseville retail trade area. To be sure, <br /> <br />9 <br />