CC_Minutes_2015_0622 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,June 22,2015 Page 34 Roll Call Ayes: McGehee, Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, and Roe. Nays: None. b. Tax Increment Financing(TIF) District Overview Given time constraints tonight, Community Development Director Paul Bilotta referenced the details in the RCA and attachments, intending this presentation on- ly as a brief overview, with future action and more detail available at future meet- ings. A Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Summary was provided as a bench handout. Mikaela Huot, Financial Consultant, Springsted Ms. Huot provided brief overview, and at the request of Councilmembers McGe- hee and Laliberte, agreed to provide her presentation tutorial to staff for including as part of the meeting record and for public understanding of TIF. Ms. Huot's presentation included an understanding of what TIF involved, a TIF model for redevelopment projects; why cities use TIF; common methods used to finance project costs, including general obligation bonds, pay-as-you-go notes, and revenue bonds; and a"but for"needs analysis in considering the use of TIF. Ms. Huot provided a summary of existing TIF districts in Roseville, with seven still active; three pre-1990 providing the most flexibility, two post-1990 contain- ing considerably more restrictions; one housing district; and one economic devel- opment included provisions as part of the temporary jobs bill of 2010. Ms. Huot referenced the map included as part of the materials provided in the RCA; and briefly reviewed limitations within each district, all of which were part of the City's development districts. Ms. Huot noted the inclusion of two Hazardous Substance Subdistricts that could be used to address contamination costs. Ms. Huot reviewed existing TIF obligations remaining for each district and pro- ject areas for each. From a financial perspective, Ms. Huot noted a total of $1,557,807 remained, and provided planned decertification dates for each district. Ms. Huot covered future considerations including existing obligations in a majori- ty of the TIF districts; decertification of district #13 in 2015 with a sizable fund balance being returned as excess increment depending on 2014 and 2015 tax col- lections; and the City's share of$816,214 estimated as part of if and when that excess is redistributed to various taxing jurisdictions. In an overview of TIF redevelopment district #17 (post-1990), Ms. Huot noted more restrictions that applied;but since it was also created in 2005 at the height of