2017_0109_REDA Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

REDA Meeting Minutes — Monday, January 9, 2017 Page 4 variables of those improvements on adjacent properties. President Roe advised that his thoughts with his requested language revisions had been along that concept. However, while requesting his colleagues to consider such language President Roe advised that he was amenable with the language as currently presented with one exception. President Roe asked that language in item 4.A.3 be revised to read: "Consideration of benefit to the surrounding properties [and overall city tax base] if his colleagues were in agreement. Member McGehee asked for language to be revised and broadened with the word "impact" versus "benefit" since the impact may be either positive or negative, and therefore both should come to the REDA in the first pass with this acquisition framework. As one of his considerations as well, President Roe spoke in support of such language. Member Laliberte opined, through using a formula or analysis, the best scenario was intended for consideration; but noted that "impact" may depend on individual perspectives, with one person's negative impact being another person's benefit. President Roe opined that any change in property value included a certain degree of constant variables that could be included in the analysis. Member Laliberte suggested saying "value" rather than "benefit" to surrounding properties. Member McGehee opined that she preferred language not to be so proscribed, and welcomed differing points of view to provide broader information for their decision-making. Member Willmus questioned what the ultimate goal of the REDA was and whether they were trying to discern the effect the surrounding property and their market value with respect to item 4.A.3. President Roe agreed that had been his primary thought. President Roe referenced the city's tax increment financing (TIF) policy that includes a requirement for a cost -benefit analysis, not specifically a "but for" test, but specific and broader city language related to cost benefit. President Roe clarified that had been his interest to provide more specificity in determining if a project was of benefit to the community and how to quantify that, especially if the project was seeking public assistance of any kind. Member Willmus suggested item 4.A.3 be revised as follows: "Consideration of [effect] [benefit] to [market value and tax capacity of surrounding properties and overall city tax base].