Laserfiche WebLink
Revitalization Commission <br />Minutes <br />April 8, 2019 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />— Blight Factors — 9 noted <br />— Purpose <br />— Objectives <br />— Implementation <br />— Property Tax TIF <br />— Eminent Domain through Urban Renewal • Super majority <br />City/LRC Cooperation Agreement <br />— Support Services <br />— Approval of LRC Budget <br />— Approving Agreements, Bonds, other financial commitments <br />— LRC and City Council as separate <br />City Manager Balser noted not every urban renewal authority has a cooperation <br />agreement with their Council. This is specific to Louisville. There are differences <br />throughout the State concerning how the urban renewal authorities operate. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton asked about bonding and wanted clarification. Attorney Kelly <br />noted the City and the LRC are separate legal entities and have their own budgets and <br />ratings. Lipton noted there could be some reputational impact should an urban <br />renewal bond default. <br />Agreement with County <br />— Shareback of TIF revenues <br />• Originally 14.3% of revenue starting in 2015 <br />• Reduces to 7.15% as no other municipality did a similar agreement <br />Not in State law but part of the agreement from the beginning to give back half of what <br />the County would have gotten then reduces if no other municipality has a similar <br />agreement. There was discussion of how that came about and it was noted <br />negotiations took place to arrive at agreement. <br />Councilmember Loo asked if this was the only agreement Boulder County has with <br />municipalities. Answer was yes. Legislation does not demand an an agreement. <br />Going forward could the urban renewal authority come up with an agreement with any <br />other district? The answer was yes. <br />Urban Renewal Tools <br />— Tax Increment Financing (TIF) — base valuation when set up — Colorado has floating <br />base. Increment only assessed on taxable new construction, improvements, base can <br />