My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 05 13
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
REVITALIZATION COMMISSION
>
2004-2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 05 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 10:20:29 AM
Creation date
5/16/2019 2:03:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
RCPKT 2019 05 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Revitalization Commission <br />Minutes <br />April 8, 2019 <br />Page 4 of 7 <br />increase or decrease each year. There was no significant TIF revenue collected prior <br />to 2014 because value was not increasing. <br />• Property Tax <br />• Sales Tax — (requires additional authorization by City Council) not included <br />• Facilitating Projects is the main intent and is broad in scope <br />Assistance can be provided for infrastructure, direct financial assistance, other <br />projects. <br />City Attorney Kelly noted urban renewal could use property tax increment and Council <br />could use sales tax rebates through the Business Assistance Program. DeJong <br />noted bonding is different for urban renewal authorities than for the City as the LRC is <br />not subject to TABOR. <br />Lipton asked that be added to the slides for future. <br />Loo asked in the history for what TIF has been used for to date could be included in <br />future presentations. DeJong noted improvements to downtown lighting and <br />undergrounding of power lines were included in LRC budget. <br />Chair Fisher noted the City can ask for LRC taking care of improvements. <br />The base valuation, which changes annually, is determined by County assessor. <br />Question was asked whether personal property tax is part of tax increment. Kelly <br />noted would need to look into although she thought not. <br />DeJong noted agreements utilizing a TIF Rebate structure set a base valuation to use <br />for calculating the project's increment. <br />Chairperson Fisher suggested a joint budgeting discussion with Council. <br />A question was asked about indirect benefits to the public and their definition. DeJong <br />noted new commercial building can have indirect benefit for the community as a <br />whole. Commissioner Dalton noted this is a "squishy" phrase. <br />Commissioner Adler asked if this could be more defined in the future. <br />Chairperson Fisher noted in Boulder eminent domain was used in Crossroads and that <br />is now gone. DeJong noted utilizing eminent domain should not be taken lightly. <br />Lathrop noted some of the Boulder folks affected never recovered. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.