My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Economic Vitality Committee Agenda and Packet 2021 10 22
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
ECONOMIC VITALITY COMMITTEE
>
2021 Economic Vitality Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Economic Vitality Committee Agenda and Packet 2021 10 22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2021 4:58:42 PM
Creation date
10/26/2021 4:21:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
10/22/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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
SUBJECT: ECONOMIC VITALITY STRATEGIC PLAN ITEM #1-3 <br />DATE: OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 2 OF 6 <br />considered a wide variety of potential program changes, both in response to feedback <br />staff communicated about the BAP as well as how incentives could also be aligned with <br />other economic vitality objectives. The EVC meeting materials from August contain a <br />more complete description of options for incentivizing outcomes. <br />Staff shared themes communicated by applicants at various stages of the program, <br />including: <br />• Positives of the program: <br />o Creates certainty of City commitment; <br />o No obligation to business if it does not proceed with project; <br />o Appreciate simple application; and <br />o Establishes early connections with City staff for processes such as <br />licensing, permitting, etc. <br />• Negatives of the program: <br />o Did not know of eligibility requirement about signed lease; <br />o Inability to negotiate based on unique project or benefit to the City; <br />o No assistance offered to move location within Louisville (program requires <br />expansion); <br />o Lack of incentives for existing businesses that are not doing significant <br />tenant improvements or new construction; and <br />o Requirement for no lease commitment delays ability to apply for liquor <br />license and lengthens the process. <br />The EVC also requested information about the communities surrounding Louisville and <br />their practices for incentives. Staff contacted City of Boulder, City of Lafayette, City of <br />Longmont, Town of Erie, and Town of Superior to gather data. Lafayette and Superior <br />have less formalized programs and incentives are generally negotiated on a case -by - <br />case basis. Boulder, Longmont, and Erie all have formal incentive programs. Boulder's <br />program is most similar to the existing Business Assistance Program. Summaries of <br />these community programs are reflected in the August EVC materials. <br />In September, two members of the EVC reviewed a narrowed list of six (6) program <br />recommendations. The members were supportive of five (5) of the changes, which are <br />outlined below. The recommendations impact some factors of eligibility and approval as <br />well as new incentives. Staff and the EVC have attempted to craft recommendations that <br />will improve retention efforts to local and small businesses. The BAP would continue to <br />be a strong tool for business attraction. <br />Revise Application Timing Requirement <br />• The existing program requires that a business must apply for and receive an <br />assistance agreement prior to signing a lease or closing on a property. It takes <br />three to four weeks to process an application and for it to receive City Council <br />approval. This length of time causes some businesses to delay anticipated lease - <br />CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION <br />Agenda Packet P. 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.