My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Business Retention and Development Committee Agenda and Packet 2016 05 02
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUSINESS RETENTION & DEV COMMITTEE
>
2006-2019 Business Retention and Development Committee Agendas and Packets
>
2016 Business Retention and Development Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Business Retention and Development Committee Agenda and Packet 2016 05 02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:09:38 PM
Creation date
5/17/2016 3:56:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BRADPKT 2016 05 02
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Business Retention & Development Committee <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 4, 2016 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />members take no position ". Chris seconded. All in favor with Lipton, Maloney and Loo <br />abstaining from voting. <br />BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM DISCUSSION <br />DeJong discussed modifying one question in BAP application to hear from information <br />about financial side and implementation of Consumer Use Tax Rebates. He asked if <br />BRaD had suggestions of other tweaks to the program. <br />Commissioner Reichenberg talked about pricing being proprietary information in <br />negotiations and businesses may not want to, or be allowed to, divulge such <br />information. Fleming said ultimately the approval is public record so public knows what <br />the basis is for the incentive. <br />Council member Maloney said Commissioner Reichenberg makes a good point. <br />Articulating the risk analysis is important to him. When proposal comes forward it is the <br />risk analysis; is there a risk of losing this business? There are times it is not a level <br />playing field. Needs to be discussion around it. Maloney supports the program. <br />Commissioner Menaker said risk analysis means to him there is a City budget risk but <br />BAPs are typically rebates. Council member Maloney said it is an investment and we <br />need to weigh the risk on this investment. Commissioner Menaker would hate to lose <br />the original focus of the BAP program — it was tonal. <br />Council member Lipton's concern with the program generally is that businesses look at <br />this as a first resort rather than a last resort. What is landlord or contractor giving? <br />Feels we are giving this to any business who wants it. Not sure we are using it <br />strategically. Use it in relation to how economy is going. <br />Chair Loo says she feels we are not giving it to everyone. She would like DeJong to <br />provide report of who we turn away. She feels we are in a very competitive market with <br />other municipalities. Would like better data. <br />Commissioner Reichenberg said he is in negotiations and works with tenants making <br />decisions. Sometimes it comes down to "feeling" of transaction. When municipalities do <br />not give assistance it can be perceived as negative. Small acts of not - significant dollars <br />show a willingness to work with business. <br />Commissioner Staufer said if the business wouldn't be coming here if not given the <br />rebate then this should not be a discussion. We do not gain anything by having vacant <br />property. He does not see downside of offering rebates. <br />Commissioner Menaker said this was a tool for Economic Development and allowed us <br />flexibility. <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.