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 4 of 6 <br />Council member Lipton said it would go a long way if under the criteria, there was <br />something that required staff to show issuing this BAP is absolutely necessary to keep <br />the business or bring the business. <br />City Manager Fleming said to what extent will the business come if we don't offer the <br />incentive? He would have an issue "certifying" that a business will or will not come as <br />we are not in the board room when those decisions are made. Ultimately, it is a policy <br />decision. The City Manager said it gets back to a tonal message. <br />Commissioner Menaker said it would be helpful if over the next year, DeJong listed the <br />requests for assistance that did not make it to Council. <br />City Manager Fleming said to address it strategically to get the policy direction from <br />Council — ie: we don't give assistance to businesses in a certain location in town. Lipton <br />feels we are not being strategic, Loo disagrees. Her perception is that historic <br />preservation grants are automatic. The idea we don't look at this carefully is not her <br />perception. <br />Randy Caranci said not giving assistance to restaurants in downtown area delayed a <br />project he is working on. It was going to be a large user. It would be nice if you could <br />bring an application to committee to at least have them review it. Historic preservation <br />grants money is earmarked specially to historic preservation. It is a dedicated tax. <br />The NYTimes had an article about Sierra Nevada which mentioned CTC. <br />Commissioner Menaker feels that advertising made the BAP worthwhile. <br />Council member Maloney feels it is a very important program. He is glad to hear from <br />members of BRaD to give a different perspective. Also would like to hear which BAPs <br />did not move forward. <br />Redline in packet is an attempt to get more information from applicants. Does it damage <br />the BAP? Reichenberg said you cannot submit purchase price during purchase. <br />Council member Maloney said he does not know if we can require the information but if <br />applicant provides it, great. <br />Randy Caranci said he does not agree with the redline because he would not disclose <br />this information for his client. He does not want to compete with himself if he has <br />properties in other municipalities. <br />Implementation of Consumer Use Tax Rebate — DeJong explained what qualifies for <br />this rebate. Would like to simplify for businesses and finance department. DeJong <br />discussed the table in the packet. <br />Originally set up as investment based. Council member Maloney said it would be <br />interesting to see the table weighted. <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.