My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
EDSR MEMORANDUM 03-13-2000
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Packets
>
1993-2002
>
2000
>
03-13-2000
>
EDSR MEMORANDUM 03-13-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2016 10:49:00 AM
Creation date
2/18/2016 10:48:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDSR
date
3/13/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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).
View images
View plain text
• At its last meeting, the EDA reviewed a draft of the proposed policy <br /> modifications, provided comments and recommendations on the policy, and <br /> directed staff to complete the modifications for a public hearing and final <br /> approval. <br /> Action Requested <br /> Staff recommends that the EDA consider any input provided at the public <br /> hearing and then adopt the revised tax increment financing policies. <br /> 7. Tax Abatement (Tax Rebate Financing) Policy <br /> As directed by the EDA at the March 13 meeting, staff has completed a <br /> draft of a tax abatement policy. As you will recall from past discussions of <br /> this new development tool, tax abatement differs from TIF in that each <br /> political body is given the option to "abate" its portion of the project's <br /> property taxes. Generally, this will result in less dollars being generated <br /> for the project than with TIF, although abatement is easier and less costly <br /> to administer. <br /> The tax abatement policies that staff has drafted are very similar to the <br /> recently revised TIF policy. The tax abatement policy emphasizes <br /> industrial development and includes a ratings worksheet to aid in analysis <br /> of proposals. The primary difference between the two policies is that no <br /> • minimum threshold for building value or size is stipulated in the tax <br /> abatement policy. This is due to the fact that the smaller amount of dollars <br /> generated with tax abatement, combined with less administrative time and <br /> costs, will make tax abatement more appropriate for smaller scale projects. <br /> It should also be noted that staff is proposing that tax abatement be <br /> referred to as Tax Rebate Financing (TRF), which more accurately reflects <br /> how the tool functions. Sherburne County, which is also drafting a tax <br /> abatement policy, is considering a similar name modification to avoid <br /> confusing the tool with other, more established forms of tax abatement. <br /> Requested Action <br /> No action is requested at this time. However, staff asks that the EDA <br /> review the proposed draft of the tax abatement policy and provide <br /> feedback. <br /> 8. Incubator Update <br /> Staff will provide a verbal update of recent interest in the business <br /> incubator. Further discussion on the incubator is planned for the April <br /> EDA meeting. <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.