Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes <br />February 5, 2018 <br />Page 7 <br />of 26 years. She further noted the term can be longer for rural communities due to <br />construction costs and needing to close the gap. <br />Councilmember Ovall asked what the average term is for other communities <br />considering establishing a housing district. He also asked Ms. Hour about pooling <br />increment as there is confusion if it both projects need to be TIF eligible for pooling. <br />Ms. Huot stated she has seen Housing District terms anywhere from 15 to 25 years <br />depending on the individual housing needs of each community. <br />Ms. Hoot stated pooling is defined as the spending of tax increment dollars from a <br />specific tax increment district within a defined project area. She stated it is the taking <br />of tax increment dollars from a particular TIF district and spending them on <br />qualifying uses outside the boundaries of that district. She discussed how the districts <br />can be different along with the percentage of dollars pooled. She stated housing <br />districts have the most flexibility meaning a city can spend the dollars anywhere in <br />the city as long as they are on a qualifying project. <br />Councilmember Ovall stated this is an important distinction and that a project <br />receiving pooled increment does not have to be a qualifying TIF district as long as <br />the project has an affordable housing component to it. He questioned if this is a <br />TIF -eligible project because it does create an increment, but based on Ms. Huot's <br />comments, it seems to be geared more towards affordable housing and percentage. <br />Ms. Huot stated, based on the two current project criteria, it would not make any <br />sense to create a district for the Lodge project because it doesn't generate any <br />increment. She stated the only way for this project to receive any increment would be <br />from some other funding source. <br />Councilmember Ovall affirmed the Lodge could qualify for pooling under the <br />statutory uses. <br />Ms. Hoot stated as long as there are capital expenditures and it meets the <br />affordability criteria. <br />Councilmember Ovall stated the base issue to consider is whether the Council wants <br />to veer from the 15 years outlined in city policy. He noted the intent from the <br />applicant is to pool the projects in order to use the increment for capital <br />improvements at the Lodge, which there is capital improvements and it would meet <br />the affordable housing guidelines. <br />Mayor Dietz questioned if the city is requiring the applicant to make the Lodge into <br />an apartment building. <br />Ms. Othoudt stated he is doing it by choice because he is required to do the repairs <br />per city ordinance, noting it is currently an illegal non -conforming use. <br />10/EAEI B1 <br />NATURE <br />