Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Alternatives for TIF Grant Request <br />January 6, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />The nuance with a potential request from Perf-form Products <br />centers around what triggers the need for a public hearing to <br />amend an existing TIF Plan. Previously, TIF funds have been <br />expended without a public hearing. An example here is the <br />infrastructure improvements to the Industrial Park 2nd <br />Addition. With other expenditures from Districts No. 1 and No. <br />3, staff has gone through the public hearing process found in <br />the Tax Increment Act. Examples here include the Chuba project <br />and the City-EDA acquisition of the Main Street redevelopment <br />site. <br /> <br />Staff has reviewed the general terms of the Perf-form Products <br />expansion with the City Attorney. Based on the company <br />providing staff with information on "eligible expenditures", <br />the attorney agreed to determine whether or not a public <br />hearing would be required. <br /> <br />The fundamental question, however, is whether the EDA and City <br />Council desires to assist a project utilizing this process. As <br />a result, direction is sought from the EDA with the expectation <br />that it would forward a recommendation on to the City Council. <br /> <br />As with all requests for City incentives, the applicant must <br />submit financial records and make projections which help ensure <br />the applicant is a credit worthy risk. <br />