09/11/85 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I generated, an~ (b) poolin~ of ta~-increment districts', debt servioe through refinancin~ of bonds, as authorized in a special law adopted in 1984. Of oourse, the flexibility that has b~en available to city goverr~ents by 10colin] will be possible through use of redevelopment fund~. Require that the actual distribution of burd.e~, of tax-increment authorizations be made ~ublie--Gounty tax officials should be instructed to prepare public reports sh~rg the actual effect on all overlappir~ taxirg jurisdictions, inclu~irg the state, of tax-increment financing. This means that voters would be able to identify exactly how burdens would be distributed if a system of dire~ levies and aids were in existenue instead of tax-ir~rement financing. (S~. a detailed expl-natic~ on pa~e 29 of how bua~en is distributed. ) i I i I I I I I Bequire that cit~ administrative expenses be financed from sources other than tax-increment financirg~ reo0mmend that the Legislature prohibit city goverr~ents from usin9 tax-increment financing receipts to pay for salaries and related administrative expenses of city employees ha~4~ le certain responsibilities for tt~ projects. This means that the existirg practiee by which cities apportion a per~entage of the expense for %~rious city offices to the tax-increment projects would be disoontinu~d. Cities would be required to pay f~r such administrative expenses from other so/rces, such as their redevelop~nt funds or their general funds. This would i-e~m~ any possible incentive a city government might hav~ to oor~in~ to approve additional tax-increment projects as a way to provide re~.nue to b~lanue the city budget. ~ the provision in tax-increment finanu~ that allows property values to be kept artifi~ally hi~h~ recom~er~ that the Legislature repeal the right of city governments to obtain fro~ developers contractual pledges that keep property values in tax-imcr~ent districts at predetermined levels, even if the selling price of those properties happens to drop in oomirg years. Part of the risk in setting up a tax-ir~Irement district is that the estimated growth in taxes will be insufficient to pay the public exper~es in the district. Such estimates are made with the hope that property values will remain at certain le~ls. If for scme reason ~ market value of property drops in ocming years, the tax-increment district would 9enerate less revenue than anticipated. In anticipatic~ of such a possibility, existing law m~kes it possible for the city to instruct the assessor to keep values at initially determined levels, e%~_n though market conditions in ocmin9 years might call for a reduction in values. In turn the city is _ .~3,powered to obtain a pledge frum the developer not to cbal lethe the higher value durirg the contract period, even though this means property taxes will be higher than on c~e properties outside the tax-increment district. This is unsour~ from an economic star~int ar~ from an equity standpoint. I 5. Plan required~Ne recc~J~ that a~y city goverrm~nt desirir~ to help d~~s through its red~e~ fur~ or through tax-increment financin9 be required to adopt a city renewal plaru identifying selected geographic areas i where the.city anticipates providirg assistarme. Such a plan would be subject to periodxc modification. Tm intent of this approach is to emphasize renewal of existing urbanized areas, not new construction on raw lan~. Gonsequently, a I city gove~ent'.s renewal plan--to ~ke the city eligible for using a redeve~t fur~ or tax-increment financirg--shsuld be allowed to ~s