Laserfiche WebLink
South Bed Redevelopment Commission <br />Special �eeting - June 12, 1980 <br />6. NEW OUSINESS <br />b. Mr. Butler continues.... <br />ck to us for re- consideration. <br />. Nimtz: The City Council can <br />whatever they want to. <br />r. Ellison: I do think that the City <br />ouncil will have to in any event <br />ake a finding which suggests that <br />onditions that the statute require <br />o exist. That has to happen first <br />efore you can proceed further in <br />he process. If in fact the Common <br />ouncil's intent was to look at <br />broad area then I presume the <br />uman Resources Committee would <br />to that and would come to its own <br />'inding. <br />Hr. Szarwark: The problem is that if <br />this committee gives a negative vote <br />on it, I would think that tax abatement <br />probably would be dead, because certainly <br />the Common Council has decided to look <br />to this group as a body of expertise <br />when it comes to the quality of neighbor- <br />hoods and the quality of land with the <br />City. If you take.a look at the procedures <br />for tax abatement, it is long and involved <br />but it is fairly precise. This group <br />is looked upon as having a body of <br />expertise with respect to specific <br />quality of the environment, of the <br />neighborhood, and of land within the <br />City. Area Plan is looked upon as having <br />a body of expertise in terms of the <br />overall land use. It might be that a <br />piece of property is very badly <br />delapidated and should be redeveloped <br />but not in a particular way that <br />somebody is proposing. For example, <br />building a smelting plant in downtown <br />South Bend. On the other hand, the <br />Human Resources Committee presumably <br />was put in the process because it has <br />the duty of laying benefits weighing <br />benefits to be done by the Redevelopment <br />against the taxpayer's cost. I think <br />that if you had a negative report from <br />11 <br />