My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 01-16-81
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1981
>
RM 01-16-81
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 4:06:36 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 11:27:42 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br />Regular Me ting - January 16, 1981 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS <br />f. continued... <br />Mr. Cira: This wouldn't be an increase in taxes, <br />would it? <br />Mr. Butler: It is a terrific device. We, of course, <br />are on the ground floor in Indiana, and we have test <br />litigation now before the courts. The statute was <br />ap roved by the Circuit Court here and now is going <br />th ough the appeal process. In other communities in <br />of er states where this has been utilized it has been <br />ve y effective for purposes of making the necessary <br />im rovements. <br />Mr. McMahon: Right now we have nearly every city in <br />th2 State supporting us with regard to the court pro - <br />ce s we are going through. <br />Mr. Butler: I think that again commendation is due <br />for- the City Officials and the Commission for having <br />again been first in line in the State of Indiana to <br />utilize and now the other communities recognize its' <br />im ortance. <br />Mr. Nimtz: Fort Wayne joined with us at that time to <br />get it to the Legislature. <br />Mr Butler: The City, the South Bend Community School <br />Co poration, TRANSPO, the other taxing units that re- <br />ceive tax dollars, all, of course, have an interest.. <br />Th law suit on file'is being brought by one of those <br />to ing units (TRANSPO), as well as by taxpayers. <br />Mr. McMahon: The rationale is that over the long range <br />they will benefit. <br />Ms Derbeck: Have you gotten any new information about <br />how soon you can expect a ruling from the Supreme Court <br />on the litigation? <br />Mr. Butler: No. At one point we were anticipating <br />that it would be April, and now I would think that it <br />will probably be May or June. I think the motion to <br />co rect errors has been filed with the Circuit Court, <br />that is the next step. Once the motion to correct <br />er ors is denied, then the plaintiffs are open to file <br />th appeal. <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.