07-14-03 Community & Economic Development

Home Browse Search

July 14, 2003 Page 3 No. 03-68 be recommended favorably to Council. The motion passed. Under unfinished business, Council Member King advised the Committee that he has reviewed the annual report prepared by Mr. Beitzinger addressing tax abatements granted by the City. He noted that he has found that several have presented data which shows that in the areas of job creation and/or estimated dollar investment that they have not been met their goals as set forth in their petition for abatement. He noted that there is a state form which requires a finding of whether the applicants are in compliance. Between 10-14 companies have not met their commitments, with some having fewer jobs now than the number they had when they requested abatement. Council Member King noted that the entire Council needs to review the data. He added that Mr. Beitzinger has received materials from the City of Indianapolis as to how they handle such situations. Council Member King suggested that Mr. Beitzinger present data to the Committee on each of these companies which appear not to have met their commitments, since such information cannot be ignored. The Council Attorney noted that she would provide a copy of the governing state law to the Council prior to the 7 p.m. Council meeting. [Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-5.9 Determination of Substantial Compliance with State of Benefits; Notice of Noncompliance; Hearing; Resolution; Appeal} (copy attached). Council Member Kelly suggested that the Council get the information and then bring in representatives from the companies. He noted that some of them may have good reasons. Dr. Varner suggested that the Council receive a summary from Mike Beitzinger and a spread sheet with regard to the categories. Council President White noted that she agrees with the remarks which have been made by Council Members King, Kelly and Varner. She noted that it is a matter of accountability. Information should be given to all Council Members and have adequate time to review the information. She concluded her remarks by stating the Council cannot ignore such information. Council Member Coleman added that some work could be done at the Committee level with recommendations being made to the entire Council. Council Member King gave an example of one company which had 94 employees when petitioning for abatement; that it stated it would create 14 new jobs and now has 8 0 employees. He added that of the fourteen (14) abatements which may be in non-compliance that ten(10)companies are involved. Council Member Pfeifer noted that in some situations it may be a matter of inflated figures when petitioning the Council for abatement. There should be repercussions for not meeting stated goals. Council Member Aranowski suggested that there be one (1) meeting where all of the company representatives are given the opportunity to present their case. Council Member Kirsits suggested that if all representatives are required to appear at one meeting that it-be-held on a non-Council meeting date.