Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br /> Regular Meeting—August 28, 2014 <br /> • 6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.) <br /> B. Northeast Neighborhood Development Area <br /> (1) continued <br /> in 2014). Part of the value of TIF is its ability to be responsive to business opportunities as <br /> they present themselves. <br /> Mr. Inks concurred but wondered if there would be value in deciding up front that the first <br /> "x"amount would be used by Redevelopment, but the remainder be released to other <br /> jurisdictions. <br /> Mr. Ford agreed that this issue should be part of the conversation on City finances—cannot <br /> think of TIF in isolation. So, if there are ways we can address all City needs together <br /> particularly items relating to economic development—such as infrastructure costs—we <br /> certainly are willing to do so in the name of fiscal stewardship. <br /> Mr. Rompola added the AV which is created can sometimes be used as an incentive for <br /> creating the AV in the first place—as was done in the South Side Development Area. <br /> Dr. Varner stated this is the kind of discussion needed. To the administration's credit, we are <br /> • currently using a benchmark of approximately 15% for the maximum City investment in <br /> projects. An additional discussion needs to include items such as: should we use TIF to <br /> support a project that's in the pipeline or use TIF to drive projects which are not there yet. <br /> One is a direct benefit,the other is speculative in nature. Historically, cities do not seem to <br /> be too good at speculation. And, if we decide we are using the funds exclusively for the <br /> direct benefit project then we could look at capping the TIF as suggested by Mr. Inks. <br /> Initially,Redevelopment was set up to spend bond proceeds as approved by Council or grant <br /> money, etc.,not necessarily to approve speculative projects. All these issues are part of the <br /> discussion which needs to occur—which is why he believes the proposed timeline is <br /> constrained. <br /> Consideration of Resolution No.3228—Upon motion by Mr. Downes, seconded by Mr. Inks <br /> and a majority approval, the Commission approved Resolution No. 3228 designating and <br /> declaring certain areas as redevelopment areas and adding certain territory from the South <br /> Bend Central Development Area for the purpose of amending the boundaries of the <br /> Northeast Neighborhood Development Area and the Northeast Neighborhood Development <br /> Area Allocation Area No. 1 and approving an amendment to the Development Plan for said <br /> area. Ms. Schey cast a dissenting vote stating that it is because the geographic area of the <br /> TIF has increased. She looks forward to the continuing discussion on the matter and may <br /> change her mind at her later opportunities to vote on the issue. <br /> • <br /> 8 <br />