Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-84 Human Resources & Economic Development alnn it ttnn Er port • 1hi tl7c Grimm Counrtl of Up 01tti� of Etnid11 Pnd: HUMAN RESOURCES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE The June 25, 1984 meeting .of the Human Resources and Economic Development Committee was called to order by its chairman, Eugenia Braboy at 4: 30 p.m, in the Council informal meeting room. • Persons in attendance included Councilmen Serge, Braboy, Beck, Puzzello, Taylor, Zakrzewski, Crone, Paszek, and Voorde; Jon Hunt, Irene Gammon, JoAnn Harper, Colleen Rosenfeld, Ann Kolata, and Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand and Mayor Parent. • Councilman Braboy noted that the purpose of today' s meeting was to continue the discussion of the tax abatement procedures. She noted that the Department of Redevelopment recently sent packets to each of the Councilmen which included the annual report, the SIC Code listings, copies of ordinances from various other cities, and a map of the existing tax abatement impact areas and a map with proposed impact areas. Ann Kolata, briefly reviewed her memo dated June 19, 1984. She noted that the tax abatement annual report summarizes information received from various owners who are receiving personal and/or real property tax abatement. She noted that there .were various discrepancies H and inconsistencies-- in the information received. It was suggested that any new instructions include that the petitioner must file the necessary documents with the County Auditor. She also noted that several recommendations have been suggested by the Department of Economic Development. These include maintaining the SIC codes (15-39 and 42) . They also requested abatement in targeted areas and the elimination of the Airport Industrial Park. They would recommend elimination of the 100 job requirement.They would recommend a penalty of not more than $1, 000. 00 for failure to file- the annual tax abatement report. The staff further recommended that certain targeted areas as shown on the map be proposed and that such areas be reviewed every two years. Councilman Taylor voiced strong opposition against the negative overtones suggested by the $1,000 fine. He felt that the Council was "Stuck in ideoaog-y"_; " instead of trying to use tax abatement as an incentive for new businesses and jobs. Councilman Voorde noted that the annual report requirement was included last year in the hope of bringing accountability when reviewing the entire tax abatement program. He noted that the Council should review the necessity of this report and voiced oppositon to the fine proposal. Councilman Crone noted that the amount of taxes abated was not included in the report and suggested that it should be. The staff then reviewed the maps outlining the existing and proposed tax abatement areas. Those outlined in blue were the redevelopment areas, those outlined in red were the existing tax abatement impact areas, and those outlined in green were the recommended new areas. Councilman Voorde thought that the elimination- of the airport industrial park as a geographic area would be possible since businesses should qualify under the SIC codes. Councilman Puzzello noted that she could not ►A[[ •A[[[ IV[l1[MIM•CO. 'Page 2. support tax abatement for restaurants which would be within a tax abatement area since they would be in direct competition with those that are located elsewhere. Councilman Taylor was concerned that the Miami Street area was not included. Councilman Voorde spoke against retail and commercial - projects receiving tax abatement. • Councilman Braboy noted that in Philadelphia they are revitalizing commercial and industrial areas throughout the City. There is a particular ei asi.son the revitalizaton of older parts of the City and and emphasis on technical assistance for small businesses_ She noted that she brought back several documents explaining their program which she planned to. review. Irene Gammon stated that South Bend needs jobs whether they be industrial, commercial, etc. She thought that the financial value should ' be carefully reviewed. Councilman Voorde noted that there was a significant difference between the amount of revenue generated in commercial jobs versus industrial and manufacturing jobs. Councilman Beck noted that abatement in Philadelphia is for five years. She also noted that tax abatement in and of itself deserves a more positive pitch from the City and that it ,was not the only reason for the recent drop in assessed valuation. This point was concurred by Jon Hunt. Councilman Crone questioned whether the department' s proposals would include tax abatement only for those meeting certain SIC codes or being located within a tax abatement impact area. She was advised that this was correct. She then asked what the criteria would be for. determinng whether a business qualified for tax abatement if it would be within a geographic area. There was much discussion on this point, however no consensus was reached. Several Councilmen voiced support of commercial establishments receiving abatement and others spoke against it. Councilman Crone thought that the Council must again evaluate what the real purpose of what tax abatement should be.. Councilman Braboy asked how much revenue the City has lost through its ' tax- abatement program and specifically questioned what effect it has had on the tax base. Mayor Parent noted that this would be difficult to answer however he believed that many projects would not have gone forward but for the tax abatement program. • Councilman Braboy requested that each Councilman review the maps and all of the information recently received so that they -could bring their suggestions to the next committee meeting. Councilman Taylor also requested that each Councilman; carefully .review all of 'the areas -within their Councilmanic Districts for possible impact areas., • Councilman Beck made a. motion. secondedby • Councilman Taylor that the meeting be`adjourned. The meeting' was adjourned at 5:35 p.m. • Respectfully submitted, Eugenia Braboy, Chairman