CCMin_95Apr12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes ti April 12, 1995 Page 6 Wellington stated that this proposal will not put taxpayers at risk because TIF funds would be used defease the bonds and terminate the assessment agreement. Councilmember Jacobs thanked Mr. Wellington for the improvements that he has made to the appearance of Falcon Crossing. Jacobs commented that he is impressed with Mr. Wellington's entrepreneurial spirit but that he is also impressed with the fact that Mr. Wellington bought a retail building for 5330,000 when Mr. Wellington's appraisal gave it a value of 5749,000. Jacobs also noted that some tenants have recently moved from across the street to Falcon Crossing and therefore, the rents and relative commercial. space must be somewhat competitive. He noted that Mr. Wellington chose not to release rent rates to the city when requested and that when the property was purchased in July 1994, Mr. Wellington knew what the taxes were, he knew it was in a TIF district, and he had been told by the City Administrator that it was unlikely that the city could find a public purpose to amend the assessment agreement. Jacobs stated that if the assessment agreement is terminated, the city stands to lose 5650,000 and Mr. Wellington stands to gain over 5414,000. Finally, Jacobs said that at this time he doesn't believe Mr. Wellington will allow the property to deteriorate and that the tenants will stay even if the city does nothing. Jacobs concluded by asking Mr. Wellington "What's really in this for the city?" Mr. Wellington replied that his building's appraisal was done without information about the TIF and debt arrangements, so it is really not reflective of the buildings value. He chose not to release rent information to the city because it would become public information that his competitors would use against him. Councilmember Gibson Talbot commented that, in her mind, there is a single policy question: "What is the benefit to the public?". She noted that she can't find any specific public good in the current proposal as presented. She agreed with Councilmember Jacobs' appreciation for the site improvements done and the quality of tenants attracted thus far. Other individual assessment amounts have not been reduced and it would not be fair to reduce this one unless a positive public good can be served. Mr. Long asked the council if they felt that Larpenteur Avenue improvements would be the best use of this money when compared to what the county and school district could do with the funds. He said that he believes that TIF itself is questionable as a public policy tool since it redirects taxes from counties and school districts and gives them to cities for development projects. Councilmember Gehrz remarked that the future of TIF is an unknown -the legislature might change the use rules, for example. Gehrz said that she would be open to looking at a new proposal in the future, but that she could not support the proposal presently before the council. The city council is responsible to all city taxpayers.