Laserfiche WebLink
Resolution <br />Board of <br />e amsery. oanCommrssioners <br />Presented By Commissioner Schaber <br />Attention: <br />Date September 13, 1982 No. 82 -734 <br />Page Two - continued <br />making negotiated recoupment either a total or partial <br />requirement for every tax increment project. Starting with <br />the premise that the municipality should eventually recoup <br />all or part of its subsidy, with the timing and amount of <br />recoupment determined by a project's profitability, a more <br />selective use of tax increment financing would occur. The <br />recoupment plan could include alternatives such as repayment <br />to the city very quickly or only when and if the project is <br />sold; municipally retained ownership of the land and recouping <br />expenses through lease arrangements; or the developer allowing <br />the municipality to be partial owners of the development. <br />Municipalities are encouraged to develop tax increment plans <br />as part of their capital improvement planning and budgeting <br />processes to insure that their goals are accomplished in a <br />systematic way. Since a municipality's capacity to carry <br />bonded debt is limited, so is its ability to use tax increment <br />financing. As part of its debt management process, the munici- <br />pality should decide what portion of its bonded debt it wishes <br />to allocate to tax increment bonds. That portion should then <br />be tentatively allocated to various activities deemed appropriate <br />recipients of tax increment resources. Resulting development <br />projects could then be considered on how they relate to the <br />previously identified needs of the municipality. <br />Page 41 <br />ROBERT J. ORTH, Cha.ihman <br />