My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
11/02/2009 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2009
>
11/02/2009 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2014 11:41:41 AM
Creation date
5/28/2014 9:13:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
11/02/2009
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />• <br />• <br />If a TIF project calls for issuance of general obligations bonds, where the City's full faith <br />and credit is pledged, then City Council action is required. In fact the City itself must <br />issue the bonds and the EDA pledges the tax increment revenue back to the City in order <br />to pay debt service. <br />Also, keep in mind that the City still has its own development powers. That is, the City <br />could create its own tax increment districts, and use development powers under the <br />development district statute (Section 469.124 to 469.134). The only difference is that for <br />TIF districts that have been created by (or transferred to the EDA), the Council no longer <br />has control. <br />Abatement under Sections 469.1812 to 469.1815, by contrast, is a power given only to <br />the City Council. The EDA may make recommendations, but it has no powers to actually <br />approve an abatement. Likewise, only the City can issue abatement bonds (as in the case <br />of the bonds issued for the YMCA). <br />If the enabling resolution were revised to include non - council members on the EDA <br />board, and the resolution were not otherwise revised, the EDA would have the authority <br />to buy and sell land, and use tax increment revenues (for districts approved by the City <br />Council) without Council action. Moreover, the Council would have no authority to <br />direct the EDA to spend or not spend EDA money or undertake certain actions (other <br />than by amending the enabling resolution again to take EDA powers away). <br />However, when non - council members are added to the EDA board, the common practice <br />is to add some limitations on the EDA's activities in the enabling resolution. The most <br />typical limitation is to require City Council approval for issuance of any bonds by the <br />EDA. But this is entirely a matter for the City Council to decide. I am aware of at least <br />one City where the EDA board has a majority of non - council members, and virtually all <br />EDA actions (including all land acquisitions and contracts) require prior Council <br />approval. That type of enabling resolution means the EDA functions more like an <br />advisory body. <br />More common is a limited set of actions requiring Council approval. Following is an <br />example of some limitations used by one City: <br />6.01. The following limits apply to the EDA and its operation: <br />(a) The sale of bonds or other obligations of the EDA must be approved <br />by the City Council. <br />(b) The EDA must follow the budget process for City departments in <br />accordance with City policies, ordinances, and resolutions and the City charter. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.