Rosalind Nelson takes note of Duke Powell�s comment:
> >Over the years local governments have found that,
instead of retiring the TIF District after 10 years,
it was quite attractive to "re-up" it and treat the
resulting revenues as "found money." These monies have
been used to fund pet projects that have frequently
involved beautification projects. >>
and asks:
> Do other people agree with this evaluation? Ever
since Kathy Thurber said in her withdrawel letter
�Tax Increment Financing funds the NRP. It's that
simple," I've been trying to figure out the
relationship >.
[TB] I don�t think Duke�s comment and Kathy�s remarks
are entirely related. Yes, municipalities have
extended TIF districts and used money well outside the
purpose of the original district. This is nowhere
unique to Minneapolis, it happens all over the state.
It is one of the reasons that the life of the
districts needs to be limited. TIF is intended to be
a development tool, not a development tool plus
anything else that you can sneak in.
There was specific enabling legislation for NRP, the
relationship being that it is funded by a specific TIF
district(s). The enabling legislation included a
requirement that 50-some percent (54% sticks in my
mind, but I�m not sure on that) of the total program
be spent on �housing or housing related� items. The
first half of the 20 year NRP program did not meet the
percentage minimum so the 2nd half needs to make it
up, one of the reasons that money wouldn�t have been
available for some of the things that had been done
with NRP money before the tax changes.
What I haven�t seen anywhere is anything saying if the
54% requirement still exists and that basically all of
the 2nd half money needs to be spent on housing and
housing related items. I�m all for NRP being a
housing program, I�m much less excited about using NPR
money to fund rehab of someone�s garage in one of the
neighborhoods around Lake of the Isles because they
couldn�t find a house that needed/qualified for the
rehab money. Even in Minneapolis there are
neighborhoods that don�t need to be �revitalized� and
the money is much better spent in those that do. The
Policy Board (Mark Stenglein, Chair) needs to be sure
that the money is spent where it is needed. (BTW, why
wasn�t the Policy Board Chair over at the legislature
talking with the legislative committees that Mayor
Sayles-Belton didn�t bother to visit with?)
Terrell Brown
Loring Park
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS � Can anyone explain to my why a person who owns
multiple condominium units in a single downtown
building and rents those units to various tenants is
able to homestead those units thus receiving the much
lower homestead tax rate?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
