Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/27/2006 - REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE AD HOC COMMITT DATE: June 27, 2006 WORK SESSION ITEM STAFF: Joe Frank URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Report and Recommendations from the Ad Hoc Committee Regarding Implementation of the Urban Renewal Authority. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED The Ad Hoc Committee and staff would like direction from the Commission on the following: 1. Does the Commission have comments or questions on the Final Report? 2. Is the Commission comfortable with the recommendations contained in the Final Report? 3. Is the Commission comfortable with the implementation strategy? BACKGROUND On February 21, 2006, the Urban Renewal Authority adopted Resolution No. 003 establishing an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Commissioners Karen Weitkunat, David Roy and Ben Manvel. The purpose of this Committee was to: "formulate recommendations to the Board regarding the most effective ways in which the Authority can collaborate with the City, the private sector, and other public entities to fully effectuate the purposes of the Authority and implement the Plan." Various staff and two members of the North College Citizen Advisory Group participated in the Committee's deliberations. A report and recommendations of the Committee was to be submitted by May 22. Attached is the Committee's Final Report and summary memo that includes background information,a description of practices of other Colorado URAs,and recommendations. Also attached is a schedule of implementation actions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo to the Commission, from the URA Ad Hoc Committee, dated May 22, 2006. 2. Report entitled "Discussion Papers — URA Issues and Recommendations, dated May 22, 2006. 3. Implementation schedule. 4. Memo from Chuck Seest to Joe Frank dated June 16, 2006. 5. Powerpoint presentation. Community Planning and Environmental Services ATTACHMENT 1 Advance Planning Deparhment City of Fort Collins May 22, 2006 TO: Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority FROM: URA Ad Hoc Committee Ben Manvel David Roy Karen Weitkunat Darin Atteberry, City Manager Greg Byrne, CPES Director C b. t^'� Joe Frank, Advance Planning Direct RE: Recommendations Regarding Impl entation of the Urban Renewal Authority On February 21, 2006, the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority passed and adopted a resolution (see Attachment #1) establishing an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Commissioners Karen Weitkunat, David Roy and Ben Manvel. The purpose of this Committee was to: "formulate recommendations to the Board regarding the most effective ways in which the Authority can collaborate with the City, the private sector, and other public entities to fully effectuate the purposes of the Authority and implement the Plan." A report and recommendations of the Committee was to be submitted within 90 days (May 22) of the date of the resolution. Attached is the Committee's Final Report. Various City staff and two members (Ron Lautzenheiser and Dean Hoag) of the North College Urban Renewal Plan Citizen Advisory Group also participated in the Committee's deliberations. A work plan (see Attachment#2) guided the Commission's discussions and schedule. The Committee met on two occasions to discuss the issues, provide direction to staff, and review draft reports. Each of the issues in the Final Report includes background, a description of practices of other Colorado URAs regarding this issue, and a Committee/staff recommendation. It is important to note that the recommendations contained in the Final Report, particularly those regarding the North College Urban Renewal Plan area, are in the Committee's and staff's best judgment the wisest choice in response to the needs of the URA considering the current capacity (both financial and staff) and the start-up stage of the URA. As time passes, and as the capacity of the URA increases, or as new Urban Renewal Plan (URP) areas are adopted, it is expected that these choices will change. Hence, the Committee is recommending that within five years, the Commission undertake a similar process to reconsider these issues. 281 North College Avenue • P.O.Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6376 FAX(970)224-6111 • TDD(970)224-6002 • E-mail:aplanning@fcgov.com Recommendation In summary, the recommendations contained in the Final Report are as follows; 1. Role(s) the URA should play to assist private sector development First, there is no universal recommendation except to carefully tailor the URAs roles to specific, unique Urban Renewal Plan (URP) areas. For the North College URP area, the Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommends that the role of the URA during this initial start-up phase (next five years or so) be limited to the following primary roles until such time as the URA has a larger tax increment revenue stream that allows an expanded role. • Use a portion of any tax increment to stimulate and leverage development projects by providing TIF assistance in response to proposals from businesses and developers. • Set aside the remaining portion of tax increment revenues to accrue until an unencumbered Tax Increment revenue stream is established well enough to allow the URA to proactively undertake planned area-wide public capital improvements. These overall roles include some basic operational roles: Work collaboratively with private owners and developers to solve problems. Bring the necessary parties to the table to facilitate private projects and plan public capital improvements meeting the objectives of the urban renewal plan. Proactively market and recruit desirable uses to the area. Consider outside grants that facilitate improvements meeting the objectives of the urban renewal plan. As the North College URP Tax Increment revenues grows and the program matures, other, expanded roles should be considered such as assembling property for new development and public purposes, and revolving loan programs to improve older buildings 2. Calculation of the Tax Increment This issue should be determined for each Urban Renewal Plan on a case by case basis. The issue would ultimately be decided in negotiation with the County on any Urban Renewal Plan. The Ad Hoc Committee and City staff recommends the "hybrid interpretation" for the North College URP area. Given the sizeable storm water facility investment made by the City to mitigate the floodway in the North College area, the URA should jointly negotiate an arrangement with Larimer County that allows the URA to receive the market appreciation on real property associated with parcels in the floodway. The URA would continue to capture the increment on properties outside the floodway per the "DDA interpretation". 3. Vision and Mission of the URA, including policies and criteria for spending Tax Increment The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommend adoption of the Mission Statement and policies described in Attachment #5. 4. Administrative procedures for reviewing applications for TIF The Ad Hoc Committee, staff, and NCCAG recommend that the Commission agree with the process for reviewing applications for TIF, and accept the Application Form (Attachment #6) and Score Card (Attachment#7). 5. Relationship between the City and URA in regards to staffing, financial support and other matters The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommends that a formal general "umbrella" IGA be entered into between the City and the URA which will govern the various topics listed below and will include the possibility of supplemental IGAs for individual projects and the funding thereof. • The IGA should recognize the URA as a separate legal entity with its own set of bylaws and the IGA should establish that the URA Commission shall be governed by the ethical rules applicable to the City Council. • The staff and legal services for the URA should be provided by the City and the IGA should also state that the City Manager or his designee shall be the executive director. • The IGA should contain provisions which allow for the City Council to require the URA to reasonably compensate the City for its costs in providing staff and executive director services at such time that the City Council determines that the URA has a sufficient funding source to make such reimbursement. The details regarding how "reasonable compensation" should be defined were generally discussed by the Ad Hoc Committee and will need further discussion and direction from the City Council as the IGA is drafted. • The IGA should provide that the sales tax increment will accrue to the City with the expectation that the City may share the sales tax increment with the URA for specific projects on a case-by-case basis, to be decided by the City Council under established criteria. 6. Composition of the Commission of the URA The Ad Hoc Committee and City staff recommends that Council should continue as the Commission of the URA. This role should be reconsidered as the URA adds new Urban Renewal Plan areas. 7. Role of the North College Citizen Advisory Group in the Activities of the URA. The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommend that NCCAG continue to fulfill the roles as outlined in Attachment#11. ATTACHMENT 2 w. n r b. .I 9. Discussion Papers - URA Issues and Recommendations May 22, 2006 1 . URA Roles in Private Development Lead: Clark Mapes Outcome: Written recommendations for roles of the URA in assisting private development. Issue What roles should the Fort Collins URA play to assist private sector development? Background Colorado's Urban Renewal Law enables very wide latitude in the operation of URAs to accomplish revitalization of blighted Urban Renewal Plan areas. C.R.S. 31-25-105 states: Every authority has all the powers necessary or convenient to carry out the purposes of [the Urban Renewal Law]"...followed by a broad listing of examples of such powers. Accordingly, the numerous URAs around Colorado operate differently. However, they all do so within a general framework of roles as catalyst, financial partner, advisor and participant in a variety of efforts to foster sound development and redevelopment in urban renewal areas. Tax increment financing (TIF) is the common thread through all URAs. All URAs focus on public benefits when they play these roles. The use of TIF is usually related to improvements of a public, physical nature. Most common are street, highway, and other vehicular circulation improvements, utilities, sidewalks and streetscapes, plazas, sculpture and landscaping programs, parking structures, parking lots and public restrooms. URAs participate in these improvements by working with private developers on a project by project basis; or more rarely, by proactively funding area-wide public improvements. With respect to TIF, Colorado law is identical for DDAs and URAs; so the Fort Collins DDA is fair game as a reference when considering TIF as a role of the URA. Other URA Practices In March and April 2006, staff reviewed web sites and spoke to other URAs by phone to get a good sense of the range of roles played. Roles are listed below in general order from most common to least common among Authorities: Work collaboratively with private developers on specific projects, either by: 1) issuing a formal request for proposals for major centerpiece projects on specific sites; or 2) providing TIF assistance in reaction to owners or developers who propose projects within an URP area. The former approach appears most common—that is, proactively targeting significant, site specific projects. 1 Of the few URAs that take the latter approach of designating an area and then reacting to project proposals, Denver authorizes TIF only for individual projects within the URP area, so that each project gets the full 25 years worth of TIF. In essence, the URP areas have an indefinite lifespan rather than a 25-year total lifespan as is the case of the North College URP and the DDA as well (the DDAs 25-year TIF period was actually extended to 30 years by the State legislature.) Participate in projects where site acquisition, clearance, rehabilitation, remediation, conservation, development, redevelopment or a combination thereof is necessary and beyond the abilities of the private market acting alone. Accrue TI revenues to undertake area-wide public capital improvements not directly related to a specific private project. Bring the necessary parties to the table to facilitate projects meeting the objectives of the respective urban renewal plan. Buy and sell property for new development and public purposes, to guide key uses to optimal locations and prevent undesirable uses from locating on key sites. Improve older buildings with financial assistance for fire safety issues, ADA access, facades, and restrooms, typically to assist business expansion while conserving and updating buildings. Exercise eminent domain to facilitate projects—this includes friendly condemnations, leasehold interests, and other complex circumstances. • Provide relocation assistance for businesses and residents displaced by projects. • Undertake a variety of less dramatic, but worthwhile, endeavors including sidewalk cleaning, sculpture themes, landscape themes, banners, and Christmas lighting. Creation of historic districts. • Management of federal CDBG and HOME grants received annually by cities for housing programs. In general, URAs emphasize proactive, strategic targeting of specific projects. Most commonly, URAs seek significant projects, generating significant tax increment, to help cover the costs of transforming blighted areas by adding public infrastructure and increased economic activity. The practice of designating areas, and then responding to proposals from developers and businesses, including modest projects, is less common. This practice appears best suited to areas where much of the general pattern of existing development is expected to remain intact. Some URAs do both—that is, they proactively solicit or pursue strategic projects and also consider requests from individual developers and businesses. This balancing act requires careful attention to multiple obligations placed on the TI revenue stream. 2 Recommendation First, there is no universal recommendation except to carefully tailor the URAs roles to specific, unique URP areas. For the North College URP area, the Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommends that the role of the URA during this initial start-up phase (next five years or so) be limited to the following primary roles until such time as the URA has a larger tax increment revenue stream that allows an expanded role. • Use a portion of any tax increment to stimulate and leverage development projects by providing TIF assistance in response to proposals from businesses and developers. • Set aside the remaining portion of tax increment revenues to accrue until an unencumbered Tax Increment revenue stream is established well enough to allow the URA to proactively undertake planned area-wide public capital improvements. These overall roles include some basic operational roles: • Work collaboratively with private owners and developers to solve problems. • Bring the necessary parties to the table to facilitate private projects and plan public capital improvements meeting the objectives of the urban renewal plan. • Proactively market and recruit desirable uses to the area. • Consider outside grants that facilitate improvements meeting the objectives of the urban renewal plan. As the North College URP Tax Increment revenues grows and the program matures, other, expanded roles should be considered such as assembling property for new development and public purposes, and revolving loan programs to improve existing buildings. 3 2. Calculation of Property Tax Increment Lead: Clark Mapes Outcome: Written recommendations for how to calculate tax increment. Issue How should property tax increment be calculated/negotiated with the County Assessor's Office? Background Colorado's Urban Renewal Law has been subject to a degree of interpretation and debate regarding exactly how to calculate the property tax increment that accrues to a URA. The concept is simple: when an Urban Renewal Plan (URP) is adopted, the taxable value of all property within the plan area is identified. This value is referred to as the base. Taxes on the base continue to go to all taxing entities the same as if the URA did not exist. After the URP is adopted, increasing tax revenues from increasing taxable value are divided between biannual adjustments to the base, and an increment which accrues to the URA. Increasing taxable value within an URP area is presumed to be a given, and typically does occur due to: 1) private, taxable improvements to property; 2) public actions in the URP area such as infrastructure improvements, rezoning, and even the general public expression of support; and 3) from the general increase in market value based on demand not necessarily associated with circumstances in the URP area. The debate is over how much of 2) and 3) should be above assigned to the base versus the increment. Thus, the simple idea proves to be extremely complex in practice, requiring clarification with the County Assessors Office and careful documentation. Two Main Interpretations in the Debate To summarize the debate, there are two main interpretations. First, throughout ongoing debates over what the increment consists of, one interpretation has been clear, whether "right" or "wrong": the interpretation that has been used by the Fort Collins DDA for the past 25 years or so (DDA and URA tax increment provisions are identical). The "DDA interpretation" fits with instructions from the State Department of Local Affairs, and analysts at the Larimer County Assessors Office have been familiar with it for years. Under this interpretation, the increased property tax resulting from 1) taxable new improvements to private property are captured by the URA. Subsequent appreciation on those specific improvements over time is also captured by the URA. The bottom line is that increment results only from specific taxable construction identified on a parcel by parcel basis. 4 The increments from all improved parcels are then totaled into an overall increment for the whole URP area. Second, a new interpretation has recently surfaced in Larimer County: a one-of-a-kind 'Centerra interpretation', which analysts at the Assessors office have been directed to use in that one particular URP area. Here's what they do: In the biannual reassessment process, the Assessor applies the county- wide average general % increase in market value based on demand, for all property in the county, to the base. This general market increase is referred to as the Larimer County Average, or LCA. Any and all additional increase in value of property in the plan area, regardless of cause, is assigned as increment, whether or not any taxable construction has occurred. Again, the concept is simple. This approach allows Centerra to capture increases in value created by public improvements, rezoning, the show of public support, marketing, or any other factor, in addition to value created by taxable private improvements. The underlying assumption is that the plan area will increase in value due to general market demand more than the county as a whole. Because the starting base value was for vacant and agricultural land, this has already proven to be a safe assumption as the area develops and becomes more desirable. The financial implications of this approach for North College is extremely complicated. And even IF the URA wanted to pursue this, it would need to negotiate with and convince the County Attorneys as Centerra did. The County is not necessarily simply offering this Centerra approach as an option to be selected for other URPs. A significant question for the URA would be whether the North College area will increase in value due to general market demand more than the LCA. While any answer would be speculative, it appears to be a somewhat risky assumption. If increased land values due to 2) and 3) above proved to be less than the LCA increases, the URA could lose any increment that otherwise would have accrued from under the "DA interpretation" that is, increment from 1) above -- actual taxable improvements in the area. One other aspect of any property tax increment is that 11% of any increment captured by the URA would have otherwise gone to the City, IF one assumes the increased valuations would have been the same without the URA. In other words, if the URA were to pursue a greater share of appreciation, there would be a financial impact on the City along with other taxing entities. Possible Third New 'North College' Interpretation in the Debate There has been interest expressed by the Ad Hoc Committee and City staff, in a new, third interpretation unique to the floodplain circumstances of North College. Staff has conceived such an approach, which could be characterized as a "hybrid interpretation" based on both the Centerra and DDA interpretations above. 5 The driving principle is that the URA should be allowed to capture any increases in general market value of land, above the LCA, for those properties which are now located in the Dry Creek Floodplain but will soon be removed due to expensive public infrastructure improvements to the URP area, The reasoning is that such increases in market value would clearly be related to circumstances in the URP area rather than general Larimer County market increases. The reason this could potentially be beneficial to the URA is because property values have been depressed by the floodplain; and as values adjust to removal of the floodplain, the % increases may exceed the LCA. Implementation of the concept would involve identifying the base value of property in the floodplain, and then if the general market value increases of property within the floodway exceed the LCA, the URA would capture the increment. The URA would continue to capture the increment on properties outside the floodway per the DDA interpretation. Projecting the difference between the three interpretations for North College has been a somewhat mind bending exercise in speculation about future appreciation. And, it comes with big caveats. Staff has done some preliminary TIF projections for the North College URA Plan area (see Attachment#3). The North College Avenue Urban Renewal Plan is written in such general terms as to allow either method. Other URA Practices One thing is clear among all URAs: the bottom line is that a URA needs to reach agreement with the County Assessor's Office through confirmation of the terms of standard practice or through discussion and negotiation on some adjustment to standard practice. Anecdotal information indicates that the Denver URA, City and County of Denver, for example, have a good working relationship with each other and also with a coterminous school district, and as a result they have negotiated variations to facilitate different Urban Renewal Plans for certain areas. Likewise, here in Larimer County, Loveland now has two different URP areas with two different approaches based on agreement with the County. Recommendation This issue should be determined for each Urban Renewal Plan on a case by case basis. The issue would ultimately be decided in negotiation with the County on any Urban Renewal Plan. The Ad Hoc Committee and City staff recommends the "hybrid interpretation" for the North College URP area. Given the sizeable storm water facility investment made by the City to mitigate the floodway in the North College area, the URA should jointly negotiate an arrangement with Larimer County that allows the URA to receive the market appreciation on real property associated with parcels in the floodway. 6 3. Vision and Mission of the URA, and, Policies for Spending Tax Increment, including: • Criteria and policies for providing Tax Increment Financing to stimulate private sector capital investment (e.g. types of development, loans versus grants, reserves and use of sales tax). • Criteria and policies for funding public improvement projects (not associated with any private sector development). Lead: Clark Mapes, Chuck Seest Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices"of other URA's. b. Written recommendation of mission, vision and policies. Issue What overall mission and policies should guide the URA as it evaluates how the tax increment financing is spent within existing and future urban renewal plan (URP) areas? Background Over the past few months, the URA Staff Team and the NCCAG have been preparing a mission statement, general (URA-wide) policies, and policies specific for the North College URP. The draft description of the Mission of the area-wide URA is as follows: The Mission of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is to remedy blight by stimulating and leveraging private capital investment, using tax increment financing in private development projects and public improvement projects. The URA functions as a catalyst, partner, advisor and participant to foster sound growth and redevelopment. The "vision" for the URA should be tailored to specific URP areas. For North College, the vision is contained in the North College Avenue Corridor Plan (1995) (see Attachment#4). The URA Staff Team and the CAG have also prepared draft policies for how the URA should consider using tax increment financing URA-wide, as well as policies specific to the North College URP. Other URA Practices Based upon discussions with various URAs and a review of their related websites, staff noted the following criteria and policies to stimulate private investment: • the project is identified as a significant beneficial use which enhances the image, economy, and appeal of the URA Plan Area • the project involves the retention or expansion of existing businesses offering primary jobs or unique offerings that complement the desired business mix 7 • the project will have significant economic benefit to the area • the project has not previously been funded by the URA • the project would use the best available technologies and practices for renewable energy and/or energy efficiency • the project would give local contractors an opportunity to bid on the project • the project is not for expenditures already made or committed • the project is not in negotiations regarding a purchase price unreasonably in excess of market rates • the project is scheduled for completion within three years • the project's primary source of funding is not contingent upon participation by the URA in the project • the project does not require the URA to hold title to an asset that is not a public improvement (i.e. sale and leaseback arrangement) • the project cannot use URA funds for debt retirement or operating expenses • the project cannot use URA funds to support individuals or personal use Criteria and policies to stimulate public infrastructure: • the project generates infrastructure that serves other development and redevelopment sites, facilitating further improvements in the area • the project provides enhancements and amenities that benefit the public such as streetscapes, enhanced architecture and building materials, special site improvements, etc • the project requires site clearance or site acquisition • the project requires the removal of hazardous materials or conditions • cannot be used for public buildings Recommendation The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommend adoption of the Mission Statement and policies described in Attachment #5. The recommended Mission Statement and all of the policies are wholly consistent with the practices of other URAs, and are apparently more formal and detailed than what most URAs have. 8 4. Administrative Procedures for TIF Lead: Joe Frank Outcome:a. Summary of`best practices"of other URAs. b. Written recommendation for TIF procedures. Issue Does the Commission accept the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee, URA staff and North College Citizen Advisory Group (NCCAG) regarding use of the attached Application and Score Card for receiving, reviewing and evaluating private sector applications for tax increment financing (TIF)? Is the Commission comfortable with the TIF review process? Are there other administrative procedures that the Commission wants to explore? Background Early on, it was decided that a formal process for submitting, reviewing and evaluating TIF applications was needed. The URA Team and NCCAG spent several months working on drafting the attached Application Form (see Attachment #6) and scoring sheet (see Attachment #7). The URA Staff Team and the NCCAG have been using both forms. The Application Form would be used URA-wide; and, the Score Card was developed specifically for use in the North College URP. The process for reviewing TIF applications is as follows: 1st Step: Pre-applications meetings and formal applications for Tax Increment Financing are initially screened and reviewed by the URA Staff Team (see Attachment #8). The staff assists applicants in preparing successful submissions e.g. compatibility with the Urban Renewal Plan and funding policies, completing the Application Form and Score Card, and determining supporting documentation for review by the NCCAG and Commission. The URA Staff Team makes a recommendation regarding funding the application. 2nd Step: Applications (and less frequently, pre-applications) are reviewed by the CAG. The NCCAG formulates a recommendation to the Commission. 3`d Step: The Commission makes a decision on the project. 4`" Step: Formal TIF agreements and other necessary budgetary actions are then prepared by the URA Staff Team, and adopted by the Commission or Council, as needed. The Commission has also formed a Finance Committee (a.k.a. Council Finance Committee) that will review and comment on general financial policies as it pertains to the administration of the URA. Application Form. The Application Form is required to be submitted by applicants for TIF. It provides general information about the applicant, project, TIF funding requested, and the relationship of the project to the goals and objectives of the Urban Renewal Plan. It has worked well so far. Score Card. The Score Card is intended to provide structure to and a tool for use by the NCCAG in their discussion and recommendation to the Commission on providing TIF to a specific project. The Score Card includes 11 criteria that are weighted according to their 9 importance relative to the other criterion. Points are then awarded for each criterion. The Score Card has proven to be a useful tool, but will be examined and refined as needed on an ongoing basis. Both the Application Form and Score Card are available for review and download on the City's URA website. Other URA Practices: Application forms are often used by other Colorado URAs. The recommended Application Form is based upon the "best' of these other applications forms. Scoring sheets and financial policies are far less frequently used by other URAs; rather, URAs seem to rely mostly on common sense, urban renewal plans, broad mission statements, State Statutes, etc. to make TIF decisions. Recommendation The Ad Hoc Committee, staff, and NCCAG recommend that the Commission agree to the process for reviewing applications for TIF and accept the use of the attached Application Form and Score Card. At some point in the future, the URA will need to prepare and adopt relocation policies and operations if the actions of the URA ever force the relocation of families and establishments from a project area 10 5. Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City and the URA in Regards to Staffing, Financial Support and Other Matters Lead: Paul Eckman, Joe Frank Outcome:a. Summary of"best practices"of other URAs. b. Written recommendations for provisions to be contained in an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") between the Authority and the City. Issue Should there be an IGA between the City and the URA, and if so, what should the IGA state with regard to the question of URA staffing and whether it should be provided by the City, and whether the City should provide such staffing with or without compensation. Also, what should such an IGA provide regarding the sharing of sales tax increment, the provision of legal services by the City or by outside counsel, and the provision of loans by the City to the URA. The IGA should also address the question of whether the URA should adopt its own by-laws. Background In order for the URA to function, it must have personnel to do its work. Should the City provide the personnel, office supplies and office space needed by the URA for this purpose? If so, should the personnel, space and services be provided free of charge or should the City be compensated for its costs? Currently, administrative costs are provided by the City and included in the 2006/2007 Adopted Budget. In order for the URA to function it must also have money. The source of funding for the URA comes from tax increment, typically from property taxes, but sometimes from sales taxes as well. Should there be an IGA between the City and the URA which clarifies how these tax increments will be shared? Should the URA be receiving any sales tax increment? An IGA between the City and the URA might also address the question of whether the City will be willing to loan money to the URA, and if so, the general terms and conditions upon which such loans will be made. The IGA should also address the question of whether the URA itself should have a separate set of bylaws dealing with officers and staff of the URA, meetings, conflicts of interest, etc. A good model set of bylaws has been developed by the Centennial URA and is attached as an example of potential bylaws that we could use for our URA. Other URA Practices Based upon a survey of Front Range communities with URAs, it was discovered that some municipalities do not enter into general IGAs (but do enter into specific loan agreements or specific project agreements on a case-by-case basis) while others do have umbrella IGAs. Even in the absence of an IGA, there is common understanding between the URA and the City as to how things are going to operate. Many of the municipalities that do not have IGAs are in a situation where the URA has not matured to the extent that it is actually up and running as a financing agency, or if it is, it is only in its early stages of development. The best practice appears to be that there ought to be an IGA between the City and the URA establishing the relationship between the two. Typically, the IGAs answer the following: 11 • Whether there should be a formal general "umbrella" IGA between the City and the URA, with the possibility of supplemental IGAs for individual projects, particularly as those projects might pertain to the City providing loans in support thereof. • Whether the IGA will recognize the URA as a separate legal entity with its own bylaws and whether the URA will operate under the ethical rules which govern the City Council or whether the URA will operate under state statutory ethical rules. • Whether the staff and legal services needed for the functioning of the URA will be provided by the City. • If the City is to provide staff and legal services, whether the City will be compensated by the URA at some point in the future when the City Council, after determination that the URA has sufficient funding to support such payment, requests it of the URA. • Whether the City Manager should appoint the executive director of the URA. • Whether the City and the URA are to share any sales tax increment, and if it is to be shared, whether that decision will be made by the City Council or the URA Commission. The foregoing topics of importance to be contained in IGAs have been gleaned from a survey of various municipalities (see Attachments#9 and #10). Recommendation The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommends that a formal general "umbrella" IGA be entered into between the City and the URA which will govern the various topics listed below and will include the possibility of supplemental IGAs for individual projects and the funding thereof. • The IGA should recognize the URA as a separate legal entity with its own set of bylaws and the IGA should establish that the URA Commission shall be governed by the ethical rules applicable to the City Council. • The staff and legal services for the URA should be provided by the City and the IGA should also state that the City Manager or his designee shall be the executive director of the URA. • The IGA should contain provisions which allow for the City Council to require the URA to reasonably compensate the City for its costs in providing staff and executive director services at such time that the City Council determines that the URA has a sufficient funding source to make such reimbursement. The details regarding how reasonable compensation" should be defined were generally discussed by the Ad Hoc Committee and will need further discussion and direction from the City Council as the IGA is drafted. • The IGA should provide that the sales tax increment will accrue to the City with the expectation that the City may share the sales tax increment with the URA for specific projects on a case-by-case basis, to be decided by the City Council under established criteria. 12 6. Composition of the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority Lead: Joe Frank Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices"of other URAs. b. Written recommendation for the composition of the Commission. Issue Does the City Council want to continue to be the Commission or authorize the Mayor to appoint a Commission? Background According to State Statutes, the Council may designate itself as the authority (a.k.a. "Commission") or allow the Mayor to appoint an odd number of commissioners (not less than 5 or more than 11) to govern the URA. Council Resolution 82-10 (1982) established the Urban Renewal Authority in the City of Fort Collins and the City Council designated itself as the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority. During the discussions with City Council in 2004 regarding adoption of the North College Urban Renewal Plan, the Council reconfirmed that they had no desire to pass the duties of the Urban Renewal Authority to an appointed group. Instead, the Council opted to create the North College Citizen Advisory Group. Other URA Practices Prior to the adoption of the North College Urban Renewal Plan, staff met with staff from other Colorado URAs to discuss governance structure. More recently, staff conducted a survey of a sample of Colorado URAs specifically asking how their Commission was designated Staff heard a variety of arguments, both for and against the two forms of governance structure. In general, the staff of the URA preferred the governance structure they operated under. Arguments in favor of Council serving as the Commission: • Having Council serve as the Commission provided a much stronger and clearer connection between policy and implementation, for example, expenditure of tax dollars, land use decision-making, etc. Council's are already very familiar with City policies and procedures. • Having Council serve as the Commission avoids potential conflicts and disagreement that could arise if there was an appointed Commission. • Having Council serve as the Commission avoids potential conflicts of interest for City staff having to serve and represent a separate and independent governing appointed Commission. 13 • The Council is more familiar with and accurately reflects the larger public. Having Council serve as the Commission keeps the activities of the URA at the forefront of their attention. • Having Council serve as the Commission avoids issues of finding and appointing qualified and impartial (free of conflict of interest) Commission members. • Having an appointed Commission required special effort on the part of the City Council, appointed Commission, and URA staff; to be sure they are all operating in concert. Arguments in favor of an appointed Commission: Having an appointed Commission relieves the Council from the burden of doing the required work of the Commission. • Having an appointed Commission removes some of the "politics" from decision-making. Having an appointed Commission potentially sped up the decision-making process because a non-elected Commission could be more flexible, less bureaucratic, and more independent of City policies and procedures, generally more business-like or business- friendly. An appointed Commission was also perceived as potentially being more sensitive to and reflective of the problems and needs of the particular Urban Renewal project area because they were specifically selected from those areas to represent those areas. • An appointed Commission could contain members with special expertise that is important to the functioning of the URA (e.g. banking, real estate). The results of a survey of a sample of Colorado URAs are as follows: • Lakewood - Council is Commission • Fort Collins - Council is Commission • Vail - Council is Commission • Loveland - Council is the Commission • Longmont— Council is the Commission Centennial — Council is the Commission • Greeley - Council appointed a separate Commission • Boulder - Council appointed a separate Commission • Brighton - Council appointed a separate Commission • Englewood - Council appointed a separate Commission • Estes Park - Council appointed a separate Commission • Arvada - Council appointed a separate Commission • Denver - Council appointed a separate Commission Recommendation The Ad Hoc Committee and City staff recommends that Council should continue to serve as the Commission of the URA. This role should be reconsidered as the URA adds new Urban Renewal Plan areas. 14 7. Role of the North College Citizen Advisory Group (NCCAG) in the Activities of the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area. Lead: Joe Frank Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices"of other URAs. b. Written recommendation of the role of the CAG. Issue Is the Commission comfortable with the current role of the North College Citizen Advisory Group? Should the role be expanded or more limited? Background Attachment#11 is a description of the membership, jurisdiction, functions and minute-taking responsibilities of the North College Citizen Advisory Group. This summary was prepared by City staff, approved by the Commission, and recently revised and accepted by the NCCAG. Karen Weitkunat has served as the Commission Liaison to the NCCAG. Other potential NCCAG functions have been discussed over time, including but not limited to: • Marketing the North College URA • Business recruitment Other URA Practices The use of citizen advisory committee is rare in Colorado URAs. The Arvada URA formed a citizen advisory group to inform their appointed Commission to guide a big, controversial project. Recommendation The Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommend that NCCAG continue to fulfill the roles as outlined in Attachment#11. The contribution of the NCCAG to the URA could be enhanced by adding members with experience and knowledge in finance, banking, and real estate development. 15 14pli, TI RAW �t r a ^s a 4 r q fr iC 1 Attathments Attachment #1 RESOLUTION NO. 003 OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY APPOINTING AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE URA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN WHEREAS, on January 5, 1982, the Fort Collins City Council(the "Council") created the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority(the "Authority") and appointed its own members to serve as the Board of Commissioners of the Authority(the "Board"); and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Authority is to eliminate blight and prevent the spread of blight within the urban renewal area,the boundaries of which are coterminous with the boundaries of the City of Fort Collins (the "City"); and WHEREAS,on June 15,2004,the Council adopted Resolution 2004-076,directing City staff' to prepare an urban renewal plan and blight study for the North College Avenue Corridor; and WHEREAS,on December 21,2004,the Council adopted Resolution 2004-151, approving an "existing conditions" study for the North College Avenue area and determining that the area defined in said resolution (the "Plan Area") is appropriate, under the relevant provisions of the Colorado Revised Statutes, for inclusion in an urban renewal project (the "North College URA Project"); and WHEREAS, on that same date, the Council also adopted Resolution 2004-152, approving an Urban Renewal Plan (the "Plan") for the North College URA Project; and WHEREAS,on January 24,2006,the Board adopted Resolution 2006-002,approvinga 2006 budget for the Authority, and also met in a work session to discuss various options for funding that budget; and WHEREAS, in formulating the Plan, City staff has worked closely with the North College Avenue Citizen's Advisory Group(the"CAG"),and the CAG continues to assist the Authority in an advisory capacity; and WHEREAS, the Board believes it to be in the best interests of the Authority and the City to form an ad hoc committee,consisting of members of the Authority,to work with City staffinembers and members of the CAG in formulating recommendations to the Board with regard to the Board's exercise of its statutory powers as an urban renewal authority and, in particular,with regard to the implementation of the Plan. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY as follows: 17 Section 1. The Board hereby establishes an ad hoc committee (the "Committee"), consisting of Councilmembers Karen Weitkunat,David Roy, and Ben Manvel. Section 2. That the purpose of the Committee shall be to consult with members of the CAG and such members of staff as may be designated by the City Manager and the City Attorney and to formulate recommendations to the Board regarding the most effective ways in which the Authority can collaborate with the City,the private sector,and other public entities to fully effectuate the purposes of the Authority and implement the Plan. Section 3. That the Committee's recommendations shall include,but need not be limited to the following topics: a. the appropriate terms and conditions of an intergovernmental agreement between the Authority and the City; b. funding alternatives for the Authority; C. policies and procedures for reviewing applications from private parties for financial assistance from the Authority; and d. the kinds of projects that will best advance the interests of the Authority and the goals and objections of the Plan. Section 4. That the report and recommendations of the Committee shall be submitted to the Board within ninety days of the date of this Resolution, at which time the Committee shall be dissolved, absent an extension of its term by the Board. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the BoarM Commissioners of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority this 21 st day of February, A.D 0 Mayor ATTEST: ,�DE�FORT C���.,-i .......... - '•= wit'tin • EAL '• City Clerk Wit, ;o 18 Attachment #2 Urban Renewal Authority Ad Hoc Committee Work Plan (3/24/2006) Project Manager: Joe Frank Purpose: Formulate recommendations in Report form for presentation to the URA Board regarding "best practices" of the administration of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority, including: 1. Role(s) the URA should play to assist private sector development (e.g. marketing, acquisition of sites, eminent domain, TIF, and grant management). Lead: Clark Mapes Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA's recommendations o the roles o the URA b. Written f O f 2. Calculation of the Tax Increment (e.g. DDA or Centerra approach) Lead: Clark Mapes and Chuck Seest Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA 's b. Written recommendation for method of calculating Tax Increment. 3. Vision and Mission of the URA, including policies and criteria for spending Tax Increment, including: • Criteria and policies for providing Tax Increment Financing to stimulate private sector capital investment (e.g. types of development, loans versus grants, reserves, and use of sales tax). • Criteria and policies for funding public improvement projects (not associated with any private sector development). Lead: Clark Mapes and Chuck Seest Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA's b. Written recommendation of mission, vision, policies and criteria. 4. Administrative procedures for reviewing applications for TIF including application forms, process and scoring sheets. Lead: Ken Waido Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA 's b. Written recommendations on procedures including application form and scoring sheets. 19 5. Relationship between the City and URA in regards to staffing, financial support and other matters. Lead: Paul Eckman Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA's b. Written recommendations for provisions to be contained in an IGA between the Authority and the City 6. Composition of the URA Board (e.g. Council or appointed citizens) Lead: Joe Frank Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices"of other URA's b. Written recommendation for the composition of the Board. 7. Role of the Citizen Advisory Group in the activities of the URA. Lead: Ken Waido Outcome: a. Summary of"best practices" of other URA 's b. Written recommendation for description of the role of the Citizen Advisory Group in the URA. 20 Project Schedule: FEB February 21 —Resolution approved by the URA Board, appointing Ad Hoc* committee. MAR March 3 —URA Lead Team meets to discuss resolution. March 17—Prepare draft work plan and schedule for distribution to URA Lead Team** and URA Staff Team March 24—Finalize work plan and schedule March 17 —April 7 —Survey other URA's for best practices; formulate draft recommendations. APR April 6 (noon)— Issue Lead Person delivers draft survey and recommendations to Joe for compilation and distribution to URA Lead Team. April 7 —URA Lead Team meets to discuss survey and draft recommendations TBD, April 8 - 14 —Ad Hoc Committee meeting (1) (a 3-4 hour evening or weekend meeting); staff presentation of survey results and draft recommendations; discussion and direction from Ad Hoc Committee. CAG is invited to attend. April 13 — CAG meeting, presentation of survey and draft recommendations April 21 —Draft report to Ad Hoc Committee April 22 —28 — Ad Hoc Committee review of Draft Report; sends written comments to staff. April 28 —May 5 — Staff makes revisions to Report. MAY May 5 —Final draft of Report delivered to Ad Hoc Committee and CAG May 11 —CAG meeting, presentation and discussion of final draft report TBD May 8— 12 —Ad Hoc Committee meeting (1) (a 1-hour meeting) to review Final Draft Report May 12 —URA Lead Team meets to discuss Final Report May 12 —Final revisions to Report received from Ad Hoc Committee May 22— Deadline for the Ad Hoc Committee to submit its Report and recommendations to the Board. May 22— Ad Hoc dissolved, absent an extension of its term by the Board JUNE June 27—Council Work Session —presentation of Report of the Ad Hoc Committee TBD URA Board action on the Report recommendations 21 Attachment #3 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 3, 2006 TO: Joe Frank, Advanced Planning Director FROM: Charles Seest, Finance Director Clark Mapes, City Planner SUBJECT: TIF PROJECTIONS FOR NORTH COLLEGE URA PLAN AREA Background Historically, there has only been one method in Larimer County under which to calculate tax increment financing (TIF) dollars generated within the plan area of an urban renewal authority (URA). That method was tracking the value of improvements constructed after the base year in which the Plan Area was established. This approach did not take into account general appreciation of real property due to other factors within the Plan Area. This method has been utilized to calculate TIF for all URAs and other entities funded by tax increment within the County, including the City of Fort Collins' Downtown Development Authority. Recently, however, the Loveland URA negotiated an approach for one of its URA Plan Areas that allowed the Plan Area to receive all growth in taxable value above the base year value, adjusted annually for county-wide average market appreciation. This approach has been applied to the new retail center known as Centerra, located at the intersection of 1-25 and US 34, one of the primary traffic flow areas within the County. In order to best understand how either approach may be applied to the North College URA Plan Area, staff developed a few projections. One approach was labeled the DDA method and utilized the traditional calculation applied by the County. The second approach was labeled the Centerra method and was applied under two scenarios, one in which the North College Plan Area market appreciation rate equaled the county-wide rate and another where it lagged the county-wide rate. Finally, it was noted that a sizable percentage of the overall North College URA Plan Area is currently located within a floodway that essentially precludes development from occurring on those parcels. Since the City has expended significant resources to address this issue, it would be equitable to capture the increased values on those parcels with a hybrid method. Therefore, a third approach was developed to address this issue by utilizing the traditional DDA method on all parcels outside of the floodway and applies the Centerra method to the floodway, which represents approximately 47% of the acreage within the North College URA Plan Area. Below is a summary of the three approaches. 1 Traditional "DDA" Approach This approach yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of $14 3 million in constant 2006 dollars or $18 6 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3%. Benefits of the approach: 1. Recognized by Larimer County. 22 2. No additional negotiation required. 3. Receipt of tax increment from improvements is certain. Limits of the approach: 1. Does not recognize any value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. 2. Does not allow for any additional revenue should the URA market appreciation rate exceed the county-wide growth rate. 2. Centerra Approach This approach yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of$20 1 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3% which was assumed to equal the county-wide market appreciation_rate. The TIF stream dropped to $11 8 million if the URA Plan Area could only achieve a market appreciation rate of 2% versus the county-wide rate of 3%. Benefits of the approach: 1. Allows the Plan Area to receive all additional revenue above the county-wide market appreciation rate. 2. Does recognize value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. Limits of the approach: 1. Requires negotiation with Larimer County. 2. Requires plan area have a market appreciation rate equal to or greater than the county-wide rate. In the event that the Plan Area does not achieve the county-wide rate, even the receipt of tax increment from improvements is not certain. 3 DDA Approach plus Application of Centerra Approach to Floodway This approach yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of$17 8 million in constant 2006 dollars or $23 0 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3%. Benefits of the approach: 1. Except for the floodway area, TIF based on traditional method recognized by the County. 2. Does recognize value value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. Limits of the approach: 1. Requires negotiation with Larimer County. 2. Does not allow for any additional TIF revenue if the URA Plan area overall has a market appreciation rate that exceeds the county-wide rate. Conclusion: Given the sizable investment made by the City to mitigate the floodway, the URA created by the City along with the City should jointly negotiate an arrangement with Larimer County that allows the URA to I property associated with the parcels in the floodway. Since this receive the market appreciation on reap p y approach even with over the Centerra a approach yields the most tax increment revenue it is p P the assumption that the North College URA Plan Area keeps pace with the market appreciation rate 23 experienced county-wide. It should be noted that staff did not propose a scenario under which the market appreciation rate on North College exceeded the county-wide rate. Under that unlikely scenario, the Centerra approach may yield greater revenue than the hybrid approach being recommended. Thus the DDA approach plus application of the Centerra approach to the_ flood%A is the recommendation of staff for the North College URA Plan Area. Should you have any questions about this item, please contact Chuck or Clark. 24 I, 8� Z I 0 lee °t 9 IL nr � I I °z Z CD o Z ci s�o� LL 3 z 1- o Z t s W W oo o eo C� �`°z Z << I °r 02 so o� 0o in o 0 0 �n o °�' N N r r suoill1w 25 6roe Rear r 0 � I t 9rp t Reoe Q 6epe C. �t C I Ot troe V teat e o 0roe N M Z ) ) 6tot Z ® Riot L t Y Y 3 '3 � toe LL 910e J _ SIOt Q C) C) ktoe £tot LU etoe L,LI tjoe otoe V 600e Z 8002, .400t 1900e uO o tn o LO o in N N SUOIllIw 26 Attachment #4 PART 1 PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS A VISION FOR THE CORRIDOR The participants involved in creating this plan see North College Avenue becoming a more integral part of the community through revitalization and economic growth. This plan is a guide for changes, providing direction for investments and improvements. It will guide development and redevelopment as itoccurs. The plan does not propose displacement ofexisting uses and businesses, and in fact the planning process resulted in a vision for the area based in some ways on its existing character. Yet key aspects of the recommendations involve incentives for development and redevelopment in order to realize the vision. A wide range of land uses have a place here, with a balance between commercial uses with highway frontage and a mix of other land uses in a transition away from the highway. In specific areas on the east side,the plan promotes the development ofpedestrian- friendly urban neighborhoods similar in character to downtown. These areas also happen to offer special opportunities to blend development and activity with the natural environs of the river, ditch corridors,and other natural areas. Many aspects of development and redevelopment are included within the recommendations. The role of the area as an incubator for small and local business, including basic employment, is reinforced by the policy statements. Additional streets are proposed to connect the Corridor with surrounding neighborhoods and make vital connections to downtown. Changes to zoning are recommended to increase flexibility and opportunities for the compatible development of business, commercial, and residential projects. The proposed zoning is meant to provide incentive for development with a streamlined regulatory process that reflects the residents' desire for positive change. Recommendations in the plan give direction on solving infrastructure and drainage problems, and suggest actions to take to make the improvements happen. The recommendations are based on a set of general goals which led to policy statements for five major policy sections: Land Use; Storm Drainage; Transportation;Image,Character,and Urban Form; andEconomic Development. The Illustrative Plan portrays the main elements that are proposed. Implementation Strategies outline the actions recommended to translate the goals and policies into improvements that will contribute to the area's vision for its future. 27 Attachment #5 City of Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority Mission Statement The mission of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is to remedy blight by stimulating and leveraging private capital investment, using tax increment financing in private development projects and public improvement projects. The URA functions as a catalyst,partner, advisor and participant to foster sound growth and development. General URA Policies The URA will only assist development and redevelopment projects that meet the identified objectives of the respective Urban Renewal Plan (URP) area. The URA will consider TIF for infrastructure needs normally required of development and redevelopment projects if one or more of the following are met: • the infrastructure is an extraordinary or unusually costly remedy for blight factors (e.g., due to difficulties of retrofitting existing developed areas,need for assembly of multiple properties, etc.) • the project is for affordable housing • the project creates significant numbers of new primary jobs • the project has great potential to capture spending that is currently"leaking" out of the market area, or is a "destination"use that will attract others from outside the area • the infrastructure serves other development and redevelopment sites, facilitating further improvements in the area The URA will also consider TIF for: • enhancements and amenities that benefit the public such as streetscapes, enhanced architecture and building materials, special site improvements, etc. • retention or expansion of existing businesses offering primary jobs or unique offerings that complement the business mix • site clearance or site acquisition • removal of hazardous materials or conditions • projects that preserve and adaptively reuses historic structures • projects that protects natural habitats and features both on the site and in the vicinity of the site • projects that use the best available technologies and practices for renewable energy and/or energy efficiency The URA will not retroactively reimburse projects or make payments to cover costs associated with any actions already incurred by a development or redevelopment project prior to a request for financial assistance being considered by the URA The URA will pursue grants and other types of financial assistance from federal and state agencies. The URA will cooperate with other governments, entities, and agencies to accomplish redevelopment objectives. 28 North College Corridor URA Policies. In addition to the general URA policies on the previous page, the following specific policies apply to the North College Corridor Urban Renewal Plan (URP) area. The URA Commission will only consider TIF in a development or redevelopment project within the North College Corridor URP area after the proposal has been reviewed by the Citizens Advisory Group (CAG). The URA Commission is the final authority on all TIF requests. The URA will give preference to funding projects that have local ownership (Larimer County). The URAs priorities for providing TIF to development and redevelopment projects within the North College Corridor URP area are: • enhancing transportation infrastructure • providing stormwater drainage or floodplain improvements • expanding or upgrading utility infrastructure • providing amenities that benefit the public including but not limited to streetscapes, enhanced architecture and building materials, fagade renovations, special site improvements, etc. that contributes to a positive identity and image for the North College area. Last Revision: May 10, 2006 29 I Attachment #6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Assistance pO APPLICATION ( REVISED 5 / 1 /06 ) COLLINS PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS / LOCATION: APPLICANT / DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION APPLICANT DEVELOPER PROPERTY-OWNER Company Name Company Owner/CEO - - Contact Person — - - Title -— -- - - Complete Address -- --------{ Phone - G FAX - - Email TYPE OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT / REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY ❑ Residential ❑ Mixed-Use (Residential/Non-Residential) ❑ Commercial/Retail ❑ Mixed-Use (Commercial/Industrial) ❑ IndustriaVWarehouse ❑ Other(please explain) PROJECT ELEMENTS ❑ New Construction ❑ Site Clearance ❑ Infrastructure Improvement ❑ Building Rehabilitation ❑ Land Acquisition ❑ Other(please explain) NEW OR EXISTING BUSINESSES (NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ONLY) New Business for URA Plan Area? ❑ Yes ❑ No Existing Business in URA Plan Area? ❑ Yes ❑ No Years in Business years FORMATION Construction Loan $ FINANCIAL / FUNDING SUMMARY IN Current Actual Value (Assessor) $ Fees $ Current Property Tax $ Soft Costs j $ Projected Actual Value (Assessor) $ - Land Cost $ Projected Annual Property Tax $ New Construction Costs $ Total TIF Assistance Requested $ Other Costs $ Total Property Tax Increment Expected $ Total Protect $ Total Project Cost $ Current Annual Sales Tax (if any) $ Projected Annual Sales Tax $ 30 TYPE OF TIF REQUESTED (include general terms & conditions) ❑ Grant_ ❑ Loan ❑ Loan Guarantee SUMMARY OF FUNDING SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS Amount Source Use $ URA Tax Increment Financing (TIF) i $ F $ $ $ Project Total ATTACH DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Please provide an answer for each of the following questions, no more than 1 page per question. Please include a location map, any site plans or project drawings, and any other materials related to the TIF application not previously requested. 1. What is the nature of the project? 2. Why is TIF assistance needed; how will the funds be used? 3. How will the project help improve/upgrade public infrastructure (streets, utilities, drainage, etc.)? 4. How will the project enhance the property tax base (and sales tax base, if applicable) of the area? 5. How will the project help achieve the goals of North College Urban Renewal Plan? 6. How will the project help eliminate slum and blight conditions? 7. What is the proposed project timetable (what is the estimated time frame for major steps including the City's planning decision, completion of financial commitments, start of construction, and issuance of Certificate of Occupancy (CO)? 8. What is the financial capacity of the developer to complete the proposed project? ATTACH BACKGROUND INFORMATION ❑ Owner/CEO Resume ❑ Owner/CEO Credit Report ❑ D/B Report on the Corporation ❑ Project Pro Forma SIGNATURE REQUIRED By: Title: Date: 31 Attachment #7 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Assistance SCORE CARD NORTH COLLEGE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN CITIZEN ADVISORY GROUP Date Project # Project Instructions: With the exceptions of#8-9, assign point values ranging from 1-10. Use the provided Points Scale as a guide to assign your point values. Points Scale Points Weight Score Project Characteristics 0 5 10 (P) (W) (WxP) FINANCIAL BENEFITS 1 Annual Property Tax $ /ac $0 $5k 7Ok+ x = of 20 (Incrementlacre) Annual Sales Tax = 0.0 2. (increment/sf)Retail only,first $ /sf $0.00 $5.00 of 10 36 months projected.Annual Payroll = 0.0 3. $ 00 $o $soo of (commercial only) COMMUNITY BENEFITS Implements City Plan & North College Slightly7Moderately X 2.0 = of 20 4. Urban Renewal Plan _ 0.0 5. Enhances Area/Eliminates Blight Slightly X 2.0 - of 20 0.0 6. Local Ownership (Larimer County) None x 0.5 - of 5 FINANCIAL STRUCTURE 0.0 7. Demonstrated Need/Financing Gap Slightly Moderately Greasy x 0.5 = of Grant Loan X 1.0 = 0.0 8. Type of Request ofa (5 pis) (10 pts) of 10 Lump Sum Over Time X 0.5 = 0.0 9. Form of Payment n/a (5 pts) (10 pis) of 5 of Total Project = 0.0 10, P t % >50% 49%-16% <15% X 0.5 of Cost Requested 0.0 11. % of Total TI Requested /° — of 10 TOTAL SCORE % of MAX POSSIBLE SCORE FOR APPLICABLE CRITERIA % Attachment #8 Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority Organizational Chart commission of the North College CAG 1 P&Z Board Responsibilities: Urban Renewal Responsibilities: • Advice on Authority • Recommend Plans significant NC URA matters (City Council) City Manager Darin Atteberry CPES Greg Byrne Progratn Manager Joe Frank,Advance Planning Responsibilities: • Program Administration • URA Commission Liaison Financial Legal Planning Chuck Seest,Finance Paul Eckman, Ken Waido,Advance Dept. City Attorney's Office Planning Clark Mapes,Advance Responsibilities: Responsibilities: Planning • Account payables • Legal review Sheri Wamhofl, • Accting/financial • County Assessor Engineering reporting Coordination Glen Schlueter, • Project review- • Project review- Storm Water Utility financial legal - • Financial Analysis Responsibilities: • County • NCCAG,PZ and Assessor/Appraiser URA support coordination • Property owner contacts • Project review • URA Plans Revised May 10, 2006 33 Attachment #9 VARIOUS FRONT RANGE MUNICIPALITIES AND THEIR URA 1. Loveland. Loveland presently has no IGA with its URA and the City provides all staffing for the URA without charge to the URA. No sales tax increment is captured by the URA and the property tax increment is "passed through" the URA to the metropolitan district (for Centerra) with the URA retaining a small amount of the "pass through" for administrative fees which ultimately are to be reimbursed to the City of Loveland. 2. Greeley. The URA in the City of Greeley receives staff support from the City without cost to the URA, and unlike Loveland, there is an increment of sales tax that is shared between the City and the URA. The property tax increment goes to the URA, and the URA administers all of the CDBG funding that would otherwise have been administered by the City of Greeley. In the end, neither the City of Greeley nor the URA pays for the staffing, because the staffing is covered by CDBG funding as an administrative expense. Greeley utilizes a general IGA defining the relationship between the URA employees and the City's employees (stating that the City's employees are the URA employees) and prohibiting the URA from supplementing their salaries and providing that the URA legal services should be provided by outside counsel and paid from CDBG funds. Greeley also enters into separate project- by-project IGAs, mostly centered on funding mechanisms. 3. Boulder. Boulder has a URA which was created in 1978. Boulder's URA also has its own set of bylaws. Although there is no umbrella IGA between Boulder and its URA, in 2003, Boulder, Boulder County, the Boulder URA and the Boulder Central Area GID all entered into a cooperation agreement for the provision of funding, involving the sale of $12 million in bonds for various projects in the Boulder area. This cooperation agreement involved both property and sales tax increments. There have been other site-specific financing agreements and loan agreements in addition to the 2003 one. 4. Longmont. Longmont has no IGA and there is no policy at present regarding staff time for the Longmont URA, because it is in its embryonic stages. Presently, Longmont is providing staff to its URA without charge, but the URA blight study and plan have not yet been completed. The City has also paid for a consultant to assist in the preparation of the URA plan. A tabulation was received from the City of Longmont containing the results of a survey that it did in November 2005 with regard to the question of whether the City provides staff support to various URAs and DDAs around the state. A copy of that tabulation is attached for your information. However, the tabulation does not answer the question of whether the City staff is provided with or without charge. 5. Westminster. Westminster has no separate comprehensive IGA with its URA but Westminster does enter into individual site-specific IGAs to cover specific funding issues as projects come up. According to Longmont's survey, Westminster provides staff support to the URA. The Westminster URA collects the property tax increment provided by the County and uses the collected increment to repay loans made by the City to the URA. 6. Centennial. Centennial does have an umbrella IGA with its URA which specifically provides for the City to supply the URA with employee assistance, supplies, office space, etc. The City is reimbursed for the provision of these services. If the URA desires to obtain services somewhere else, it may do so. Although the Centennial IGA does not deal with any topic other than the provision of City 34 services, if the Council should desire to receive reimbursement from the URA for the City's provision of services, then the Centennial model is a good one. 7. Denver. Denver Urban Renewal Authority (DURA) does have an IGA with the City of Denver which deals with the collection, sharing and distribution of both sales and property tax increment. Denver does not provide staff to the DURA and, beyond the tax increment issues in its umbrella agreement, Denver also agrees, to the extent permitted by law, to cooperate with the URA in accomplishing street and utility locations and relocations. 8. Golden. Golden has an IGA with its URA which gives the City the right to review the URAs work programs and budgets. The City does not have the right, however, to approve or deny a budget. The IGA provides that one hundred percent of all sales tax increment and property tax increment go to the URA and the URA rents commercial space outside of the City Hall for its offices and staff and pays the cost of that rent and staffing. The URA has an executive director who is not an employee of the City, and the URA Commission is separate from the City Council. 9. Arvada. Arvada has a URA which employs an executive director who is not an employee of the City. All other employees of the Arvada URA are City employees and are governed by an IGA between the City and the Arvada URA. Those employees record and document their work time and bill the cost to the URA. The IGA states that the City Council has the right to approve the employment and set the salary of the executive director. Termination of the executive director requires the joint approval of the City Council and the URA, but the executive director is a contract employee of the URA and not an employee of the City. Under the IGA, the City provides all other management services for the URA including, procurement, personnel, legal and planning services. The City is fully reimbursed for these services. The City also provides workman's compensation and other insurance needs of the URA and the City Manager has the right to participate in all URA meetings and, unlike Golden, Arvada has the right to approve or disapprove of the URAs budget. 35 Attachment #10 Urban Renewal Authorities Type of Using Tax Iris ent Does City Staff Municl all Authorl Fin andn mvide Support? Arvada URA Yes Yes Aurora URA Yes _Yes Boulder URA No Yes Brighton both No Yes Broomfield URA Yes Yes. Colorado Springs URA Yes Yes Commerce City URA No Delta _ URA No No Denver URA Yes No Englewood URA Yes Yes Estes Park URA Yes Yes Federal Heights URA Yes Yes D Yes o —75 Glenwood Springs _ DDA Yes _Yes Golden URA Yes Yes Greeley _ URA Yes Yes Grand Junction DDA Yes No La Junta URA Yes No Lafayette URA Yes Yes _ Lakewood URA Yes Yes Las Animas URA No Yes Longmont DDA Yes No Loveland URA Yes Yes Monte Vista _ DDA No _ Yes Mt Crested Butte _ DDA Yes Yes Nor ftlenn _ URA Yes Yes Pueblo URA Yes Yes Ran ley DDA No n/r Sllverthome_ URA No Yes _ Sterling URA Yes _ No Superior URA Yes Yes Thornton _ URA Yes Yes Westminster _ URA Yes Yes Wheat Ride URA Yes Yes Woodland Park DDA Yes Yes urban renewal chart.xls Revised 11/17/20OF230 36 Attachment #11 Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority North College Urban Renewal Plan Citizen Advisory Group (Rev. 5/10/06) Creation The intent of the North College Urban Renewal Plan is for the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority to consult with an advisory group on all significant actions and decisions of the Authority regarding the North College Urban Renewal Plan. Therefore, there shall be created and established a North College Urban Renewal Plan - Citizen Advisory Group (the"Advisory Group"). Membership; term (a) Members of the North College Urban Renewal Plan Citizen Advisory Group shall be appointed by official action of the North Fort Collins Business Association and shall consist of nine (9) members who are landowners,business owners, tenants, or residents within the boundaries of the North College Urban Renewal Plan. City liaisons will be appointed to work with the Advisory Group, consisting of one (1) Fort Collins City Councilmember appointed by the City Council, and one (1)member of the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board, appointed by the Board. (b) Members appointed by the North Fort Collins Business Association shall serve four (4)-year terms, with the first appointments being staggered to allow for turn over and subsequent overlapping terms. Liaisons appointed by the City Council and Planning and Zoning Board shall serve at the discretion of the Council and Board respectively. Jurisdiction The Advisory Group shall exercise its powers within the boundaries of the North College Urban Renewal Plan a map of which is on file in the City Clerk's office. Functions The Advisory Group shall provide advice to the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority on all significant actions and decisions of the Authority which the Authority may undertake within the boundaries of the North College Urban Renewal Plan, including the following: 1. Amendments to the North College Avenue Existing Conditions Survey regarding findings of "blight" as defined by the Urban Renewal Law. 2. Amendments to the North College Urban Renewal Plan. Requests for redevelopment/development ro'ect financing using the property tax increment 3. qproject and/or sales tax increment to be accrued and used by the Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority under the property and/or sales tax allocation financing provisions of the Urban Renewal Law. 4. Public improvements to be financed by the Authority in order to promote the effective utilization of developed, underdeveloped, or undeveloped land in the Renewal Area. 5. Purchase of property by the Authority to for an urban renewal project to remedy blight factors pursuant to the Urban Renewal law and the North College Urban Renewal Plan. 37 6. Demolition of existing development and clearance of existing sites by the Authority as part of specific redevelopment/development projects. 7. Requests specifically directed to the North College Urban Renewal Plan Citizen Advisory Group by the Fort Collins Commission of the Urban Renewal Authority and/or City staff. Minutes The Advisory Group shall take and keep on file for public inspection summary minutes of any meetings where the Group discussed matters listed in the Functions section above. 38 ATTACHMENT Schedule for Implementing the Recommendations Of the URA Ad Hoc Committee Summary: Staff believes that the implementation of recommendation #1 (roles), #4 (administrative procedures), #6 (Commission) and#7 (NCCAG) can be accomplished by direction from the Commission during its Work Session on June 27. Staff would also like direction from the Work Session on recommendations #3 (mission) and#5 (IGA), except, however, these recommendations require formal adoption by Resolution, tentatively scheduled for next August/September. Recommendation #2 (tax increment) needs more staff analysis and discussions with the County Assessor's Office and is not ready for implementation. #1. Role(s) the URA should play to assist private sector development Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like approval from the Commission to implement the roles as described in the attached Report. Staff believes that this action can be taken at the Work Session and no further action is needed by the Commission on this matter. #2. Calculation of the Tax Increment Implementation Action: This issue is not ready for implementation. Since preparation of the Report, staff has met with County Assessor's Office to discuss options for calculating tax increment in the North College area and in future URA Plan areas. And, some new ideas have emerged. Further negotiation with the County is needed. During the Work Session, staff will update the Commission regarding discussions with the County, some new ideas, and next steps. #3. Vision and Mission of the URA, including policies and criteria for spending Tax Increment Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like approval from the Commission to use the Mission Statement and policies described in Attachment#5 of the Report. Staff believes that the Mission Statement and policies should be adopted by Resolution by the Commission. Adoption of the Resolution is tentatively scheduled for next August/September. #4. Administrative procedures for reviewing applications for TIF Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like the approval of the Commission to use the recommended process for reviewing applications for TIF, and accept the Application Form (Attachment #6) and Score Card (Attachment#7). Staff believes that this action can be taken at the Work Session and no further action by the Commission is needed on this matter. #5. Relationship between the City and URA in regards to staffing, financial support and other matters Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like direction from the Commission that a general "umbrella" IGA be entered into between the City and the URA which will govern the various topics listed in the attached Report, including adoption of bylaws for the Commission. If so directed, the staff will prepare an IGA and by-laws for adoption by the Commission and Council, tentatively scheduled for next August/September, after review by the NCCAG. #6. Composition of the Commission of the URA Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like direction from the Commission that Council continue as the Commission of the URA. Staff believes that this action can be taken at the Work Session and no further action by the Commission is necessary on this matter. V. Role of the North College Citizen Advisory Group in the Activities of the URA. Implementation Action: During the Work Session, staff would like direction from the Commission that the NCCAG continue to fulfill the roles as outlined in Attachment #11 of the Report. Staff believes that this action can be taken at the Work Session and no further action by the Commission is necessary on this matter. ATTACHMENT 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 16, 2006 TO: Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director FROM: Charles Seest, Finance Director SUBJECT: MEETING WITH COUNTY ASSESSOR ON TIF METHODS I. Background Historically, there has only been one method in Larimer County under which to calculate tax increment financing (TIF) dollars generated within the plan area of an urban renewal authority (URA). That method was tracking the value of improvements constructed after the base year in which the Plan Area was established. This approach did not assign any tax increment to factors other than taxable construction, with some minor exceptions involving tax-exempt property. This method has been utilized to calculate TIF for all URAs and other entities funded by tax increment within the County, including the City of Fort Collins' Downtown Development Authority. Recently, however, the Loveland URA negotiated an alternative method for one of its URA Plan Areas that assigned tax increment any and all factors which create value increases above the base value, with the base resulting from any or all factors adjusted annually for county-wide average market appreciation. This method has been applied to the new retail center known as Centerra, located at the intersection of 1-25 and US 34, one of the primary traffic flow areas within the County. In order to best understand how either method may be applied to the North College URA Plan Area, staff developed a few projections. One was labeled the DDA method and utilized the traditional calculation applied by the County. The second was labeled the Centerra method and was applied under two scenarios, one in which the North College Plan Area market appreciation rate equaled the county-wide rate and another where it lagged the county-wide rate. Finally, it was noted that a sizable percentage of the overall North College URA Plan Area is currently located within a floodway that essentially precludes development from occurring on those parcels. Since the City of Fort Collins has expended significant resources to address this issue, it would be equitable to capture the increased values on those parcels with a hybrid method. Therefore, a third method was developed to address this issue by utilizing the traditional DDA method on all parcels outside of the floodway and applies the Centerra method to the floodway, which represents approximately 47% of the acreage within the North College URA Plan Area. Prior to meeting with the County Assessor's Office, staff had developed some assumptions and applied them to the various methods. Below is a summary of the results of the three methods. 1. Traditional "DDA" Method This method yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of$14.3 million in constant 2006 dollars or$18.6 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3% Benefits: 1. Receipt of tax increment from improvements is certain. Limits: 1. Does not recognize any value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. 2. Does not allow for any additional revenue should the URA market appreciation rate exceed the county-wide growth rate. 2. Centerra Method This method yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of$20.1 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3% which was assumed to equal the county wide market appreciation rate. The TIF stream dropped to $11.8 million if the URA Plan Area could only achieve a market appreciation rate of 2% versus the county-wide rate of 3% Benefits: 1. Allows the Plan Area to receive all additional revenue above the county-wide market appreciation rate. 2. Does recognize value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. Limits: 1. Requires plan area have a market appreciation rate equal to or greater than the county-wide rate. In the event that the Plan Area does not achieve the county-wide rate, even the receipt of tax increment from improvements may not be certain. 3. DDA Method plus Application of Centerra Method to Floodwav This approach yielded a cumulative tax increment stream of$17.8 million in constant 2006 dollars or $23.0 million after applying an annual appreciation rate of 3% Benefits: 1. Does recognize value value associated with the appreciation of real property currently located in the floodway. Limits: 1. Does not allow for any additional TIF revenue if the URA Plan area overall has a market appreciation rate that exceeds the county-wide rate. Based on the above staff discussed with the Council Ad-Hoc Committee the idea of pursuing the last method presented above also known as the hybrid method The Council Ad-Hoc Committee concurred and staff scheduled a meeting the County Assessor. II. Discussion with County Assessor Office The above methods were presented to the County Assessor. The County Assessor staff indicated that since a new TIF method ("Centerra") had been established since the creation of the North College URA Plan Area, this method should be made available to the Fort Collins URA as it was to the Loveland URA. Furthermore, in order to promote equality among all TIF districts, the County Assessor stated that all future TIF districts would be calculated utilizing only the "Centerra" method. However, given that the North College URA Plan Area was established prior to that method, it would be given the option of selecting either the traditional "DDA" method or the "Centerra" method. City staff stated there was heightened concern regarding the application of a county wide appreciation rate to the North College Plan Area. The County Assessor staff indicated that without the future potential of development within the floodway, it was not likely that the North College Area would achieve the appreciation rate experienced on a county-wide level. With regard to the hybrid method, the County staff stated that would not be possible as it would require application of two methods to the same TIF district. Given that no TIF was recognized by the County Assessor for the Plan Area in 2006, the County Assessor staff suggested that the City review all assumptions and then notify them of which TIF method to utilize. City staff also requested that the County Assessor staff prepare a ten year history on the county-wide appreciation rate to provide additional data to assist City staff with the decision. III. City Staff Concerns on the TIF Method Options Presented by the County County Assessor staff provided the following table regarding the county-wide appreciation rates since 1995 for the reappraisal years, which occur every other year: 1995 9.70% 1997 6.40% 1999 13.07% 2001 14.60% 2003 2.73% 2005 5.27% Average 8.63% If this trend were to continue, the North College URA plan would need to maintain pace with the average reappraisal appreciation rate of 8.63% in order to reflect an increase in tax increment. For greenfield developments such as Centerra or Timnath, this level of appreciation, while not assured during every reappraisal year, is certainly achieved during the early years of the development. As a result, a significant cushion is established for these greenfield developments when converting agricultural land to residential and commercial development. Unfortunately, the margin narrows dramatically when converting existing developed parcels to redevelopment projects. This bias toward greenfield development creates long-term issues for redevelopment within the City of Fort Collins. Aside from those project areas that are assured of receiving a significant infusion of construction dollars during the early years of the project area (ie., Foothills Mall), it is difficult to assess whether adequate activity in any area of the City would maintain pace with the county-wide appreciation rate. Certainly, one would expect that part of the reason for pursuing redevelopment is to spur economic activity that currently hasn't kept pace with the rest of the City or County. IV. Next Steps by City Staff Due to these concerns, which staff intends to pursue in joint dialogue between the County Assessor staff and the staff of other established TIF districts within the County, City staff now intends to pursue the DDA method for the North College Plan Area. However, given that the North College Plan Area does have development options that are a direct result of the City's investment in Stormwater improvements, staff will pursue expanding the County's definition of improvements to include changes in the flood plain map as these improvements are the result of the City's investment. This dialogue will be part of a larger dialogue regarding the County's overall approach to TIF and how the Assessor's application of the Centerra method yields the unintended result of favoring greenfield development over traditional redevelopment. ATTACHMENT 5 Urban Renewal Authority Report from the Ad Hoc Committee Work Session IOH;t9iILV5 June 27,2006 i A June 27 Work Session: Direction Sought • Does the Commission have comments or questions on the Final Report? e Is the commission comfortable with the recommendations contained In the Final Report? • Is the Commission comfortable with the Implementation strategy? Brief History of the URA in Fort Collins • (UN)dran Urblala Rannewal Authority (UM) am • Council designeted itaelt as the governing board of the se • Thecft Ii.bounclaries of the UM an the h. _l\_ • USN IIE to ancounY radeva opmald of"blighted"are.. ♦ North Col kpe Avenue: 0enmaerlthe:< Council 11 UmaadangRenewwa of n ama aos wranue I 1 Resolution # 003, adopted February 21,2006 • Appointed an Ad Hoc Committee • Karen Weitkunat,Commissioner • Ben Manvel,Commissioner • David Roy,Commissioner • Ron I-autoenhelser,NCCAG • Dean Hoag,NCCAG • Various City staff • Purpose • Formulate recommendations In Report form to the URA Commission regarding"bast pracNces'o(Me administration o([he Fort Collins URA •Timeline • 90-days(May 22 deadline) a.r Study Process ♦ Detailed Work Plan and Schedule ♦ Committee Meetings(2) ♦ Review draft reports prepared by staff ♦ Final Report,published May 22 *Available from WWW-fcgov.com/lURA ♦ Mold Work Session —June 27, 2006 "V G Final Report - Format •7 URA-related issues analyzed; each issue includes: •Background Information •Other um'Practices'review •Committse recommendation • Caveat on Recommendations: •Wisest choice-considering current capacity and ^start-up-stage of the URA •As time passes,and as capacity increases, these clud III h • Will need to reconsider these choices within 5- years 2 #1: Roles the URA should play to assist private sector development a Will need te be tailored to specific Urban Renewal Plan areas . Recommendation for North College: - Primary Roles: ♦U a pprtlpn pr TtFr,Nmuwr.anE Inures dawlopmant pralecte e uwiM publiciuP"l Impro..nuumm for ewa- - Support Roles: •warY mllahararwely wltll wlveN ownalf arM davatagw u Ww proDume .erina panic m twe table m facilitate �vata prMacb am puell0 capful mprowmaata .Prmcewhr m.rxtimd mcrus desk.bla uww ♦Cmader OatYde scene, r .q #2: Calculation of Tax Increment • How should property tax Increment becalculated? p party - ]axlsdag..methods in tarimar County ^oounY.p.aUaan'-Iraanlonal apprwm "C.murn wunpwr me,-sow - Recent discussions with County assessor's Office M boc commlNe rewmmenaeaw-'Mena dYrprwuw'- •anLenY1 -"Mwt\Cnllya W n oeaow•ene^nr•[e a 14.Mww�Callwe�proalemat4 lw anlnlnp• bllpbbE aruf - Staff is will be presented at Tuesdays ores Session i,111 #3: Mission and Policies •Mission Statement: w Mission is to remedy blight by stimulating and leveraging private capital investment,using tax Increment financing in private development Projects and public improvement projects. The URA functions as a Catalyst,partner,advisor,and participant to faster sound growth and redevelopment^ 3 Mission and Policies — URA-wide (cont.) • URA-wide Policies for using TIF: - Projects must meet objectives of the Urban Renewal Plan -TIF will be used for'un•syyually costly" public Improvements associated with redevelopment -TIF may be used for Infrastructure normally requited of development if: For affordable Munn,,or .y —as Primary Jose or aYi /or a bupness Mat c plurse spmMing that is e^looldn out 0 e t N madm ....rho 'dMinWon-uw.ar the IMraatrumure IWlkates Ndhar ra davalopment Mission and Policies — URA-wide (cont.) • TIF will also be considered for projects that: - enhances the public realm(e.g.beautifies the street or buildings) - retains or expands existing boo nesses - preserves historic buildings - protects natural habitats - uses best practices in enemy afficiones g. Mission and Policies — North College • TIF requests will be „$ reviewed by the Citizen Advisory Group fCAG) ♦ Preference to local ownership -- ♦ North College"orioritles^ -transportation improvements - storm drainage improvements - upgrading utilifim, - public amenities k 4 #4 Administration Procedures ♦Review Process for reviewing TIF applications -Application form ® _ - -Score Card _ _ h #5 Intergovernmental Agreement • Need for a common understanding of relationship between URA and Staff, addressing: •Use of City Man and serricea,and spmpepaatipa thereof -IlemmmmGlbn: URA Mould reasonably mm"rund. the City a hso!hero is eufadant Tax Dlmemerd mnw •Describe how to,Increment will amrpe and be )hated between the City and URA -Rw'n,nrM,:dedua: URA willfphet property tax InWnenh bade,to ba M ded by City Council n a 4taby-uso • Need to prepare Bylaws for the Commission a � #6: Composition of the Commission • State law allows two alternatives: -Council can serve as the Commission -Mayor appoints the Commission ♦ Since 1982,the Council has served as the Commission -Recommendation: Council to continue to serve as the Commission, but reconsider this role as the URA adds new Urban Renewal Plan areas 5 #7 Role of the North College Citizen Advisory Group ♦ The intent of the CAG is for"the Commission W rpn�ntftuel�t wiM an adviaery arord o tha North Canada nt Oman Renewal Plan^ ♦ NCCAG was created in 2005 • Rial(g)i ng members/rom the _ one(I Lily 0 an one 1)Plannine and Zoning aearo m nitair. Recommendation. The CAG should continue to fulfill this role r Implementation of Recommendations • 5avaral of these recommendations can be implemented admigistratiyffirfrom direction Yiven by the Commission at thhe Work Se..ion. These include: r N6 CommfW n make-u0 mid 07(Rnala of d�' • Other recommendations will require.fgpaal �p������tpi���i1 by resolution by the Commission. T es include: ♦*33(disdon and polidesh end,15(MA end b, how• a2(calculating tax increment)is not_ready for implementations and needs more staff analysis and negotiations with the County Assessor's Office nx3f i June 27 Work Session: Direction Sought • Does the Commission have comments or questions on the Final Report? • Is the Commission comfortable with the recommendations contained in the Final Report? • Is the Commission comfortable with the implementation strategy? 6