HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-11-01 TIF Commission MinutesCITY OF RIVERSIDE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 1, 1995
Members present: Jimmie Karr, Ed Young, Jim Davis, Betty Burch,
Tim Weeks, Jim Wedua, Al Tunis, Ron Super, and Diza Eskridge.
Also present: Don Witt, Dick Smith, Paul Pien, Dan Peak, Roxsen
Koch, Richard King, and Ann Daniels.
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Ron Super. Roll
call was answered. A motion was made by Jimmie Karr, seconded by
Jim Davis, to approve the Minutes from the October 27 meeting as
printed. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Betty Burch, Treasurer, reported she had received two checks
totalling $20,000 from the developer, per the funding agreement.
She stated a checking account would be opened at the Farmers'
Exchange Bank of Riverside.
A motion was made by Diza Eskridge, seconded by Jimmie Karr, that
a bill submitted by Witt & Hicklin, in the amount of $4,088.49, for
legal services provided, be approved for payment. The vote was
unanimous.
Tim Weeks distributed a new set of questions presented by the
School Board to the developer for clarification.
Don Witt introduced Paul Pien, Vice President and General Counsel
for the Trillium Corporation. Mr. Pien stated his company was in
the process of answering the questions submitted by the School
Board.
Dick Smith, attorney with Craft, Fridkin, and Rhyne, was introduced
by Don Witt. Mr. Smith told of his involvement, through his law
firm, as legal counsel for the Kansas City Tax Increment Financing
Commission. He will be advising the Riverside TIF Commission.
During his comments, Mr. Smith stated he had only recently received
the developer's plan and had several questions following his
cursory review. Some of these issues concerned: the description
of the area as blighted when Argosy is already being developed;
the involvement of Argosy in this plan; proof that the property
owners will be benefitted by the plan; proof that the development
will not occur unless the plan is adopted; and to address why this
property will not be developed while other property (Argosy) is
already being developed with no levee or infrastructure.
Mr. Smith stated that, from his cursory review, the plan was not
complete and there would need to be many questions answered before
he could make a recommendation to the Commission.
Discussion was held concerning the time of the Hearing (November
13) and the necessity of having all the negotiations in place, as
well as the development agreement negotiations underway, prior to
that date. It was stated that a completed plan must be submitted
to the public for review but that the plan could be amended during
the Public Hearing process. The boundaries cannot be amended.
Mr. King stated he would like to hear the questions and concerns of
the Commission members. He stated he had heard some discussion
that the School District might like to exempt levy increases from
the TIF since they were preparing to vote on a levy increase.
Trillium is open to negotiation on this issue. He further stated
he had heard from some that the levee should be the first priority
and that could be negotiated, also.
The question was raised as to what benefit other properties might
be receiving from the plan, when Argosy would be receiving a new
entrance road to their property.
Roxsen Koch stated the actual requirement is that the properties,
when they are developed, have to benefit from the redevelopment
project improvements. That would include the Interchange from 635
and the levee which would benefit every property in the area.
Suggestion was made that the developer might need to bring cash to
the project for serious consideration to continue. Mr. King stated
they were not opposed to discussing this issue but wished to have
a suggested amount to consider for negotiations.
Other discussion centered around the levee and actual funding
commitment from Congress for it; granting of right of way and
easements, as well as land, from Trillium Corporation to construct
the levee; the length of time required to pay back the bonds;
and the possibility of the City having Mr. Smith's law firm compute
the figures to ensure their accuracy.
The question was also asked about the City's ultimate
responsibility for repayment of the bonds if the developer should
default. The answer to that question was that the City would have
NO liability and is not at risk.
It was suggested that Argosy should be involved and possibly offer
a commitment to the project. Mayor Burch stated they had been
contacted and would probably have a representative at the next
meeting.
In response to the questions, "Could the City build the levee
without the Developer?", the answer given was yes.
A motion was made for adjournment by Jimmie Karr, seconded by Mayor
Burch. Motion carried unanimously.
Ann Daniels, Secretary