My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-01-30 Study Intergovernmental agreement
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2013
>
2013-01-30 Study Intergovernmental agreement
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2013 8:29:04 AM
Creation date
2/13/2013 8:29:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
1/30/2013
TYPE
STUDY
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />the area for both cities. However, any projects requesting a “Tax Increment Financing <br />(TIF)” would have to be approved by the City where the project was located. <br /> <br />Q: <br /> Ms. Carr asked if either City could amend the code that was adopted by both Cities. <br />She asked to verify that the 353 Corporation would be the administrator of the <br />development. <br />A: <br /> Mr. Martin stated the 353 Corporation committee would be the City’s agent for <br />interested developers, using the code that was jointly developed and approved by <br />each Council. <br /> <br />Q: <br /> Ms. Carr asked what happens to the funds U City collects through their Economic <br />Development Sales Tax meant for improvement along Delmar and Olive. <br />A: <br />Mr. Mello stated that contingent on Olivette doing the same, the tax collected in the <br />defined area would stay for use in that area. He noted if both cities passed the same <br />Economic Development Retail Sales Tax, the money would go back to the defined <br />area and could be used for either side. Right now, the City of University City has the <br />local option tax, Olivette does not. Mr. Martin noted that Council could remove this <br />clause from the agreement if they wanted to do so. <br /> <br />Q: <br />Mr. Crow asked if the JRIC had reviewed the agreement. <br />A: <br /> It was noted that they had but did so in an abbreviated time frame since Olivette’s <br />zoning overlay agreement was expiring. Ms. Riganti added that the November 2011 <br />resolution adopted by both councils established deadlines for the JRIC to submit a <br />draft intergovernmental agreement to both councils. <br /> <br />Q: <br /> Mr. Crow asked how the 353 Corporation would establish credit to help fund <br />developments. He asked if Mr. Mello had similar experience. <br />A: <br /> Mr. Mello said this type of joint development initiative was fairly new but he had seen <br />credit issued many times through Special Purpose Entities. <br /> <br />Q: <br /> Mr. Crow asked about an ordinance that needed to be passed by each City within a <br />one year time frame. <br />A: <br /> Mr. Mello said the JDC had three-years to develop their plan but could not do so until <br />each City passed their ordinance; the zoning overlay was in place; and modifications <br />were made to each City’s Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Q: <br />Mr. Crow asked who from the City would be creating the ordinance; would each city <br />doing their own thing. <br />A: <br /> Mr. Mello indicated that each city would go through their respective ordinance <br />approval process, with councils providing final approval. Each city’s ordinance should <br />be uniform so that each city doing is not doing their own-thing. <br /> <br />Q: <br /> Mr. Crow noted that for tax abatements, should a representative from the school <br />district be on the 353 Corporation. <br />A: <br /> Mr. Mello said the 353 Corporation would have a public hearing for which the school <br />district would be notified and the District could provide comments at the hearing. The <br />353 is not structured like a TIF Commission so there is no state requirement to have <br />school board representation on the 353 Corporation.It was also noted that Olivette did <br /> <br />not have its own school district, which the JRIC took into account when deciding on <br />this issue. <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.