My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
TC 2003
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Town Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
TC 2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2008 1:02:03 PM
Creation date
12/30/2008 1:00:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Clerk Treas
DATE
2008-12-30
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
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 />It is my feeling that we need to evaluate our past success through the projects the <br />Redevelopment Commission have completed in the mid-town district that were to reduce <br />the clear water infiltration into our sanitary sewers and determine other projects necessary <br />to complete the repair and restoration of the Town's infrastructure so that we can <br />determine when this area is not longer deemed "blighted" and remove them from the <br />district. This would create additional tax revenues not only to the Town, but to the <br />schools and other tax funded entities. The more we continue to-it's not even really about <br />granting additional abatements. My concern is that we don't have a good handle on the <br />amount of money that has come in over the existence of the TIF districts and when we <br />can expect to start receiving forwarded funds from the Redevelopment Commission or a <br />projected timeline for when we can start eliminating areas out of the TIF District so that <br />those tax revenues come to the Town of Mooresville nit the Redevelopment <br />Commission. Since 1.996 the Town budget has almost doubled, from over $3million to <br />over $6 million and we have lost all the existing business we had in the mid-town district <br />which included Nice-Pak, Labco, an other downtown businesses. 5o that increase has <br />had to be absorbed by the current homeowners and the new residential subdivisions that <br />have been brought in to Town. I am very close to getting all of these numbers together. <br />The county, Helen and Jeff have been very helpful in getting numbers to me as well as <br />the Clerk_Treasurer. But until we can pinpoint this and work with the Redevelopment <br />Commission to determine when some of these benefits are going to be forwarded to the <br />Town I don't think we should move forward with granting any additional abatements. I <br />think that by the next meeting we should be able to have a much better handle on where <br />we have been and where we intend to be in the near future and further on down the line <br />and with that T make a motion to table the hearings until we have completed the review of <br />the Redevelopment Commission and established a potential. timeline of possible TIF <br />District downsizing and additional funds forwarded to the Town. <br />Councilman Worthen said he guessed the only. question is by granting this abatement <br />whether it is a ten year or a three year, we are stall getting 50°l0 of something. (Weis the <br />Redevelopment Commmission). He said you and X have discussed it and the original plan <br />looked in areas maybe this council hasn't looked at, such as improvements with our <br />storm sewer system. I think most of our storm sewer system has within the TIF area has <br />- been either replaced, relined, grouted, cameraed, etc. We do some things outside the TIF. <br />We do have a project possibly coming up within the TIF area, but we should <br />wholeheartedly look at going to the Redevelopment Commission and asking for funding <br />on it. Councilman Worthen said he thought what would be better served is if there could ~ <br />be a meeting between the Redevelopment Commission and the Town Council, an open <br />meeting and sit down and discuss future plans what can or cannot be done. I still say the <br />abatements is receiving something, if no projects had come, would we be worse off than i <br />we are now. The additional services in the areas, I think this council made a bold and <br />loud statement on development of residential areas early this year. Because we know that <br />our police staffing is based an so many police officers per population and our business <br />district is more of an investment in our future. booking at what Helen has prepared, it is <br />showing that over in 2012, 2013 that it's going to generate over a million and a half <br />dollars in tax revenue, that is not all the Towns, probably a third of that would be the <br />Town's. X know it's going to generate something. I think nurturing this, hoping to grow <br />the business district is filling up and at that point, it is time to do away with the TIF area. <br />Councilman Bryant asked, when will that be? I wholeheartedly want to have the <br />meeting. That is what I am getting at, we need to sit down and determine in the future <br />the potential to relinquish some of this area., but if ground becomes available further <br />south of Hancel Parkway or Flagstaff Industrial Park, will it be extended further down. <br />The TIF district is a great tool, but ours just keeps expanding. We have almost half the <br />Town of Mooresville in the TIF district and we do not know when some of these funds <br />can be relinquished back to us. I understand we are getting one half of something that we <br />were not getting before, but I am sure that has been the thought process since day one, <br />but we( the Tawn) still aren't getting anything. Councilman Worthen said he thought <br />what we hive been doing is invest back into it and maybe the time has come to look at <br />the projects, the businesses in mid-town and I think we should have a meeting with the <br />Redevelopment Commission. That's my thoughts. Councilman Bryant said he would <br />like to have that meeting too. Attorney Currens reminded the council there was a motion <br />on the floor. President Dolen said do we have a second to the motion. There was na <br />second forthcoming so the motion died. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.