Gardiner Economic Development Committee
Gardiner City Hall Council Chambers
Tuesday, September 10th, 2002, 8:00 a.m.
Minutes
Attending: Randy Clark, Rebecca Colwell (Chair), Anne Davis, Norman Gardner, Nelson Gosline, Kim Greenleaf, Geri Robbins, Norman Temple, Francis Grey, Chris Paszyc
1) Approval of Minutes from Previous Meeting
Becky Colwell motioned; Norman Gardner seconded, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
2) Economic Development Director's Report
Chris reported that a promising contact for Libby Hill had been made with the Maine Tourism Association. Another company that expressed interest is Synernet, which does medical waste treatment. They claim that their process leaves the medical waste clean enough to stuff teddy bears with. They would require an 8,000 s.f. building to house their machinery, but with few employees to run it. Chris suggested that despite the sanitary nature of the process, people might perceive it as a less desirable business for Libby Hill that might actually fit better with the businesses and uses of the Fairfield Biotechnology Park. Anne asked if there would be negative consequences if we say no to someone. Chris said that actually it could be highly positive as "regional cooperation."
Chris said Synernet came upon us from our ad in Mainebiz, the third one to mention that source.
Someone asked if anything has happened with the Credit Union Building. Chris said that the Board of Trade has to meet. Norman Gardner asked if there was any news about Pine State. Chris said they are supposed to be coming back in the fall.
Chris said that the posts are all up for the Gateway signs, and the next thing that needs to happen is the holes need to be drilled in the granite for the signs to be connected. The Public Works crew has been working tirelessly to get the posts up and help install the new streetlights as well as all of their regular tasks. Downtown has a new property owner, Don Myers of Portland, who recently purchased five buildings.
3) Loan Applications
There were no loan applications to review.
4) Other Business
a) Downtown Tax Increment Financing District
Chris presented to the committee the map and spreadsheet for the proposed downtown TIF district. It has been discussed for over two years. Since Hannaford finished their major renovation project, it's time the City "captured the value". The map describes the boundaries of the proposed TIF district. Someone commented that the district does not include Purbeck Isle, D & H Motors, Standard Distributors, Yorktown, and E. J. Prescott. It would be nice if someone came along who was interested if we could help them. Chris said those properties might be difficult to pass the straight face test with state officials as part of the downtown, and that there would be nothing preventing a separate TIF arrangement for any of those properties. Chris explained that when any
improvements are made in the downtown TIF district, the increment of revenue from the new valuation would be earmarked for an economic development sinking fund, and would be sheltered from the calculation of our State Revenue Sharing, School Subsidy, and County Tax. For example, if Hannaford has an increment of $412,000, it would create $8,356 of new revenue that would be sheltered. As projects continue in the Downtown Revitalization, the new increments in valuation could start to add up. We have to decide what the district is, and for how long it should continue. As a blanket TIF, any new valuation will be captured. No businesses will get part of their taxes back. Instead, it is all sheltered to go into an economic development sinking fund. Some people who don't have children ask, "Why should I pay taxes to pay for schools?" Under this scenario, they're not. They're paying for improvements to their downtown. As
earmarked tax money, whatever new revenues generated in the district have to go back into the downtown. It's new revenue that is not lost to the City. It's a good way to fund projects in the downtown without putting pressure on the City in other areas.
Someone commented that the City Council might have a problem designating tax money for a certain area. Chris said that it would improve our position immediately in the areas of school, state subsidy, and county tax. We should have the district at least as long as we have bonds to pay down. On the "con" side is the political implication. Some people don't like the name "TIF." The beauty of the blanket TIF concept is that it picks up small projects as well as big ones.
Kim commented that it might not be a good attraction tool for new businesses if their tax increments are going to pay old bond debt. Paying old bills would not be a good marketing tool compared to new improvements in the downtown. Chris said that we could decide from year to year where it will go. For example, 50% could go toward debt service and 50% toward façade improvements in a given year. Someone asked if we should try to include a bigger area in the district, then scale it back our plan if the state doesn't like it. Chris said that the state has a real concern with geographic boundaries, and that we don't need a sacrificial lamb built in. The TIF is only for real estate tax, not for business personal property.
b) Other
The Housing Forum is in one week. Chris described the format. Information is available on the web site. Kim asked when the plans for the Arcade building to open up the passage would come to fruition. Chris said that we d need another grant to do that. Also, the people currently in negotiations to buy the building are among the more cooperative parties in the downtown, and have the resources to participate in that project.
5) Regular Review of RLF Accounts
Tammy Benoit is the only one currently behind in payments.
6) Schedule Next Meeting
Scheduled for October 8th at 8 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Christopher Paszyc
Director
| 
