Budget Hearing Notes, July 24, 2024, 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Uncategorized

County Council Budget Hearing Notes, July 24, 2024, 8:30 a.m. -6:00 p.m.  I’ll be posting the audio recordings  at a later time.

This post at Brown County Matters

Agenda – Budget Hearings, Wednesday July 24, 2023

Attendance by the public: I have been attending the hearings for years. The other attendee this year was Patrick Nledlander, a Republican candidate for the council.

Review Process. The council selected a new financial advisor last year. He supplemented the budget submissions by the departments with with additional detail. It will be another few weeks before final approval, and we have an idea as to what can be funded and how. New also this year was the need for the departments to identify their capital improvements that might be able to be funded with the money from the General Obligation (GO) bond. The council will be voting to approve the limits and terms of this bond at their next meeting.

Taxes. Borrowing money via a bond for infrastructure is paid for by a property tax and is a recurring event.  The amount borrowed started off at 2 million/2 years, then 3 million/3 years, and now the amount to be borrowed is not to exceed 4 million.  The length has yet to be decided – likely longer than “4” years. When we borrowed 3 million, the interest rate was less than 1 percent so it could be claimed that borrowing an extra million would be “tax neutral” – the existing tax would not go up.

Convention Visitors Commission (CVC).  There were several members of the public attended the last session –which was the presentation of the budget by the CVC. This budget identifies how the revenue from innkeepers tak (1.3 million) is to be spent.  This was the first year I can recall that the CVC budget received any scrutiny, and council members sought to understand the financial relationship between the county, the CVC/CVB,  and the Maple Leaf Management group. The county financial adivsior suggested that a flowchart would be helpful to understand the process.

Reduced CVB Funding. THE CVC has identified its intent to reduce funding for the CVB. The CVB is a non-profit created (in 1984?) to market tourism to include managing the visitors center. A building they bought.  The CVC objected to the purchase and the possibility that the mortgage would be paid for with the revenue from the innkeepers’ tax.  This issue was discussed at the Joint meeting of the commissioners and council:

CVC Budget – Review and Approval. The county council – “by statute”, reviews and approves the CVC budget. Any change in the budget and funding of the CVB would need to be reviewed and approved by a majority vote of the county council.  Commissioners and Council appoint members to the CVC. I do not recall what the appointment process is for members of the Maple Leaf Management  Group. This is a 7-member board that includes a representative from the council – Darren Byrd, and a  Commissioner  – Jerry Pittman.  The Maple Leaf Management group determines the distribution of the excess revenue from the Music Center.

County Financing for Private Development. A short discussion on the council’s non-binding intent to provide county matching funds (3.4 million est. ) for the development of the Little Opry/Apartment Building project.  Funds would be used to finance the extension of sewers in the area, which is in Nashville’s sewer district.  I am not aware of any current plans by  Nashville’s Utility Service Board (USB) to fund sewer expansions in the area.

The property is owned by the Tiltons, who will lease the property to a developer.  The idea is for 1-2 bedroom apartments leased at market rates (1,500 a month). Tax abatements and revenue from increases in taxes as a result of the development were identified as possible options.

A Tax Increment Financing District (TIF) has also been mentioned as a possible source of revenue for funding the costs of infrastructure. This topic was also discussed at the Joint Session references above.

TIFs and Legal Council. The topic of TIFs was mentioned —a meeting was held on the topic with the RDC president, the financial advisor, and an attorney from Barnes and Thornburg. During the commissioner presentation, it was mentioned that the RDC should be funded with 10K to help cover legal expenses to support economic development funding strategies, including TIFs.

NEW.   Establishing TIF districts to support economic development is NEW to Brown County but common in other counties.  Nashville has established TIFs that have not resulted in an influx of capital. TIFs are used to fiancé the infrastructure needed to attract businesses and jobs, increase school enrollments, housing, shopping, etc. Carmel and Fischers have used TIFs and other incentives to maximize their development.

Purdue—The Use of Tax–Increment Finance. Indiana law now makes clear that TIF is intended to fund infrastructure to promote development that would not occur without the added infrastructure financed by the TIF revenues. 

    • Evidence that the development would not happen but for the establishment of the TIF district must be presented before the TIF district is approved. 
    • TIF is not meant as a source of revenue for responding to ongoing development nor as a substitute for other sources of infrastructure funding. 

Leave a comment