Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Reinvestment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Atchison officials seek joint workshop after county signals withdrawal from neighborhood revitalization program
Summary
Atchison city staff said Atchison County notified the city it plans to withdraw from the joint neighborhood revitalization rebate program; city leaders proposed a joint workshop and outlined what withdrawal could mean for rebate levels and development incentives.
City Manager Mark Westhoff informed the Atchison City Commission that Atchison County has notified the city it plans to terminate its participation in the neighborhood revitalization plan, a multi-party tax-rebate program that reduces property taxes on new builds and larger renovations within the city’s qualifying areas.
"They notified the city ... that they are planning to terminate their participation in the neighborhood revitalization plan," Westhoff said. He told commissioners staff had reached out to the county and requested a joint workshop between the city commission and the county commission to discuss concerns and alternatives. Westhoff said other taxing entities would be invited to that workshop.
Westhoff told the commission the county’s letter triggered a 90-day statutory notification clock that began when the county adopted the relevant action Sept. 2; that window would run to Dec. 1. He said the city had not received a formal, final response from the county’s board and that county officials indicated they were in the midst of their budget process.
Commissioners and staff discussed how the rebate is calculated. Westhoff explained the program provides rebates on 95 percent of the added taxes from an improvement and that the effective benefit varies by category and location. He said a new house in the Arbor Lane subdivision would average about 63 percent rebate over seven years and that, across the life of the program, some project types have yielded roughly a 60 percent benefit. Westhoff noted the rebate follows the property rather than the owner and that a step-down period prevents homeowners from facing a sudden large tax bill immediately after a rebate ends.
City officials discussed potential responses if the county withdraws: the city could continue the program with other taxing partners or alter the rebate schedule. Westhoff said a withdrawal by the county would remove more than a third of the program’s current backing and would require an adjustment to the benefit structure or a re-evaluation of program goals.
Commissioners asked whether the county's rebate payments to taxpayers approached $998,000; Westhoff said that was not the figure he had seen and that some numbers discussed were informal. He said city staff would continue to seek clarity from the county and pursue a joint discussion to determine whether changes other than withdrawal — such as narrowing the target area or reducing rebate percentages — could address county concerns.
No formal action was taken; commissioners authorized staff to pursue a joint workshop and report back with confirmed county positions and potential options.
