Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Incentives And Conagra Tif topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Huron council accepts tax-incentive review recommendations as city manager defends ConAgra TIF
Summary
At its March 25 meeting the Huron City Council accepted Tax Incentive Review Council recommendations to continue 10 tax abatements and two TIFs while City Manager Matthew Lasko pushed back on school board criticism of the ConAgra TIF and explained why funding the seawall is central to waterfront redevelopment.
The Huron City Council on March 25 approved a resolution accepting the recommendations of the Tax Incentive Review Council to continue 10 tax-abatement agreements and two tax-increment financing districts, and heard an extended response from City Manager Matthew Lasko defending the ConAgra waterfront project and the city’s use of incentives.
Lasko told council the TIR council’s role is advisory and that “cities, ultimately, with these TIFs, are the ones taking the risk.” He said the ConAgra TIF has been included in annual reporting even though, as discussed at the meeting, the ConAgra TIF is not yet in effect and will return to council for final action in late April or May. "Without a seawall, there is no development," Lasko said, arguing that reconstructing the seawall is necessary to unlock private investment and future TIF revenues.
The nut graf: the vote completes the city’s annual reporting duties under state procedures and signals council’s continued support, for now, of existing abatements and the two TIF districts named in the review. Lasko’s remarks were focused on correcting what he described as misinformation raised at a recent school-board meeting and on explaining how the ConAgra project’s public infrastructure needs — especially the seawall — factor into the city’s economic-development strategy.
Lasko told council the TIR council reviewed 10 abatements and two TIFs (the Rye Beach and Sawmill Creek TIFs) and the auditor recommended continuation of all. He said the ConAgra TIF item was included on the council agenda but had not been voted on by the advisory TIR council because the TIF itself “does not exist yet” and will be formally considered later.
Lasko pushed back on several critiques raised publicly about the ConAgra proposal, disputing characterizations that the project was pushed on a developer or that TIF funding for the seawall would produce a waterfront “playground for the rich.” He noted changes in developers over time but said the plan’s core elements (approximately 80–100 residential units, marina, green space, interior road and modest retail/hospitality) have been consistent and that the seawall reconstruction was a repeated requirement in developer requests during two RFP processes. Lasko also contrasted ConAgra with other incentives, saying earlier projects such as Sawmill Creek involved large infrastructure investments and did not draw the same criticism.
Council placed the resolution on the agenda and adopted it by roll call. The resolution directs city staff to submit the required reporting to the Ohio Department of Development by the end of the reporting period.
Council members did not propose substantive amendments to the resolution during the March 25 meeting. Lasko requested that council’s final recommendation and reporting be submitted on schedule to the Ohio Department of Development.
Ending: The ConAgra topic will return to council for additional hearings and formal votes on any TIF creation or tax-abatement modifications; Lasko said the formal ConAgra TIF action is expected in late April or May.
