Council advances plan for Tax Increment District 18 to fund roads, roundabout and NextGen housing incentives

The West Bend Common Council on Aug. 4 approved creation of Tax Increment District No. 18 and a project plan to capture new property-tax revenue from proposed residential and industrial development along Roscoe Road between River and Main Street. The plan identifies roughly $31.4 million in project costs including reconstruction of Roscoe Road, a roundabout at Roscoe and River, a small lift station and development incentives, and anticipates up to 315 owner-occupied housing units and roughly $180 million in new taxable value over the TID’s life.

The TID is designed as a mixed-use district with a maximum 20-year life. Phil Costin of Ehlers, the city’s municipal advisor, told the council the plan assumes a 20-year financing schedule and outlined parameters for borrowing and the limits the council set tonight to allow a parameter sale for general obligation promissory notes to pay for the public costs. Costin said the city will initially finance up to $20 million of the fire station financing separately and that the TID borrowing is intended to finance the Roscoe/River projects and developer incentives described in the plan.

Why it matters: the TID will let the city direct new property taxes generated by development back into public infrastructure and incentive payments tied to the project, rather than distributing that growth to overlapping taxing jurisdictions. Council members were presented with financial projections for revenues, assumed tax rates and a cash-flow model showing the district will likely need the full 20 years to repay anticipated obligations under conservative assumptions.

Council discussion and outside partners: City staff described the TID boundary (about 164 acres after excluding 12.8 acres of wetland), statutory limits on residential acreage inside a mixed-use TID and required maps and findings the state requires. Christian Cheslock, CEO of the Economic Development Washington County (EDWC), presented an economic and fiscal-impact analysis focused on the residential component and the county’s NextGen housing support. Deb Silski, Washington County’s community development director, described the county’s NextGen Housing program, which provides up to $20,000 per owner-occupied unit (typically as a 0% loan) and an additional permit-fee mitigation payment of $6,000 per unit to municipalities; she said the program requires 40% of units in one price tier, another 40% in a second tier and the remaining 20% below a third ceiling, with owner-occupancy covenants required.

Incentives and payback: the project plan proposes a mix of up-front and pay-as-you-go incentives. Cost estimates in the plan include $7.7 million for reconstruction of Roscoe Road, the roundabout and the lift station plus development incentives. EDWC’s analysis showed net fiscal benefits to taxing bodies after incentives, with a payback period for incentives reported in the presentation as under 15 years (an aggregate payback near 14 years under the assumptions used).

Council action and timing: a motion to postpone final action until Aug. 18 was moved during the meeting but failed on a roll call (the transcript records the roll-call result as five votes against postponement and three in favor). The council then voted to approve resolution No. 26 creating TID No. 18, with the transcript recording the passage of the resolution (the clerk recorded the motion as approved). Staff and the municipal advisor said that if the council approves the district tonight the next step is the joint review board review and then filing with the Wisconsin Department of Revenue for certification. Costin noted the city must complete final approvals by Sept. 30, 2025, to be established as a 2025 TID, and the project plan will return to the council in the form of development agreements that will set final incentive terms.

What was left undecided: the project plan contains incentive numbers and draft developer terms that staff and partners said will be adjusted in final development agreements with the residential developer (Scott Simpson) and the industrial developer described as F Street and Keller. The council asked for more time and detail; one alderman said he needed additional review before final vote and attempted postponement. Costin and partners said schedule changes are possible and the joint review board meeting can be rescheduled if the council delays final approval.

Ending: staff said they will refine the equalized-value calculations, continue negotiations with developers and county partners, and return development agreements and any needed amendments for council approval. The plan and presentations are available in the council packet for further review.

Speakers quoted in this article are limited to those who spoke on the record at the Aug. 4 meeting as listed in the transcript.