Fishers RDC adopts preliminary TIF resolution for Gray Eagle golf-course and multifamily project amid public objections

The Fishers Redevelopment Commission on June 9 adopted a preliminary declaratory resolution establishing the Gray Eagle economic development area and two allocation areas to support tax increment financing for a golf-course clubhouse and an age‑targeted multifamily project.

The action clears a procedural step that lets the city pledge future tax‑increment revenues toward developer‑purchase bonds for the two projects; commission members then approved separate resolutions pledging increment for the clubhouse allocation area and for the multifamily allocation area.

The case matters because the resolutions authorize using incremental property‑tax revenue generated in the new allocation areas to pay debt service on bonds described in the meeting documents (not‑to‑exceed amounts for related bond series were stated in the record). Opponents said the record lacks evidence the project qualifies as a “major” or “significant” business enterprise and raised concerns that long‑term tax flows would not go into general municipal, county or school budgets but instead would be pledged to bond repayment.

At the public hearing, Matthew Brands, 9446 Ash Lake Lane, said the city’s written findings did not show the project met statutory criteria for a significant business enterprise and that the economic‑development plan lacked quantitative job or wage information. “The commission should reject it,” Brands said, arguing the proposal would effectively subsidize a luxury recreational amenity and would depart from the city’s comprehensive plan land‑use guidance as he read it.

Megan, a planning staff presenter, described the Gray Eagle project as two linked developments: renovations to the existing privately owned golf course and clubhouse and a separate, JC Hart‑developed, age‑targeted multifamily component that includes paired patio homes and a multifamily building. She told the commission the TIF proceeds are split between the multifamily project and the golf course/clubhouse, and that the financing structure being used is a developer‑purchase tax increment financing model. “Their intention is in August, once they close on their bonds and their construction loan, they begin filing for permits and start demoing the clubhouse,” Megan said.

A staff member and legal counsel told the commission the project had previously gone through the Plan Commission and that the notice and documents submitted met Indiana statutory requirements for this type of financing. Staff clarified that the taxes on the improvements are assessed and paid; those incremental taxes are pledged to the bond debt service rather than flowing into regular municipal, county or school operating funds while the bonds are outstanding.

Commission members asked and discussed comprehensive‑plan consistency and the character of the multifamily product. One commission member noted involvement in the city’s 2040 comprehensive plan process and said the plan had identified a shortage of housing options for an aging population; that member urged consideration of the benefit of keeping older residents in Fishers rather than losing them to neighboring communities.

After public comment and staff responses, the commission moved, seconded and approved the preliminary declaratory resolution. The commission then voted to approve separate pledging resolutions for the clubhouse allocation area and for the multifamily allocation area; meeting materials described the bonds as developer‑purchase bonds and included stated not‑to‑exceed amounts for the series referenced in the record.

Discussion (public comment) — Matthew Brands, resident: objected to the findings of fact, said the economic report provided little detail on jobs, wages or demonstrated significant business enterprise status, and argued the proposal did not conform to the comprehensive plan as he read it.

Staff responses — Planning staff and legal counsel: said the documents had been processed through the Plan Commission, that Indiana law allows the chosen lease/financing structure, and that incremental taxes are assessed and paid but pledged to bond repayment rather than to general government operating budgets while the bonds are outstanding.

Outcome — The commission adopted the preliminary declaratory resolution and then adopted the subsequent resolutions pledging the tax increment revenues for the two Gray Eagle allocation areas to the bond repayment (motions and voice votes recorded as adopted in the meeting transcript).

Ending — The items now proceed to the financing steps and to any subsequent approvals required by the financing documents and bond closings; staff said the developer aimed to close bonds and construction financing in August and begin construction activities thereafter.