Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ashland County Board backs City of Ashland plan to create Tax Increment District 11

3152562 · April 30, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Ashland County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a resolution supporting the creation of Tax Increment District No. 11 in the City of Ashland after a presentation from municipal finance adviser Sean Lentz of Ehlers Incorporated.

The Ashland County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a resolution supporting the creation of Tax Increment District No. 11 in the City of Ashland after a presentation from municipal finance adviser Sean Lentz of Ehlers Incorporated. The board’s resolution, R04-2025-1501, passed by voice vote during the meeting.

Lentz told the county board that the city intends to use tax increment financing to pay for infrastructure and incentives to spur redevelopment on a largely vacant parcel along Beazer Avenue. “What we're looking at in this particular situation is there is an area in the city where the city council and staff would like to see the location updated, renewed and redeveloped,” Lentz said. He described an initial Phase 1 package of work and incentives estimated at roughly $3.2 million to $3.5 million to support a primary residential project the city hopes to build in 2025.

Under the proposed plan, the development group would build a large apartment project on the north end of the proposed district; Lentz said the developer is currently promoting about 130 units (they described a possible upper bound of 150). The presentation estimated the two phases of development could create about $44 million in new taxable value and, over the full life of the district, generate about $19.2 million in tax-increment revenue to repay project costs. Lentz also noted statutory limits and rules that govern tax increment districts in Wisconsin, including a maximum district life of 27 years and that some eligible project costs may occur either inside the district or within a half-mile under state law.

Board members asked about ownership, risk and offsite impacts. Lentz said the apartment building would be privately owned and taxed like any other private property. He also described two common repayment approaches: the city borrowing and repaying from captured increment revenue, or a pay-as-you-go arrangement in which a developer is repaid from increment revenue as it is produced. Lentz emphasized that the city will finalize a development agreement with the developer and that the city — not other taxing jurisdictions — would be responsible for any shortfall if increment revenue did not cover district costs.

Supervisors raised questions about environmental cleanup, school and county service impacts, and fiscal capacity. Supervisor Liz asked whether soil testing and any additional cleanup had already been completed and who would be responsible; Lentz replied that cleanup responsibilities and costs beyond already completed remediation were being negotiated in the development agreement and likely would be covered in part by incentives to make the site fully redevelopable. Supervisor Passy asked whether the plan accounted for increased demands on schools and county services if new residents arrive; Lentz said such impacts are commonly discussed at the Joint Review Board and that the school district participated in earlier meetings and would continue to study any effects.

The County Board discussion also touched on the city’s existing use of tax increment financing; Lentz noted the city previously used TID 10 to support a downtown hotel redevelopment and said the city remains well below statutory debt limits and a 12% state threshold that can restrict new TIDs. The immediate next step Lentz described was a scheduled Joint Review Board vote on May 22; if the joint board approves, documentation would be submitted to the State of Wisconsin for processing.

The board took formal action later in the meeting. Mr. Bassett moved to adopt resolution R04-2025-1501 supporting creation of City of Ashland TID 11; Mr. Kinney seconded. The resolution passed on a voice vote with no recorded roll-call in the meeting minutes. The county’s approval is advisory as part of the multi-jurisdiction review required for creation of the district; final approval requires affirmative votes by all overlapping taxing jurisdictions at the Joint Review Board and state processing.

The city’s project plan names a mix of Phase 1 infrastructure and development incentives, potential street and utility work, park improvements, and housing and business grants that would be eligible to be repaid from captured increment revenue if the district is created and generates expected value. Lentz and county staff said individual projects would remain subject to the city’s normal approval processes, and inclusion in the project plan makes projects eligible for TID repayment but does not guarantee they will proceed.

Next steps: the City of Ashland’s Joint Review Board is scheduled to vote on the district on May 22; if approved by all required taxing jurisdictions, the formal materials will be transmitted to the State of Wisconsin for processing and the city and developer will continue negotiating a development agreement that would specify responsibilities for remediation, financing and repayment.