Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance Incentives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Experts brief council on tax increment financing and new community authorities, outline risks and municipal controls
Summary
An outside economic development attorney explained how TIFs and new community authorities work, their uses for infrastructure financing, and governance features that allow cities to retain oversight.
Canal Winchester council received an extended briefing on March 3 that explained tax increment financing (TIF) and the New Community Authority (NCA) — two legal tools developers and municipalities use to finance public infrastructure and community amenities.
Emma Mulvaney, an economic development attorney with Forrest Brown & Todd, told council that TIFs divert the increase in property tax revenue above an established base to finance public infrastructure or repay bonds. "When we're talking about TIF, you do not see any difference," Mulvaney said, explaining the mechanism operates through auditor/treasurer accounting rather than an immediate change to a taxpayer’s bill.
Nut graf: The presentation framed both tools as flexible financing options but emphasized trade‑offs: TIFs redirect future tax growth for a limited period to pay for roads, sewers and utility oversizing, while NCAs can levy additional community charges, own property and fund long‑term amenities — giving developers and cities multiple options to stage or fund large projects.
TIF highlights in the presentation: Mulvaney explained typical commercial TIFs capture increments for financing public improvements and can be structured as rolling districts activated parcel‑by‑parcel. She noted statutory protections for school districts under certain TIF structures, and that state lawmakers have occasionally enacted project‑specific TIF extensions in the past.
New Community Authority overview: Mulvaney described NCAs as a ‘‘HOA on steroids’’ — nonprofit, quasi‑public corporations that can levy community charges (mills, sales or bed taxes, gross receipts or lease fees) and issue bonds. She highlighted statutory controls intended to preserve municipal oversight: NCA boards are composed of developer, municipal and local‑government appointees (the municipality is entitled to a one‑member advantage), public‑meeting and audit requirements apply, and the petition and feasibility study are part of the formal creation process.
Questions from council addressed transparency and local impacts. Councilmember Amick asked how a buyer would learn an NCA charge applies; Mulvaney said the declaration must be recorded in property records and typically appears on title reports or in developer disclosures. Councilmembers also raised whether NCAs could be applied to noncontiguous parcels and how NCA charges interact with school levies; Mulvaney said noncontiguous additions are possible with justification and cautioned that high NCA charges can affect voters’ appetite for other levies.
Why it matters: both tools can reshape how growth is financed in Canal Winchester. Mulvaney and staff urged careful feasibility analysis and consultation with the city’s municipal financial adviser before pursuing either a TIF or an NCA for a specific project.
Follow-up: Mulvaney offered to provide staff and council with additional analyses and said petition language, expected project list and an economic feasibility study are required steps if the city were to consider an NCA petition.
Sources: Presentation and Q&A with Emma Mulvaney, Forrest Brown & Todd, and questions from council members at the March 3 council meeting.
