Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Convention Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates possible incentives for proposed convention center, leaves options open for RFP
Summary
EDIC discussed whether to permit tax increment financing or other public incentives to support private development—especially a hotel—adjacent to a publicly owned convention center; committee favored keeping the request for proposals open‑ended and exploring options on a site‑by‑site basis.
Committee members discussed incentives the city might consider to attract a hotel or related private development tied to a planned city‑owned convention center. The committee did not make a final decision but directed that incentive options be left open in early RFP work.
Jim Gilmore and other staff framed the question for the committee: if the city builds a convention center that is publicly owned and exempt from property tax, should the city create a larger TIF district or otherwise offer incentives to encourage private development—particularly a hotel—adjacent to the center to improve the facility’s viability? Gilmore described several ways the city has provided public assistance in the past, including funding public improvements, issuing TIF notes under a development agreement, and granting targeted tax exemptions to simplify accounting.
Charlie (city commissioner) said leaving a TIF or incentive option available could make proposals more attractive and provide flexibility. Charlie and Jim emphasized that the RFP should be as open ended as practical to encourage creative proposals and that more specific negotiations could occur later when finalists are selected. Committee members discussed tradeoffs, including whether incentives should subsidize hotel construction or be limited to extraordinary public costs such as demolition, structured parking, or expanded meeting spaces.
Committee members described next steps: the city’s convention‑center committee is touring comparable facilities (Saint Cloud and Rochester) and expects an initial RFP draft in the spring; the committee is meeting weekly and intends to engage catering and event professionals to determine kitchen and event-space requirements. Committee members noted the convention‑center tax revenue is designated to the convention center and emphasized that any incentive structure should aim to limit ongoing city operating costs.
No formal vote was taken on a specific incentive package; the committee’s judgment was to keep incentive tools (including potential TIF districts) available as an option in the RFP and to continue developing program details and site analyses.
