Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews 'inland port' tax‑differential concept to finance infrastructure
Summary
Committee members discussed using an "inland port" or tax‑differential mechanism that captures future property‑tax increases in a designated area for up to 25 years to fund infrastructure and incentives. Members noted advantages for financing but raised governance and control considerations.
Payson Economic Development Committee members discussed an "inland port" model — a tax‑differential financing tool similar to a redevelopment area — that would capture a portion of future property‑tax increases in a designated area for up to 25 years to fund infrastructure improvements.
A committee speaker explained the basic mechanism: the existing tax base for properties in the zone is set, and as property values rise, a portion of the additional tax receipts (the "tax differential") is directed back into that area to fund roads, utilities and other improvements. Committee members described a split in which roughly 75% of the incremental value could be reinvested in the area while the remaining portion would continue to be distributed among taxing entities. "What this is able to do is set that existing tax base ... for a period of 25 years," a speaker said. "... 75% of the of the value gets put back into that specific area that's been created for for that inland port or an RDA..."
Members said the approach can speed infrastructure buildout, make bonding and developer incentives easier, and allow recruiters to market the area to prospective businesses. They also noted tradeoffs: a port authority or similar entity typically controls the captured funds and can make funding decisions, though cities generally retain land‑use and permitting authority. Members said the city would still control zoning and permitting but that the port authority would have significant financial and project‑selection influence. The committee also discussed that the mechanism can apply to multiple parcels rather than requiring a single contiguous site and can be applied to existing buildings if upgrades are needed.
No formal decision was recorded; committee members said the inland‑port model merits further study as a tool to attract manufacturing and large employers to Payson’s growth corridors.
Ending: Staff and committee members encouraged further research and stakeholder engagement with county officials and taxing entities before pursuing such a designation.
