Evansville redevelopment commission accepts 2024 TIF report after review of downtown hotel shortfall and bond obligations

The Evansville Redevelopment Commission on April 15 accepted the 2024 annual report on tax-increment financing (TIF) activity and discussed several items that commissioners said need clearer labeling in the state-required template, including a downtown hotel revenue shortfall, outstanding bond obligations for the Ford Center and other projects, and the accounting for developer‑funded infrastructure.

The report, prepared by the controller’s office with Department of Metropolitan Development (DMD) staff, is a state-mandated summary of activity by TIF district that staff will upload to the state’s Gateway portal and provide to the mayor’s office and City Council. Auditors were scheduled to begin reviewing the submissions May 1, staff said.

Commissioners pressed staff for more context after they noticed figures for the downtown hotel TIF showing revenues of $833,271 and expenses of $1,200,000 with a $237,000 fund balance. Staff explained the Gateway template isolates TIF property‑tax increment and does not show other revenue streams that may be pledged to the same bond issue — such as food-and-beverage tax, local income tax (LIT) or a sports district increment — and that those additional sources make up the difference for debt service.

Commissioners asked for the report to better indicate when a TIF district’s debt service is supported by multiple revenue sources. Staff said they can produce income statements for each TIF that include pledged revenues, reserves and beginning balances and will make those available to commissioners; staff also said a master spreadsheet of city debt will be updated to show outstanding series and project names.

Discussion also covered several district-specific items: the newly created South Kentucky allocation area has no increment yet because no projects have started; Jacobsville shows a multi-million‑dollar fund balance on December 31 but commissioners were reminded to subtract bond reserves and upcoming debt service to estimate true cash available; Franklin Lofts is a developer‑purchase bond with revenues pledged to the developer, not the commission; and the Burkhart (Grove Road) infrastructure work was financed by a developer borrowing money with the city pledging increment up to an agreed cap.

Commissioners flagged the Ford Center debt and asked staff to confirm which line items on the report correspond to that series; staff said the controller’s debt spreadsheet and bond records will be cross‑checked to ensure the Ford Center and other large obligations are clearly identified. Staff also noted that routine items such as Baker Tilly arbitrage calculations and paying‑agent fees are included in the TIF fund accounting.

The commission’s role in these matters was reiterated: the redevelopment commission controls TIF resources and annual appropriations within each district; City Council and the mayor receive the report for informational purposes and do not vote on the submission to the state. Staff warned commissioners they are monitoring statewide legislative changes that could change TIF revenue rules and stressed conservative budgeting because large tax appeals or revenue losses could affect debt service capacity.

Votes at a glance: two routine votes recorded during the meeting. The commission approved minutes from its April 1 meeting by voice vote with Commissioners Halsman, Walton, McAllister and Morley recorded as “aye.” Later the commission accepted the 2024 TIF report; during that vote Commissioners Aultman, Wathan, Fussner, McAllister and Morley were recorded as “aye.” No “no” votes or abstentions were recorded in the minutes for either item.

The commission accepted the report and directed staff to upload the document to Gateway and provide the supporting income statements and the updated city debt spreadsheet to commissioners before subsequent meetings. Staff and commissioners said auditors would review the filings starting May 1.

The meeting closed after travel and room logistics for the May 6 meeting were discussed; commissioners were told the May 6 meeting room will not support WebEx and will require in‑person attendance.