Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mitchell planning panel approves TIF District No. 40 to support two affordable apartment buildings
Summary
The Mitchell Planning and Zoning Commission approved boundaries and the project plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 40, recommending roughly $1.6 million in developer‑fronted TIF assistance for two 24‑unit affordable apartment buildings; the state retains final approval authority.
Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Mitchell Planning and Zoning Commission voted to set boundaries and approve the project plan for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District No. 40, recommending the district to support construction of two 24‑unit apartments intended to be rented at or below 80 percent of median income.
Mark, a city staff member presenting the proposal, said the developer is "requesting about $1,600,000," with roughly $1.7 million in TIF‑eligible expenses and a total project cost of about $12,000,000. He described the request as a developer‑financed TIF with a five‑year spending window and a 20‑year tax‑increment payback schedule.
The recommendation approved by the commission does not finalize state review: Mark noted the state still has the authority to designate the project as an affordable‑housing TIF and could decline the designation. Counsel for the applicant, Skyler Mickelson, said the applicant has provided additional information to a frequent critic who attends City Council meetings and expects that person to continue attending public hearings.
Commission members moved and seconded the boundary setting and project plan approval after the staff presentation. The commission carried both motions by voice vote and recommended approval of District No. 40 to the next appropriate authority. The record packet included a cost breakdown and a 20‑year payback schedule that staff said comes in just above the developer's requested amount.
The commission did not record detailed roll‑call tallies in the transcript; the motions were approved by the board and marked "motion carried." The project materials and the developer agreement will govern specific payback terms, and the state designation remains a required next step before TIF funds may be used.
The commission moved on to other agenda items following the vote; no members of the public spoke during the TIF hearing.

