Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
IDB hears county audit of TIF program; board weighs formal policies and staffing for oversight
Summary
Hamilton County's internal audit found TIFs are generally meeting goals but flagged weak formal policies and inconsistent oversight. IDB staff and members discussed strengthening monitoring, using new CivicServe software, and whether to fund a dedicated IDB project manager from administrative fees.
Winston Brooks, director of economic development and entrepreneurship, presented a Hamilton County internal audit of tax increment financing (TIF) agreements initiated by the city and county dating to 2013 (audit dated 10/09/2025). Brooks said the audit "concludes that the program is generally achieving its primary goals of encouraging economic development and maintaining adequate internal controls," but it identified weaknesses including a lack of formal policies and inconsistent monitoring of financial compliance with agreements.
Brooks and Speaker 5 (Sharita) told the board the city and IDB will implement improvements. Staff noted the board recently approved CivicServe software to manage incentives and reporting; the software will support financial reporting and compliance tracking when it begins in 2026. Sharita said future IDB reports will expand to include the original purpose of each TIF, whether the TIF is meeting its objectives, and other items the auditor requested; the next regular report is expected in June 2026.
Board members asked for clarification about specific audit recommendations: one recommendation suggested delegating an individual within the IDB to review contracts and financial reports to ensure compliance. Sharita said that historically oversight has been distributed across city teams (city engineer for stadium work, economic development for Tubman project, housing team for housing-related TIFs) with finance serving as a common thread. She said the IDB may consider hiring a staff member or project manager; administrative fees collected under each TIF could fund such a position, but the city attorney would need to confirm the employment structure.
Members also raised a county-versus-city accounting discrepancy on the Black Creek TIF (page 9 of the auditor’s report). Speaker 8 said the county’s calculation treated an item differently; Speaker 5 said economic development, city finance and the county auditor met and resolved an issue specific to the county calculation. Staff agreed to return with recommendations on staffing and compliance by February and to incorporate auditor-requested report elements into future TIF reporting.
