New London JRB appoints public member and chair, reviews TID 5 amendment and proposed TID 7

The New London Joint Review Board on an initial review agreed to appoint Christie Dorsey as a public member and to name Julia Ratke chair, and reviewed a draft amendment to Tax Incremental District (TID) 5 and a proposal to create TID 7.

At the start of the meeting, the board approved the appointment of Christie Dorsey (moved by Dave; seconded by Joe) and then appointed Julia Ratke as chair (moved by Dave; seconded by Kristi). Both motions carried on recorded “Aye” votes. The meeting record does not attach full surnames or office titles to all votes beyond the stated mover and seconder.

During the substantive review, a presenter identified only by the transcript as Speaker 3 described the TID 5 amendment as adding two parcels on the south side of the existing district—stated in the meeting record as about 0.884 acres—to support a proposed condominium development by Breezewood Builders. The presenter said most of the project plan is a reconciliation of prior actual costs with earlier estimates: the original plan estimate for the district had been about $2,800,000, actual spending to date was reported at about $3,300,000, and the amendment carries forward an extra $470,000 plus a new proposed incentive of roughly $300,000 and interest costs, producing a revised projected total near $4,300,000. The presenter said the district’s 20‑year life would not change and that the amendment satisfies statutory mixed‑use tests the presenter cited (a 50% developable area test and a limit of 35% newly platted residential), reporting 63% developable and 24% newly platted residential for the amended TID 5.

Speaker 3 also noted that certain capital projects within a half‑mile of the district (for example, North Water Street and North Pearl Street improvements) would require express permission from the JRB to be funded from TID revenues, and that the city intends to recover an advance made from the wastewater treatment plant fund if there is a balance available in the TID.

On TID 7, the presenter described a new mixed‑use district on the north end of town prompted by a proposed Aldi store and potential future development to the east. The plan is phased: Phase 1 would install necessary infrastructure (stormwater, water, sanitary, street reconstruction) to render parcels developable; Phase 2 would defer additional infrastructure and possible land acquisition for stormwater ponding and would include developer incentives. The presenter said the plan modeled Aldi at about $2.0–$2.25 million in value and estimated Phase 1 infrastructure costs at $1,000,000. Projected 20‑year tax‑increment collections for the district were modeled at about $820,000, producing an early‑years cash‑flow shortfall that the presenter said would likely require borrowing and could, in a worst case where no further development materializes, require a property tax levy to cover a portion of debt service.

Speaker 2 summarized that the board and city staff wanted to present the financing downside to the council and public “with eyes wide open,” noting the possibility that, if development did not occur, “there is a chance that…this could be levied.” The presenter explained the approval sequence: the planning commission would hold a public hearing that night, the common council was scheduled to review the matter on Aug. 20, and the JRB would reconvene afterward to take final action and make the statutory findings required to create or amend the districts.

Board members agreed to reconvene the Joint Review Board on Sept. 4 at 4:45 p.m. (prior to a finance meeting) to consider final action. The meeting adjourned after a motion and second.

What the meeting did and did not do: the JRB completed initial procedural steps and appointments and conducted a staff presentation and discussion; it did not approve the TID 5 amendment or formally create TID 7 at this session. The planning commission and common council are the next decision points, and final JRB findings are expected at a subsequent reconvened JRB meeting.

Quotes from the record

“So we’re just kinda truing up those costs with audited financials and then adding in the new incentive.” — Speaker 3, explaining the TID 5 amendment.

“There is a chance in this district that…over time that this could be levied.” — Speaker 2, warning of levy risk if development does not occur.

Next steps

The planning commission will hold a public hearing that evening and consider a resolution; the common council review was portrayed as scheduled for Aug. 20. The JRB is scheduled to reconvene Sept. 4 to take final action and make the required findings on both TID 5 and TID 7.