Hooper council hears consultants on CRAs, PIDs and performance-based incentives

Hooper — At a Jan. 22 work session, consultants Cody Dieter of EMG Consulting and Rob Sant of Urban & Main Consulting outlined options for a draft economic development policy, describing how Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs) and Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) could be used to pay for infrastructure and attract commercial anchors.

Dieter told the council he has worked in the municipal industry for two decades and framed the session as a working meeting to pull policy principles into a written document. Sant described CRAs as a tax-increment tool that captures growth above a base value to fund a project area and said, “you would create the Hooper Community Reinvestment Agency,” as the legal entity to manage such areas.

Why it matters: Council members said Hooper needs a larger commercial tax base but stressed limits tied to existing sewer and the city’s character. Members repeatedly said they do not favor large apartment complexes and want incentives focused where infrastructure already exists — notably along 5500 South and the SR‑177 corridor.

What the consultants proposed

Rob Sant explained that a CRA sets a base assessed value and channels the tax growth above that base for a fixed period into project costs such as roads or sewer. He described the standard “but‑for” test used to justify public assistance and said the CRA model is typically post‑performance — meaning a city reimburses eligible costs after agreed milestones are met.

On PIDs, presenters said the district is a standalone legal entity that can levy assessments and issue bonds. Cody Dieter summarized the investor risk model: assessments are tied to parcels and typically appear in title reports, and investors — not the city — bear most of the default risk, though elected bodies must understand how assessments affect homeowners.

Council concerns and policy guardrails

Councilmembers pressed consultants on protections and guardrails. Speaker 1 asked whether Utah law includes utilization requirements to prevent overcommitting future revenues, referencing California’s past CRA overreach; Sant advised that some protections can be established locally by policy (caps on included assessed value, geographic limits) rather than by state statute.

Members discussed using private‑investment ratios to prioritize projects (examples given ranged from $5 public to $30 private up to $1:10), limiting incentives to public infrastructure and specifying preferred industries (retail anchors, grocers, manufacturing, or higher‑wage tech jobs). Several members emphasized sewer capacity as the practical constraint on expansion and said incentives should be focused where sewer and roads already exist.

Accountability and performance measures

Consultants recommended mandatory fiscal‑impact or cost‑benefit studies (often paid for by the developer), clear performance milestones, annual reporting and clawback provisions if agreed targets are not met. Sant recommended post‑performance incentives to avoid up‑front payouts and said participation agreements and interlocal agreements define the legal framework and enforcement mechanics.

Next steps

Councilmembers asked the consultants to review an existing developer impact analysis and provide negotiation guidance. Staff confirmed there is a small budget line and the mayor can authorize expenditures under the procurement threshold discussed during the meeting; consultants said they can draft the policy and later provide project‑specific support under a separate scope.

Quotes

“I am Cody Dieter, with energy finance and government, EMG consulting,” Dieter said as he introduced the presentation. Rob Sant said the CRA approach is a tool that is “post performance, so you’re not giving any money away.”

What wasn’t decided

No formal motion or vote occurred. The council did not adopt any specific incentive, cap, or geographic boundary at the meeting; members asked staff and consultants to draft policy options reflecting the guardrails discussed and to review an existing fiscal impact analysis for a pending proposal.

What comes next

Consultants will supply policy drafts and review developer materials when requested. Councilmembers asked for draft language that prioritizes projects bringing private investment, limits incentives tied to public‑infrastructure need, and protects homeowners from unexpected assessments. The council also asked staff to refine maps identifying priority incentive areas along 5500 South and SR‑177.