Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local resident warns rising property taxes are squeezing affordable housing; another questions TIF-related resolution
Summary
A Gibson County resident warned the commission that large assessment increases threaten affordable rental housing; a second commenter accused commissioners of signing a TIF-related resolution that he says approved debt, and a commissioner responded that counsel had said the vote approved only the TIF footprint/boundaries.
During public comment, a local resident who identified himself as Josh spoke at length about rising property assessments and their effect on affordable housing and small local businesses.
"We're taxing like it's a new building. It's still a 50 year old building that I'm trying to offer affordable housing, but I can't do it no more," Josh said, describing assessment increases he said ranged from 17% to as high as 88% on some properties and saying such increases make it difficult to sustain affordable units.
Josh asked what the town could do to support redevelopment and said he had discussed developing 32 homes near Walmart but was concerned the town lacked funds for infrastructure such as water and sewer. A commissioner noted the county has been pursuing development tools and funding, including the ERIP agreement and past sewer projects aimed at making property developable.
Later in the public-comment period, a commenter identified as Larry challenged commissioners over a recently signed statutory resolution related to a TIF district, asking whether the commission had read the resolution and alleging that the action included approval of debt. "You don't have a clue what you signed," Larry said.
A commissioner responded that, based on what county counsel and RDC counsel told the board in the public meeting, the commission approved only the TIF district footprint and boundaries, not adoption of the TIF or any debt. "The only thing we approved was the footprint, the boundaries, period," the commissioner said.
No formal action was taken in response to the public comments at the meeting; commissioners noted the concerns and referred to counsel's prior explanations about the scope of what had been approved.
