Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middleton staff recommends denying TIF aid for proposed Electron/Lacrone mixed-use project; committee defers action
Summary
City staff told the finance and personnel committee it recommends denying tax-increment-financing (TIF) assistance for a proposed mixed-use development on the grounds the site already lies within TIF District 5, may not meet statutory or policy eligibility, and targets 80% AMI units rather than the city's historical 60% AMI threshold. The committee deferred final action to await planning commission review.
City staff recommended against providing tax-increment-financing assistance for a proposed mixed-use development known in materials as the Electron/Lacrone project, and the Middleton Finance & Personnel Committee held discussion and deferred any final recommendation until after the planning commission reviews the rezoning request.
Abby, a city planning staff member, told the committee the recommendation rests on several grounds: the project site is already within TIF District 5 (a district scheduled to close in 2036), the area is not identified in the city's comprehensive-plan guidance for a new site-specific TIF, statutory rules make a new site-specific TIF unlikely for primarily greenfield residential development, and the city has applied a policy standard of providing assistance only for income-restricted housing at 60% of area median income (AMI) or below. Abby also cited prior TIF assistance related to stormwater infrastructure for the Tribeca development (about $1.5 million) and said the city has consistently applied its TIF policy since adoption.
"Our staff is recommending against providing TIF assistance for this project," Abby said, listing the statutory and policy reasons behind that conclusion.
Fernando Escobar, representing the developer, disputed a categorical denial. He said the project includes market-rate multifamily units, senior housing, and a full-service hotel and would materially expand the city's property-tax base while creating short-term construction employment and permanent jobs in hospitality and building services. Escobar said 20% of multifamily units would be set aside as workforce housing and told the committee he would be open to increasing that set-aside to 25% as part of negotiations.
"We are suggesting that 20% of all the multifamily units will be developed as workforce housing units," Escobar said, adding that the development's mix and density convert an underused parcel into higher-value tax-generating property.
Alder Charles Myers, whose district includes the site, told the committee he supported staff's recommendation and raised two additional concerns: the proposal removes nearly all commercial space envisioned in the original plan for the area and could create a car-dependent neighborhood that departs from the comprehensive-plan vision; he also said the item was premature before the planning commission had issued a final recommendation.
The committee did not take a formal approval vote on the TIF concept. Members agreed the planning commission should complete its review first; a planning commission hearing was noted in the record. The Finance & Personnel Committee stood the item down for later consideration and adjourned the meeting.
What happens next: the planning commission is scheduled to hear the rezoning request, after which the developer may return with refined terms for TIF consideration. The committee did not make a formal TIF commitment and indicated the city would follow its policy and statutory constraints in any future deliberations.
