Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rona Park staff brief council on using an EFID to fund downtown infrastructure
Summary
City staff outlined how an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EFID) could use tax-increment financing to pay for redevelopment projects; the council authorized staff to pursue fact-finding for a low‑cost Phase 1 analysis after members raised questions about costs, county buy-in and outreach.
Senior analyst Kevin King told the Rona Park City Council that an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District, or EFID, would use tax‑increment financing (TIFF) to capture growth in property tax revenues inside a defined boundary and redirect that increment to local infrastructure projects. King said EFIDs can run 10, 20, 30 or up to 45 years, rely on an Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) to identify projects, and are governed by a Public Finance Authority (PFA) that can issue bonds backed by TIFF revenues.
King said the city’s preliminary work will begin with a limited “fact‑finding” Phase 1 that would cost about $23,530 to determine feasibility and project options. Forming an EFID through the consultant process typically costs about $250,000 in formation work plus surveying and assessor coordination; King said partnering with neighboring Katy could cut those upfront costs by roughly half through cost‑sharing. He also noted Cosmont (the consultant recommended for the analysis) has helped form many EFIDs in California and could provide bonding support.
Council members pressed King on the likely return on investment and on public engagement. “If we spend $250,000 … we could conceivably get the entire $250,000 back,” King said, describing how initial formation costs may be recovered once a PFA forms and TIFF revenue begins to be captured. Multiple council members said they wanted clearer estimates on likely TIFF yields, how commercial property owners would be engaged and whether the county and two supervisors representing parts of the city would agree to participate.
King said outreach to property owners and county officials is a required part of Phase 1 and emphasized that TIFF is generally applied to commercial parcels, not residential property. He added that EFIDs do not take tax revenues away permanently — the diverted increment returns to regular taxing entities after the EFID expires. King told council the work would aim to produce an IFP base‑year package by August and, if the city moves forward, a PFA submittal to the state by December of the same year.
Council members asked staff to proceed with the limited fact‑finding analysis and to return with estimates of expected TIFF revenue, a proposed boundary and outreach plan for affected property owners. The council did not vote to form an EFID; it approved moving to Phase 1 fact‑finding and analysis.
