Staff to draft industrial development board ordinances after long briefing on TIF, PILOT and REIDA

City staff gave an extended technical briefing on April 6 outlining several economic-development tools — tax-increment financing (TIF), payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑tax (PILOT) arrangements via industrial development boards (IDBs), and the new Real Estate Infrastructure Development Act — and asked the commission whether staff should proceed drafting ordinances to create a local IDB.

The presenter told the commission these tools are statutory mechanisms for financing public infrastructure related to new development; staff emphasized statutory petition and public-hearing requirements and noted that, under Tennessee law, the process has built-in public-notice steps and limits on what local governments may directly abate. “Tax increment financing is just a method utilized by local governments to pay for community improvements with future tax revenues,” the presenter explained.

Staff walked commissioners through practical examples and risks, citing a local example (McKee Corporation) and preliminary developer numbers for the Chastain Trails proposal. Staff said the developer’s preliminary figures indicated infrastructure costs in the multimillions (a figure discussed in the presentation was roughly $6.8 million for certain infrastructure components) and a tentative per-home assessment range staff described as averaging in the low thousands; staff illustrated how assessment or bond-based approaches would affect upfront sales price versus long-term payments.

Commissioners raised questions about who would own and administer bonds, whether the city or an IDB should act as issuer, conflict-of-interest rules for board members, and disclosure requirements to buyers. Staff described statutory safeguards (board composition, annual conflict disclosures, public hearings and petition thresholds) and possible administrative fees for the host municipality. Several commissioners said they favored creating a local IDB (rather than using the county’s board) and asked staff to draft ordinances and model bylaws; staff requested clear direction and said they would return with proposed drafts and legal templates.

No formal vote was taken on creation of an IDB; the commission gave direction in principle for staff to prepare ordinances and materials for future review. Staff encouraged residents with questions to contact the city manager’s office and said presentation materials and minutes would be published.

Next steps: staff will draft ordinances, gather model documents, and return to the commission for formal consideration and required public hearings if a petition or district-creation request is filed.