Redevelopment commission receives Baker Tilly TIF update; Wapakoneta payoff options and Riverview West pass-through discussed

Jason Simler of Baker Tilly presented the Perry County Redevelopment Commission’s annual tax-increment financing (TIF) update, reviewing remaining allocation areas, bond obligations and options for next steps.

Simler told the commission the Wapakoneta allocation area (Perry County allocation area number three) carries bonds refinanced in 2021 that remain payable from the tax increment captured there and are guaranteed by a minimum semiannual payment from Wapakoneta of $685,175 (about $1,370,350 annually). He said recent declines in local tax rates and some reductions in assessed value have produced shortfall deficiency payments from Wapakoneta in recent years.

The consultant reviewed timing and mechanics: the TIF was created in 1995 and has a 30-year life that, because of the assessment/pay cycle, means the commission will receive settlements in June and December 2026 and the final bond payment is due in January 2027. Simler noted the commission has sufficient trustee and allocation-fund balances (presented as roughly $769,000 in the allocation account plus bond-fund and construction reserves) to pay remaining principal if the board chooses to retire bonds early.

Simler framed the policy tradeoff: paying bonds off early would save an estimated $8,596 in upcoming interest but would end the taxpayer agreement that obligates Wapakoneta to continue making deficiency payments (roughly $51,080 for 2026). "If you pay these bonds off early, that taxpayer agreement goes away," Simler said, describing the result that Wapakoneta would no longer be required to make the shortfall payments.

On a second allocation area—Riverview West, created in 2015—Simler said the parcel has produced only nominal revenue (about $230 a year) because expected development did not occur. A commissioner proposed dissolving that TIF; Simler suggested the alternative of leaving it open but passing through 100% of any increment next year so nearby taxing units receive the small amount while avoiding administrative burden.

Commissioners raised questions about how the commission has handled allocation-fund proceeds from other projects (for example, receipts from land sales tied to Forest Canyon lots). Simler recommended keeping sale proceeds and land-proceeds in a separate fund (rather than commingled with broader allocation/TIF funds) to simplify audits and traceability, and he warned the State Board of Accounts may scrutinize commingled uses.

On newly available uses of TIF revenue, Simler noted recent legislation allows TIF funds to be used for operating costs of police and fire (a statutory carve-out) but cautioned that such operating commitments should not be treated as long-term recurring obligations when the TIF itself has a sunset date. Commissioners asked staff and legal counsel for the statutory citation and for a follow-up memo describing constraints and best practices.

The commission asked the consultant to provide electronic versions of the report and supporting documents, to identify inactive TIF areas and relevant statutes (including the police-and-fire carve-out and the 15% school set-aside rules), and to locate original plan and resolution documents for each TIF so the board can determine whether particular projects (such as school set-asides) were authorized in the plan.

What happens next: staff and counsel will be asked to retrieve the original TIF plans and resolutions, review the legal limits on using allocation funds for capital or operating purposes, and place a discussion of Riverview West (dissolution vs. 100% pass-through) on the May agenda so the commission can decide whether to pass through assessments or take other action before the June 15 pass-through notification deadline.