Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Increment Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses TID to help rebuild Ruidoso Downs racetrack; commissioners, track manager outline costs and remaining questions
Summary
Village council and county commissioners discussed forming a Tax Increment Development District (TID) to finance permanent repairs at Ruidoso Downs Racetrack after flood damage, with the track and consultants outlining financing steps, estimated costs and outstanding questions about tax baselines, owner liability and state participation.
The Village council on Jan. 27, 2025 took an initial step toward a potential Tax Increment Development District to help pay for rebuilding Ruidoso Downs Racetrack after last summer’s floods, while county commissioners and track management pressed for clearer figures and legal protections before any formal commitment.
City Attorney John Underwood opened the discussion and introduced Larry Horan, a consultant who walked the council and county commissioners through the TID process: form a district and boundaries, identify property owners, adopt a TID development plan, set a baseline for property or gross receipts tax collections, and then seek state approvals (Board of Finance, New Mexico Finance Authority and legislative enabling action) to dedicate increments of tax revenue to the district. “The concept…is you’re going to do something within the district to create economic growth, and you’re going to use the growth in the revenue for the area to help pay for the public infrastructure,” Horan said.
Why the state’s participation matters, Horan and others said, is that the racetrack currently returns little or no gross receipts tax to the village or county. “None of the gross receipts taxes that the track pays come back to the village,” Underwood said, and Horan explained that, without a local baseline increment, the TID would likely rely on a state gross receipts increment to be viable.
Rick Ball, general manager of Ruidoso Downs, described the scale of damage and the track’s reconstruction plan. Ball said the track estimates its annual economic impact at roughly $160 million and reported recent direct losses in the millions: “Right now, at the track, we’re sustained about a $12,500,000 loss,” Ball said. He outlined a proposed conveyance of 28 acres (riverbed) to the village and an 8‑acre retention basin in the track infield designed to protect downstream areas and critical village infrastructure. Ball said the culvert and river repairs being discussed are in the $15–$18 million range.
County Commissioner Mark Fisher and other county officials emphasized taxpayer protections and asked specific questions about ownership, board composition and liability. Fisher noted material in a handout indicating that, unless the district is part of a Metropolitan Redevelopment Area (MRA), property owners in a TID might be required to cover 20% of initial infrastructure costs (repayable with bond proceeds), a term he described as “new to me” and a point that needs firm answers before any vote. “We cannot raise the property taxes of any citizen in Lincoln County,” Fisher said.
Councilors and the county also discussed alternative vehicles for financing such work. Horan and city staff suggested that the Metropolitan Redevelopment Act (MRA) can permit a broader set of eligible expenditures and local administration, while a TID may require state-level steps but could be focused on gross receipts tax increments if those increments can be established.
On some key numbers, presenters offered specific estimates: track management reported approximate annual gross receipts tax collections of $725,000 and annual property tax receipts around $108,000 attributable to the track, and consultant discussion placed major reconstruction costs (culverts, permanent flood controls) in the mid‑millions. Ball also said a single element of the track rebuild, the tow board, could cost about $7,580,000.
Public commenters and members of the economic development board urged thorough review and broader local engagement before action. Brian Roberts, an economic development board member, told the council that if the cost were borne only by village residents it would “amount to about $4,000 per capita,” and asked that any TID spending be limited to permanent infrastructure.
Next steps identified at the meeting included pursuing bond counsel and a detailed legal/finance package, clarifying whether an MRA is a better fit than a TID in this instance, firming up baseline gross receipts or property tax data with Taxation & Revenue, and returning to council (or calling a special meeting) once a draft resolution and more precise cost and liability figures are available. The council approved a separate budget adjustment resolution earlier in the meeting (Resolution 2025‑01) and otherwise took no final action on forming a district.
The council adjourned after members and county commissioners agreed to continue studying options and gather the additional financial and legal detail needed for a decision.
