Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Developer Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer says rising costs require TIF re-evaluation; counsel says bonds will not expose county general fund
Summary
Developer representatives told commissioners that sharply higher infrastructure costs and uncertainty about later-phase pricing mean Darp may need the TIF to maintain project feasibility; county legal counsel said the bonds would be special-obligation and third-party issued, with no county general-fund liability under the proposed structure.
Ron Sweeney of Darp, the developer, told residents that when Darp acquired the site it was zoned for multi-family units and they later sought single-family rezoning to proceed with Liberty Place. Sweeney said the developer expects infrastructure costs to be substantially higher than earlier estimates and that later phases lack firm pricing; as a result, the developer must "re-evaluate" whether the project can proceed without the TIF.
"When they started the process, they anticipated the TIF being part of the process," Sweeney said, and added that because costs have changed the company will have to assess the project anew if the TIF is not approved. Darby Dooley, the county’s outside counsel for the TIF work, explained the financing structure: bonds would be issued by third-party issuers as special-obligation bonds and would be repaid from the TIF revenue stream, not the county general fund. "There is no scenario where the general fund of the county is exposed to repayment and obligations for the bonds," Dooley said. The meeting record also noted developers and county staff discussed cost increases in a range referenced during the meeting (figures in discussion ranged from roughly 20% to as high as 70% for certain infrastructure components).
