[RP TownTalk] Fwd: Friends and neighbors,

[varcher at gmail.com]

No time for detail now, but we already have a revenue/new expenditures projection posted on our website. look forward to more discussion tonight/soon
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-----Original Message-----
From: Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 16:45:20 
To: Vernon Archer<varcher at gmail.com>
Cc: TownTalk<TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
Subject: Re: [RP TownTalk] Fwd: Friends and neighbors,

Vern -
Thanks for the clarification; this is helpful - and hopeful.  Nonetheless,
as a firm adherent of the Devil's-in-the-details School of Policy Analysis,
it would be helpful to know some of those important details.

TIFs happen to fall in that small niche of 'stuff I do'. But I'm unfamiliar
with TIFs in Maryland. In some states TIFs are quite onerous, and place an
unfair and unaccountable burden on schools  - the good news is, assuming
what the information I found today is still current, is that school
revenues are not abatable, so they are not threatened by the TIF.  But that
still leaves several questions.

The first question is, is the TIF taken from town property taxes, or county
property taxes? Or both?

The next questions is what would be the foregone uses of those revenues if
they are earmarked for the bridge. In other words, if the county and/or
town revenues were not diverted to pay for the bridge, what would they be
used for? What do we lose by giving that up? It's good to know that you
anticipate new revenues coming in that would exceed the amount of the TIF.
But it's also clear that the demand for services - police, fire, schools,
snow and leaf removal, street cleaning, trash and recycling, infrastructure
(if/when they are turned over to the town) - and the degree is not trivial.
We're talking about an increase in residential population in the town of
something between 10 - 15%. And an increase in commercial businesses of a
very substantial amount.

It would be very helpful to hear - tonight, if feasible - what the
projections are for total new revenues vis-a-vis total cost of anticipated
new level of services, and how that compares to the diversion of some of
those revenues for the bridge construction subsidy.

Thanks!

Dwight Holmes
Riverdale Road

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Vernon Archer <varcher at gmail.com> wrote:

> Friends and neighbors,
>
> Based on several postings today it is clear that I need to give an
> overview of what is to be proposed regarding building and financing a
> crossing of the CSX railroad if the Calvert tract goes forward.
>
> First, the bridge proposal sets a series of triggers that will insure
> that a bridge will not just get built, but will be completed promptly
> after the first businesses open--within 18 months of Whole Foods Opening
> the bridge will be open.
>
> Second, we now have a good/dependable estimate of what the crossing
> will cost--while the developer's numbers are $8.6 million, the county PW
> office says we should plan on 10.6 so that is what we will
> utilize.
>
> Third, the developer had to agree to pay a substantial portion of the
> cost out of their pocket directly. The number on the table is $5
> million or 50% of the cost.
>
> Regarding the other half or $5.6 million, we and the county have
> agreed that a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is in principal a way to
> pay the difference, though we expect that the developer will seek other
> funding
> sources as a TIF will be very cumbersome for them.
> Should it come to a TIF, how would it work? Here is an outline:
>
>    - A TIF utilizes the increased tax revenue from ONLY the new
>    development to finance infrastructure that is associated with that new
>    development.
>    - There is no change to any one's tax rates; the developer pays the
>    exact same amount of tax as they would anyway, it's just a portion of it is
>    earmarked to be spent in or immediately adjacent to the project.
>    - While I cannot speak for the county, it is clear that Riverdale Park
>    would still bring in substantially more new revenue than we would ever
>    commit to a TIF *and* the increased services the development will
>    require. Thus the town would still bring in substantially more revenue than
>    it would expend.
>
> While this is an abbreviated outline, I hope it lays to rest any concerns
> or misunderstandings regarding this matter.
>
> I would again encourage any and all to join us tonight at town hall.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Vern
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
>
>
> --
> Vernon Archer, Mayor
> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
>
> _______________________________________________
> TownTalk mailing list
> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org is for automated subscription
> processing only
> http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>
> For more information about Riverdale Park, visit
> http://www.riverdaleparkmd.info
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20120109/b11ec8c1/attachment.html>