Agenda - 01-27-2015 - 1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

M SanfordHolshouser www.Sanfordholshouserlaw.com - Memorandum- To: Ken Pennoyer Date: November 4, 2014 Re: Ephesus - Fordham — County- Municipal Agreements To Share Tax Increment Attachment A When the Town of Chapel Hill made a presentation last spring to the Orange County Board of Commissioners on the Ephesus - Fordham project, one Commissioner asked for examples in which a county and a municipality agreed to share the benefit of a tax increment for the purpose of paying off a loan. We quickly found two illustrations. Woodfin — Buncombe County Buncombe County in 2008 issued approximately $13 million in formal tax increment financing bonds to pay for improvements in Woodfin, a town within the County. As part of the financing arrangements, the County and Town each pledged (to each other and to the bondholders) that the incremental tax revenues generated from taxable improvements in the financing district would be paid to a central fund and used for debt service on the bonds. This is a binding, long -term agreement between the two entities that covers 100% of each party's incremental revenues. Fayetteville — Cumberland County Fayetteville and the County, along with the City's Public Works Commission, entered into a 2010 agreement to finance and develop a parking garage in the City's downtown. The City and County each agreed that 100% of the incremental tax revenues in a defined municipal service district would be used to make payments on the City's financing for the parking deck. This arrangement is in support of an installment financing and not a formal tax increment financing, and so is closer to the arrangement proposed for Ephesus - Fordham improvements. ********* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** We would be happy to look for additional examples at the Town's or the County's request. Please let us know if you have any questions about this material or if we can otherwise be of any help. -- Bob Jessup -- Adam Parker