HomeMy Public PortalAbout051-2010 - Tax Abatement - Rahee Investments LLC - real es.exh.ORDINANCE NO. 51-2010
A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL
OF A STATEMENT OF BENEFITS FOR A PROPERTY OWNER
APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C. 6-1.1-12.1
WHEREAS, Common Council has previously designated eight economic revitalization areas
within the City of Richmond; and
WHEREAS, I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 requires the Common Council as the designating entity to approve
all Statements of Benefits required to be filed by property owners applying for
deductions in assessed valuations for the installation of new manufacturing
equipment or for the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property; and
WHEREAS, an owner of real property located in an economic revitalization area is entitled to
deductions from the assessed value, pursuant to Indiana law, for a period of any
number of years less than or equal to ten (10) years (i.e. one to ten years); and
WHEREAS, an owner of new manufacturing equipment is also entitled to deductions from the
assessed value, pursuant to Indiana law, for a period of any number of years less
than or equal to ten (10) years (i.e. one to ten years); and
WHEREAS, in order for Common Council to approve a Statement of Benefits to allow a
deduction, it must make the following findings, to -wit:
1. That the estimate of value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation, as to real
property, or the estimate of cost of the new manufacturing equipment, as to
personal property, is reasonable for projects of that nature or equipment of
that type.
2. That the estimate of number of individuals who will be employed or whose
employment will be retained can be reasonably expected to result from the
proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation, or from the installation of
the new manufacturing equipment.
3. That the estimate of annual salaries of those individuals who will be employed
or whose employment will be retained can be reasonably expected to result
from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation, or from the
installation of the new manufacturing equipment.
4. That any other benefits about which information was requested are benefits
that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed redevelopment or
rehabilitation, or from the installation of the new manufacturing equipment.
5. That the totality of the benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction.
6. That the improvements to the real estate described in the SB-1 must be
completed within 24 months of the date the ordinance is signed by the
designating body.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana, now
makes the following findings:
1. That the estimate of value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation, as to real
property, or the estimate of cost of the new manufacturing equipment, as to
personal property, is reasonable for projects of that nature or equipment of
that type.
2. That the estimate of number of individuals who will be employed or whose
employment will be retained can be reasonably expected to result from the
proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation, or from the installation of
the new manufacturing equipment.
3. That the estimate of annual salaries of those individuals who will be employed
or whose employment will be retained can be reasonably expected to result
from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation, or from the
installation of the new manufacturing equipment.
4. That any other benefits about which information was requested are benefits
that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed redevelopment or
rehabilitation, or from the installation of the new manufacturing equipment.
5. That the totality of the benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction.
6. That the improvements to the real estate described in the SB-1 must be
completed within 24 months of the date the ordinance is signed by the
designating body.
THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Common Council of the City of Richmond, that the
following property owner meets the requirements for property tax assessed valuation deductions,
as follows:
REAL ESTATE - 10 YEARS
Rahee Investments, LLC
Jobs Retained: NIA
Jobs Created: 35
Estimated New Value: $6,800,000.00
Dated: November 5, 2010
Passed and adopted this day of 2010, by the Common Council of the
City of Richmond, Indiana.
Clayton Miller)
ATT N,T '
(Karen Chasteen)
President
PRESENTED to the Mayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this XZ day of ,
2010, at 9:00 a.m.
erk
(Karen C asteen)
APPROVED by me, Sarah L. Hutton, Mayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this/ day of
2010, at 9:05 a.m.
Mayor
(Sarah L. Hu on)
ATTES
(Karen Chasteen)
STATEMENT OF BENEFITS 20_ PAY 20
REAL ESTATE IMPROVEMENTS RECEIVE11 NOY 5 rin €€
' State Form 51767 (R21 1-07) FORM S13-1 I Real Property
Prescribed by the Department of Local Government Finance
This statement is being completed for real property that qualifies under the following Indiana Code (check one box):
❑ Redevelopment or rehabilitation of real estate improvements (IC 6-1.1-12.1-4)
❑ Eligible vacant building (IC 6-1.1-12,1-4.8)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. This statement must be submitted to the body designating the Economic Revitalization Area prior to the public hearing if the designating body requires
information from the applicant in making its decision about whether to designate an Economic Revitalization Area. Otherwise this statement must be
submitted to the designating body BEFORE the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property for which the person wishes to claim a deduction.
Projects" planned or committed to after July 1, 1987, and areas designated after July 1, 1987, require a STATEMENT OF BENEFITS. (IC 6-1.1-12.1)
2. Approval of the designating body (City Council, Town Board, County Council, etc.) must be obtained prior to initiation of the redevelopment or rehabilitation,
BEFORE a deduction maybe approved.
3. To obtain a deduction, application Form 322 ERAIRE or Form 322 ERAMBD, Whichever is applicable, must be riled with the County Auditor by the later
of: (1) May 10; or (2) thirty (30) days after the notice of addition to assessed valuation or new assessment is mailed to the property owner at the address
shown on the records of the township assessor.
4. Property owners whose Statement of Benefits was approved after June 30, 1991, must attach a Form CF-I/Real Property annually to the application to
show compliance with the Statement of Benefits. (IC 6-1.1-12.1-5.1(b) and IC 6-1.1-12.1-5.3())]
5. The schedules established under IC 6-1.1-12.1-4(d) for rehabilitated property and under IC 6-1.1-12.1-4.8(1) for vacant buildings apply to any statement
of benefits approved on or after July 1, 2000_ The schedules effective prior to July 1, 2000, shall continue to apply to a statement of benefits filed before
July 1, 2000.
Mimi O.63wllrnl•
Name of taxpayer
Rahee Investments, LLC
Address of taxpayer (number and street, city, state, and ZlPcode)
533 West Eaton Pike, Richmond, IN 47374
Name of contact person Telephone number E-mail address
Kirit Patel 765-939-9500 kb 822@gmail.com
• a • r s • ♦ -•^• r --•
Name of designating body Resolution number
City of Richmond Common Council
Location of property County DLGF taxing district number
6000 National Road East, Richmond, IN 47374 Wayne
Description or real property improvements, redevelopment, or rehabilitation (use additional sheets if necessary) Estimated start date (month, day, year)
100 room hotel with an approximately 7,000 square foot 01/01/2011
conference center which will seat 270 attendees Estimated completion date (month, day, year)
banquet style or 450 theater st le 10/01/2011
;NOTE:
nt number Salaries Number retained Salaries Number additional Salaries
35 $425,000
Pursuant to IC 6-1.1-12.1-5.1 (d) (2) the COST of the property REAL ESTATE IMPROVEMENTS
is confidential. COST ASSESSED VALUE
Current values
Plus estimated values of proposed project 6,800,000
Less values of any property being replaced
Net estimated values upon completion of project 6 i 800 000
Estimated solid waste converted (pounds) Estimated hazardous waste converted (pounds)
Other benefas
•
I hereby certify that the representations in this statement are true.
Signature of authorized representative �� J Title 1�1i..•%v r 1 i•r• olul� .ol�+ Date signed (moth, day, year)
Page 1 of 2
We have reviewed our prior actions relating to the designation of this Economic Revitalization Area and find that the applicant meets the general standards
adopted in the resolution previously approved by this body. Said resolution, passed under IC 6-1.1-12.1. provides for the following limitations:
A. The designated area has been limited to a period of time not to exceed calendar years * (see below). The date this designation
expires is
B. The type of deduction that is allowed in the designated area is limited to
1. Redevelopment or rehabilitation of real estate improvements Yes ❑ No
2. Residentially distressed areas ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Occupancy of a vacant building ❑ Yes ❑ No
C. The amount of the deduction applicable is limited to $
D. Other limitations or conditions (specify)
E. The deduction is allowed for years* (see below).
We have also reviewed the information contained in the statement of benefits and find that the estimates and expectations are reasonable and have
determined that the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction described above.
Approved (signatu a of ufhorized member of designating body) Telephone number Date signed (month, day, earl
Attes (si nat yid a of attester) /� f Design. ed body
* If the designating body limits the time period during which an area is an economic revitalization area, it does not limit the length of time a taxpayer is
entitled to receive a deduction to a number of years designated under IC 6-1.12-12.1-4.
A. For residentially distressed areas, the deduction period may not exceed five (5) years.
B. For redevelopment and rehabilitation or real estate improvements:
1. If the Economic Revitalization Area was designated prior to July 1, 2000, the deduction period is limited to three (3), six (6), or ten (10) years.
2. If the Economic Revitalization Area was designated after June 20, 2000, the deduction period may not exceed ten (10) years.
C. For vacant buildings, the deduction period may not exceed two (2) years.
Page 2of2
Form SB-1A
City of Richmond, Indiana
Taxpayer Wage & Benefit Information
Company Name, Address & Contact Person:
The information requested on this supplement to form SB-1 must be completed and submitted
along with your SB-1 in order for your tax abatement request to be considered by Richmond
Common Council. Please retain your records and calculations used to arrive at the information
requested on this form. It is subject to review as a part of our monitoring process.
1. Average hourly wage for existing employees $ —0-
2. Average hourly wage for projected new positions $ 9.00
3. Average hourly health insurance benefit
E,
1. The length of the abatement you are requesting l6
(A 1-10 year abatement may be requested for read estate improvements and manufacturing equipment.)
2. If purchasing equipment, please attach a list that includes the following:
• brief description of each piece of equipment being purchased
• the projected useful life of each piece of equipment
• the state(s) in which the equipment is being brought into Indiana from if purchasing used
equipment
+ the cost of each piece of equipment
3. If making real estate improvements, please provide a list that includes the following:
+ brief description of the real estate improvement {new construction, rehab, expansion, etc.}
• size of the proposed real estate improvements
• costs of the proposed real estate improvements
DEFINITIONS
1. Average hourly wage for existing employees: for your most recent pay period please provide the
average base wage per hour for all current full time, non -supervisory employees. Do not include the
following groups:
A. part time employees;
B. management, supervisors, foremen, or any other supervisory personnel;
C. owners, stockholders, or partners if they own 2% or more of the business, and their
family members.
2. Average hourly wage for projected new positions: Use the same definition of employees to be included
as in number one above.
3_ Average hourly health insurance benefit: Please provide the current company paid health insurance
benefits provided to hourly employees (as defined above) and family members. Please present in the
form of an hourly rate computed using the annual cost per eligible employee divided by 2080 hours.
Z51
e and Title) (Date)
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MEMO
CITY OF RICHMOND
50 NORTH 5TH STREET
RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374
Sarah L. Hutton, Mayor
Department of Law
Walter S. Chidester, City Attorney
Kimberly A. Vessels, Assistant City Attorney
December 15, 2010
Members of Common Council
Mayor Sarah L. Hutton, Tony Foster, Kimberly Vessels
Walter S. Chidester
Ordinance No. 51-2010
I M-1
This memo is to clarify that Common Council can, if it so chooses, pass and
adopt Ordinance 51-2010.
With much assistance from City Clerk Karen Chasteen, Metropolitan
Development Director Tony Foster and Administrative Secretary Marilyn Miles, the
Law Department has located Ordinance 113-97 that was passed and adopted by
Common Council and signed by then Mayor Andrews. The purported ordinance
cited at the last meeting of Common Council was not an ordinance that had been
adopted and passed by Council. What was shown was one of the many drafts of the
tax abatement ordinance. This purported ordinance that was cited at the last
meeting of Common Council was not signed. This is understandable because it was
never passed and adopted by Council nor signed by then Mayor Dennis Andrews.
Attached with this memo, please find the following:
1. A signed copy of Ordinance 113-97, which passed and was adopted by
Common Council on January 20, 1998 and signed by Mayor Andrews
on January 21, 1998. Also enclosed is the vote tally sheet, showing
that present Common Council members Bing Welch, Larry Parker,
Jack Elstro and Bruce Wissel voted for this ordinance.
2. Copies of two letters from then City Attorney Bob Bever, with one
letter dated October 31, 1997, and the other letter dated December 31,
1997.
3. Minutes from minutes of Common Council for November 3, 1997 and
from January 20, 2008.
4. A draft of Ordinance 113-97, which was not passed or enacted, which,
in paragraph 2.g, states, in part: "...any business property owner
applicant which collects Indiana sales tax on its products or services
from the subject property, will not be given an approval for its
Statement of Benefits."
Please note that this provision was deleted from the ordinance that
was subsequently passed and adopted by Common Council and signed
by the Mayor.
5. A copy of the current version of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-3, which
states, in I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-3(e)(10)(C), that a "deduction for the
redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property may not be approved
for ... any facility the primary purpose of which is .... other retail.
The various drafts of Ordinance 113-97 culminated in Common Council adopting
flexibility over rigid requirements in reviewing and approving requests for tax
abatements. This issue is precisely what is now before Common Council.
I will address more of this, and any questions you have as a result of this Memo and
accompanying documents, at Monday's Council meeting.
As always, you may contact me prior to the meeting at 962-7527 or at my email at
wchidester@bbkcc.com.
ORDINANCE NO.113-1997
A SPECIAL ORDINANCE REGARDING
PROCEDURE FOR TAX ABATEMENTS
WHEREAS, Common Council has previously designated eight economic revitalization
areas within the City of Richmond, and
WHEREAS, . I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 requires the Common Council as the designating entity to
approve all Statements of Benefits required to be filed by property owners
applying for deductions in assessed valuations far the installation of new
manufacturing equipment or for the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real
property, and
WHEREAS, an owner of real property located in an economic revitalization area is
entitled to deductions pursuant to Indiana law, which pursuant to prior
Council resolution, i.e.: Resolution No. 2-1987, has currently been
established for a ten year period from the assessed value; and
WHEREAS, an owner of new manufacturing equipment is entitled to deductions
pursuant to Indiana law for either a S year or 10 year period from the.
assessed value of new manufacturing equipment, and
WHEREAS, Common Council wishes to amend its prior Resolution No. 2-1987
regarding establishing a ten-year period for all approved Statement of
Benefits on real property, to allow a consideration of the statutory
possibilities of 3, 6, or 10 years for each Statement, pursuant to the
guidelines set forth within this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-3, in order for Common Council to approve a
Statement of Benefits to allow a deduction, it trust make certain findings
of fact regarding certain benefits which will be forthcoming from the
described project therein; and
WHEREAS, Common Council wishes to establish guidelines in determining whether a
specific Statement of Benefits, regarding either real property or new
manufacturing equipment, meets the required positive beneficial findings;
and
WHEREAS, Common Council recognizes that the goals and purposes of allowing a
deduction through a Statement of Benefits includes adding property for tax
base revenue which would not otherwise be included without the
deduction; providing an incentive for higher wages and a better quality of
f..
life for the citizens of Richmond; and keeping Richmond competitive for
economic development opportunities; and
WHEREAS, Common Council also wishes to enhance the City's monitoring of certain
aspects of approved Statement of Benefits.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Common Council of the City of
Richmond, Indiana as follows:
1. Resolution No. 2-1987, is hereby amended and/or rescinded to eliminate the
establishment of a 10 year period for all future Statement of Benefits regarding real
property located in an Economic Revitalization Area and in lieu thereof, the applicable
time period for each future real property phase -in and/or application shall be either 3, 6,
or 10 years, as determined by Common Council in each Special Ordinance approving a
specific Statement of Benefits, and as determined pursuant to the guidelines established
herein.
2. In determining whether to approve a Statement of Benefits and in determining
which time period to use on any approval, Common Council shall consider the following
factors in making its required findings of beneficial impact, to -wit:
a. average wage paid to employees, including fringe benefits
b. health care benefits paid to employees
c. upward mobility of jobs to be created and/or retained by the applicant
d. size of redevelopment/rehabilitation and/or new manufacturing equipment
e. applicant's level of commitment and involvement in the City.
3. All Statement of Benefits shalt continue to be referred to Common Council's
Tax Abatement Committee for consideration of the above guidelines and for
recommendation of which time period the applicant will receive as to its phase -in. The
applicant will be given notice of the Tax Abatement Committee's recommendation prior
to any final action taken by Common Council.
4. Commencing in 1998, five percent of all outstanding property owners who
have previously secured approved Statement of Benefits from Common Council, and are
still in the period of their phase -ins, shall be randomly selected by the City
Administration, and their information regarding,job creation and/or retention, and
applicable employee wages, shall be audited by the City Administration as part of
assuring.continued compliance with their Statement of Benefits. Besides the random
audit process, any written complaints that the City receives about non-compliance of a
specific business will also be investigated and subject to audit. To the extent any non-
conforming information is found, the City Administration and/or Common Council shall
be authorized to take all action as authorized by I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-1 et sect.
5. In order to implement and/or advise applicants of the guidelines described
herein, an addendum to the Statement of Benefits Farm SB-1, known as Form SB-lA (a
copy of which is incorporated by reference and attached hereto) shall be required of all
applicants with their Statement of Benefits applications,
Passed and adopted this4 day o 199$, by the Common Council of
the City of Richmond, Indiana.
President
(!BRc;c�"
ATTES City Clerk
(Norma chroeder)
PRESENTED to the Mayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this, k1 day of
199S, at 9:00 a.m.
/tl r A
City Clerk
APP,RQVE b me, Dennis Andrews, Mayor of the City of Ric ond, di a, this
��- day o 1991, at 9:05 a.m.
Mayor
� t
Alf TES'� City Clerk
{Norma S oeder)
e
........._t......... ........ .... .......................... ..... ..
DISPOS11ION OF ORDINANCE NO. - 19
RESOLUTION NO. - 19
by Common Council
Ordinance No. -22
Resolution No.
Date 3 r�7
Elstro
Lundy
Wissel
Stamper
Welch
Flarker
Allen
Dickman
Hutton
Susp. rules 1 st reading
Title Only
Seoond
Move to 2nd reading
Secorxi
Engrossment
second
i
I
Susp.rules 3rd reading
Seoorxf
Passage
Rejection
Date Passed - 0 - U
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS:
Committee Date
y.
1
CITY OF RICHMOND
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
50 NORTH FIFTH STREET RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374
PHONE (765) 983-7220 FAX (765) 962-7024
October 31, 1997
Common Council
City of Richmond
Re: Tax Abatement Procedure Ordinance No. 113-1997
Dear Members of Council:
DENNIS ANDREWS
Mayor
ROBERT L. BEVER
City Attorney
STEPHEN H.RABE
Assistant City Attorney
Please find enclosed a draft of the above referenced Ordinance No.
113-1997, which I have prepared at the request of Councilman Stamper and
the Tax Abatement Committee. I have tried to incorporate their suggested
guidelines and procedures into the enclosed proposed ordinance form.
I must point out that because of timing and the need -to get this
draft to.you in the mail, Alan has not reviewed the same and I will take
full responsibility for its current, "rough" form. Hopefully he can
review the same and to the extent any immediate changes are necessary, I
will try to fax you any revised form either during the day Monday or at
the time of your meeting Monday night.
Based upon the fact that no vote is anticipated Monday night and
that there will be much discussion on the same, including the possibility
of a Committee of the whole meeting, hopefully there is no problem in
making future changes to this draft. I at least wanted to get.you a basic
form for your consideration prior to the meeting.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and please let me know
if you have any questions or comments. I must point out that I will be
out of town in a trial during Monday; therefore, please feel free to call
me at home (or at the office) this weekend.
Very truly yes,
Robert L. Bever
RLB/mlb
CC: Mayor Dennis Andrews
i
N
�s,
CITY OF RICHMOND
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
50 NORTH FIFTH STREET RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374
PHONE (765) 983-7220 FAX (765) 962-7024
December 11, 1997
Common Council
City of Richmond
Re: Tax Abatement Ordinance No. 113-1997
Dear Council Members:
�-rll-
7-1,9(9 F/�
DENNIS ANDREWS
Mayor
ROBERTI._BEVER
City Attorney
STEPHEN H. RABE
Assistant City Attorney
Pursuant to your meeting of the whole on tax abatement guidelines,
please find enclosed one revised draft of the above ordinance which makes
some of the changes discussed at your meeting. Specifically, this
ordinance makes the following changes:
1. It eliminates any distinction between a "manufacturing" property
owner, or any other business property owner.
2. It basically increases each section from the original ordinance
by $0.50 per hour.
3. It sets forth a maximum credit of $1.70 applicable to the health
care benefits upon the total sum.
4. It establishes a minimum period of phase -in for some wage
categories, but allows such category to reach the higher phase -in period
based upon certain considerations as set forth within Section 2(e).
5. It adds a new section 2(g) which clarifies Council's intent not
to approve a Statement of Benefits for any business property owner which
collects Indiana Sales Tax on products or services.
I would point out that this revision has been provided by the Tax
Abatement Committee, with some of my own clarifications made thereto. I
have also helped discuss another revision with Bing Welch which I
anticipate he will deliver to you at Monday night's meeting.
After reviewing both of the drafts from the Tax Abatement Committee
and from Bing, it is also possible I may include a third draft of my own
for your attention and review at Monday night's meeting.
You may recall that a number of various items and/or possible
changes were discussed at your Committee of the whole meeting, and we
could make no promise when a new final revision would be possible. I do
believe that the enclosed and the anticipated version from Bing are
possible clarifications, but I would also like the opportunity to put
together a combination of the two for your consideration, which I will try
to have by Monday.
I realize that Council wishes to provide some guidelines for
possible applicants in the community; however, I believe it is prudent to
create an ordinance which everyone is pretty comfortable with rather than
passing any ordinance just for the sake of conclusion on this issue.
I truly believe that the real issues which you must decide as a
group include whether you want to tie down an application so specifically
that you lose flexibility in making a decision (although such specifics
would make it clear for potential applicants); and whether you wish to
consider wages as the prime factor in approving a Statement of Benefits,
or wish to review other items as well.
I am not sure there is any one clear-cut answer, but I believe
everyone is moving in the right direction.
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
y tru y yours
Robert L. Bever
RLB/mlb
Enclosure
cc: Mayor Dennis Andrews
...oav iawa ante
--� z conaptions are would be much more likely to be changed, especially if Main Street and the City are not
successful in receiving contributions at a higher percentage of what has been or if there is no B.I.D.
developed. He repeated that the B.I.D. would be identifying things outside the parking issue and moreso for
adding things that the businesses want to identify. He gave as an example, there is currently no foot patrol
uptown, and they may want to identify that as something that does not look like an addition. Oldham said it is
truly a supplement. .
Councilmember Welch said the City is going to be providing the services as the corridor is opened up and
there will come a time when the merchants will be wanting other things and he hopes in the two year span it
will take to get the B.I.D. in place they will have patience with the City.
Oldham said the merchants are excited about Main Street being opened, adding that the business owners
are willing to take responsibility for the care of the front of their building, such as sweeping off the snow, and
will contribute whatever they can for other things they need. She added that they want to do their fair share
and be good corporate citizens. Wiwi expressed his appreciation for Council's time tonight to listen to the
parking committee's recommendations.
1
The minutes of the meetings of September 25 and October 2, 1997 were in the Council packets.
Councilmember Welch said he had seen, in the minutes that the properties on Industries Road have all been
obtained and that Wiwi had indicated that construction the bridge
2
2
on over the river could start as early as late
this year. Wiwi stepped forward and commented that the work could start as early as this week, noting that
the contractor is moving in a construction trailer this
2
week. He said the work will start for sure next week,
adding that the construction equipment will be coming off Chester Boulevard.
2
2
3
3
3
3
3]REPORT
3
3
MJSCELLANEO9aD-U INE55
3
3
9DIN CES
4
4
QRDINANCES
4Q
4
Councilmember Elstro moved to suspend the rules and read Ordinance No. 96, 113, 116, 118, 119 and 120 -
1997 on first reading by title only, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried
4
unanimous voice vote. on a
4
4
ORDINANCE NO, 9§ - 1997
4
4
5
The Clerk read Ordinance No. 96 - 1997 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE VACATING THE PUBLIC PLACE
DESCRIBED AS 17 FEET IN EQUAL WIDTH EAST OF THE ENTIRE EAST
5
5
SIDE OF LOT NUMBER 48 IN
M. PARRY'S ADDITION TO GREENWOOD, NOW A PART OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, WAYNE
COUNTY, INDIANA
:5
5
15
President Dickman said Ordinance No. 96 - 1997 would go to the Planning Commission and come back on
second reading.
i5
5
oJiQl�dNO.113 - 1997
5
5
6
The Clerk read Ordinance No. 113 - 1997 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE REGARDING PROCEDURE FOR
TAX ABATEMENT
g
6
6
President Dickman asked if every Councilmember had received a revised copy of this ordinance, then asked
what the Council's pleasure was and whether
6`
or not they thought it warranted a Committee of the Whole
meeting. Councilmember Welch said he would recommend that it be discussed in the Committee of the 1
6
Whole because he feels it needs public input.
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
lovember 3 1997
1 Councilmember Stamper said the Tax Abatement Guideline Committee would agree with the Committee o 2 the Whole meeting. He said he wanted to clarify a couple of the numbers bandied around, noting that the
3 number you get from many different sources is the $9.56 per hour which is the average manufacturin
4 in the community. He said that comes from the IU g wage
School of Economics, the Economic cturin pmen
5 Corporation and whoever you talk to. He said once you get beyond that, there is no consistent way to Como
6 up with the number for the average wage within the entire community. He said he was told by the E.D.C. an
7 the Chamber that the average is about $8.50 but there is nobody that publishes a number that says that. HI
8 added that those average wages do not exclude health care.
9
10 He thanked those who had given of their time to serve on the committee, noting that they had met si I
11 different times. Councilmember Wissel suggested the Committee of the Whole meet at ilmember Stamper expressed his disappointment p.m Tuesday,
.13 meeting could not be sooner and Wissel said he will be unavailable next week. ppornt7 ment that they
12 November 18, in the Council Chambers. Counc
14
15 O DINANC 16 - 997
16
17 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 116 - 1997 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 74 AND 7�
18 OF THE CITY OF RiCHMOND CODE
19
Assistant City Attorney Steve Rabe explained that this ordinance incorporates in the first section a lot c
changes that have come from the parking committeee and the parking sub committee. He said the ordinance
amends the current city codes to bring them up to date in terms of some of the legal descriptions of some c
the parking lots and incorporates the descriptions of the newly constructed parking lots into the City code.
In the second section, Rabe said, it sets forth the rates for each of the off-street parking facilities of whict
there are 14. He said it not only sets the parking rates but also states which lots have monthly passe.,
available. It also provides for the opening of Main Street to two-way traffic, he said. Addressing the issue 6
parking fines. Rabe said almost all parking fines will be increased to $20, giving some consistency to tha
area. He said currently $10 fines are reduced to $5 if paid within three days, but that provision has beer, updated so the $20 fines will be reduced to $10 if paid within three days.
Also, Rabe said, those with monthly parking passes must display them so they can be seen in theil
windshields or they are subject to a $10 fine. Also new, Rabe said, is a yearly pass which gives the pas holder a month of free parking since the charge is for only 11 months. Rabe said the ordinance will tak
effect upon its passage and will be re-evaluated in 1999. Councilmember Hutton said that evidently th
two-hour parking does not have to be in the ordinance since it is already spoken to in an ordinance an
Rabe said that is correct. Councilmember Parker asked about the North 6th Street lot where there are
certain amount of spaces reserved for the American Legion. Clerk Norma Schroeder said there are 13 spots
next to the American Legion building which are occupied by the American Legion.
President Dickman announced this ordinance would come back on second reading.
0812INANCE NO. 118 - 997
i
The Clerk read Ordinance No. 118 - 1997 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE MANDATING THE DEPOSIT O ! REVENUES FROM CERTAIN PARKING VIOLATIONS TO THE OFF STREET PARKING FUND
Rabe said this ordinance mandates that all revenues received from parking violations in the uptown area wi�
be posted to the off-street parking fund. He said these are violations between North and South A Streets an4
between 5th and 12th Streets. He said the funds will be used to maintain and improve the off-street parkin
m
facilities. Councilmeber Parker asked what that would do to the revenue the City is currently receiving Robin Henry told Rabe that 70 percent of the fines collected are in the uptown area now. Councilmember Parker said 70 percent will be going away from the fund it is currently in. Rabe said it is not a situation whey(
you are taking from one place and giving it to another.
City Controller Shelley Miller said what will occur is that fines will be identified for the locality and will go into the off-street parking fund but others will still go into the General Fund. She said they will be supporting th expenses with the revenue generated in that area. Councilmember Welch asked her for an estimate of the
4
5
.6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
.50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
representing many of the motels and hotels stating what their jobs mean to them. She said she wanted
present this petition so Council can look it over in case they need it when they are considering the'
abatement.
There being no further comments either for or against the ordinance, Councilmember Dickman moved > r
engrossment, second by Councilmember Hutton and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
Councllmember Dickman moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 130 - 1998 to third a d
final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Alien and the motion was carried on a
unanimous voice vote.
The Clerk read Ordinance No. 130 - 1998 on third reading.
Ordinance No. 130 - 1998 was defeated on the following roll call vote:
Nays: Elstro, Lundy, Welch, Parker and Wissel (5)
Ayes: Dickman, Hutton and Allen (3)
Absent: Stamper
There were none.
UNFINISHED BUSIN 5
Councilmember Allen moved to take Ordinance No. 113 - 998 ut of the Committee of the Whole and
it to second reading, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a unanimous
vote.
President Wissel declared Ordinance No. 113 - 1998, which is the tax abatement ordinance, on
hearing.
Councilmember Welch said by consensus Council would like to amend the ordinance as it was submitted
them adding Yh'at that amendment was covered in a letter sent to each Councilmember by Bever. He s:
the basic amendment addresses It o. 2 on the second-' Aye z - Lne ordinance .and he would move
strike Item No. 2 as submitted in the original ordinance and substitute Item No. 2 as recommended by t
City Attorney. He said that is basically saying that Item No. 2 will now become a, b, c, d, and a and t
abatement committee will consider (a) average wage paid to employees including fringe benefits, (b) hea
care benefits paid to employees, (c) the upward mobility of the jobs to be created or retained by t
applicant, (d) the size of redevelopment/rehabilitation and or new amount of ? equipment, and (a) applicar
level of commitment and involvement in the City. He said that would become Item No. 2 in the ordinang
The motion was seconded by Councilmember Allen. Bever also pointed out that the amendment correct:
typographical error that was in Item No. 1, taking out the 5 years. President Wissel asked Councilmembi
Welch and Allen if they would include that in their motion and second and they agreed. The motion %
carried on a unanimous voice vote.
President Wissel declared amended Ordinance No. 113 - 1998 on public hearing. There being no furtl
comments either for or against the ordinance, Councilmember Dickman moved for engrossment, second
Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
Councilmember Elstro commented that he doesn't like it this way, however, he will be voting for t. He s
Council has worked almost nine months on this ordinance and it is almost the same as what they started
with. Councilmember Allen commented that the committee will now be considering all other crib
suggested in the meetings which were held and that committee will be considering those things in
deliberations then bring them to Council. She added that it gives the flexibility that the business pec
wanted.
Lundy said she, too, was disappointed that the ordinance isn't as strong as she thinks it should be. She s<
she does not believe in giving abatements but realizes the need to try to upgrade the wage schedule and
the other things that were addressed and she said this ordinance doesn't do that. However, she said, s
doesn't want to push businesses out so she will vote for it because she feels it is needed to keep the C
rolling, adding that it is time to look at all the points.
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
Janua 20 1998
Councilmember Welch said he had submitted a point system for consideration which had more strict
guidelines than are in this ordinance, but he said Council has made some changes and moved the tax
abatement considerations back to following state guidelines and state statutes. He said Council will now be
able to look at abatements and consider giving 3, 6 or 10 years on real estate improvements and five or ten
year abatements on their capital equipment. He said they have made some strides in the right directions and
at least have something that the majority of Council agrees upon. Councilmembers Lundy and Elstro both
agreed.
Councilmember Allen moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 113 - 1998 to third and final
reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried on a unanimous
voice vote.
Ordinance No. 113 - 1998 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
Ayes: Elstro, Lundy, Dickman, Hutton, Allen, Welch, Parker and Wissel (8) i
Nays: None.
Absent: Stamper
President Wissel commended his fellow Councilmembers for their work on this ordinance, stating that their
constituents can be very proud of the way they have handled this important issue.
r�� �al�l�� :� ► I �Til �►
There being no further business, on a motion duly made, seconded and passed the meeting was adjourned.
Bruce Wissel, President
ATTEST:
Norma Schroeder, Clerk
e
A SPECIAL ORDINANCE REGARDING
PROCEDURE FOR TAX ABATEMENTS
WHEREAS, Common Council has previously designated eight economic revitalization
areas within the City of Richmond, and
WHEREAS, I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 requires the Common Council as the designating entity to
approve all Statements of Benefits required to be filed by property owners
applying for deductions in assessed valuations for the installation of new
manufacturing equipment or for the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real
property, and
WHEREAS, an owner of real property located in an economic revitalization area is
entitled to deductions pursuant to Indiana law, which pursuant to prior
Council resolution, i.e.: Resolution No. 2-1987, has currently been
established for a ten year period from the assessed value; and
WHEREAS, an owner of new manufacturing equipment is entitled to deductions
pursuant to Indiana law for either a 5 year or 10 year period from the
assessed value of new manufacturing equipment, and
WHEREAS, Common Council wishes to amend its prior Resolution No. 2-1987
regarding establishing a ten-year period for all approved Statement of
Benefits on real property, to allow a consideration of the statutory
possibilities of 3, 6, or 10 years for each Statement, pursuant to the
guidelines set forth within this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-3, in order for Common Council to approve a
Statement of Benefits to allow a deduction, it must make certain findings
of fact regarding certain benefits which will be forthcoming from the
described project therein; and
WHEREAS, Common Council wishes to establish guidelines in determining whether a
specific Statement of Benefits, regarding either real property or new
manufacturing equipment, meets the required positive beneficial findings;
and
WHEREAS, Common Council recognizes that the goals and purposes of allowing a
deduction through a Statement. of Benefits includes adding property for tax
base revenue which would not otherwise be included without the
deduction; providing an incentive for higher wages and a better quality of
4
Y• S _. fir rt lrG ''lY.{` pm
fix.. e'Y
life for the citizens of Richmond; and keeping Richmond competitive for
economic development opportunities; and '
WHEREAS, Common Council also wishes to enhance the City's monitoring of certain
aspects of approved Statement of Benefits.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Common Council of the City of
Richmond, Indiana as follows:
1. Resolution No. 2-1987, is hereby amended and/or rescinded to eliminate the
establishment of a 10 year period for all future Statement of Benefits regarding real
property located in an Economic Revitalization Area and in lieu thereof; the applicable
time period for each future real property phase -in and/or application shall be either 3, 6,
or 10 years, as determined by Common Council in each Special Ordinance approving a
specific Statement of Benefits, and as determined pursuant to the guidelines established
herein.
2. Common Council shall use the following guidelines in making its required
findings of beneficial impact, in determining whether to approve a Statement of Benefits,
and in determining which time period to use on any approval:
a. Any business property owner which otherwise statutorily qualifies for
an approval of a Statement of Benefits, meets the requirements of I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-
3(b), and pays its employees an average wage of at least $9.00/hour, including
health care benefits (for which a maximum $1.70 credit shall apply), shall be
entitled to a ten year period of phase -in for either real property
redevelopment/rehabilitation or new manufacturing equipment.
b. Any business property owner which otherwise statutorily qualifies for
an approval of a Statement of Benefits, meets the requirements of I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-
3(b), and pays its employees an average wage of at least $8.00/hour, including
health care benefits (for which a maximum $1.70 credit shall apply), but less than
$9.00/hour shall be entitled to a six year period of phase -in for real property
redevelopment/rehabilitation, which could extend to a ten year period of phase in,
after consideration of the items set forth in subsection 2(e) herein. Any such
business shall be entitled to a five year period of phase -in for new manufacturing
equipment, which could extend to a ten year period of phase in, after
consideration of the items set forth in subsection 2(e) herein
c. Any business property owner which otherwise statutorily qualifies for
an approval of a Statement of Benefits, meets the requirements of I.C. 6-1.1-12.1
3(b),. and pays its employees an average wage of at least $7.00/hour, including
health care benefits (for which a maximum $1.70 credit shall apply), but less than
$8.00/hour shall be entitled to a three year period of phase -in for real property
redevelopment/rehabilitation, which could extend to a six year period of phase in,
after consideration of the items set forth in subsection 2(e) herein. Any such
business shall be entitled to a five year period of phase -in for new manufacturing
equipment.
d. No approval of a Statement of Benefits shall be given to any property
owner paying its employees an average wage of less than $7.00/hour including
health care benefits.
e. In determining whether to extend any period of phase -in as discussed
above, the Tax Abatement Guideline Committee and Council will review other
factors associated with the Statement of Benefits, including the applicant's level
of investment &long-term commitment to the City, the additional tax revenues
associated with the additions, and/or the upward mobility of jobs to be created
and/or retained by the applicant.
f. For purposes of this entire section, a determination of an average
employee wage shall not include part-time employees; management, supervisors,
foremen, or other supervisory employees, or owners, stockholders, or partners of
the applicant owner if they own at least two percent (2%) of the applicant
business, and family members thereof
g. fn determining whether business property owner applicant is a retail
service which would be specificallya excluded for a tax abatement by Indiana
statute, and/or as simply a policy decision in determining whether an applicant
should be given an approval for its Statement of Benefits, any business property
owner applicant which collects Indiana sales tax on its products or services from
the subject property, will not be given an approval for its, Statement of Benefits.
3. All Statement of Benefits shall continue to be referred to Common Council's
Tax Abatement Committee for consideration of the above guidelines and for
recommendation of which time period the applicant will receive as to its phase -in. The
applicant will be given notice of the Tax Abatement Committee's recommendation prior
to any final action taken by Common Council.
4. Commencing in 1998, five percent of all outstanding property owners who
have previously secured approved Statement of Benefits from Common Council, and are
still in the period of their phase -ins, shall be randomly selected by the City
Administration, and their information regarding job creation and/or retention, and
applicable employee wages, shall be audited by the City Administration as part of
assuring continued compliance with their Statement of Benefits. Besides the random
audit process, any written complaints that the City receives about non-compliance of a
specific business will also be investigated and subject to audit. To the extent any non-
conforming information is found, the City Administration and/or Common Council shall
be authorized to take all action as authorized by I.C. 6-1.1-12.1-1 et seq.
5. In order to implement and/or advise applicants of the guidelines described
herein, an addendum to the Statement of Benefits Form SB-1, known as Form SB-1A (a
copy of which is incorporated by reference and attached hereto) shall be required of all
applicants with their Statement of Benefits applications.
Passed and adopted this day of
the City of Richmond, Indiana.
1997, by the Common Council of
LOO )"R A F T
President
(Robert Dickman)
ATTEST: , City Clerk
(Norma Schroeder)
PRESENTED to the Mayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this day of
, 1997, at 9:00 a.m.
City Clerk
(Norma Schroeder)
APPROVED by me, Dennis Andrews, Mayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this
day of , 1997, at 9:05 a.m.
ATTEST:
(Norma Schroeder)
(Dennis Andrews)
City Clerk
Mayor
Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1
Page 7 of 33
the geographic area where the economic revitalization area is located:
(A) A copy of the notice required by subdivision (1).
(B) A statement containing substantially the same information as a statement of benefits filed
with the designating body before the hearing required by this section under section 3, 4.5, or 4.8 of this
chapter.
The notice must state that a description of the affected area is available and can be inspected in the
county assessor's office. The notice must also name a date when the designating body will receive and
hear all remonstrances and objections from interested persons. The designating body shall file the
information required by subdivision (2) with the officers of the taxing unit who are authorized to fix
budgets, tax rates, and tax levies under IC 6-1.1-17-5 at least ten (10) days before the date of the public
hearing. After considering the evidence, the designating body shall take final action determining
whether the qualifications for an economic revitalization area have been met and confirming, modifying
and confirming, or rescinding the resolution. This determination is final except that an appeal may be
taken and heard as provided under subsections (d) and (e).
(d) A person who filed a written remonstrance with the designating body under this section and who
is aggrieved by the final action taken may, within ten (10) days after that final action, initiate an appeal
of that action by filing in the office of the clerk of the circuit or superior court a copy of the order of the
designating body and the person's remonstrance against that order, together with the person's bond
conditioned to pay the costs of the person's appeal if the appeal is determined against the person. The
only ground of appeal that the court may hear is whether the proposed project will meet the
qualifications of the economic revitalization area law. The burden of proof is on the appellant.
(e) An appeal under this section shall be promptly heard by the court without a jury. All
remonstrances upon which an appeal has been taken shall be consolidated and heard and determined
within thirty (30) days after the time of the filing of the appeal. The court shall hear evidence on the
appeal, and may confirm the final action of the designating body or sustain the appeal. The judgment of
the court is final and conclusive, unless an appeal is taken as in other civil actions.
As added by P.L.71-1983, SEC. 3. Amended by P.L.62-1986, SEC. 1; P.L.56-1988, SEC. 3; P.L.3-1989,
SEC.34; P.L.56-1991, SEC. 1; P.L.25-1995, SEC.18; P.L.4-2000, SEC. 3; P. L. 154-2006, SEC.26.
IC 6-1.1-12.1-3
Statement of benefits; form; findings; period of deduction;
resolution; excluded facilities
Sec. 3. (a) An applicant must provide a statement of benefits to the designating body. If the
designating body requires information from the applicant for economic revitalization area status for use
in making its decision about whether to designate an economic revitalization area, the applicant shall
provide the completed statement of benefits form to the designating body before the hearing required by
section 2.5(c) of this chapter. Otherwise, the statement of benefits form must be submitted to the
designating body before the initiation of the redevelopment or rehabilitation for which the person desires
to claim a deduction under this chapter. The department of local government finance shall prescribe a
form for the statement of benefits. The statement of benefits must include the following information:
(1) A description of the proposed redevelopment or rehabilitation.
(2) An estimate of the number of individuals who will be employed or whose employment will be
retained by the person as a result of the redevelopment or rehabilitation and an estimate of the annual
salaries of these individuals.
(3) An estimate of the value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation.
With the approval of the designating body, the statement of benefits may be incorporated in a
designation application. Notwithstanding any other law, a statement of benefits is a public record that
may be inspected and copied under IC 5-14-3-3.
(b) The designating body must review the statement of benefits required under subsection (a). The
designating body shall determine whether an area should be designated an economic revitalization area
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/eode/title6/arl. I/ch 12.1.html 12/14/2010
Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 Page 8 of 33
or whether a deduction should be allowed, based on (and after it has made) the following findings:
(1) Whether the estimate of the value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation is reasonable for
projects of that nature.
(2) Whether the estimate of the number of individuals who will be employed or whose employment
will be retained can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or
rehabilitation.
(3) Whether the estimate of the annual salaries of those individuals who will be employed or whose
employment will be retained can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described
redevelopment or rehabilitation.
(4) Whether any other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be
reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation.
(5) Whether the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction.
A designating body may not designate an area an economic revitalization area or approve a deduction
unless the findings required by this subsection are made in the affirmative.
(c) Except as provided in subsections (a) through (b), the owner
of property which is located in an economic revitalization area is entitled to a deduction from the
assessed value of the property. If the area is a residentially distressed area, the period is not more than
five (5) years. For all other economic revitalization areas designated before July 1, 2000, the period is
three (3), six (6), or ten (10) years. For all economic revitalization areas designated after June 30, 2000,
the period is the number of years determined under subsection (d). The owner is entitled to a deduction
if:
(1) the property has been rehabilitated; or
(2) the property is located on real estate which has been redeveloped.
The owner is entitled to the deduction for the first year, and any successive year or years, in which an
increase in assessed value resulting from the rehabilitation or redevelopment occurs and for the
following years determined under subsection (d). However, property owners who had an area designated
an urban development area pursuant to an application filed prior to January 1, 1979, are only entitled to
a deduction for a five (5) year period. In addition, property owners who are entitled to a deduction under
this chapter pursuant to an application filed after December 31, 1978, and before January 1, 1986, are
entitled to a deduction for a ten (10) year period.
(d) For an area designated as an economic revitalization area after June 30, 2000, that is not a
residentially distressed area, the designating body shall determine the number of years for which the
property owner is entitled to a deduction. However, the deduction may not be allowed for more than ten
(10) years. This determination shall be made:
(1) as part of the resolution adopted under section 2.5 of this chapter; or
(2) by resolution adopted within sixty (60) days after receiving a copy of a property owner's
certified deduction application from the county auditor. A certified copy of the resolution shall be sent to
the county auditor who shall make the deduction as provided in section 5 of this chapter.
A determination about the number of years the deduction is allowed that is made under subdivision (1)
is final and may not be changed by following the procedure under subdivision (2).
(e) Except for deductions related to redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property in a county
containing a consolidated city or a deduction related to redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property
initiated before December 31, 1987, in areas designated as economic revitalization areas before that
date, a deduction for the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property may not be approved for the
following facilities:
(1) Private or commercial golf course.
(2) Country club.
(3) Massage parlor.
(4) Tennis club.
(5) Skating facility (including roller skating, skateboarding, or ice skating).
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title6/arl. l/ch12. l .html 12/14/2010
Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 Page 9 of 33
6 Racquet sport facility (including an handball or racquetball court
() q p tY(� g Y q
(7) Hot tub facility.
(8) Suntan facility.
(9) Racetrack.
(10) Any facility the primary purpose of which is:
(A) retail food and beverage service;
(B) automobile sales or service; or
(C) other retail;
unless the facility is located in an economic development target area established under section 7 of
this chapter.
(11) Residential, unless:
(A) the facility is a multifamily facility that contains at least twenty percent (20%) of the units
available for use by low and moderate income individuals;
(B) the facility is located in an economic development target area established under section 7 of
this chapter; or
(C) the area is designated as a residentially distressed area.
(12) A package liquor store that holds a liquor dealer's permit under IC 7.1-3-10 or any other entity
that is required to operate under a license issued under IC 7.1. This subdivision does not apply to an
applicant that:
(A) was eligible for tax abatement under this chapter before July 1, 1995;
(B) is described in IC 7.1-5-7-11; or
(C) operates a facility under:
(i) a beer wholesaler's permit under IC 7.1-3-3;
(ii) a liquor wholesaler's permit under IC 7.1-3-8; or
(iii) a wine wholesaler's permit under IC 7.1-3-13;
for which the applicant claims a deduction under this chapter.
(f) This subsection applies only to a county having a population of more than two hundred thousand
(200,000) but less than three hundred thousand (300,000). Notwithstanding subsection (e)(11), in a
county subject to this subsection a designating body may, before September 1, 2000, approve a
deduction under this chapter for the redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property consisting of
residential facilities that are located in unincorporated areas of the county if the designating body makes
a finding that the facilities are needed to serve any combination of the following:
(1) Elderly persons who are predominately low-income or moderate -income persons.
(2) Persons with a disability.
A designating body may adopt an ordinance approving a deduction under this subsection only one (1)
time. This subsection expires January 1, 2011.
As added by Acts 1977, P.L.69, SEC 1. Amended by Acts 1979, P.L.56, SEC. 7, P.L.71-1983, SEC.4;
P.L.62-1985, SEC]; P.L.62-1986, SEC2; P.L.82-1987, SEC.2; P.L.56-1988, SEC.4; P.L.65-1993,
SEC 2; P. L. 25-199.5, SEC 19; P. L. 4-2000, SEC 4;
P. L.126-2000, SEC. 5; P. L.198-2001, SEC. 38; P. L. 90-2002, SEC.118; P.L. 72-2004, SEC 2; P. L. 99-
2007, SEC 25.
IC 6-1.1-12.1-4
Annual deduction; amount; percentage; period of deduction; effect of reassessment
Sec. 4. (a) Except as provided in section 2(i)(4) of this chapter, and subject to section 15 of this
chapter, the amount of the deduction which the property owner is entitled to receive under section 3 of
this chapter for a particular year equals the product of:
(1) the increase in the assessed value resulting from the rehabilitation or redevelopment; multiplied
by
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title6/arl.1/chl2. l .html 12/14/2010