Redevelopment Commission hears annual TIF report projecting modest revenue growth despite state deductions

Consultants from Baker Tilly presented the Redevelopment Commission with the annual tax-increment financing (TIF) report, saying the commission’s allocation area collected roughly $160,000 for pay‑25 and is estimated to generate about $197,000 in pay‑26 revenues despite some modeled decreases in real‑property receipts related to recent state deduction changes.

“Kyle Cross” (Baker Tilly) framed the briefing as both a compliance step and a planning exercise: “this presentation is required … and we need to talk about the long‑term plan, the budget and any impact of the overlapping tax units,” he said. Cross walked the commission through how the allocation area was created in 2017, amended in 2019 to capture certain personal property for Harrison Steel, and remains subject to a 25‑year limit tied to debt issuances.

Cross said the firm models parcel‑level changes and is explicitly accounting for recent state policy changes (referred to in the record as SCA1/SB1) that reduce some real‑property revenue in the model. He added that those deductions are being offset, in the near term, by personal‑property value increases as abatements (notably the Harrison Steel abatement) roll off. “The estimated annual TIF for pay 25 was 161,000. You guys actually collected just around 160,000. For pay 26, the TIF estimate is expected to increase to about 197,000,” Cross said.

The consultants also presented a cash‑flow scenario using the commission’s December spending plan. Under the example expenditures shown ($188,000), the model projected the TIF fund balance would rise modestly from roughly $504,000 to about $513,000 in the modeled year, even after the planned spending.

Cross described the trade-offs facing the commission if it chose to end the allocation area immediately: the model showed an approximate 7‑cent reduction in tax rates across taxing units, but only about $7,100 in additional revenue for rate‑limited funds in the short term. “You either have the TIF dollars to spend on projects now, or you pass through assessed value and see a modest tax‑rate decrease,” he said, summarizing the choice.

He also reiterated that TIF spending can be used for workforce development and training consistent with the commission’s economic development plan, and pointed to a study cited in the presentation that concludes if a project meets a “but‑for” threshold (it would not proceed but for the incentive), there is not a permanent loss to other taxing units.

No formal vote was taken on changing the allocation area at the meeting. Cross and the commission noted an administrative deadline (June 15 in the presentation) for decisions about passing through assessed value in any given year and offered to provide additional parish/parcel detail if members wanted further analysis.

The consultants concluded by offering to answer follow‑up questions and to supply the council with the separate April 15 presentation previously made to the city; commissioners thanked the presenters and moved on to other agenda items.