The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutORD 83-176 ORDINANCE NO. 74/6 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FINANCING PLAN FOR REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER ONE, CITY OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. WHEREAS, on December 7 , 1982, the City Council of the City of Beaumont ( the "governing body" ) adopted Ordinance No. 82-132 which created Reinvestment Zone Number One, City of Beaumont, Texas ( the "Zone" ) pursuant to the provisions of Article 1066e, Vernon' s Texas Civil Statutes ( the "Act" ) , and, WHEREAS, on April 12, 1983, the governing body adopted Ordinance No. 83-37 which approved and adopted the project plan for the Zone; and, . WHEREAS, the board of directors of the Zone has prepared and adopted a financing plan for the Zone and has submitted the financing plan to the governing body for its approval, as provided in Section 8 ( a) of the Act, as amended; and, WHEREAS, the financing plan for the Zone includes a statement listing the kind, number, and location of all proposed public works or public improvements in the Zone; an economic feasibility study; a detailed list of estimated project costs; and a description of the methods of financing all estimated project costs and the time when related costs or monetary obligations are to be incurred; and, WHEREAS, a copy of the financing plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" ; -/Ito /� -1zd--P3 I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF BEAUMONT: Section 1 . That the financing plan for Reinvestment Zone Number One, City of Beaumont, Texas, as prepared and adopted by the board of directors of the Zone, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all intents and purposes, is feasible and in accordance with the master plan of the City of Beaumont, and that said financing plan is hereby adopted. Section 2. That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or the application of same to a particular set of persons or circumstances, should for any reason be held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, and to such end the various portions and provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Beaumont this the day of 44- 19�3 WJ( CJA jj Mayor - 2 - "�Q 74 I a FINANCING PLAN: DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT REINVESTMENT ZONE In 1983, the Texas Tax Increment Financing Act was revised to include a requirement for a Financing Plan. The Financing Plan must include the following informa- tion: • A detailed description of the project costs, including administrative expenses. • The estimated amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred. • The expected sources of revenue to finance or pay project costs, including the percentage of tax in-. crement to be derived from the property taxes of each taxing unit that levies real property taxes in the zone. • The current total appraised value of taxable real property in the zone. • The estimated captured appraised value of the zone during each year of its existence. • The duration of the zone. This plan is intended to meet the new requirements of the amended Act and to serve as a supplement to the Down- town Reinvestment Zone Project Plan. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT COSTS The estimated costs of constructing the public improve- ments proposed in the Downtown Beaumont Reinvestment Zone Project Plan are summarized in Tables 1 and 2 . Table 1 Exhibit "A" I lists costs to be paid through Tax Increment Financing. Table 2 lists all public improvements,their cost,timing, and funding source. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS Currently, sale of Tax Increment Bonds in the state of Texas is not feasible due to unresolved legal issues raised in a lawsuit against the City of E1Paso. Until these issues are resolved by the Attorney General' s Office, financing techniques other than -the sale of Tax Increment Bonds must be used. An alternate financing technique is described below. ALTERNATE FINANCING TECHNIQUE In the event that legal or other difficulties prevent the sale of Tax Increment Bonds , financing for the proposed Kyle Park is proposed to be obtained from a "Section 108" loan from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) . The 108 Loan would be guaranteed by the City' s annual Community Development Block Grant entitlement. Each year for six fiscal years the City' s CDBG allocation would be reduced by the amount of debt service required to repay the 108 loan. Tax Increment Fund revenues would be used to repay the CDBG funds deducted from the annual allocation to repay the 108 loan. EXPECTED SOURCES OF REVENUES Table 3 lists the expected sources of tax increment revenues to pay project costs. I TABLE 1 PROJECT COSTS A. DOWNTOWN MARKET PLACE PARKING LOTS ACTIVITY DESIGN AND ENGINEERING $ 95,500 LAND AQUISITION $512,000 PARKING LOTS Dirtwork $161,000 Paving 164,000 Curbs and Gutters 15,000 Lighting 30,000 Striping 2,000 Meters 27,500 SIDEWALKS $ 64,000 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING $ 67,500 LANDSCAPING $ 50,500 CONTINGENCY $203,000 SUBTOTAL; $1,392,000 B. PUBLIC COSTS OF PEDESTRIAN PLAZA FOR DOWNTOWN MARKET PLACE Land Acquisition $245,000 Construction Excavation 16 ,000 Concrete 11000 Brick Paving & Curbs 83,000 Mechanical & Electrical 42 ,000 Landscaping 12 ,000 General Conditions of Contract 9 ,000 SUBTOTAL: $408,000 C. INTEREST $1,543,600 GRAND TOTAL TO BE PAID WITH TAX INCREMENT FUNDS $3,343,600 SOURCE: CITY OF BEAUMONT PLANNING AND URBAN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTS TABLE 2 SUMMARY' OF PUBLIC' IMPROVEMENTS Estimated Construction Project Cost Period Source of Funds Parking Lots $1,392,000 ( 9/84to 8/85 "Section 108" Loan/Tax Increment Financing Public Plaza $ 408,000 '9/84 to8/85 "Section 108" Loan/Tax Increment Financing Crockett Connector $ 871,000 6/84 to 1:2/85 1980 Major Roadway Improvement Plan Bond Issue Combination Sewer Seperations $2,000,000 undetermined Environmental Protection Agency Grant �Q r\ 1 i lists costs to be paid through Tax Increment Financing. Table 2 lists all public improvements,their cost,timing, and funding source. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS Currently, sale of Tax Increment Bonds in the state of Texas is not feasible due to unresolved legal issues raised in a lawsuit against the City of ElPaso. Until these issues are resolved by the Attorney General' s Office, financing techniques other than -the sale of Tax Increment Bonds must be used. An alternate financing technique is described below. ALTERNATE FINANCING TECHNIQUE In the event that legal or other difficulties prevent the sale of Tax Increment Bonds, financing for the proposed Kyle Park is proposed to be obtained from a "Section 108" loan from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) . The 108 Loan would be guaranteed by the City' s annual Community Development Block Grant entitlement. Each year for six fiscal years the City' s CDBG allocation would be reduced by the amount of debt service required to repay the 108 loan. Tax Increment Fund revenues would be used to repay the CDBG funds deducted from the annual allocation to repay the 108 loan. EXPECTED SOURCES OF REVENUES Table 3 lists the expected sources of tax increment revenues to pay project costs. � ' ^ . ` ' ^ ^ ^ TABLE 3 SOURCES OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES %' OF TOTAL � TAXlN� ENTITY TAX RATE X PAID TO T.I.F. T^I^F ______________________ FER�1OOO T.I. FUND RATE RAT^ -------- --------- -- CITY OF 1EAUMJKT 7.60 100.00 ------- --------- ^ SOUTH PAcK SCHOOLS'' 10-30 l0O^OO 17^6O 33^O5 JEFFERSON COUNTY 2.42 100~0O »^�« ' 44^79 PORT OF DEAUMONT ,454 100^0O �^42 10^52 NAVICATI2N DISTRI:T ^07 1O0^OO �^�5 1^f7 DRAINAGE DISTRICT 6 ^ 2 15 1O0~OO 0^07 O^3O -6--- ______ __ ______^__ ____ 2.15 9.35 -- --------- 22.994^ 22~994 ' I00~0S ' Ifade shown is in effect in areas included in the old Beaumont Independent odeot _-.~~l District. It is anticipated that this rate will �e adjusted down- Ward by the South Park Independent School District at: a later date- ^- = _ i TOTAL APPRAISED VALUE OF TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY IN THE REINVESTMENT ZONE When the Downtown Beaumont Reinvestment Zone was created by- City Council action in 1982, the total appraised value of taxable real property in the zone was set at $49 ,912,550 by the Jefferson County Tax Appraisal District. The Appraisal District set the 1983 appraised value at 55,747, 300. ESTIMATED CAPTURED APPRAISED VALUE OF- THE ZONE DURING EACH YEAR OF OPERATION Tables 4` through 7, show estimates of the total captured appraised value of the Zone for each year of operation. Each of the three estimates is based upon different assumptions regarding riew projects ARd-_inflationary appreciation of property values. DURATION OF THE ZONE The resolution creating the Zone states that operation of the zone will terminate on January 1, 2004 , or sooner if stipulated by City Council. FEASIBILITY Economic feasibility of the Reinvestment Zone Project Plan is discussed in the attached section excerted from Project Plan and labelled "Attachment 1". TABLE 4 ?i,}'!^.t 4 f,:*4,*o' sl-EP4i;n:io ONE *TAX RATE ;FER 0000 VALUATION; 22094* *% "PASS UR&M Q OTHER OTITIES; A 00* RAT-.: ; APPRECIrTI.Or,,' 2,50* ac MM"MMommommom PART 1. CALCULATION Cr TIF RE",ENUES B;' SOUR TAXii,JG TAX 'ii;TE T,I.F. ENTITY PERK00C T.I. FUND RATE ------ -------- --------- --------- CITY 700 100.1`; 7.60 SPISD 10.30 100.00 10.30 COUNTY 2,42 100.00 2,42 PORT .454 100.20 0.05 NAV. DIST .07 100.00 0.07 K&6 205 0040 2.15 --------- --------- --------- ------ 22.994 ---22.954 PART 2. ASSUMTIONS: 2.50 RATE OF ANNUAL INCREASE IN TOTAL ASSESSED JALUE 1,N Zo,N E % -------------- 2099 TAX RAE: PER STNUAND ---------- ADEED TO TGAL ASSESSED VALUE BY NEW FlOJECTS t PROJECUYEAR 6200000MARKET SQUARE/1987 PART 3. TAX INCREMENT PROJECTIONS CUMUL,'JIVE iOTAL INCREASE IN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL CUMULATIVE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT HS2 49912550 1983 55747300 5214750 134141 1964 57140983 7228433 166211 00352 1985 58569507 8656957 199058 49941U 1986 60033741 10121195 232727 732130 190 67863583 17977038 413364 1 145500 1988 M86828 19674278 412390 1597691 1989 71326429 21413941 492392 2090283 1990 Mona 2307111. 533394 2623677 1991 74937483 25024853 575421 3199099 1992 76810226 26896208 618499 381759S 1993 78771!09 28816159 662654 44S0252 1994 30699387 3070637 707913 5188165 1995 22716871 32604321 754303 5942467 1996 84784793 34872243 60852 6744320 1997 36904413 36991663 8050 759470 1?98 69077023 39164473 900548 8495458 2000 51303949 41321399 951754 9447212 2001 93526547 43673947 1004240 10451*52 2002 95926211 46013661 1058033 0509490 2003 9832436L 43411616 1113101 12622671 2004 M0782475 50AAMS 11,0707 1V - - TABLE 5 sa:o"'Plu trwo *TAX RATE: (I F F R !1' VAL�J,i Tl 11 GN 22,994* 'TASS THROUlm" TO QJIHER ENTITIES' 00* *INFLATIONARY RATE APPRECIAJT'Gti: 2.50* PART 1. CALCULATION CF TTF 2)' SQ'UIRCE TAXING TAX RATE FAW to T.I.F. ENTITY PER$1000 T.I. FUND RATE ------ -------- --------- --------- CITY 7.60 100,00 7.60 SPIED 10.30 loo.co 10.30 COUNTY 2.42 100.00 2.4-1 PORT .454 lGG40 WK NAV. FIST .07 100.00 007 D.D.6 2.15 100.00 2.15 --------- --------- --------- 22094 22,90 PART 2. ASSUMTIONS: 2.50 RATE OF A''NLAL IN,`kEAH IN TOTAL VAL;jE I.-J Z;i 4E -------------— ,99 TAN RAE: PER $WUNND ------------- A.D D E-'r, TO T 0 A L.. A z;S E SEE 1 'i A L E 'Y N E w PfR S,J E S 4 PROJECT/YEAR 16000000 KYLE PLAZA/1987 PART 3, TAX INCREMENT FROjECTIONS CUMULATIVE TOTAL INCREASE IN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL CKULATIWE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT, 1902 49912550 1983 55747300 563 750 134141 13414! 1984 57140963 7220433 166211 3OC352 1985 58569507 660957 199058 49941,'; 1986 60033745 1010195 232727 732136 1987 63734586 33222033 777704 15093% 1988 65627953 35915403 625839 233560' 1989 87773352 3800102 87507 321080, 1990 90172993 40260443 925749 40605 1991 92427318 425147a0 ?77585 51141H, 1992 94738001 44825451 1330716 614406 1793 97106451 4719390i 1065177 7230012 1994 99534112 49621562 1140998 6371080 1995 102022465 52109915 119015 9569290 1996 44573027 54660477 125660 1082610 1997 1 W187352 57274OC2 106977 12143136 1998 H9667036 5995*466 1376513 135200 2000 n2613712 62701162 1441751 14963480 2001 U5429055 6151.505 1506437 1.469'76o 2002 11831+701 6041,2231 1572641 12042807 2003 21272651 7136001 164060 19603m, TABLE 6 ' 4 3CEN,',R.0 s FOUR *01 PRE (9ER Uo" VALUATIO: 22.994* *1 "PASS MKIM" TO Ti, r EiIJITiES: C,I c1cl* *11NFLATIONArY RATE iJr 0.00# V PART 1. CALCULATION OF TIF SE*.'ENUESS E•Y ALARCE TAXING TAX ROE Z PAM TO KIM ENTITY FIRS1000 %I, FUND RATE ------ -------- --------- --------- CITY 7.60 If),' 00 7.60 SPISD 1c.1 70 1{'0.00 10.30 COUNTY 2.42 1001 0 2.42 uRT 454 100.00 0.45 NAV. DIST .07 100.010 0.07 D.D 6 _.1`5 100.;0 2.15 22.99, 22.994. PART 2. ASSUMTIMS: 0.00 RATE OF ANNUAL INCREASE IN TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE IN ZONE 22.99 TAX ROE: PER sTOLEA, -------------- ADDED 10 TAAL ASSESSED VALUE. Bf NEW PROJECTS FRO.JECT/YEAR 6200060MAF';,,Ei SQUr)RE/1967 16000000 KYLE PLAZA/1987 iii PART 3. TAX INCREMENT PROJECTIONS TOTAL INCREASE. Q PRO• ECTED ASSESSED ASSEMED ANNUAL CUMLLATIVE YEAR VALUE V(1,L U E 1N CIRE M E N T INCREMENT 1982 49912550 1983 55747300 504750 1341+1 134141 434 55747300 5834750 134164 268305 1985 55747300 KOM 134164 402469 1986 0747300 3307H 400 06634 1987 77947300 2303+750 644631 1161265 1963 77947300 28034750 644631 KHOO 1969 77947300 2800475o 644631 2470527 090 77947300 2803475& 644631 MGM 1991 77947300 28034750 644631 309769 1992 77747300 2884750 644611 4+04420 1993 775+7300 28034750 644631 5049051 1994 77947300 23034750 644631 5693682 1995 77947300 28034750 644631 6338313 1996 77947300 28034750 644631 6982944 1997 77947300 28034750 6+4631 7627575 1998 77947300 28034750 644631 6272206 2000 77947300 26034750 644631 6916837 2001 77947300 23034750 644631 9561468 M02 77947300 28034750 644631 1020600 ahr 06 200 77947700 28034750 e 644631 10B ,730 2004 77947100 nl,71A 11 TABLE 7 tTKfjEE t,T AX RA TE Ii! V ALUA 22.994* 4 n "P"S TQT • !l' T;I, CTHER ENTITIES: 0.00* 0.00* PART 1. CALCULATION OF TIE RE.'.'LNUES BY SOU�,.CE TAXING TAX RATE PAID TO T.I.F. ENTITY FIRS1000 T,1. FUND RATE ------ -------- --------- CITY 7.50 100.00 7.60 SPIED 10.33 100.00 10.30 COUNTY 2.42 100.00 2.42 FORT 45+ 100.00 0.45 NAV. LIST 07 100.00 0.07 KV6 2, 5 100.{70 2.15 22.994 22.994 PART 2. AS,7:Ut,T 10 NS 0,00 RATE OF ANNUAL INCR`--ASE IN TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE IN' ZONE (7) 22,99 TAX RATE: FER $THOLSAND AMID TO TO& ASSESSED VA,AJE BY NEW PROJECTS t Pr(O•JEC-,"/YEAR. 6200000t4AR`,.'ET SUIJARE/1937 PART 3. TAX iNCREIIENT PROJECTIOi•'S C CUMULATIVE TC1 AL INCREASE iN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL CUMULATIVE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT 1982 49912550 1963 52747300 5834750 134141 134141 1984 55747300 5834750 134164 2 6-S 30 1_i 1985 55747300 523175? 13410 +02469 1986 55747300 5334750 134164 536634 1987 61947300 1203+7,,0 276727 813361 1983 61947300 12034750 276727 09008 1989 61947300 12034750 276727 1366815 1990 619473CO 12034750 276727 1643542 1991 61947300 12034750 276727 1920269 1992 61947300 12034750 276727 2196990 1993 61947300 1203+750 276727 2473723 1994 61947ZOO 12034750 276727 2750450 1995 61947300 12034750 276727 3027177 1996 61947300 1203+750 276727 3303904 1997 61947300 12034750 276727 78001 1998 61947300 12034750 276727 3857316 2000 61947300 1203+750 276727 4134085 2001 61947300 1203+750 276727 4410612 2002 61947300 120347�,() 276727 468753? 76 2003 61947300 12034750 276727 4464 66 2034 61947300 1203+750 2767'-'7 S240997 ATTACHMENT 1 i ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY The economic feasibility of any tax increment financing proposal is dependent upon the generation of revenues through increased assessed property values. Since most tax increment zones are located in blighted or declining areas, the required increase in assessed valuation must result from redevelopment activities, new construction, or renovation of existing properties. Otherwise, the possibility exists that assessed valuations could actually decline or increase only slightly, resulting in little or no funding available to implement projects or retire bonds. To determine the economic feasibility of the project plan as outlined in this report, studies were conducted to determine (1) the potential of the Downtown Reinvestment Zone for future development and (2) the projected amount of tax increment funding to be generated by the Reinvestment Zone. Development Potential In recent years interest in potential development projects in and around the Reinvestment Zone has resulted in the preparation of several market studies and analyses of development potential. The Reinvestment Zone has several major positive factors, including locational determinants, availability of special financial incentive 3. 27 �/ -0A i programs, and market access factors , in its favor as a likely location for major CBD projects: • Adequate streets , utilities, and community facilities to support further development activities . Strong commitment by local government and business community to downtown redevelopment. 0 Streamlined and minimized zoning procedures regula- tions in the Reinvestment Zone. • Future stability guaranteed by substantial investments in office headquarters in. downtown of local, county, Federal governments, several major utility companies and banks. Highest concentration of office development in the Beaumont Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. 0 Access to a regional retail/restaurant/entertainment market with $3. 8 billion in total personal income. • Beaumont' s median family income for 1979 -- $20 ,906 -- represents a 134 . 2% change over 1979 median income compared to a national average increase of 110 . 0$ . 2 1Weinstein, B.L. , Economic Profile of the Beaumont- Port Arthur-Orange Metro olitan Area, John Gray Institute, 982. 2Ibid. , p. 13, p. 15. 3. 28 �� 1761 i 0 The downtown "daytime population" of office workers is estimated at 8000. • Several major vacant parcels suitable for hotel, office, or commercial development are available. • 26 structures eligible for Investment Tax Credits under the 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act are located in the Reinvestment Zone. • The Reinvestment Zone is included in an approved "Eligible Blighted Area" for sale of Texas Industrial Revenue Bonds to finance commercial (non-industrial) projects. Several market analyses have been undertaken to deter- mine the feasibility of various possible downtown develop- ment projects in recent years. A 1982 study by Zuchelli, Hunter, and Associates indicated that "available market research as well as the lending commitments of local banks are supportive of the finding. . .that sufficient market strengths exist to support the Downtown Market Place. " 1 Market research conducted by Zuchelli, Hunter and Associates and Cranston Development Co. in 1982 determined that the 1Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG) application, #UDAG 2, December 10 , 1982 , supplement, Market Feasibility for Downtown Market Place. 3 .29 i market for specialty retail, entertainment-oriented restaurants, and office space within the Reinvestment Zone was sufficiently strong to allow development of the Market Place mixed-use complex with rental rates competitive with existing local developments and profitable rates of occupancy and sales. Market research for the proposed Kyle Center office/ retail project was conducted by Halcyon Development, Ltd. , in 1982. It was determined that there was a shortage of prime Class A office space and restaurants in the CBD and that the Downtown Market Place, by providing a "critical mass" of specialized CBD retailing, would be complementary to further office/retail projects such as the proposed Kyle Center. 1 A 1979 Urban Land Institute (ULI) study identified markets for office uses, specialized retail development, restoration of historic structures, convention-oriented hotels, cultural and recreational entertainment and a major concentration of restaurants as major development opportunities within Beaumont' s CBD. 2 Many of the 1UDAG application, #UDAG 3, October, 1982 , Market Feasibility for Kyle Center. 2Urban Land Institute, 1979 , An Assessment of Oppor- tunities, Plans and Programs for the Revitalization of of Downtown Beaumont, 80 pp. 3 . 30 i specific projects mentioned in the ULI report are located within the Reinvestment Zone, including the Stedman, Kyle, and Gilbert buildings; a potential hotel site; and under- utilized railroad-owned properties. The Reinvestment Zone Plan includes a proposal for a downtown convention hotel as a complement to the Civic/ Convention Center. Studies by Harris, Kerr, Forster and Company and Leaventhol and Horwath in 1979 determined that sufficient demand existed for a downtown convention hotel . Several new hotel projects have since been announced, however. Further market research is needed to determine whether a first-class, downtown convention hotel with direct access to the Convention Center could overccme the competition of major competing hotels located along the interstate highway system. Projected Tax Increment Revenues Four sets of projected tax increment revenues , each based upcn different scenarios for new development and property values, are shown in Tables 3 through 6. Each projection is based on the assumption that the current total tax rate of $22.99 per $1000 currently applicable to the Reinvestment Zone will not increase during the operating life of the Reinvestment Zone. Two types of growth in the total assessed value of the zone are 3 . 31 7L I TABLE 3 xxx#.t!ttxxxt.�+t.r��x:t.txxxxxxxxxrrtt'rrtat.4t �t4x#xxx*xx SCENARIO ONE *TAX RATE i1F'ER 11000 VALUATION: 22.9943 x * xx "PASS THRGUGH° TO OTHER ENTITIES: 0.00* x # 4INFLATIONAki RATE OF APPRECIATION: 2.504 x x x x x x PART 1. CALCULATION CF TIF REVENUES.. BY SOURCE TAXING TAX RATE Z ?AID TO T.I.F. ENTITY FERS1000 T.I. FUND RATE CITY 7.60 100.00 7.60 SFIS,D 10.30 10x.0 ic.30 COUNTY 2.42 103.00 2.42 FORT .454 103.(lG 0.45 NAV. DIST .07 100.1)0 0.07 D.D.6 2.15 101.0;, 2.15 --------- --------- --------- --------- 2Z.994 22.994 FART 2 ASSUifT10N : 2.50 RATE OF ANNUAL TNCREA:E 1N TOTAL ASSESSEi. VALUE IN ZONE f':3 22.99 TAX ;'AT.. PER $lhCUSAr,B ADDED TO TCAL ASSESSED VALUE BY NEW PROJECTS # PRCJECT/YEAR S 6200000MA'FGET SQUARE/1967 FART 3. TAX INCREMENT FFG.IECTI3NS CUMULr+TIVE TOTAL INCREASE iN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL C-_MULATI'VE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT 1962 4991255 1983 55747300 5834750 134141 134141 1984 57140983 7228433 160211 30035 1985 58569507 8656957 199058 4999410 1986 60033745 10121195 232727 732136 19B7 678839588 17977038 413364 1145500 1988 69586828 19674278 452390 1597891 1989 71326499 21413949 492392 2090283 1990 73109661 23197111 533394 2623677 1991 74937403 25024553 575421 3199059 1992 76810836 26898288 618499 3817598 1993 78731109 268814559 662.654 4460252 1994 60699387 30786c�7 707913 5168165 1995 82716871 32804321 754303 5942487 1996 84784793 34872243 801852 6744320 1997 86?04413 36991863 85x591 7594910 1998 89077023 39164473 900548 6495458 2000 51303949 4191399 951754 9447212 2001 93556547 43873957 1004240 10451452 /'71 2004 9,.241,11 484116/6 111sc3a c 4�o (./ 11 / J 1003 ti8.24�OG 4841116 1113101 TABLE 4 # SCENARIO frWO # *TAX RATE ($PER 1100, VALUATION: 22.990 # # #X "PASS THROU�n" TO OTHER ENTITIES: O.OG* # # #INFLATIONARY RATE OF APPRECIATION: # # # # # �#7K>K�kt4:t*444.4t#+R+Kx##:R4#4:tk##4.k444�k#�#4A##i tk4�K�k�k*��x4 PART 1. CALCULATION OF TIF REVENUES BY SOURCE TAXING TA'd RATE % PAID TO T.I.F. ENTITY PER31000 T.I. FUN,, RATE CITY 7.60 100.00 7.60 SPISD 10.30 103.0c 10.30 COUNTY 2.42 100.CIO 2.42 PORT .454 1VV.VV 0.45 NAV. FIST .07 loc.vO 0.07 D.D.6 2.15 100.00 2.15 2.994 22.994 PART 2. ASSUMTIGNS: ---------2,50 RATE CF ANNUAL ItiL:EA E IN TOTAL AcS_.5SEL VALUE IN ZQ-r4E (7.) 22.99 TAX HATE: PER tTiGUf At•t' ---------- AD DEI; TO TOAL ASSESSEI '.'AL.JE BY NEG PF:C.JE','TS # PROJECT/YEAR S LM RKE SQUARE/ 62000, A r,_T � h��.t. lst7 16000000 KYLE PLAZA-,'1967 PART 3. TAX INCRE~ENT FR ;.JECTIONS CUMULATIVE TOTAL INCREASE IN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSE-SED ANNUAL CUMULATIVE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT 1982 49912550 1983 55747300 563470 134141 134141 1984 57140963 7228433 166211 30035 1985 58569:1:7 8656957 199058 499410 1986 60033745 10i21195 232727 73213o 1967 83734588 33622033 777704 1509840 1988 85627953 35915433 825839 2335679 1989 87973652 38 e�11G2 875177 321085o 1990 90/72993 40254443 925749 41360,5 1991 924:7310 425147o8 977585 5114189 1992 94738001 4482`451 103016 6144906 ' 1993 97106451 47193931 1085177 723O, 6 2 1994 99534112 49621562 11409`rU 6371080 1995 102022465 52109915 1198-215 9569295 1996 104573027 54660477 1256803 i0o26159 1997 107127352 57274802 1316977 12143136 1998 119367035 5994486 1378593 13521729 2210 112613712 o`wllo2 1441751 14163480 1154290°:; o` �5J° 150 640' 16 46 9'i GL 20;2 118314781 6540 231 1572841 16,428,7 '1.^.^.7 111^71:C' 7 1-(1,'.1�,^.1 1 1 9;.Y.I.., TABLE 5 «t#«s«t«a«+«�+r«;rrr«r«#«#i«#tk«««r►«F4««««tr««««t•+«t, « iCENA,I • 4THREE # *TAX FATE (SF•e=F: 410{!0 VA:G TIu�±: X2.994# # # # "PASS THROUGH" T,' OTHER ENTITIE:.: 0.00# t # AINFLATION.AF'r FATE OF AF'F'RECIATION. 0.00# 4 # # PART 1. CALCULATION OF TIF RE.ENUES BY SGURCE TAXING TA;< � TE % PAID la T.I.F. ENTITY F•ER4.iG00 T.L. FUND RATE CITY 7.00 100.00 7.00 SPED 10.30 100.60 10.30 CGU:,TY ..42 iCG.00 2.42 PORT .454 1G0.00 0.45 NAV. LIST 100.:.0 O.G.' D.D.6 2.15 100.00 2.15 --------- --------- ---------- --------- 22.994 22.994 PAR. 2. ASSUMTI0NG 0.00 RATE 3 Af4 Lr'AL INCii_i-E i T OTAL AS SEt•SEI, 'a±ALE IN Z0 4E 22.99 TAX RiJE: -Er" 3THOU"SAN1. ADDED T'l-: TOAL ASSESSED UA-JE BY NEW PROJEZTS # PRO-IEC1"/YEAR f 62C0000MAR,-.ET S 1i-FE/1987 PART 3. TAX INCREMENT F'RG3ECTIONS --------------------------------------- CUMULATIVE TOTAL INCREASE IN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL CUMULATIVE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT 1982 49912550 1983 55747300 5834750 134141 134141 1984 55747300 5834750 134164 2683)S 1985 55747300 5834750 134164 402469 1986 55747300 5834750 134164 536634 1987 61947300 12034750 276727 8133cl 1988 61947300 12034750 276727 10900u-s 1989 61547300 1203470 276727 1366615 1990 6194'3C0 12034750 276727 1643542 1991 61947300 120347_`•0 276727 1920269 1992 61947300 12034750 276727 2196990 1993 61947300 12034750 276727 2473723 1994 61947300 1203+750 276727 2750450 1995 61947300 12034750 276727 30:.7177 1996 61947300 12C34750 270727 3307,904 1997 b194'3 0 12034750 2?6727 35 JSa31 1998 61947300 12034750 2767?7 :2857358 204 2000 61947300 12034750 `7627 4134 c5 2001 61947300 12034750 "7677'7 44.0c: 2002 61947300 1203470 '-76727 4667"39 •' ,s1. a IVY- TABLE 6• # SCENAF,:„ s FOUR . s � *TAX FATE ($PEP 51000 VALUATION: 22.9944 # # ": YX "PASS THR,,UGH" TO EITHER ENTITIES: 0.00 # # i #INFLATIONAFY FATE OF APPRECIATION: 0.00* * Y *' PART 1. CALCULATION OF TIF REVENUES EY SOURCE ________________________ TAXING TAX RATE X PAID TO T.I.F. ENTITY PER$100G T.I. FUN;, RATE s CITY 7.60 1G;?. :.: 7.60 Sr'T1I 1G.:!c 1,;- 3 10.30 COUINTY 2.42 10u.�G 2.42 PORT .454 100.30 0.45 ` NAY. DIST .01' 100.00 0.07 D.D.6 -.I5 100.G3 2.15 ------ --------- --------- --------- 22.994 22.994 PAS;T 2 A53UMTIOttS: ---------0400 RATE OF ANNUAL !NCRLAH IN TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE TN ...,.°.E (..i ar' ------------- ti,: 22.99 TAX RATE: PER $THOU-? J, A.,I;EDT TOAL ASSES EI, 4ALUE "Y NEW FF0JEC?5 4 PROJECT;YEAR i 6200003MARKET SQUARE/193.7 1600,000 KYLE PLAZA/1987 is ti•: X! FART 3. .+r TAX INCREMENT PROJECTIONS CUMULATIVE TOTAL INCREASE IN PROJECTED ASSESSED ASSESSED ANNUAL CUMULATIVE YEAR VALUE VALUE INCREMENT INCREMENT 1982 4991250 =} 1983 55747300 5634750 134141 134141 19104 55747300 583+'50 134164 268305 ,k 1985 5747300 58347 0 134104 402469 '_f 1986 55747300 583+750 13+11.•+ 536634 1987 7.7947300 28034750 644031 1181265 1983 77947300 28034750 644631 1825876 1489 77447300 260347f0 5+4631 2476527 1990 77947300 2803+1510 644631 3115156 1991 77947300 280341;' 644631 3159789 1992 7'9473011 227'0 347 O 64+631 4404420 1993 77947300 2803475) 644631 5049051 1994 1,1947360 20034750 6+4631 5693682 1995 7,947300 28034750 644631 63,78313 1996 '744,'300 2803475E 644031 69829.29 79 1997 17947360 26034.'50 644031 7627575 U 1998 2607-i7E0 644031 627226 20ro 77947300 26i�,47]0 644631 691665; i y considered: (1) annual growth at a fixed rate due to inflation and the indirect enhancement of land values resulting from the downtown redevelopment program; and (2) increases due to the addition of completed new projects to the tax rolls. Fairly conservative approaches were taken for each of the two growth variables. Although local estimates of the annual rate of appreciation anticipated in the total assessed value of the zone have ranged as high as 5 percent, the projections included in this report are based upon more conservative figures of 2. 5 percent and 0 percent. Similarly, although several new major projects are likely to be built during the life of the Reinvestment Zone, tax increment revenues are projected on the basis of two alternate scenarios: (a) that the Downtown Market Place will be the only new major project, and (b) that the Market Place and Kyle Center will be the only major new projects added to the Reinvestment Zone. No allowance is made for the recent reappraisal of the Reinvestment Zone although this is expected to generate additional tax increment revenues. The variations in the four projections are as follows: TABLE 3 : 2 . 5% annual rate of increase in assessed value l 3. 36 i above tax increment base with the additional increase of $6 ,200,000 for 1985 due to completion of the Market Place. TABLE 4: Same assumptions as Table 3 with an additional $10, 400,000 added to the total assessed value in 1986 due to completion of Kyle Center. TABLE 5 : Same assumptions as Table 3 except that no annual rate of increase in the total assessed valuation is projected. TABLE 6 : Same assumptions as Table 4 except that no annual rate of increase in the total assessed value is projected. 3. 37 0-?13-1710