5/14/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that they would be excluded for the building, but improvements would qualify. ` Commissioner Eggert added that modifications and new equipment would also qualify. Chairman Adams asked specifically about the old WalMart building, and County Attorney Vitunac replied that expansion in personal property would be eligible, but the building shell would not be, nor the land. In response to additional questions, he quoted from the law: 11... provided that all these improvements were made after the Board passes an ordinance for the business." He indicated that there would be some leeway there. Chairman Adams wanted assurance there would not be decreased incentive for fixing up old buildings. Commissioner Eggert agreed that there was some leeway, and also pointed out that there are not a lot of existing empty buildings that can be turned over, but she thought ways could be found to be helpful. Chairman Adams wanted additional assurance that those buildings would not be excluded, and County Attorney Vitunac felt there was a certain dis-incentive from using an old shell building versus building a new one. The new building would get a tax exemption, and the old one would not, except for expansion or tangible personal property. Chairman Adams saw two problems. There was no advantage to encourage the sale of an old building and there would be more vacated buildings. County Attorney Vitunac replied that was covered under State law and there was no local option on that. Chairman Adams emphasized she was not against tax abatement, but wanted County Attorney Vitunac to determine how her concerns might be remedied. Commissioner Bird thought her example of the WalMart conversion was good, and Commissioner Eggert agreed. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion carried unanimously. (Resolution Nos. 96 -55 -and 96- 56 adopted) 37 May 14, 1996 8NX U