Legislature(2005 - 2006)BELTZ 211
04/26/2006 01:30 PM Senate COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB392 | |
| HB334 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 392 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 334 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CSHB 334(FIN)-MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAX DEFERRAL/EXEMPTION
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN announced HB 334 to be up for consideration.
2:22:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JAY RAMRAS, Sponsor of HB 334, introduced the
bill as an effort to deal with dilapidated buildings. He noted
that much like the MacKay Building in downtown Anchorage,
Fairbanks has the Polaris Building, which is boarded up and has
become quite an eyesore. The condition is made more obvious due
to the fact that it's located just across the street from the
new Jay Rabinowitz Courthouse.
Builder Marc Marlow, who has had experience with converting
dilapidated buildings, has been working with Fairbanks community
officials to get property tax concessions to encourage
renovation of dilapidated buildings. However, there is some
question as to whether one city council may bind a future
council. HB 334 clarifies that once a local governing body
enters into an agreement related to an exemption, it remain
valid for the duration of the project. It still allows for local
control and latitude for municipalities to strike a deal. The
only exception is a beneficial occupancy, which is between a
potential developer and the local municipality.
CHAIR STEDMAN referenced page 1, line 12 and said he understands
that once a property is sold all the deferred taxes would be due
to the municipality.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS responded changes were made in the Finance
Committee because of substantial occupancy issues that arose.
The concern related to creating an unfair advantage for a
developer who then became a landlord that didn't participate in
the sale of the building.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked for clarification that there would not be
multiple stacking issues.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS responded he believes that is correct.
SENATOR KOOKESH asked whether the McKay building was refurbished
under this statute or under municipal ordinance.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS replied Mr. Pound informed him it was a
combination, but there hasn't been clarifying language. HB 334
would provide a developer certainty that once a tax exemption
has been secured; it will remain in effect through the life of
the project even if the local governing body changes
composition. The hope is that the clarifying language will give
developers certainty so they're willing to rehabilitate eyesores
and thereby provide regentrification to communities.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked for assurance that municipalities
would have the option of adopting this and that it would in no
way be a mandate.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said that's correct.
2:31:35 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN asked him to discuss the procedure if a developer
were to abandon a property that had been exempted.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS responded HB 334 isn't meant to address a
default by a developer.
SENATOR WAGONER commented anything that helps communities is
worth consideration and he could see the need, but more than
likely just a few properties would fall under this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS responded the head of the Alaska Tourism
Industry Association (ATIA) sees the bill as a potential vehicle
for various cities to use to renovate dilapidated buildings that
might be used in the tourism industry. ATIA is the only private
sector entity that made contact, which is why he went out of his
way to contact Mr. Marlow to get his perspective and assure
himself that this legislation wouldn't benefit just one party.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS motioned to report CSHB 334(FIN) and
attached fiscal note(s) from committee with individual
recommendations. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|