Introduced
by
To revise the definition of "eligible obligations" in the law authorizing downtown development authorities (DDAs), to include certain obligations incurred by the Ionia DDA. The bill would allow this DDA to restructure its debt after a Tax Tribunal ruling on Meridian Corporation led to a reduction in the DDA's revenue. This affects tax increment financing (TIF) used by DDAs, which allows them to capture increased local property tax revenue, but not school tax revenue, that results from their financing of certain improvement projects. Due to provisions of Proposal A starting in 1994, the use of school tax revenue in a TIF scheme is not permitted without an exemption.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce and Tourism
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the bill pass.
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 37 to 0 (details)
Substitute offered
by
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To clarify a technical reference in a provision contained in the bill.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Passed in the House 106 to 0 (details)
To revise the definition of "eligible obligations" in the law authorizing downtown development authorities (DDAs), to include certain obligations incurred by the Ionia DDA. The bill would allow this DDA to restructure its debt after a Tax Tribunal ruling on Meridian Corporation led to a reduction in the DDA's revenue. This affects tax increment financing (TIF) used by DDAs, which allows them to capture increased local property tax revenue, but not school tax revenue, that results from their financing of certain improvement projects. Due to provisions of Proposal A starting in 1994, the use of school tax revenue in a TIF scheme is not permitted without an exemption.
Passed in the Senate 35 to 0 (details)
