|
J�� /,,I I, I I'l I '111ol I
<br />for purchase of new equipment and machinery. It should be noted, however, that the sun -
<br />setting AMEZ was not heavily promoted due to the uncertainty of mitigation measures for the fly.
<br />Table 3 — Financial contribution
<br />SBVEZ Budget
<br />Year 1
<br />Year 2
<br />Year 3
<br />Year 4
<br />Year 5
<br />Total
<br />$450,000
<br />142,500
<br />$132,500
<br />$135,000
<br />$135,200
<br />IVDA (34% gross)
<br />$153,000
<br />48,450
<br />45,050
<br />$45,900
<br />$45,968
<br />Balance
<br />$297,000
<br />$94,050
<br />$87,450
<br />$89,100
<br />$89,232
<br />Colton (22% net)
<br />$65,340
<br />$20,691
<br />$19,239
<br />$19,602
<br />$19,631
<br />San Bernardino (64% net)
<br />$190,080
<br />$60,192
<br />$55,968
<br />$57,024
<br />$57,108
<br />County (14 % net)
<br />$41,580
<br />-�-1 3,16-7
<br />$12,243
<br />$12,474
<br />. $12,492
<br />While HCD has indicated that it will improve upon tracking and monitoring of utilization of
<br />incentives by businesses in the enterprise zone, until the proposed zone is in place, results and
<br />effectiveness are unknown and despite what HCD says, Colton is not convinced that the
<br />information will be more readily available than it is now for the AMEZ. Having a zone
<br />coordinator in each jurisdiction is a mechanism over which each jurisdiction will have control
<br />with regard to employee vouchering similar to what is in place now for the AMEZ. It also bears
<br />mentioning that the businesses in the AMEZ may not be the same businesses in the proposed
<br />SBVEZ, see Map attached as Exhibit A.
<br />Colton is concerned with the reasonableness of several budget estimates for the proposed
<br />SBVEZ. Although, Colton offered cost saving mechanisms, they were rejected by the
<br />representatives from the other participating jurisdictions. The low estimate for environmental
<br />studies required, high amount allocated to marketing, no assurance of any higher utilization
<br />within Colton's portion of the zone, and no track record for the state to ensure tracking and
<br />monitoring of tax incentive utilization, all add up to some unknowns for which staff is
<br />uncomfortable with in light of the fact that the financial and time commitment required is fifteen
<br />years. It is staff's opinion that currently the proposed SBVEZ is not in the best financial interest
<br />of Colton.
<br />Other costs to be borne by the participating jurisdictions, in addition to those outlined in Table 2
<br />include the following: ]VIDA retained the services of a consultant in the amount of $72,900 to
<br />prepare the application, which is due to the State on September 6 and is responsible for the
<br />SBVEZ's legal description, estimated to cost an additional $24,600. San Bernardino has agreed
<br />to pay for the initial study. The County will provide all the mapping and assessor parcel
<br />information. Colton has been providing this information for acreage within Colton's jurisdictional
<br />boundaries. From the onset and on a continual basis, Colton has stressed the need to identify
<br />costs as soon as possible so that it could make a determination as to whether or not
<br />participation in the proposed zone was the most prudent use of Colton's tax dollars. The exact
<br />numbers of the budget and anticipated allocation to each jurisdiction have not been finalized.
<br />However, it is not anticipated that any adjustments will significantly effect the numbers.. Given
<br />the sensitivity to time, this item was placed on the agenda with a recommendation of denial, but
<br />includes a MOU and Resolution should the Council elect to participate in the zone.
<br />R \ , I . I I . . I I I , , I , , , , I % I , , I I , I , , , ( I , I'' \ 1, , I I I , , I , I I 'I l� ", I , , %U It H l�, I " , I , i , ,
<br />
|