Rochester NH plans to utilize RSA 162:K to finance public infrastructure as a catalyst to development. 2 million square feet of retail, hospitality and commercial development is at stake.

1. May 13, 2014
City Council Meeting, Rochester New Hampshire
Presented by Karen Pollard, CEcD, EDP
Economic Development Manager

2. RSA 162-K
Local Option: Municipalities adopt provisions of RSA
by the governing body
Create and adopt Development & Financing Plans to
achieve community development goals
Define the district, public facilities and infrastructure
will be constructed, estimated budget and proposed
operations within the district
The plan can be amended as needed by the governing
body, with required Public Notice & Hearings
Multiple TIF Districts are allowed
Not to exceed 8% of assessed community value, or 16% for all
districts with bonds outstanding
Not to exceed 5% of total acreage, or 10% for all districts with
bonds outstanding

3. Increment accrues after date district is established
Use of grant funds is allowed within TIF Districts
Bonds – First payment must be within 5 years and last
payment no longer than 30 years.
Bonds are NOT to be included when computing the
municipality’s net debt under RSA 33
Annual report will include financial reports for any
development districts
Appointment of a TIF Advisory Board by the governing
body is required.
RSA 162-K:14 “Members shall be owners or occupants of
real property within or adjacent to the development district”

4. Pre-construction or “original value” $100,000
Post-construction or development $10,000,000
Value as assessed for Ad Velorum Taxes by City Assessor
Increment or “captured value” $9,900,000
Property Tax calculation is “post construction”
value at the city’s tax rate per thousand, currently
$26.36 per Thousand = $263,600
Taxes received on the original value go to the general
fund = $2,636
Taxes received on the increment are dedicated to costs
as detailed in the Development & Financing Plan =
$260,964
Property Taxes on
$10,000,000
= $263,600
($26.36/$1,000)
$2,636 to General Fund
($100,000 @ $26.36/$1,000)
Pre-construction
value $100,000
$260,964 Increment
($9,900,000 @ $26.36/$1,000)
Increment
$9,900,000
Post-construction
value $10,000,000
Bond Payment
Reimburse
Expenditures
Maintenance
Administration
Reserves

5. Create your TIF District with a development project “in
hand”
Have written development agreements about scope of
public improvements
Have a financial surety or developer guarantee as part of
the development agreement
Create a reserve account for at least 1 year of debt service
& operating costs
“Background” market growth does get used towards
increment, but don’t count on increases every year
Work in phases & expand the scope as development occurs

7. 1988 Report by Applied Economic Research
2000 Land Use & Transportation Master Plan
2006 Economic Development Master Plan
2006 Bruce Mayberry TIF Analysis - Feasibility
2007 Buxton Retail Analysis – Regional Demand
2008 CLD Engineering & Traffic Study – Land & Infrastructure
Capacity
2010 City Council endorsement of the Development District, new
zoning adopted
2010 MOU with NH DOT regarding Granite Ridge District, DOT
endorsement of CLD Study
2013 DRED approves city’s application for New Hampshire
Revitalization Zone status
2014 Proposed creation of TIF District in conjunction with
development to be initial “phase 1” catalyst project

8. Rochester is in need of
amenities such as shopping,
hospitality and service
businesses to serve the
residents & business in the
city and in surrounding
towns.
Leakage of $308 million
Capacity & demand for 2
million sq ft mixed uses
Increase property taxes
581%
Employment creation
Development Potential
Gross Land Area (Acres) 913.09
Building Floor Area (square feet)
Existing 594,316
Growth Potential 1,615,904
Buildout Total 2,210,220
Taxable Assessed Value
Existing 2013 $ 62,326,773.00
Growth Potential $ 362,419,005.00
Buildout Total $ 424,745,778.00
Annual Property Tax Yield
Existing 2013 $ 1,642,993.74
Growth Potential (Increment) $ 9,553,364.97
Buildout Total $ 11,196,298.71

10. ComparisonFactorforStatutory Limitations
Comparison Factor for Statutory TIF Limitations Taxable Valuation Land Area in Acres
RSA 162-K:5
City Total 2013 $ 2,048,617,212.00 28,688.05
Maximum Allowable - Individual TIF District
(8% of City-wide Assessment; 5% of City-wide Acreage) $ 163,889,377.00 1,434.40
Granite Ridge Development District Valuation for Tax Purposes $ 62,326,773.00 913.09
As Percent of City Total 3.04% 3.18%
Maximum Cumulative TIFs Allowable $ 327,778,754.00 2,868.81
(16% of City-wide Assessment; 10% of City-wide Acreage)
Granite Ridge Development District TIF $ 62,326,773.00 913.09
Granite State Business Park RSA 162k:5 TIF $ 13,413,792.00 335.26
Granite State Business Park RSA 205 TIF $ 24,169,200.00 56.45
Total Cumulative District Values 2013 $ 99,909,765.00 1304.80
As Percent of City Total 4.87% 4.55%

12. CLD Est. Public Improvements In 2008 $
Frontage Road & Interior Intersections $4,330,000
Access A & Farmington Road 1,010,000
Access B/ Nashoba Dr & Farmington Rd 1,530,000
Access C/ Crane Dr & Farmington Rd 1,900,000
Access D/ Little Falls Bridge & Farmington 1,770,000
Two Rod Rd & Farmington Rd 2,015,000
Access E & Farmington Rd 695,000
Access F & Farmington Rd 1,115,000
Water – Entire Project 2,900,000
Sewer – Entire Project 5,400,000
TOTAL $22,665,000
Public Improvements - 2014-2015 Anticipated
4. Severino Estimate - Access Roads to Boulevard &
Intersection Little Falls Bridge Road
$
814,675.00
5. Severino Estimate - Frontage Road (Granite Ridge
Boulevard) and Wetland Basin
$
1,500,440.25
6. Sewer & Water Improvements $
1,000,000.00
Subtotal $
3,315,115.25
Engineering 20% $
663,023.05
Contingency 20% $
795,627.66
Permitting & Mitigation $
225,984.04
TOTAL $
4,999,750.00

13. May 13 – Public Presentation
May 20 – Public Hearing & City Council
Resolution and Reading for a 1st time
May 27 – Modifications to the TIF Development
& Financing Plan (if necessary)
June 10 – Consideration for approval to create
the TIF District (after mandatory 15 day period)
Development Agreements will be considered
individually by the City Council on a project-by-
project basis