The Nebraska TIF Project Amendment, also known as Amendment 6, was a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment on the November 7, 2006 general election ballot in Nebraska, where it was defeated.
| Amendment 6 (TIF Project)|
|Yes|| 151,041|| 24.7%|
Official results via: Nebraska Blue Book 2008-09 (p.264)
Text of measure
The language that appeared on the ballot:
- A vote FOR this amendment will remove the requirement that property eligible for public debt and special property tax financing be substandard and blighted and allow development of property as a qualifying purpose for the use of public debt and special property tax financing. The Legislature will also be given the authority to: (1) determine the terms and conditions for use of public debt and special property tax financing; (2) authorize counties, in addition to cities and villages, to use public debt and special property tax financing; (3) authorize cities and villages to expand the use of public debt and special property tax financing beyond their boundaries; and (4) extend the pledge and payment schedule for public debt and special property tax treatment from fifteen years to thirty years under specified circumstances.
- A vote AGAINST this amendment will retain the constitutional requirement that property be substandard and blighted in order to use public debt and special property tax financing, will not add development of property as a qualifying purpose, will not authorize use of public debt and special property tax financing beyond the boundaries of cities and villages, will not authorize the Legislature to expand the use of public debt and special property tax financing by counties, and will not extend the pledge and payment schedule from fifteen years to thirty years.
- A constitutional amendment to remove a requirement that property be substandard and blighted for purposes of rehabilitating, acquiring, or redeveloping such property through use of public debt or special property tax treatment, to add development as a purpose for use of the constitutional provision authorizing public debt and special property tax treatment, to permit counties and cities and villages outside their corporate boundaries to use such constitutional provision, and to authorize the Legislature to extend the term of such special tax treatment from fifteen to thirty years.
Objectives of the initiative
Amendment 6 was intended to authorize the Unicameral to make 4 substantial revisions to the prior TIF regulations, as follows:
- TIF authority would be extended to county governments, in addition to all the municipalities which had this authority under the old law.
- The amendment would remove the "substandard and blighted" qualification in defining areas that TIF can be implemented on, so that any municipal or county government would have authority to implement a TIF project anywhere.
- Under the old law, the time period for repayment of the redevelopment loan was set at a maximum of 15 years, after which all property tax revenue from the TIF project property would have to be directed back to its original recipient(s); namely, cities, counties, and school districts. This amendment would authorize the Unicameral to increase the maximum to 30 years for any TIF project(s) taking place on land of which 50% or more is owned by the State of Nebraska, thereby further ensuring complete repayment of loans when the state has a direct interest in the property in question.
- Municipal and county governments would no longer be restricted to performing TIF projects within their normal jurisdiction, but would be able to undertake such projects anywhere they were authorized to do so by the Unicameral.
- Would bring the constitution up-to-date with current TIF practices, which tend to extend beyond what some people consider constitutional under the original TIF amendment.
- Would likely increase property taxes for pre-existing home- and business- owners, as property taxes from TIF projects would be diverted to special projects, rather than the traditional recipients of property taxes, such as schools.
- Gives the legislature too much control over what should be local projects