HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-26 Public Comment - N. Nakamura - Do not extend the South Bozeman Technology DistrictFrom:Natsuki Nakamura
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Do not extend the South Bozeman Technology District
Date:Tuesday, September 22, 2026 7:49:38 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
As a disclosure, I am a member of the Economic Vitality Board, a member of Better Bozeman
Coalition, and a member of Montanans for Palestine, but am speaking only on behalf ofmyself as a Bozeman resident.
Dear City Commission,
This comment is in regards to items I.6 and I.7, related to the South Bozeman Technology
District.
In the staff packet for I.6, it states (my emphasis added throughout this comment), "Under [the2022 development] agreement, the City agreed to issue bonds to reimburse the developer for
eligible public infrastructure costs once new buildings on the campus generated sufficientincremental taxable value to support the debt service on tax increment financing bonds."
This is not true.
Instead, the 2022 development agreement (amended in 2026) states:
"Pursuant to Resolution No. 5420 of the City Commission, the City approved the use ofTax Increment, if available, to reimburse the Costs of the Infrastructure Improvements
in a total amount not to exceed the Reimbursable Amount.""Subject to the Coverage Ratio requirement described in Section 5.2(a)(ii), the City may
issue the Bonds in its sole discretion to finance the Reimbursable Amount. The Bonds, ifauthorized and issued, will have such terms and conditions as are approved by the City
Commission. This Agreement does not require or imply that the City has anyobligation to issue the Bonds."
"The Developer understands and agrees the City shall have no obligation to and maynot issue the Bonds if the City is unable to find and determine that the Tax Increment is
sufficient to pay the Bonds timely, to produce a Coverage Ratio of not less than 1.7, tosatisfy the requirements of the Bond Resolution, and to satisfy all other financial
obligations related to the District.""If any of the above conditions are not satisfied in the determination of the City, the City
shall have no obligation to reimburse the Developer for any of the costs of theInfrastructure Improvements and the City’s determination to refrain from reimbursing,
or its inability to reimburse, any of the costs of the Infrastructure Improvements shallnot be or result in a default of this Agreement."
"The Developer agrees that if Tax Increment in the amount of $3,599,178 is notavailable to the City to reimburse the Developer and/or, if the City, in its sole
discretion, determines that it cannot reasonably sell the Bonds, whether due to lack ofTax Increment, market conditions, or otherwise, the City shall have no obligation to
pay to the Developer the Reimbursable Amount described in Section 4."
The South Bozeman Technology District (SBTD) Work Plan also states, "The development
agreement is not a guarantee of reimbursement or bonding for reimbursement."
With this, I ask the City and the Commission to use its discretion to NOT pledge TaxIncrement to the payment of bonds and to NOT extend the SBTD for another 25 years.
Districts such as the SBTD are supposed to encourage the "development of value-adding
industries" and the SBTD Comprehensive Plan states the goal to, "Build a healthy and diversehigh-tech economic base that provides high-paying jobs and generates revenue to pay for
service needs without degrading the natural resources or the overall quality of life."
I have serious concerns about the industries currently within the SBTD and their heavyreliance on Department of War funding (see my previous comment about the tenants in the
Innovation Campus), and as the SBTD Comprehensive Plan states, industry clusters "becomevirtuous circles" and "attract other like businesses."
But even if you don't share my concerns about investing in war and surveillance technologies,
perhaps you can admit concern about the SBTD's ability to "generate revenue to pay forservice needs." The reason bonds are being considered tonight in items I.6 and I.7 is because
there is NOT sufficient Tax Increment to reimburse infrastructure costs. Pledging TaxIncrement from the district for the next 25 years is not "timely."
If instead we started putting the ~$520,000 annual Tax Increment back into the City's General
Fund, perhaps we could pay for:
Six to seven firefighters a year (annual salaries starting at around $72,000)
A team of librarians to staff a new library out west that the library Foundation is activelyworking towards (starting salaries ranging from $50,000 to $80,000)
Reliably supporting the emergency shelters in town (the Warming Center is receiving$290,000 tonight to help keep it open)
Maintaining or expanding the Streamline (budgeted $400,000 in this year's budget)
Please do not approve items I.6 and I.7. Please do not extend the SBTD.
Thank you for your consideration,
Natsuki Nakamura