The city’s new tax increment financing advisory board voted May 8 to recommend that the City Commission approve bonding against the AgriTech TIF for about $3.2 million to complete infrastructure improvements and reimburse developers for previously installed improvements.

It was a second, special meeting on the request, since the three members of the five-member board in attendance couldn’t get enough votes to make a decision and Mitch Tropila, board member, said he wanted to delay their decision until after the city votes on a tax abatement request from Janicki Industries for a different lot within AgriTech.

The request is independent of the proposed Janicki development and has been discussed for years under the original development agreement between the city and the Great Falls Development Alliance.

Brett Doney of GFDA presented to commissioners during their Feb. 3 work session about progress in the park and the remaining infrastructure needs.

City, county commissioners set hearings on Janicki tax abatement request for May 12

He said they started discussions with the city about three years ago to bond against the TIF for infrastructure and to reimburse  GFDA and Pacific Steel for the infrastructure costs they paid up front. At the time, it wasn’t feasible, but D.A. Davidson and the city’s bond counsel now believe there’s enough development to support the bond.

The request includes using about $1.4 million to complete infrastructure installation along 67th Street North, which is needed for the development of Lots 7-10 in AgriTech:

• Lot 7 – under contract for the existing Ponderosa Solutions operation to expand
• Lot 8 – not under contract
• Lot 9 and 10 – under contract for Janicki Industries

On May 12, City Commissioners are scheduled to consider a tax abatement for Janicki’s proposed project on Lot 1C in AgriTech. The abatement request doesn’t include Lots 9-10, according to city documents.

Story continues below.

Since the property is generating minimal increment now, the tax abatement, if granted, wouldn’t negatively impact the TIF district, according to staff.

The city currently owes GFDA and Pacific Steel about $1.4 million for previously installed infrastructure, and another $1.4 million worth of infrastructure is required along 67th Street North for development of Lots 7-10.

AgriTech is about 395 acres and is the East Industrial Park Tax Increment Financing District.

It includes 13 lots:

• Lot 1 (undeveloped) – Pacific Hide and Fur (Pacific Steel)
• Lot 2 – Montana Specialty Mills
• Lot 3A – Helena Chemical Company
• Lot 5A – Fedex
• Lot 6A – Ponderosa Solutions
• Lots 7-10 (undeveloped) – GFDA currently owns
• Lot 1A – Steel Etc. Holding Company
• Lot 1B – Admiral Beverage Corporation
• Lot 1C (undeveloped) – GFDA owned, under contract for Janicki, subject property for requested tax abatement
• Lot D – TRSB Enterprise

The infrastructure to be installed includes reconstruction of 67th Street North, water main extension, and extension of gravity sewer to serve lots 7 through 10.

In 2025, GFDA paid the city to review the construction plans and the bid documents for work that is being competitively bid, according to GFDA’s TIF application.

City Commissioners established the AgriTech TIF district in 2013 and adopted an associated development plan that included extending a rail line from the existing BNSF line through the industrial park, which was completed.

City considering tax abatement for Janicki project

The original agreement provided that GFDA would install infrastructure in three phases, with eligible costs being reimbursed through available TIF funds and that once each project is certified as eligible, GFDA would receive 85 percent of the city’s TIF revenues in the district until the eligible reimbursement obligations are satisfied, according to city staff.

Under the agreement, the city doesn’t accrue or pay interest until the project park reaches the required taxable property market value for each phase, as certified by the Montana Department of Revenue. At that point, interest accrues and may be paid at a rate of 4 percent annually.

The required market value thresholds are:

• Phase 1: $35.7 million
• Phase 2: $46.4 million
• Phase 3: $71.4 million

None of those thresholds have yet been met, so the city hasn’t accrued or paid interest, according to staff.

The district is currently governed under the first amendment to the development agreement, which commissioners adopted in 2019. It didn’t change the total reimbursement amount, but reappropriated amounts among the build-out phases and revised timing.

Infrastructure improvements included in the amendment, summarized by city staff:

• Phase 1, completed in 2016
  • city previously agreed to reimburse GFDA up to $4,064,868
  • included construction of public infrastructure supporting Lots 1-5 and rail to serve Lots 1-8
• Phase 2, completed in 2016
  • city agreed to reimburse GFDA up to $4,526,012
  • included construction of public infrastructure supporting Lot 6
• Phase 3A, not yet completed and the subject of this TIF request
  • city agreed to reimburse GFDA up to $1,251,528
  • includes construction of the public infrastructure necessary for Lots 7-10 (along 67th Street North)
• Phase 3B (not completed and no longer necessary)
  • city agreed to reimburse GFDA up to $1,012,327
  • includes the construction of the rail to serve lots 9-10.

Rail extension isn’t needed for the anticipated uses of Lots 9-10, according to GFDA, and that provision will be removed from the agreement with a second amendment.

The city is planning to issue debt for the district to settle the city and GFDA’s obligations and eligible infrastructure requirements.

City staff are coordinating with D.A. Davidson for financing options and are anticipating about $3.2 million of debt issuance, plus closing costs.

Great Falls a finalist for Janicki Industries expansion

If approved, the debt would be payable solely from future tax increment revenues generated within the AgriTech TIF district.

The AgriTech TIF is set to expire in 2028 and city commissioners have expressed wariness about extending the district another 20 years, which is typically the case when debt is issued in a TIF district.

City staff are working with D.A. Davidson and third-party bond counsel to structure the debt to allow for early repayment so the TIF district could end once the debt is paid off.

“The primary fiscal tradeoff is that extending the district delays the return of future taxable value to the overlapping taxing jurisdictions. However, the proposed infrastructure is intended to support pending private development, which is expected to increase taxable value and generate additional increment to repay the debt,” according to the city staff report.

Once the TIF district ends, the city only receives its proportionate share of the taxable revenue generated by the property, which is about 28 percent, rather than the full increment captured within the district, as tax revenue would be returned to overlapping taxable jurisdictions, including the county and Great Falls Public Schools.

Commissioners are scheduled to review the TIF request and adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance of bonds during their May 19 meeting.

City’s new TIF advisory board to meet for first time

Brock Cherry, city planning director, said during the May 5 TIF board meeting that staff intends to issue debt to complete the city’s initial obligations and finish the phase of infrastructure while allowing commissioners the discretion to sunset the TIF district once the debt is retired and recognizing the potential for future development.

During the meeting, Kellie Pierce, TIF board member and director of the downtown Business Improvement District, asked if Janicki’s project had been decided, to which GFDA representatives and city staff said, no.

Janicki is choosing between Great Falls and Twin Falls/Jerome, Idaho for its expansion in a proposed $830 million project. The company has said it’s working with state and local officials to “assess available tools and incentives, recognizing that startup and site‑development costs are critical to the company’s final location decision,” and “pursuing infrastructure support to offset site development costs.”

City, county disagree about TIF board appointment; board can’t meet without county member

The company has said it intends to make its final selection by the end of May.

Pierce asked if the TIF request was in preparation for Janicki’s proposal.

GFDA representatives said Janicki was one of the companies looking at Lots 7-10.

Cherry said that the city can’t make a speculative decision.

Melissa Kinzler, city finance director, said “this isn’t contingent on a new person coming in there, it’s been talked about for a long time. We’ve been talking about that for quite a while.”

She said it’s not necessarily a best practice to have a tax abatement in a TIF district, but the city has allowed it before, specifically in the downtown TIF district.

Kinzler said that under the agreement with GFDA, the city is required to reimburse GFDA for infrastructure, but didn’t have the increment to issue bonds previously.

Proposed data center project off [2025]

If the debt isn’t issued and the district isn’t extended, the city’s existing debts won’t be paid and the infrastructure improvements won’t be completed, she said.

The infrastructure work needs to be done regardless of Janicki’s decision to build in the AgriTech Park, she said.

Jeremy Jones, deputy city manager, said that the city is working with Malmstrom Air Force Base officials to extend the road from the back gate through the area.

GFDA and Cascade County were recently notified that they’d been awarded a $$788,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development through Congressman Troy Downing’s office to extend 18th Avenue North.

Brett Doney of GFDA told The Electric that the funding was initially planned for the proposed data center project in that area, which was withdrawn.

City to create TIF advisory board under new state law [2025]

GFDA purchased another 42 acres around 67th Street North and this road construction will open that land to be subdivided into two lots, one of which is east of the existing Lots 9-10 and one to the south.

The roadwork would extend some infrastructure to the large parcel, previously considered for a data center, that Doney said they’d like to see put into future use.

Doney said they’re working out the funding and design details so the road could be built this season, but it may be delayed to next year, depending on federal timelines.

The property is in the county, but Doney said the road will be built to city standards in the event it’s considered for future annexation.

During the May 5 meeting, Mitch Tropila, TIF board member, moved to postpone their decision to their next meeting.

Luke Diekhans, TIF board member and GFPS’ business operations manager, said he’d second for discussion purposes.

Ponderosa Solutions requesting permit amendment to handle additional hazardous materials [2025]

Tropila said he wanted to wait to see what commissioners decided on Janicki’s tax abatement request on May 12.

Jones said staff had been working to address the “very aggressive timeline” with Janicki wanting to make a final decision by the end of May.

He said this TIF request predated the Janicki proposal, but the company would be looking for all the pieces to make their final decision.

Pierce said she didn’t think it would be beneficial to delay a decision since the “abatement really has nothing to do with this actual request. It’s not a part of what we are approving.”

City approves permit for transloading facility in AgriTech Park [2024]

Jones said the proposed infrastructure work has to be done regardless of Janicki’s decision, to see completion of AgriTech Park.

“This stands on its own legs and needs to move forward to complete all the obligations set forth by the partners,” Jones said.

Tropila withdrew his initial motion and Diekhans moved to recommend approval.

Tropila didn’t second the motion and Pierce said she couldn’t since he was acting as chair in the absence of Don Ryan, the county’s representative on the board and chair.

Cherry said they could reconvene on May 8 to vote and board members should let staff know what information they needed “so we’re not shooting in the dark.”

Montana Specialty Mills breaks ground in AgriTech Park [2017]

The board did reconvene on May 8, when Cherry said that Ryan had notified the city on May 6 that he was resigning from the TIF board because he had retired from county employment.

The county had submitted Commissioner Joe Briggs as its representative for the board, which is required to include a county representative under state law.

City Commissioners opted not to appoint Briggs, saying they didn’t want elected officials on the board, and in February, selected Ryan, who was working part-time with Meals on Wheels and the only applicant from the county.

Cherry said the board could proceed with its review of the TIF request and that staff would soon post the vacancy for the county representative.

Ed Brown, a TIF committee member and Great Falls Area Chamber of Commerce director, attended the May 8 meeting.

Cherry said staff hadn’t received any requests for information from board members since the previous meeting.

Jolene Schalper, GFDA vice president, attended the May 8 meeting and said that GFDA and Pacific Steel paid the upfront infrastructure costs for AgriTech Park.

She said Pacific had planned to build in the park, but around the same time, the City of Spokane used eminent domain to take their facility there and the company had to divert resources to address that issue first.

Montana Specialty Mills moved from West Bank into AgriTech and has since invested about $60 million, she said.

Helena Chemical and FexEx moved into the park and then most development came to a standstill during COVID, followed by a slow restart as construction costs skyrocketed.

Schalper said those reasons combined to slow AgriTech’s development, but completing the infrastructure included in this TIF request would allow Lots 7-10 to be developed.

She said they already lost a transloading facility that had been considering developing Lot 10 due to the lack of infrastructure.

Schalper said the plan is to pay off the bonds early and end the TIF district. She said if the city lands Janicki, the debt will be paid off quicker.

She said that Idaho laws shield the tax incentive discussions between Twin Falls/Jerome and Janicki from public disclosure, which was reiterated by County Commissioner Joe Briggs in a separate county discussion on May 8.

He said Twin Falls/Jerome can see everything Great Falls and Cascade County are offering, but they’re in the dark about Idaho’s offers.

Brown said, “I think we do a disservice if we don’t move this forward,” and moved to recommend approval.

Diekhans seconded, with Brown, Diekhans and Pierce voting in favor.

Tropila abstained.