The Sweet Home City Council agreed to spend $2,000 to begin initial steps in a feasibility study on whether the city should form an urban renewal district.
Urban renewal districts are a special taxing district that creates a mechanism that cities can use to generate funds for upgrading infrastructure, including streets, sewer, water and storm drainage, in sections of the community.
The urban renewal district freezes property taxes for regular taxing districts, such as the city, the Sheriff’s Office and the county. When property values inside the urban renewal district increase, the urban renewal district collects the difference in taxes for use in projects.
An agency and board, most often the city council creating the district, oversee the urban renewal district. The funds raised by the district can be used as match and leverage for infrastructure funding sources.
The Sweet Home Planning Commission supported looking into forming an urban renewal district as a tool to help with inadequate infrastructure and poorly developed areas of the city.
The council agreed to hire Jeffrey Tashman, LLC, to complete a preliminary legal and technical evaluation of the City of Sweet Home and an urban renewal district.
If an urban renewal district is not feasible technically or legally, no additional work would be necessary, City Manager Craig Martin said. The preliminary study could warrant a full study leading to the establishment of a new urban renewal district, which would cost an additional $4,500.
Additional costs would also be incurred to actually establish the final plan and for the legal and technical to complete the formation of the district, Martin said.
Infrastructure is important to quality of life, and both are important in economic development, Economic Development Coordinator Karen Owen said. Looking at the state budget, there won’t be much outside funding available for improving infrastructure . This is a way to make funding available.
Councilman Jim Gourley said he had many questions, but they could only be answered by a study.
Councilman Robert G. Danielson opposed the study.
“This is a little, dead town,” Danielson said, and there must be an increase in property values to generate funds within the district…. I bet you in 10 years, you wouldn’t have $5,000 in this fund.”
If enough development inside the urban renewal district were to generate significant funding, Danielson suggested the area wouldn’t need improvement because the developer would improve the related infrastructure.
The district could help areas surrounding such a development improve infrastructure, Gourley said. The taxes diverted into the urban renewal district by new development would improve nearby substandard infrastructure.
The council voted 5-1 to approve the study. Voting to approve were councilmen Bob McIntire, Craig Fentiman, Gourley, Jim Bean and Mayor Tim McQueary. Danielson voted against the study.
– In other business, the council voted 5-1 to vacate platted roadways at the corner of Foster Dam Road and Highway 20. A subdivision of single-family townhouses is under review by the Planning Commission for the property. A new road will replace Foster Dam Road and enter Highway 20 across from Weyerhaeuser’s Foster Division driveway. Further plans for the development include an RV park and marina. Voting in favor of the vacation were McIntire, Fentiman, Gourley, Bean and Mayor McQueary.
Danielson voted against the vacation after asking for and being denied specific details on the proposed development, which is under review by the Planning Commission. Staff explained that the City Council is the appeal body for the proposal and should not be exposed to the information at this point.