The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem A: Urban Renewal ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: Urban Renewal Meeting Date: July 8, 2009 Agenda Item Number: A Department: Planning & Development Staff Contact: Amanda Nobel Flannery www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5535 ISSUE STATEMENT The work session is a follow-up to action taken by the council on May 27, 2009, to discuss potential economic development projects, financial requirements, and the amendment process for the urban renewal plan. Staff will address questions raised and ideas discussed at the May 27 work session, and provide next steps for a strategy to reinforce existing programs and businesses downtown and create a series of stimulus actions to strengthen the City’s role in community economic development. No formal action is requested; however, staff is seeking feedback and input from the Mayor and council. BACKGROUND The council had an initial conversation regarding economic development at the January 28, 2009, work session and unanimously approved adoption of a City of Eugene Mayor and City Council Economic Development Statement. The economic stimulus discussion continued at the April 13 and May 27, 2009, work sessions. On May 27, the council approved actions on three economic development related items: 1) sale of surplus City real estate for identified development projects; 2) initiation of procedural code amendments, and 3) consideration of an amendment to the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan. At the April 13 and May 27 work sessions, the council discussed a potential amendment of the Downtown Urban Renewal District Plan. As indicated during the discussion, the maximum indebtedness (spending limit) in the district plan would need to be expanded to provide financial capacity to support development opportunities in the downtown core. Individually, and collectively, the investments could provide a significant economic boost to downtown as well as to the community as a whole. On May 27, the council asked staff to schedule another work session to discuss potential projects, financial requirements, and the amendment process. Councilor Inquiries from 5/27 Work Session: Information on downtown resources 1.– Several councilors requested additional information regarding available resources to support downtown projects. Attachment A provides the current resources available to downtown projects divided into three categories: 1) Financing Tools, 2) Development Tools, and 3) Additional Tools. Impact on other taxing jurisdictions 2. – Attachment B is the Urban Renewal Agency information included in the FY10 Proposed Budget. This attachment includes an overview of financial information about both urban renewal districts, such as assessed value and property tax information, maximum indebtedness update, effect on tax bills, and the impact on overlapping taxing jurisdictions. Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090708\S090708A.doc Historical Analysis – 3.Councilor Brown requested a comprehensive study on the overall benefits of the Downtown Urban Renewal District since its creation in 1968. Staff has started working with him on this request. Over the past several years, the Urban Renewal Agency has made Downtown District investments in public infrastructure, public facilities, and private building improvements. Staff compiled examples of projects that received council approval for the use of urban renewal and that could be used as a model for future uses of urban renewal (see Attachment C). Boundary information 4.– Councilor Zelenka inquired about the expansion possibilities of the Downtown District, specifically in relation to the City Hall block. Urban renewal districts can be expanded by a maximum of 20% of their original size. It should also be noted that a district boundary cannot be reduced in one area in order to expand beyond the 20% limit in another area. The Downtown District has never been expanded. It is possible to expand the Downtown District by a total addition of 14 acres. To assist the Veterans Affairs clinic or complete the Park Blocks improvements, two of the projects discussed on May 27, the Downtown District boundary would need to be expanded to include those sites. The City Hall site is not included in either Urban Renewal District. At the meeting on May 27, staff thought the Riverfront District might be expanded to include City Hall; however, upon review, that district has previously been expanded to its maximum area. The Downtown District would need to be expanded to take in the City Hall site if there was a desire to use urban renewal funds to complete projects on this site. See attachment D for a map of the Downtown District. Staff will provide a map that delineates expansion options for the August 10 meeting. Veterans Affairs Clinic 5. – Veterans Affairs is currently seeking a site for a 90,000 square-foot clinic in Eugene. The downtown area is high on its list of potential locations. The request for proposals (RFP) has not been issued yet; however, they have stated they plan to select a site by September 1, 2009, for occupancy by December 30, 2012. The Eugene Clinic site, along with neighboring th buildings near 12 Avenue and Willamette/Olive streets, is less than one block from Lane Transit District’s Eugene Station and could be an outstanding location in the heart of Eugene. PeaceHealth owns the property and is expected to submit a proposal. Siting this facility in such a central location promotes sustainable development but may require City/URA assistance to assemble land parcels or assist with infrastructure, parking and other improvements. Potential Projects – 6.The council discussed potential urban renewal projects at the May 27 meeting. Attachment F includes project specifics for two of the potential projects that were discussed: Park Blocks improvements and local business assistance. This attachment is provided to serve as an example of the type and scope of information that could be provided on each potential project. Public Involvement Plan The purpose of Eugene’s Urban Renewal public involvement plan is to ensure that residents, property owners, businesses, and other interested parties have convenient opportunities to become fully informed about the proposed projects and to provide input throughout the process. The draft public involvement plan calls for several strategies which will be used to promote public involvement. Formal opportunities will include a public hearing before the City Council. Information about the hearing will be distributed via outreach at community events, the City website, paid media ads, neighborhood newsletters and press releases. In addition, a public notice will be sent to all households to let them know about the proposed changes, the public hearing, and availability of information on the City website. More informal opportunities to share information and solicit comments will include at least two public forums in August and September, and staff presence at Saturday and Farmers’ Markets in August and at the Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090708\S090708A.doc Eugene Celebration in September. In addition, project materials will be available on the website throughout the process, including fact sheets, presentations, and links to relevant information. The website will also be used to collect public feedback on proposed projects and urban renewal issues. A Frequently Asked Questions section will be maintained and updated based on feedback received via the internet or though outreach at community events. (See Attachment E for more details on the draft public involvement plan.) The draft public involvement plan will be referred to the Planning Commission for its review. The comments, suggestions, and amendments of the Planning Commission will be incorporated into the final public involvement plan. Next Steps The council will meet August 10, 2009, as the Urban Renewal Agency Board to discuss the potential projects, financial requirements, possible boundary expansion and to act on initiating the amendment process. Staff will provide project information, boundary maps and draft potential changes to the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan and Report in the materials for the work session. An increase to the maximum indebtedness (spending limit) and expansion of the boundary by more than 1% are both considered major amendments to the urban renewal plan and must follow a specific process by state statute. A draft timeline for the process is provided as Attachment G. COUNCIL OPTIONS Staff is seeking input, confirmation and feedback that the level and type of information provided is the right level of detail and kind of information the Mayor and council would like to see when they officially initiate on August 10. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION No recommendation is needed. SUGGESTED MOTION No motion is suggested. ATTACHMENTS A.Downtown Project Tools and Assistance B.FY10 Proposed Budget for the Urban Renewal Agency C.Case Studies Information D.Map of Downtown Urban Renewal District E.Draft Public Involvement Plan F.Example Level of Project Information – Park Blocks Improvements and Local Business Assistance G.Draft Timeline for the Urban Renewal Plan Amendment Process FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Amanda Nobel Flannery Telephone: 682-5535 Staff e-mail: amanda.nobelflannery@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090708\S090708A.doc ATTACHMENT A DOWNTOWN TOOLS AND ASSISTANCE At the May 27 work session, several City Councilors asked for additional information regarding available resources to support downtown development. For the purpose of this attachment, resources are divided into three categories: 1) Financing Tools, 2) Development Tools, and 3) Additional Tools. A. Financing Tools are sources of funds. 1. Urban Renewal 2. Downtown Revitalization Loan Program 3. Community Development Block Grant associated programs i. Brownfield Economic Development Initiative Grant and Section 108 Loan Guarantee ii. Business Development Fund 4. Property tax exemptions i. Multi-Unit Property Tax Exemption ii. Vertical Housing Development Zone 5. Affordable Housing Tools 6. City’s General Fund 7. Improvement/Service Districts B. Development Tools are uses of funds that support public/private partnerships, but that are not generally sources of funds on their own. 1. Land assembly 2. Public parking 3. Public infrastructure 4. Direct investment 5. City as landlord or tenant C. Additional Tools includes numerous actions by the City that directly and indirectly benefit businesses, visitors and residents downtown. 1. Event programming 2. Public Safety 3. Downtown Eugene Inc. 4. Beautification efforts 5. City as a landlord or tenant City employee presence downtown The Financing and Development Tools are described below with a summation box, detailed narrative explanation, and an example downtown Eugene project. A narrative on the additional assistance follows. The estimates in the attachment assume that the development agreements with Beam Development LLC and WG Development occur as budgeted. If there are changes to those agreements and budgets, then the estimates in the attachment could change. 1. FINANCING TOOLS A. Urban Renewal Urban Renewal Summary ? Funds must be spent to benefit the district and for projects listed in the plan; currently, includes public improvements, off-site facilities, acquisition and redevelopment, relocation, development and redevelopment, staff for downtown projects, property disposition, and rehabilitation and conservation. ? Any expenditure over $250,000 (other than loans) must be explicitly approved by the URA Board ? Currently, $0.5 million remains under the spending limit (“maximum indebtedness”) ? Substantial plan amendment needed to increase spending limit (enter into obligation > $0.5 million) or expand boundary (>1%); 100+ day process: Review by ERAC, URA, & CC; o Public notice & public hearing; o URA approval & CC ordinance o ? Additional funds would be available as potential development resources, assuming a plan amendment (about $14.2 million, assuming current unallocated cash plus debt that is repaid over remaining life of district) ? Annual tax increment revenue is currently about $1.7 million ? The URA can borrow funds to complete projects; there is no current outstanding bonded debt. Borrowing is limited by several factors: remaining life of district, required debt coverage ratio and debt service reserve, & project interest rate Urban Renewal is a means to support economic development and civic improvement by a) encouraging private development and b) financing needed public improvements such as infrastructure, parks and open spaces, public plazas, parking garages or environmental improvements within designated districts. The City of Eugene Urban Renewal Agency (URA) is a separate entity authorized by state statutes. City Council acts as the Renewal Agency Board. The URA oversees two urban renewal districts – the Downtown District and the Riverfront District. Each district has its own URA adopted plan. Below is an explanation of available funds, the spending limit (maximum indebtedness), the plan amendment process, current and future obligations, access to future revenue, and an example of a previous urban renewal project. It should be noted, however, that the legislature has approved significant changes to urban renewal, and those changes have not yet been analyzed and incorporated into this analysis. Available Amounts for Development Projects: The Downtown District currently has an expenditure limit of approximately $0.5 million under the “maximum indebtedness” spending limit. The District currently has total available resources of approximately $3.0 million, as set out in the chart below. (A further explanation of “maximum indebtedness” follows the charts and an explanation of the downtown loan program is item 1.B.) Summary: Current Capacity of the Downtown Urban Renewal District Approximate for FY10 Amount Remaining Under Maximum Indebtedness Limit $ 0.5 million Downtown Loan Funds 2.5 million Total Amount Available $ 3.0 million If the Downtown District plan were amended to increase the “maximum indebtedness” limit, then there would be additional capacity to undertake downtown development projects. The following chart sets out an initial estimate of the amount that could be available for projects if the plan were amended to increase the limit. Summary: Potential Capacity of the Downtown Urban Renewal District Approximate for FY10 Amount Remaining Under Maximum Indebtedness Limit $ 0.5 million Additional Cash Available Beyond Maximum Indebtedness Limit 3.7 million Borrowing Capacity – assuming plan amendment & repayment over 14 years 10.5 million Downtown Loan Funds 2.5 million Total Amount Available $17.2 million Downtown District “Maximum Indebtedness”: Oregon Statutes require each district that receives property taxes to include a “maximum indebtedness” limit in their urban renewal plans. The Downtown District amended its plan in 1998 to include a maximum indebtedness limit of $33 million. “Maximum indebtedness” is a spending limit. Certain expenditures of the district are included in the “maximum indebtedness” calculation and certain expenditures are excluded. For instance, interest on debt and downtown loan funds are excluded from the calculation, but administrative expenses or direct cash payments for projects are included in the calculation. About $0.5 million remains under the $33 million limit in the Downtown District. For the district to enter into obligations that exceed the current limit (~ $0.5 million), a “substantial amendment” to the district’s plan is needed. The process is determined by Oregon Statute and the district’s plan. City-wide notice is required for changes in the maximum indebtedness and expansion of the district boundaries by more than 1% The time necessary to complete the process for this type of special amendment is 100+ days. The major steps are: ? Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee (ERAC) may meet to discuss the proposed plan amendments and make a recommendation to the City Council ? City Council meets to initiate plan amendments ? URA submits plan amendments and report on the plan to taxing bodies affected by the district for review and comment ? City sends out special City-wide notice ? URA meets to receive the revised plan and report on the plan ? City Council holds a public hearing on the plan amendment ordinance ? City Council meets to approve ordinance amending the plan Current & Future Debt Obligations: The URA does not currently have bonds outstanding, but must pay the Library Obligations through December 2009 ($2.5 million). If the Downtown District plan is amended, it would be possible for the district to enter into obligations of greater than the $0.5 million allowed under the current “maximum indebtedness” figure. The Downtown District is scheduled to terminate in FY24. If the district entered into a new debt obligation (after substantially amending the plan) in FY10, that would leave 14 years for a debt obligation to be repaid. Assuming a 14 year repayment schedule, a 1.5 times debt coverage ratio, and a projected interest rate for next fiscal year, the Downtown District would have a debt capacity of approximately $10.5 million. It should be noted, however, that the legislature has approved significant changes to urban renewal, and those changes have not yet been analyzed and incorporated into this analysis. Project Examples: Downtown Athletic Club & Eugene Public Library The Downtown Athletic Club (DAC) is one of the most significant anchors downtown, employing 150 individuals and drawing club members and event visitors to the core of downtown daily. The presence of the , DAC is also an attractive amenity for office uses downtown. In the 1970sThe URA acquired the former Ax Billy Department Store building which was built in 1909. The building was mostly vacant and scheduled for demolition. The URA issued an RFQ and selected the DAC proposal. The URA sold the property in 1985 for its appraised value ($213,000), and also provided gap financing in the amount of $150,000 for the renovation. CDBG loan funds in the amount of $300,000 were also used for the initial renovation. The Ax Billy building is now on the National Register of Historic Places. All financing provided for the DAC project has been repaid in full. Property tax revenue on the property was $3,570 in 1984. Since the historic tax exemption expired in 2005, the DAC properties have paid $375,000 in property taxes. The Urban Renewal Agency and the City entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement that committed the Agency to make the debt service payments on $18.5 million of City debt obligations for the library and to provide additional cash contributions to the project, if excess urban renewal revenues were available in future years. The resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign the Intergovernmental Agreement was approved by the Council and the Agency on February 28, 2000, along with the resolution authorizing issuance of the debt obligations. On April 27, 2000, the City issued $18.5 million of debt that was to be repaid from Agency resources. The debt was to be repaid in annual amounts of about $2.5 million and the final maturity is on December 1, 2009. The City pledged its full faith and credit to repay these bonds, but that pledge has not been used because tax increment revenues have been sufficient to make the debt payments. B. Downtown Revitalization Loan Program (DRLP) Downtown Revitalization Loan Program Summary ? Available funds FY10: $2.5 million ? Building improvements within Downtown Urban Renewal District ? Below market interest rate ? Matched with private financing The DRLP is a revolving loan program funded through Urban Renewal District program revenue. The FY10 budget will include approximately $2.5 million available for DRLP loans, with approximately $82,000 in principal and interest repayments forecasted in FY10. Available to businesses and property owners located within the Downtown Urban Renewal District, the DRLP is a flexible financing program designed to encourage investments within the Downtown District that contribute to the economic vibrancy and density goals for downtown. The primary goal of the DRLP is to provide funding assistance to projects that meet the goals and objectives of the Urban Renewal Plan for Central Eugene Project and the Eugene Downtown Plan. The program is also designed to be responsive to unique redevelopment opportunities, specific downtown redevelopment challenges, and specific individual project financing needs. The DRLP aims to encourage private, non-profit, and mixed-use development and public/private partnerships in overcoming issues with a low loan to value ratio, insufficient cash flow, and extraordinary project specific costs. The DRLP provides project financing typically between 25% and 50% of total eligible project costs. Eligible projects include building rehabilitation, façade improvements, tenant improvements, awnings, historic preservation, and accessibility improvements. Remaining project financing is provided by private sources. Loan amounts are generally between $10,000 and $500,000. The URA currently has approximately $900,000 of outstanding loans under the DRLP. The revolving nature of the program means that it is self-financing. As new loans are made, the payments on the loans are then returned to the loan pool and loaned out for new projects. Loans are approved by the City Manager. Example: Tiffany Building Built in the early 1900s, the Tiffany Building was severely damaged by a 1986 fire. The uninhabitable structure sat vacant for over five years and the improvements had an assessed value of only $500. In 1991, the URA provided gap financing in the amount of $350,000 for the renovation of the building. The Tiffany Building is now on the National Register of Historic Places. The renovation project included the creation of 18 new downtown housing units. Prior to the renovation, it had been several years since any new housing units were developed in the downtown core. The immediate market success of the Tiffany Building apartments played a major role in stimulating other downtown housing, including Broadway Place and High Street Terrace. The project has also attracted successful, local retailers. Financing provided for the project has been repaid in full. Since the historic tax exemption expired in 2005, the Tiffany Building property has paid $55,828 in property taxes. Examples of other downtown projects that have been assisted by DRLP funds include McDonald Theatre Building, Adam’s Place, Downtown English, Harlequin Beads & Jewelry, Bradford’s Hi-Fidelity, The Strand Building (occupied by Theo’s & Cozmic Pizza), Full City Coffee Roasters, Saturday Market, The Davis Restaurant & Bar, Zenon Café, and Ambrosia. C. Community Development Block Grant The City of Eugene receives an annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds through the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). CDBG projects must be used for projects that benefit low- and moderate- income individuals. A limited number of projects that eliminate conditions of slums and blight are also eligible. The City has two programs that can provide financial assistance to qualified projects. Brownfields Economic Development Initiative Grant (with HUD Section 108 Loan) BEDI / Section 108 Summary ? $2 million BEDI grant awarded to the City in 2006; $1.315 million remaining ? $7.95 million Section 108 loan pool approved by HUD; $5.189 million remaining ? The remaining BEDI & Section 108 funds are currently committed to Beam Development ? Individual project approval process: 1) Public hearing at City Council, 2) Council approval (resolution), & 3) HUD approval ? Project must meet HUD national objective Benefit low/mod income through job creation or provision of services o Eliminate conditions of slums and blight o ? Projects must be in Downtown or Riverfront urban renewal districts ? Section 108 funds must be repaid to HUD ? Primary collateral and debt service for remaining Section 108 borrowing would be developer repayments and urban renewal . Secondary collateral must also include the City’s pledge of future CDBG funds; City general funds may not be used as collateral The City was awarded a $2 million BEDI grant to assist redevelopment projects within the City's Downtown Urban Renewal and Riverfront Urban Renewal Districts. BEDI funds must be used in conjunction with a Section 108 guaranteed loan. HUD administers the BEDI as a key competitive grant program to stimulate and promote economic and community development. BEDI is designed to assist cities with the redevelopment of abandoned, idle, and underused industrial and commercial facilities where expansion and redevelopment is burdened by real or potential environmental contamination. BEDI grant funds are targeted for use in the redevelopment of brownfield sites in economic development projects to increase economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons as part of the creation or retention of jobs and to eliminate conditions of slums and blight. Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG program. Section 108 allows cities to borrow up to five times their annual CDBG allocation; thereby, providing communities with a source of financing to support large-scale economic development, housing rehabilitation, and public facility projects. In March 2006, the City submitted a $7,895,000 Section 108 application that HUD later approved. Section 108 funds combined with BEDI funds are a loan fund for redevelopment projects within the two urban renewal districts that will make positive economic and community development benefits. Council authorized the use of the Section 108 loan program in an ordinance in February 2007. To draw down Section 108/BEDI funds, the specific project funding request is subject to a HUD public comment process, and a public hearing is required, followed by City Council and HUD approval. Projects that receive Section 108/BEDI funds must 1) meet a CDBG national objective of benefiting low or moderate income persons or eliminating conditions of slums or blight, 2) lead to economic revitalization in connection with brownfields, 3) be financially feasible, 4) be within reasonable risk, 5) be likely to be repaid, and 6) provide permanent, full- time employment for low and moderate income individuals. Example: Purchase of Centre Court and Washburne Buildings The Urban Renewal Agency used Section 108 loan and BEDI grant funds to purchase the Centre Court and Washburne buildings in July 2008, as part of the Beam Development project. Beam then purchased the properties from the Agency for a total purchase price of $3.6 million. The URA provided financing to Beam totaling $3.55 million for the property acquisition. The sources of funds for the URA’s financing included HUD Section 108 loan funds ($2.7 million), BEDI grant funds ($440,000), and DRLP funds ($404,000). The primary source of repayment for the Section 108 loan is payment from Beam Development on the loans from the URA. The secondary source of repayment is urban renewal, to the extent that there are funds available. The final source of repayment is future CDBG allocations. Business Development Fund (BDF) Business Development Fund Summary ? Available funds FY10: dependent on ongoing loan activity ? Below market interest rate ? Matched with private financing ? Eligible projects must create new jobs The BDF provides assistance to new and existing businesses through CDBG. Established to create jobs and stimulate private sector investment, the BDF could assist local tenants to start-up or relocate to downtown. The BDF is a self-sustaining revolving loan fund that was started 25 years ago. Funds are available to new and existing businesses within Eugene. While businesses that receive BDF loans must create or retain one full-time permanent job for every $35,000 in loan funds, companies have typically exceeded this minimum. Loan amounts have ranged from $10,000 to $500,000 and are generally between $75,000 and $150,000. The BDF can provide up to 50% of project financing. Remaining project financing is provided by private sources. Projects with greater needs may be eligible for the Emerging Business Loan Pool (EBLP), a program within the BDF, for businesses that face extraordinary credit barriers such as low-income status and female or minority owned business. Over 200 businesses have utilized the program and created more than 1,100 new jobs. The BDF program has loaned over $16 million and leveraged an additional $43 million in private investment. Examples: Historically, the BDF program has supported the start-up and expansion of several downtown businesses, including Lord Leebrick Theatre, Opus Six, Harlequin Beads and Jewelry, and Hartwick’s. D. Tax Exemptions Tax exemptions differ from other types of financial tools because they do not represent a direct expenditure by the City to another party for a development purpose. Instead, they represent foregone tax revenue. The theory behind the tax exemption is that the development would not have occurred “but for” the granting of the exemption. If the project would not have occurred without the exemption, then the tax revenue would not have ever been received. Multi-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE): MUPTE Summary ? 10-year property tax exemption on core-area housing investment in 5 or more units ? Council approves each exemption MUPTE is enabled under state law for the purposes of stimulating the construction of multi-unit housing in the core area, and to ensure use of the core area as a place where citizens have the opportunity to live as well as work. The MUPTE program offers tax exemptions for the construction, addition, or conversion of rental or ownership multi-unit housing within the MUPTE boundary (see Exhibit A “MUPTE Boundary”). The exemption is granted on the new investment for a maximum of 10 years. (The land and non-housing value of the project is not included in the exemption). Projects must include a minimum of five new housing units. Tax exemption requests are reviewed and approved by City Council. Example: The Tate Condominiums The Tate Condominiums received a MUPTE in 2004 for new construction of 47 units. The annual tax exemption (to be granted to condo owners) in 2006 was estimated at $285,000, and is estimated to total $3.2 million over the 10-year period. Other examples include Broadway Place and High Street Terrace. Downtown Eugene Vertical Housing Development Zone: Vertical Housing Development Zone Summary ? Mixed-Use (ground level commercial and 1 or more levels of housing) ? 20% tax exemption per housing floor; 80% maximum ? 10-year property tax exemption Established under state law in 2001, vertical housing development zones encourage dense "mixed-use" development and redevelopment in urban cores. Specifically, an eligible project consists of ground-level commercial with one or more upper floors of residential housing that has been newly constructed, reconstructed, or rehabilitated. The Downtown Eugene Vertical Housing Development Zone was established in 2003 and matches the Downtown Plan boundary (see Exhibit B “Vertical Housing Development Zone Boundary”). The program offers a 10-year property tax exemption on the new structure, or incremental change in the property value of the building that comprises the project. The program grants a tax exemption of 20% for each floor of housing that is incorporated above ground floor commercial, with a maximum tax exemption of 80% for any single project. Tax exemption requests are reviewed and approved by the State of Oregon. The exemption is effective upon initial occupancy or re-occupancy and does not require City Council approval. No exemptions have been granted under this program to date. Example: A $25 million 3-story building, with 2-levels of housing would receive a 40% property tax exemption (20% for each floor of housing). Overall, the total annual property tax exemption would be approximately $100,000 and would be $1 million over the 10-year period. E. Affordable Housing Tools Affordable Housing Summary ? Low-Income Housing Tax Credits State administered o Equity for mixed-income or entirely affordable projects o ? Other potential tools for downtown: SDC Waivers, Property Tax Exemption, and Homeownership Assistance Program The City has developed a set of tools to invest in the development of affordable rental and ownership housing that is affordable to low-income households. The tools are typically used in combination with one another and with other subsidies allocated at the state level to make up the difference between development costs and the rents paid by low-income residents. The typical affordable rental housing development uses between 10 and 15 sources of funding to cover all necessary costs. The majority of the affordable housing resources may not be applicable to many downtown developments with the largest exception being the use of Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. Low Income Housing Tax Credits support the investment in affordable housing by providing equity for mixed-income or entirely affordable projects. The Federal program is administered by the State of Oregon. Several other City affordable housing tools and incentives that could potentially benefit a downtown development would include Systems Development Charge (SDC) Waivers, the Low-Income Rental Housing Property Tax Exemption Program, and the Homeownership Assistance Program. Example: WestTown on 8th WestTown on 8th, owned and operated by Metropolitan Affordable Housing Corporation, has 102 housing units affordable to persons at 60% of AMI or below and nine market-rate live-work units. Tools used for the $22 million project include: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits,CDBG funds through City’s Landbanking program for the site (valued at $570,000 in 2004), $1,025,000 federal HOME Housing Development grant, $222,000 Eugene System Development Charge Waivers, 20-year Low-Income Rental Housing Property Tax Exemption, $300,000 short-term low interest loan from the City – Housing Capital Project Fund and the Low-Income Housing Fund (generated through MUTPE fee payments), and other project subsidies for WestTown were provided by the Eugene Water and Electric Board and Lane County. F. City’s General Fund / Full Faith & Credit Pledge General Fund / Full Faith & Credit Pledge Summary ? Contribution to project from City’s general resources ? Provide security to bondholders for borrowings, with debt payments made from a different revenue source, and ultimate back-stop by the City’s general resources ? Guarantee urban renewal financing on an interim period prior to receipt of incremental revenues The City’s General Fund resources and its full faith & credit pledge may also be used to assist with downtown development projects. General Fund resources are unrestricted and may be used for any public purpose. General Fund resources, however, are subject to significant competition from the City’s other services and programs. The City’s full faith and credit pledge may be used to provide security for borrowings that are repaid from other sources, such as building rental revenues, parking revenues or urban renewal tax increment revenues. The City’s pledge for such borrowings results in access to the public capital markets and a lower interest rate for those borrowings that might not otherwise be available. Examples: Broadway Place Garages, Atrium Building, Eugene Public Library The City has used its full faith & credit pledge to secure downtown development project financing in the past. The Broadway Place Garages were financed with the City’s full faith and credit obligations that are repaid from parking system revenues. The Atrium building was purchased with City full faith and credit obligations that are paid from Atrium building rentals. The Eugene Public Library was partially financed with City full faith and credit obligations that are paid from urban renewal revenues. G. Assessments / Local Improvement Districts / Business Improvement Districts Assessments / Improvement / Business Districts Summary ? For transportation / utility projects ? Property owners may elect to finance through City Assessments and improvement districts can be used for infrastructure improvements, such as transportation or utility projects. Assessments and improvement districts spread the cost of the project among those that benefit. Property owners contribute to the cost of the project through assessments. For local improvement districts, property owners may finance their obligations through the City. Example: Downtown Service District Property owners pay a fee per square foot. Funds are used to provide services within the Downtown Service District. Downtown guides are the primary use of funds. 2. DEVELOPMENT TOOLS Development Tools are uses of funds that support public/private partnerships, but that are not generally sources of funds on their own. A. Land Assembly Land Assembly Summary ? Development footprint of adequate size is fundamental to project ? Areas of decline have many owners of small parcels ? City/URA can: Purchase property, buy purchase options; o Prepare site for development (demolition / predevelopment); and o Sell land at reduced price. o The expensive, long, and uncertain process of assembling property is a major barrier to private redevelopment. Cities and urban renewal agencies often take an active role in property assembly as a method of creating redevelopment opportunities and providing incentives for private reinvestment in a given area. Specific actions typically include securing purchase options, direct purchase for resale or contribution to development, demolition and predevelopment, and purchase price reductions. Example: The City of Eugene and the URA have previously assembled land for the benefit of the following projects: Beam Development (Centre Court & Washburne buildings), Broadway Place, Hilton Convention Center, Eugene Public Library, Wayne Morse Federal Courthouse, US Bank Building, Lane Transit District Downtown Station, and affordable housing development via the Landbanking Program. Parking Parking Summary ? Downtown core is a parking exempt area ? Important for developers and lenders for new housing construction ? Parking requirements for new development vary based on density and uses ? Structured parking revenues can support on-going operations and maintenance, but not the capital cost for building the garage ? City has historically provided structured parking to support private development and activity downtown The City owns and operates eight public structured parking facilities in the downtown core, including the Broadway Place structures at Broadway and Charnelton Street (366 north spaces and 363 south spaces), the Overpark at 10th Avenue and Oak Street (598 spaces), the Parcade at 8th Avenue and Willamette Street (438 spaces), the Pearl Street Garage (262 spaces), the HultCenter garage by the Hult Center (520 spaces), garage under the downtown library (69 spaces), and under City Hall (196 spaces). The City offers monthly bulk parking permit discounts of up to 30% for businesses that purchase bulk permits (50 or more permits) and have an active alternative modes plan. Although the downtown core area is parking exempt (meaning there are no requirements to provide parking under City code), developers and lenders will typically require that the development provide parking in support of certain types of uses. For example, market feasibility and lenders may require housing uses to meet a 1:1 housing unit to parking space ratio. Retail uses may also demand specific parking supply per square foot. The existing Land Use Code requires within the C3 zone that if parking of 20 or more spaces is to be provided that they be structured. Because there are cost constraints and income limitations associated with privately constructed structured parking, the provision of publicly provided parking can be a development tool. Examples: Broadway Place & Enterprise Rent a Car The Broadway Place development required parking spaces for the retail and housing components of this public/private partnership. The City assembled the land, built the two public garages, and sold the “air rights” to the developer at a reduced rate for the construction of commercial and residential portions. (The purchase of “air rights” allows the developer to develop on top of the garage.) Broadway Place also received a MUPTE (10- year property tax exemption on the housing portion of the project, currently in its last year). The City used its full faith and credit pledge to issue bonds to pay for the garage. The bonds are repaid from parking revenues. The City has not had to use its general resources to make debt service payments. Enterprise Rent-A-Car invested in a contact center in downtown Eugene in April, 2008. One of their decision factors was availability of affordable parking. Their location at 175 West Broadway is across the street from the Broadway North parking garage. It is also within a few blocks of two other garages and the downtown bus station. Enterprise Rent a Car was able to redevelop a formerly vacant building using existing parking infrastructure. C. Public Infrastructure Public Infrastructure Summary ? Utility relocation/upgrades, transportation improvements ? Investment in current and future developments in given area ? Funds from a wide variety of sources Public infrastructure includes streets, sidewalks, lighting, landscaping, open space, pedestrian improvements, utility relocations and upgrades, or transportation improvements. Cities and urban renewal agencies can provide infrastructure as a means of investing in a development with the intended purpose of the development being a trigger for further development in the area that will also benefit from the infrastructure improvements. A variety of funds may be used to pay for the improvements, depending on the nature of the project, such as SDCs, assessments, road funds, general funds, tax increment funds, and other resources. Examples: Reopening of West Broadway, Courthouse District A public infrastructure investment was made with the reopening West Broadway in 2002. The project included the reopening of the street, pedestrian improvements, landscaping, and public art. The total expenditure was $2 million. Public funds were matched with $200,000 in private contributions. Additionally, the Riverfront Urban Renewal District provided funds to underground the utilities in the courthouse district. D. Direct Investment Direct Investment Summary ? URA participation through a grant program ? Funds from tax increment revenues The City/URA could also directly invest in a development as a way to reduce overall costs. Funds could come from various sources, but would most like come from tax increment financing. The City has not chosen to use direct investment in the past. The City’s preference has been to provide loans, which revolve and provide funding for additional future projects. Example: No previous example. E. City as Landlord or Tenant City as Landlord or Tenant Summary ? Set lease rates to fill spaces with desired occupants ? Improves feasibility of development or downtown location The City owns several downtown properties some of which have commercial space available. As a landlord, the City can offer lease terms to improve feasibility for a business or entity to locate downtown. Additionally, the City has a need for space downtown and can be a tenant. The City is a strong tenant and can serve as an anchor tenant to help satisfy lender leasing requirements. Example: Beam Development The City agreed to be a back-up tenant for the new building to be constructed on the vacant lot owned by Beam Development. The City’s commitment was instrumental in Beam’s decision to purchase the property and is considered to be a major consideration in Beam’s pursuit of financing for the construction of the new building. 3. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE Numerous actions by the City directly and indirectly benefit businesses, visitors and residents downtown. In addition to financial and development tools, comprehensive programs and projects reinforce, refocus, or energize downtown enhancement efforts. These activities are designed to revitalize Eugene’s downtown by improving its image, business and residential climate, and physical environment. Each requires significant coordination, communication and staff expertise from different City departments, attention to critical details, and commitment to the vision for a revitalized downtown. These activities enhance the environment for downtown development, but may have a more limited impact in terms of facilitating specific redevelopment efforts. A. Event Programming Programming for activities and events supports downtown as the arts and culture center of the community and brings thousands of visitors into the core. The visitors may shop or eat downtown, or simply come to view downtown as a great place to visit or bring family and friends in the future. Activities include the Summer in the City offerings coordinated through Library, Recreation and Cultural Services (LRCS), the Eugene Celebration, Farmers’ Market and Saturday Market. Each of these activities requires City coordination, planning and publicity to achieve and maintain success and support downtown as a key destination; most of the staff involved are not dependent on urban renewal funds. Many of the downtown Summer in the City events are presented in cooperation with partners including Saturday Market and Downtown Eugene, Inc. Several City departments are actively involved in this collaboration; efforts include improved lighting in several locations and increased police downtown bicycle patrols to enhance safety and inhibit behavior problems. We continue to work with local downtown businesses, non-profits, developers and other institutions and partners in multiple ways to foster a more dynamic and attractive city center. B. Safety A safe downtown is a critical component of an active, economically vital downtown. The City supports downtown safety directly through the downtown police patrol, on bicycle, foot and in patrol cars, as well as indirectly through support for Downtown Eugene, Inc.’s Downtown Guides and the provision of restrooms. The City also provides additional safety enhancements through lighting, parking garage surveillance, and implementation of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques. Event programming also enhances downtown safety, bringing positive energy and people to deter crime and to enhance the public’s experience and perception of safety. C. Beautification Beautification projects throughout downtown help create a welcoming, Eugene-based identity and environment. Hanging flower baskets, public art, well maintained planted areas, and thoughtfully designed plaza areas – all provide a downtown amenity and support the community goals for a revitalized city center. Urban renewal funding is more typically needed for larger redesign efforts, such as for the Park Blocks or Broadway Plaza, but smaller, localized amenities can be provided through other sources. D. Business Assistance City staff routinely provide business assistance for downtown owners, investors or developers seeking to redevelop or locate downtown. The assistance may be in the form of helping to identify funding sources or possible tenants, or providing more generalized information about opportunities and regulations downtown. Some of these services are fee based, such as limited consultations, which pull in key staff from various departments to focus on specific project scenarios. E. Planning Efforts Planning efforts coordinated by City staff provide a forum that brings public and private sector constituents together to discuss downtown issues, reinforce a downtown vision, and identify key next steps. Implementation of planning efforts for downtown have resulted in specific projects, including planning for EWEB and the Federal Courthouse area, code amendments to facilitate desired development downtown, and critical momentum for downtown development projects. Work under the direction of the Library, Culture and Recreations services has focused efforts on a Public Arts Master Plan, with a focus on key locations downtown. Staff for some but not all of these projects are supported through non urban renewal funds. F. City Staff Impact City employees are the largest group of downtown workers. They serve the public at a wide variety of jobs, often drawing people downtown, such as to the library or for building permits, as well as providing services that benefit the entire community. As downtown workers and patrons, City employees support downtown activities and patronize shops and restaurants. Downtown employees, both public and private, make a significant difference in creating a positive and active downtown environment. Exhibits A: MUPTE Boundary B: Vertical Housing Development Zone Boundary Exhibit A: MUPTE Boundary Exhibit B: Vertical Housing Development Zone Boundary G. Urban Renewal Agency Table of Contents Mission........................................................................................................................................G.1 Central Eugene Project District...................................................................................................G.2 Riverfront District.......................................................................................................................G.3 Assessed Value Information........................................................................................................G.4 Bonded Debt Information............................................................................................................G.9 Maximum Indebtedness Information........................................................................................G.10 Description of Funds ...............................................................................................................G.13 Net Budget Detail......................................................................................................................G.14 Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance.....................G.15 Financial Summaries: Resources/Requirements Summary.........................................................................................G.16 Fund Schedules--All Funds.....................................................................................................G.17 Non-Departmental...................................................................................................................G.23 Interfund Transfers Detail.......................................................................................................G.24 Legal Expenes.........................................................................................................................G.24 Urban Renewal Agency Overview Mission Statement Ì¸» °«®°±» ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ · ¬± ¬·³«´¿¬» »½±²±³·½ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¬¸®±«¹¸ °®·ª¿¬» ·²ª»¬³»²¬ ·² ¿ °»½·º·½ ¿®»¿ ±º ¬¸» ½±³³«²·¬§ ·² ½±³°´·¿²½» ©·¬¸ ÑÎÍ Ý¸¿°¬»® ìëéò ×¬ · ¿ ³»¿² ¬± «°°±®¬ »½±²±³·½ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¿²¼ ½·ª·½ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ ¾§ º·²¿²½·²¹ ²»»¼»¼ °«¾´·½ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ ©·¬¸·² ¼»·¹²¿¬»¼ ¼·¬®·½¬ «½¸ ¿ ·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®»ô ±°»² °¿½»ô °«¾´·½ °´¿¦¿ô °¿®µ·²¹ ¹¿®¿¹»ô ´¿²¼ ¿½¯«··¬·±²ô ®»²±ª¿¬·±² ¿²¼ º¿9¿¼» ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ ±® »²ª·®±²³»²¬¿´ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ò Ì¸» Ý·¬§ ³¿²¿¹» ¬©± «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬æ ¬¸» Ý»²¬®¿´ Û«¹»²» Ð®±¶»½¬ ø¿´± µ²±©² ¿ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬÷ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ò Governance Ì¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ ß¹»²½§ øËÎß÷ · ¿ »°¿®¿¬» ¾«¼¹»¬¿®§ »²¬·¬§ ¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼ ¾§ ¬¿¬» ¬¿¬«¬»ò Ì¸» ËÎß ©¿ »¬¿¾´·¸»¼ ·² ïçëè ¿ ¿ »°¿®¿¬» ½±®°±®¿¬» ¾±¼§ò ×² ïçèîô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ úÎÈÏÚÔÑÜÊÊÈÐØÙÉÕØËÎÑØÎ×ÉÕØëØÏØÆÜÑüÖØÏÚÄûÎÜËÙÜÏÙÙØÑØÖÜÉØÙÛÈÙÖØÉËØÇÔØÆÉÎÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊ Þ«¼¹»¬ Ý±³³·¬¬»»ò Ì¸» ËÎß ±ª»®»» ¬©± «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ »¿½¸ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¸¿ ·¬ ±©² ¿¼±°¬»¼ °´¿²ò Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee Ì¸» Û«¹»²» Î»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ß¼ª·±®§ Ý±³³·¬¬»» øÛÎßÝ÷ ©¿ º±®³»¼ ·² îððì ¬± °®±ª·¼» ¿¼ª·½» ±² ¬¸» ·³°´»³»²¬¿¬·±² ±º ®»½±³³»²¼¿¬·±² º®±³ ¬¸» «°¼¿¬»¼ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ °´¿² ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ Ý·¬§ úÎÈÏÚÔÑøëüújÊÐÔÊÊÔÎÏÔÊÉÎmÜÙÇÔÊØÉÕØíÑÜÏÏÔÏÖÜÏÙùØª»´±°³»²¬ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ ±² ¬¸» ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±º ¼±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²» ¿²¼ ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ËØÑÜÉØÙÉÎøÈÖØÏØjÊèË¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ü·¬®·½¬ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿³»²¼³»²¬ ¬± ¬¸» »¨·¬·²¹ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ °´¿²ô ½±²·¼»®¿¬·±² ±º ¿²§ ²»© ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ ÍËÎÓØÚÉÊÜÊÊÎÚÔÜÉØÙÆÔÉÕÉÕØÈÊØÎ×ÈËÛÜÏËØÏØÆÜÑ×ÈÏÙÊl Ì¸» ½±³³·¬¬»» · ½±³°®·»¼ ±º »ª»² ³»³¾»®ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ ±²» ¿¬ó´¿®¹» ³»³¾»® ¿²¼ ·¨ ³»³¾»® ©¸± ´·ª»ô ©±®µ ±® ±©² °®±°»®¬§ ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ô ±® ®»°®»»²¬ ¿ ¾«·²» ¿±½·¿¬·±²ô ²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ ¿±½·¿¬·±²ô ¬¸» Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±²ô ±® ¬¸» ª±¬»® °±±´ò Ó»³¾»® »®ª» º±® ¬¸®»»ó§»¿® ¬»®³ò URA District Management éÕØúÔÉÄjÊíÑÜÏÏÔÏÖÜÏÙùØÇØÑÎÍÐØÏÉùØÍÜËÉÐØÏÉ³¿²¿¹» ËÎß ¿½¬·ª·¬·»ò Í¬¿ºº ¿²¼ ³±¬ ³¿¬»®ó ·¿´ ¿²¼ »®ª·½» ½±¬ ¬± «°°±®¬ ËÎß °®±¶»½¬ ¿®» ®»½±®¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ò Ì¸» ±°»®¿¬·²¹ ¾«¼¹»¬ ±º »¿½¸ ËÎß ¼·¬®·ÚÉËØÔÐÛÈËÊØÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊöØÏØËÜÑ÷ÈÏÙ×ÎËÉÕØÊØÚÎÊÉÊüÊÜ ®»«´¬ô ¬¸»» »¨°»²» ¿®» ¸±©² ¬©·½»ô ±²½» ¿ ÎÍØËÜÉÔÏÖØÅÍØÏÊØÊÔÏÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊöØÏØËÜÑ÷ÈÏÙ ¾«¼¹»¬ º±® ¬¸» ¼»°¿®¬³»²¬ô ¿²¼ ¿¹¿·² ¿ Ð´¿²²·²¹ ¿²¼ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±°»®¿¬·²¹ »¨°»²» ·² ¬¸» ËÎß ÛÈÙÖØÉÉÎËØÔÐÛÈËÊØÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊöØÏØËÜÑ÷ÈÏÙ Urban Renewal Agency Overview Central Eugene Project District (also known as the Downtown District) Ì¸» Ý»²¬®¿´ Û«¹»²» Ð®±¶»½¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ô ¿´± µ²±©² ¿ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ô ©¿ »¬¿¾´·¸»¼ ·² ïçêè ¬± ®»¼»ª»´±° ïé ¾´±½µ ·² ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ¿®»¿ò Ì¸» ¾±«²¼¿®·» ±º ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿®» ¸±©² ·² ¬¸» ³¿° ¾»´±©ò Ì¸» ±®·¹·²¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ¹±¿´ ·²ª±´ª»¼ ´¿²¼ ¿½¯«··¬·±²ô ¾«·´¼·²¹ ®»¸¿¾·´·¬¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ±º °«¾´·½ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ò ß² «°¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ïçêè °´¿² ©¿ ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ ª±¬»® ·² ïççð ¿²¼ ©¿ »¬ ¬± »¨°·®» ·² ÚÇïðò ×² Ö«²» ïççèô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ½¸±» ±²» ±º ¬¸» ±°¬·±² °®±ª·¼»¼ ¾§ Ó»¿«®» ëð ´»¹·´¿¬·±² ¬¸¿¬ ¿´´±©»¼ º±® ¿ Ý·¬§ó©·¼» °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ ¿ ©»´´ ¿ ¼·ª·¼·²¹ ¬¸» ¬¿¨» ½±´´»½¬»¼ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» Ý±«²½·´ ´·³·¬»¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ±º ²»© º«²¼ ¬± ½±³°´»¬·²¹ »¨·¬·²¹ °®±¶»½¬ ¿²¼ ½±²¬®«½ó ¬·±² ±º ¿ ²»© ³¿·² ´·¾®¿®§ò Ì¸»§ ¿´± ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¿ °´¿² ¬± ®»¼«½» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿¼³·²·ó ¬®¿¬·±² ±ª»® ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ¬¸®»» §»¿®ò ×² ÚÇðëô ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ´·¾®¿®§ ½±³°´»¬»ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» °´¿² ¬± ¿´´±© º«²¼·²¹ º±® ±¬¸»® ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ·²½´«¼ó ·²¹ »½±²±³·½ ®»ª·¬¿´·¦¿¬·±² ¬®¿¬»¹·» ¿²¼ ¬± »¨¬»²¼ ¬¸» ¬»®³·²¿¬·±² ¼¿¬» ¬± Ö«²» íðô îðîìò ×² Ò±ª»³¾»® îððéô ¿ ¾¿´´±¬ ³»¿«®» ¬± ·²½®»¿» ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ¿³±«²¬ ¾§ üìð ³·´´·±² ¿²¼ »¨¬»²¼ ¬¸» ¬»®³·²¿¬·±² ¼¿¬» º®±³ îðîì ¬± îðíð ©¿ «²«½½»º«´ò Î»ª·»© ±º ¬¸» °´¿² ¿®» ®»¯«·®»¼ ·² îððç ¿²¼ îðïçò Ó¿¶±® ¹±¿´ º±® ÚÇïð ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ¿®»æ ¬¸ Ý¿°·¬¿´·¦» ±² ¬¸» ±°°±®¬«²·¬§ ®»°®»»²¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» É»¬ Þ®±¿¼©¿§ ¿²¼ ïð ¿²¼ Ý¸¿®²»´¬±² ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ °®±¶»½¬ ¬± º¿½·´·¬¿¬» ¸·¹¸ ¼»²·¬§ô ¸·¹¸ ¯«¿´·¬§ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ½±²·¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ð´¿²ò Ð®±³±¬» ¼±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²» ¿ ¬¸» ½«´¬«®¿´ô »½±²±³·½ ¿²¼ ¹±ª»®²³»²¬¿´ ½»²¬»® ±º ¬¸» ®»¹·±²ò Ë» º·²¿²½·¿´ ·²½»²¬·ª» ¬± «°°±®¬ ¬¸» ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±º °®±°»®¬·» ·² ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ¿®»¿ò Û²½±«®¿¹» ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±º ¸·¹¸ ¼»²·¬§ô ±©²»®ó±½½«°·»¼ ¿²¼ ®»²¬¿´ ¸±«·²¹ ¼±©²¬±©²ò Ý±²¬®«½¬ ±® ®»½±²¬®«½¬ °«¾´·½ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©·´´ ¬·³«´¿¬» ¿½¬·ª·¬§ ±® °®·ª¿¬» ·²ª»¬³»²¬ ·² ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ¿®»¿ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Riverfront Urban Renewal District Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ©¿ ½®»¿¬»¼ ·² ïçèë ¬± ¿·¬ ·² º·²¿²½·²¹ °«¾´·½ ·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®»ò Ì¸» ±®·¹·²¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ »²½±³°¿»¼ ²»¿®´§ ïìè ¿½®» ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ¬±ÜÏÙÔÏÚÑÈÙÔÏÖÉÕØèÏÔÇØËÊÔÉÄÎ×îËØÖÎÏjÊëÔÇØË º®±²¬ Î»»¿®½¸ Ð¿®µ ·¬»ò ×² ÚÇðìô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» ¾±«²¼¿®·» ±º ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬± ¿¼¼ ¿²±¬¸»® íð ¿½®»ô ¾®·²¹·²¹ ¬¸» ¬±¬¿´ ¿®»¿ ¬± ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ ïéè ¿½®»ò Ì¸» ½«®®»²¬ ¾±«²¼¿®·» ±º ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿®» ¸±©² ·² ¬¸» ³¿° ¾»´±©ò Ì¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ °´¿² ©¿ ®»ª·»©»¼ ¿²¼ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ·² Ó¿®½¸ îððìò Ó¿¶±® ½¸¿²¹» ·² ÉÕØÍÑÜÏÜÐØÏÙÐØÏÉÊÔÏÚÑÈÙØÙÚÕÜÏÖÔÏÖÉÕØÏÜÐØÎ×ÉÕØÙÔÊÉËÔÚÉ×ËÎÐÉÕØmëÔÇØË×ËÎÏÉëØÊØÜËÚÕíÜËÒ èËÛÜÏëØÏØÆÜÑüËØÜlÉÎÉÕØmëÔÇØË×ËÎÏÉèËÛÜÏëØÏØÆÜÑüËØÜlØÅÉØÏÙÔÏÖÉÕØÉØËÐÔÏÜÉÔÎÏÙÜÉØÉÎ îðîìô »¨°¿²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ®»ª··²¹ ¬¸» ´·¬ ±º °®±¶»½¬ ¿½¬·ª·¬·»ô °®±ª·¼·²¹ ²»© ½±¬ »¬·³¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ¬± ¾» «²¼»®¬¿µ»²ô »¬¿¾´·¸·²¹ ¿ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ±º üíìòè ³·´´·±²ô ¿²¼ °®±ª·¼·²¹ ±¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ¿¾±«¬ ¬¸» ·³°¿½¬ ±º ¬¸» ¿³»²¼³»²¬ò Ó¿¶±® ¹±¿´ ·² ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ º±® ÚÇïð ¿®»æ Ý±´´¿¾±®¿¬» ©·¬¸ ÛÉÛÞ ±² ¿ ³¿¬»® °´¿²²·²¹ °®±½» º±® ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ®·ª»®º®±²¬ ¿®»¿ò Ð®±³±¬» ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ±º °«¾´·½ ¿²¼ °®·ª¿¬» °®±°»®¬·» ·² ¬¸» ¿®»¿ ¿®±«²¼ ¬¸» ²»© É¿§²» Ó±®» Ú»¼»®¿´ Ý±«®¬¸±«»ò ×³°®±ª» ½±²²»½¬·±² ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» ½±®» ±º ¼±©²¬±©²ô ¬¸» ®·ª»®º®±²¬ ¿®»¿ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º Ñ®»¹±²ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Assessed Value Information É¸»² ¿² «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ · º·®¬ ½®»¿¬»¼ô ¬¸» ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¾±«²¼¿®·» · ØÊÉÜÛÑÔÊÕØÙÜÊÉÕØm×ËÎÃØÏÛÜÊØlôÏÉÕØÎËÄÔ×«®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ »ºº±®¬ ¿®» «½½»º«´ô ¬¸» ª¿´«» ±º ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ©·´´ ¹®±© ¿¾±ª» ¬¸» ¾¿» ¿³±«²¬ò Ì¸¿¬ ·²½®»¿» · ½¿´´»ÙÉÕØmÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉÜÑlÎËmØÅÚØÊÊl ª¿´«»ò Ñª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¶«®·¼·½¬·±² ø½¸±±´ô ¹»²»®¿´ ¹±ª»®²³»²¬ô ¾±²¼÷ ½±²¬·²«» ¬± ®»½»·ª» °®±°ó »®¬§ ¬¿¨» ±² ¬¸» º®±¦»² ¾¿» ©¸·´» ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¿¹»²½§ ®»½»·ª» °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬± ¬¸» ·²½®»³»²¬¿´ ª¿´«»ò Ì¸· · ½¿ÑÑØÙÉÕØmÙÔÇÔÊÔÎÏÎ×ÉÜÅlÐØÉÕÎÙ±º ®¿··²¹ ®»ª»²«» ·² ¿² «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ò éÕØmÙÔÇÔÊÔÎÏÎ×ÉÜÅlÐØÉÕÎÙ×Î® º«²¼·²¹ °®±¶»½¬ ®»«´¬ ·² ¬¸» Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ ß¹»²½§ ®»½»·ª·²¹ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬´§ ³±®» ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ¬¸¿² ©¸¿¬ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ©±«´¼ ®»½»·ª» ·² ·¬ ¹»²»®¿´ º«²¼ º®±³ ¼·¬®·½¬ °®±°»®¬§ò Ì¸· ³»¬¸±¼ »²¿¾´» ¬¸» ¿¹»²½§ ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ³±®» °®±¶»½¬ ¬¸¿² ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¿¾´» ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» ¿³» ¬·³» °»®·±¼ò Ì¸» º·ª»ó§»¿® ¸·¬±®§ ±º ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ·² ¬¸» Ý·¬§jÊÉÆÎÈËÛÜÏËØÏØÆÜÑÙÔÊÉËÔÚÉÊÔÊÊÕÎÆÏÔÏÉÕØ ½¸¿®¬ ¾»´±©ô ¿´±²¹ ©·¬¸ ¿² »¬·³¿¬» º±® ¬¸» «°½±³·²¹ ¾«¼¹»¬ §»¿®ò Ì¸» ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ·² ¬¸» ¼·ó ¬®·½¬ ½¸¿²¹» ·¹²·º·½¿²¬´§ º®±³ §»¿® ¬± §»¿®ò Þ»½¿«» ¬¸» ´¿²¼ ¿®»¿ ·²ª±´ª»¼ ·² »¿½¸ ¼·¬®·½¬ · ®»´¿¬·ª»´§ ³¿´´ô ½¸¿²¹» ³¿¼» ¾§ ¿ ·²¹´» °®±°»®¬§ ±©²»® ½¿² ¸¿ª» ¿ ´¿®¹» ·³°¿½¬ ±² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿»»¼ ª¿´«»ò Ú±® ÚÇïðô ¬¸» ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ · »¨°»½¬»¼ ¬± ¼®±°ô ©¸·´» ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ · °®±¶»½¬»¼ ¬± ®»³¿·² ¿¬ ½«®®»²¬ ´»ª»´ò Assessed Value Information Downtown District Riverfront District Total Total Fiscal Year IncrementalIncremental Assessed Assessed Frozen BaseValue Frozen BaseValue EndedValueValue êñíðñðë üíïôíèêôççï üïìïôîïïôèçð üïéîôëçèôèèï üîëôîëçôçèë üíïôïèêôïïë üëêôììêôïðð êñíðñðê íïôíèêôççï ïîïôçêìôéëç ïëíôíëïôéëð ëïôíèêôðîð îçôçîîôçéï èïôíðèôççï êñíðñðé íïôíèêôççï ïîïôîíéôêçî ïëîôêîìôêèí ëðôêðçôììè íîôïíðôçëð èîôéìðôíçè êñíðñðè íïôíèêôççï ïîçôðìëôìïê ïêðôìíîôìðé ëðôêðçôììè íêôííêôððð èêôçìëôììè êñíðñðç íïôíèêôççï ïîìôéîíôðéï ïëêôïïðôðêî ëðôêðçôììè íçôïéëôìïî èçôéèìôèêð íïôíèêôççï ïîïôïçéôëèì ïëîôëèëôððð ëðôêðçôììè íçôïéëôìïî èçôéèìôèêð êñíðñïð »¬·³¿¬» Í±«®½»æ Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»³»²¬ ú Ì¿¨¿¬·±² º±® ¸·¬±®·½ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²å Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» º±® ¾«¼¹»¬ §»¿® »¬·³¿¬»ò ×² îððìô ¬¸» ¾±«²¼¿®·» ±º ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ©»®» »¨°¿²¼»¼ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» º®±¦»² ¾¿» ©¿ ·²½®»¿»¼ ·² ÚÇðê ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ò ×² ÚÇðéô ¬¸» Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® ¿¼¶«¬»¼ ¬¸» »¨°¿²¼»¼ º®±¦»² ¾¿» ¿³±«²¬ò Property Tax Information Ì¸» °®·³¿®§ ®»ª»²«» ±«®½» º±® «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ · ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«»ò Ì¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ½±³» º®±³ ·²½®»¿» ·² °®±°»®¬§ ª¿´«» ·²½» ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ©¿ ½®»¿¬»¼ò Ì¸»» ·²½®»¿»¼ °®±°»®¬§ ÇÜÑÈØÊÖØÏØËÜÉØmÉÜÅÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉlÆÕÔÚÕÔÊÙÔËØÚÉØÙÉÎ ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ü·¬®·½¬ ·² °´¿½» ¿¬ ¬¸» ¬·³» ¬¸¿¬ ðØÜÊÈËØ ÛØÚÜÐØØ××ØÚÉÔÇØÆØËØÜÑÑÎÆØÙÉÎmÖËÜÏÙ×ÜÉÕØËlÉÕØØÅÔÊÉÔÏÖÑØÇØÑÎ×ÉÜÅÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉ ®»ª»²«» ¿²¼ ½±´´»½¬ ¿ Ý·¬§ó©·¼» ´»ª§ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Ì¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¿ ¼·¬®·½¬ ½±´´»½¬ · ¼»¬»®³·²»¼ «²¼»® Ó»¿«®» ëð ¿²¼ · ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ »ª»®¿´ º¿½¬±®ò Ì¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ©¿ ¹®¿²¼º¿¬¸»®»¼ ¾§ Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ·² Ö«²» ïççèò Ú±® ¬¸· ¼·¬®·½¬ô ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¬¸¿¬ ½±«´¼ ¾» ½±´´»½¬»¼ ¼»°»²¼»¼ ±² ¬¸» ´»ª»´ ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² ÚÇçè ¿²¼ ¬¸» °»®½»²¬¿¹» ¹®±©¬¸ ·² ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ±² °®±°»®¬·» ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿¾±ª» ¬¸» ¾¿» ª¿´«¿¬·±²ò Ì¸» ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» º±® ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ©¿ ½±´´»½¬»¼ ·² ¬©± ©¿§æ øï÷ ¾§ ¼·ª·¼·²¹ ¬¸» ¬¿¨» ½±´´»½¬»¼ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬å ¿²¼ øî÷ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¿ Ý·¬§ó©·¼» °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ò ß ±º ÚÇðçô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ó©·¼» °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ »²¼»¼ ¾»½¿«» ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ · ²»¿®·²¹ ·¬ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ô ©¸·½¸ · »¨°´¿·²»¼ ¾»´±©ò Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ©¿ ²±¬ ¹®¿²¼º¿¬¸»®»¼ ¿²¼ô ¬¸»®»º±®»ô ³¿§ ²±¬ ½±´´»½¬ ¿ Ý·¬§ó©·¼» °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ò Ì¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ³¿§ ½±´´»½¬ · ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» ·²½®»¿» ·² ¿»»¼ ª¿´«¿¬·±² ±² °®±°»®¬·» ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿¾±ª» ¬¸» ¾¿» ª¿´«¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» ¬©± «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿´± ¼·ºº»® ·² ©¸·½¸ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ¿®» «»¼ÉÎÚÜÑÚÈÑÜÉØÉÕØmÙÔÇÔÊÔÎÏÎ× ÉÜÅØÊlÜÐÎÈÏÉéÕØùÎÆÏÉÎÆÏùÔÊÉËÔÚÉÔÊÜmËØÙÈÚØÙËÜÉØÍÑÜÏlÉÕÜÉÐÜÄÚÎÑÑØÚÉÉÜÅÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉ ¾¿»¼ ±² ¬¸» °»®³¿²»²¬ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» °´« ¿²§ ¾±²¼»¼ ¼»¾¬ ±® ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª§ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ¬¸¿¬ ©¿ ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ ª±¬»® °®·±® ¬± Ñ½¬±¾»® êô îððïò Ú±® ÚÇðçô ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» «»¼ º±® ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ½¿´½«´¿¬·±² ©¿ üïëòçîî °»® üïððð ±º ¿»»¼ ª¿´«»ò Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ · ¿ mÊÉÜÏÙÜËÙËÜÉØÍÑÜÏlÉÕÜÉÐÜÄÚÎÑÑØÚÉÉÜÅÔÏÚËØÐØÏ¬ ¾¿»¼ ±² ¿´´ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ±² ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ »¨½»°¬ º±® ¿²§ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ò Ú±® ÚÇðçô ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ®¿¬» ©¿ üïéòçëêê °»® üïððð ±º ¿»»¼ ª¿´«»ò Ì¸» º·ª»ó§»¿® ¸·¬±®§ ±º °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ·² ¬¸» ¬©± «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ · ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» ½¸¿®¬ ¾»´±©ò Ì¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ½±´´»½¬·±² · ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸®»» º¿½¬±®æ ½¸¿²¹» ·² ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ô ½¸¿²¹» ·² ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» º±® ¿´´ ¶«®·¼·½¬·±²ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» °»®½»²¬¿¹» ±º °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨°¿§»® ¬¸¿¬ °¿§ ¬¸»·® ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ ±² ¬·³»ò Ú±® ÚÇïðô °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ·² ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ¿®» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¬± ·²½®»¿» ¼«» ¬± »¨°»½¬»¼ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ·²½®»¿»ò ×² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ô °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ©·´´ ¼®±° ¼«» ¬± ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬»¼ ¼®±° ·² ¿»»¼ ª¿´«»ò Ì¸» °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ½±´´»½¬·±² ®¿¬» · °®±¶»½¬»¼ ¬± ¾» çìû ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¾±¬¸ ½«®®»²¬ ¿²¼ ¼»´·²¯«»²¬ ¬¿¨ ½±´´»½¬·±²÷ò Property Tax Levies and Collections Fiscal Year Ended Downtown District Riverfront District Special Levy Division of Total Gross Net Taxes Division of Net Taxes ImposedTax AmountTaxes ImposedCollectedTax AmountCollected êñíðñðë üîôðçèôííç üîôíðéôëçè üìôìðëôêîê üìôîéíôíìè üëééôðçç üëëèôçìì êñíðñðê ïôçéíôïèí ïôèííôêíè íôèðêôèïé íôéîéôîèç ëéíôçïé ëìëôêíï êñíðñðé ïôçíêôéèï ïôèìîôëìí íôééçôíîì íôêéèôéðð êðêôèéð ëèèôêíç îôðéîôíðð ïôçëðôíëç ìôðîîôêëç íôéììôèêî êìíôëìé ëçéôîèì êñíðñðè ïôèèèôïîî ïôèèèôïîî ïôèîðôððð êçìôíïð êêëôððð êñíðñðç »¬·³¿¬» ïôèìðôððð ïôèìðôððð ïôéíðôððð éíðôððð êèëôððð êñíðñïð ¾«¼¹»¬ Í±«®½»æ Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» º·²¿²½·¿´ ®»½±®¼ ¿²¼ Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ ±º ß»³»²¬ ¿²¼ Ì¿¨¿¬·±² ®»°±®¬ º±® ¸·¬±®·½ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Effect of Urban Renewal on Tax Bills Ë®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¼± ²±¬ ·³°±» ²»© ¬¿¨»å ®¿¬¸»®ô ¬¸»§ ®»¼·¬®·¾«¬» ¬¿¨» º®±³ ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬± ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸»®» ¿®» ¬©± ¾¿·½ ¬»° ¬± «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ¸±© ¿² ÔÏÙÔÇÔÙÈÜÑjÊÉÜÅÛÔÑÑÔÊÜ××ØÚÉØÙ¾§ ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º·²¿²½·²¹ ·² Ñ®»¹±²ò Ì¸» º·®¬ ¬»° ¼»¬»®³·²» ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¿¹»²½§ ¸±«´¼ ®»½»·ª»ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» »½±²¼ ¬»° ¼»¬»®³·²» ¸±© ¬¸» ¬¿¨» ¿®» ¿½½±«²¬»¼ º±® ±² °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ¬¿¬»³»²¬ò Ì¸· º·®¬ ¬»° ·² ¼»¬»®³·²·²¹ ¸±© ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º·ÏÜÏÚÔÏÖÜ××ØÚÉÊÜÏÔÏÙÔÇÔÙÈÜÑjÊÉÜÅÛÔÑÑÚÎÏÊÔÊÉÊÎ× ¿°°´§·²¹ ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ø«½¸ ¿ ¬¸» ½·¬§ô ½±«²¬§ ¿²¼ ½¸±±´ ¼·¬®·½¬÷ ¬± ¬¸» ·²½®»³»²¬¿´ ª¿´«» ±º ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸¿¬ °®±¼«½¬ · ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¬¿¨» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¿¹»²½§ ¸±«´¼ ®»½»·ª»ò Ì¸» »½±²¼ ¬»° ¼»¬»®³·²» ¸±© ¬± ¼·ª·¼» ±® °´·¬ ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ± ¬¸¿¬ ©¸»² ÉÕÎÊØmÙÔÇÔÙØÙËÜÉØÊlÜËØÜÍÍÑÔØÙ¬± ¿´´ ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ ·² ¬¸» Ý·¬§ô ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¿¹»²½§ ®»½»·ª» ·¬ ¸¿®»ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ®»½»·ª» ¬¸» ®»³¿·²¼»®ò Ì¸» Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® ¼»¬»®³·²» ¸±© ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» º±® ¬¸» ½¸±±´ô ½·¬§ ¿²¼ ½±«²¬§ ¸±«´¼ ¹»¬ ¼·ª·¼»¼ ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸±» ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬òüÊÜÏØÅÜÐÍÑØÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊ °»®³¿²»²¬ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» · üéòððëè °»® üïððð ±º ¿»»¼ ª¿´«»ò Ì¸» Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® ¼·ª·¼» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ·²¬± ¬¸®»» °·»½»æ üêòçðíð ¬¸¿¬ ¹±» ¬± ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²»ô üðòðéèí ¬¸¿¬ ¹±» ¬± ¬¸» Ü±©²ó ¬±©² Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ üðòðîìë ¬¸¿¬ ¹±» ¬± ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ü·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸· ½¿´½«´¿¬·±² · ¼±²» º±® »¿½¸ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ±² ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ò ßº¬»® ¬¿µ·²¹ ¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ¬¸» Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® ¿¾±«¬ ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ ®¿¬»ô ¿² ¿²¿´§· ½¿² ¾» ³¿¼» ¬± ¼»¬»®³·²» ¸±© ¿² ·²¼·ª·¼«¿´ ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ · ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ò Ì¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ ¸±©² ¸»®» · º±® ¬¸» ³»¼·¿² Û«¹»²» ¸±³» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ º±® ÚÇðçò ß ½¿² ¾» »»²ô ¬¸· ³»¼·¿² ¬¿¨°¿§»® ©±«´¼ »»²¬·¿´´§ °¿§ ¬¸» ¿³» ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¬±¬¿´ ¬¿¨» ¾»º±®» ±® ¿º¬»® «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨»ò Ì¸» ¼·ºº»®»²½» · ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ¿®» ®»¿´´±½¿¬»¼ º®±³ ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬± ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» ¾»º±®» ¿²¼ Ü×ÉØËÈËÛÜÏËØÏØÆÜÑÇÔØÆÊÎ×ÉÕÔÊÉÜÅÍÜÄØËjÊÛÔÑÑ ¿®» ©·¬¸·² ±²» °»²²§ ±º »¿½¸ ±¬¸»®ò Ì¸¿¬ °»²²§ ®»°®»»²¬ ¬¸» »ºº»½¬ ±º ¬®«²½¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ®±«²¼·²¹ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Effect of Urban Renewal on Tax Bill for Median Eugene Home in FY09 Taxes Directed to: Taxes Before TaxingDowntown Riverfront Taxes After Difference ReallocationDistricts URURReallocation School Taxes 4j School District $728.44 $715.36 $9.96 $3.13 $715.36 -$13.09 4j School District LOL 230.11 22.913 0.00 0.98 229.13 -0.98 Lane Community College 94.97 95.59 1.06 0.32 93.59-1.38 Lane ESD 34.24 33.76 0.37 0.11 33.76 -0.48 Total School $1,087.76 $1,071.84 $11.38 $4.54 $1,071.84 -$15.92 General Government Taxes City of Eugene $1,074.72 $1,058.95 $12.01 $3.76 $1,058.95 -$15.77 Eugene Library Levy 37.08 36.96 0.00 0.12 36.96-0.12 Lane County 196.25 193.40 2.18 0.67 193.40 -2.85 28.01 Eugene Downtown UR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.01 10.47 Eugene Riverfront UR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.47 Total General Government $1,308.05 $1,289.31 $14.19 $4.56 $1,327.79 $19.74 Bonded Debt Taxes Lane County Bond $18.62 $18.36 $0.20 $0.06 $18.36 -$0.26 Eugene Bond I 51.62 50.88 0.57 0.17 50.880.74 Eugene Bond II 38.96 38.84 0.00 0.12 38.84-0.12 Eugene 4J Bond I 91.38 89.76 1.24 0.38 89.76-1.63 Eugene 4J Bond II 119.66 119.15 0.00 0.51 119.15 -0.51 LCC Bond 38.57 38.01 0.43 0.12 38.01 -0.55 Total Bonded Debt $358.81 $355.01 $2.44 $1.37 $355.01 -$3.80 $28.01 $10.47 Total Taxes $2,754.63 $2,716.16 $2,754.64 $0.01 Urban Renewal Tax Rates Ì¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ º±® Û«¹»²» ¬¿¨°¿§»® ·²½´«¼» ¬©± ´·²» º±® «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ò ß´´ ¬¿¨°¿§»® ·² ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ©·´´ °¿§ ¬¸»» ¬¿¨»ò Ì¸»®» · ²± ¼·ºº»®»²½» ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» ¬¿¨» °¿·¼ ¾§ ¬¿¨°¿§»® ·²·¼» ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ ±«¬·¼» ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» ¬¿¨ ´·²» ¿®»æ Eugene Urban Renewal Downtown · ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ Eugene Urban Renewal Riverfront · ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ×² °®»ª·±« §»¿®ô ¬¸»®» ©¿ ¿ »°¿®¿¬» ´·²» º±® ¿ Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Í°»½·¿´ Ô»ª§ô ©¸·½¸ ©¿ ¬¸» °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ º±® ¬¸» ´·¾®¿®§ °®±¶»½¬ ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸· °»½·¿´ ´»ª§ ©¿ ¼·½±²¬·²«»¼ ¿ ±º ÚÇðç ¼«» ¬± ¬¸» ß¹»²½§ ²»¿®·²¹ ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview ß º·ª»ó§»¿® ¸·¬±®§ ±º ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ º±® ¬¸» ³»¼·¿² ¸±³» ·² Û«¹»²» · ¸±©² ·² ¬¸» ½¸¿®¬ ¾»´±©ò Ì¸» ½¸¿®¬ ¿´± »¬ ±«¬ »¬·³¿¬» º±® ¬¸» ÚÇïð ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ¿²¼ ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ò Urban Renewal Tax Rates Per $1000 of Assessed Value Eugene Urban Eugene Urban Total Urban Bill for Fiscal Year City of Eugene Renewal Renewal Renewal Tax Median EndingSpecial Levy Downtown Riverfront Rate Taxpayer êñíðñðë üðòîîîç üðòîêëë üðòðêêì üðòëëìè üéì êñíðñðê ðòîðïí ðòîððï ðòðêïç ðòìêíí êì êñíðñðé ðòïèèè ðòïçíê ðòðêìë ðòììêç êì êñíðñðè ðòïçîî ðòïçëð ðòðêëí ðòìëîë êé êñíðñðç ðòïèîê ðòðêèî ðòîëðè íè êñíðñïð ðòïêðð ðòðêðð ðòîîðð íë »¬·³¿¬» Í±«®½»æ Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»³»²¬ ¿²¼ Ì¿¨¿¬·±² º±® ¸·¬±®·½ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬» ¿²¼ ¿»»¼ ª¿´«» ±º ³»¼·¿² ¸±³»ò Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Ì¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¶«®·¼·½¬·±² ¿®» µ»°¬ ©¸±´» ©¸»² ¿ ¼·¬®·½¬ · ½®»¿¬»¼ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨» »¨°´¿·²»¼ °®»ª·±«´§ò Ì¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ®»¬¿·² ¬¸» ¬¿¨» ±² ¬¸» ª¿´«» ±º °®±°»®¬§ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ©¸»² ·¬ ©¿ ½®»¿¬»¼ò Ì¸» ¸¿®» ±º °®±°»ËÉÄÉÜÅØÊ×ËÎÐÉÕØmØÅÚØÊÊÇÜÑÈØlÎËmÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉÜÑ ÇÜÑÈØlÔÊÏÎÉÚÎÑÑØÚÉØÙÛÄÉÕØÎÇØ®´¿°°·²¹ ¶«®·¼·½¬·±² ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ±º ¿² ¿½¬·ª» ¼·¬®·½¬ò ß´¬¸±«¹¸ ½¸±±´ °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» ¿®» ®»¼«½»¼ ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ô ¬¸»®» · ¹»²»®¿´´§ ²± »ºº»½¬ ±² ¿² ·²¼·ª·¼«¿´ ½¸±±´ ÊÄÊÉØÐjÊÎÍØËÜÉÔÏÖÛÈÙÖØÉÛØÚÜÈÊØÊÚÕÎÎÑÊÜËØ×ÈÏÙØÙ ¾§ ¬¸» ¬¿¬» ±² ¿ °»®ó°«°·´ ¾¿·ò Ñ² ¿ ¬¿¬»ó©·¼» ¾¿·ô ·º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ´» °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ¹±·²¹ ¬± ½¸±±´ ¾»½¿«» ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ô ¬¸»² ¬¸» ¬¿¬» ¸¿ ¬± °®±ª·¼» ³±®» ¹»²»®¿´ º«²¼ ¼±´´¿® ¬± ³¿µ» «° ¬¸» °»®ó°«°·´ º«²¼·²¹ ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ º±® ¿´´ ¬¸» ½¸±±´ò ×º ¿ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¸¿ ¿ ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª§ô ¸±©»ª»®ô ¬¸¿¬ ´»ª§ ®»ª»²«» ½±«´¼ ¾» ®»¼«½»¼ ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ·²½®»³»²¬¿´ ª¿´«»ò Ë®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ²±³·²¿´´§ ¿ºº»½¬ ½»®¬¿·² ª±¬»®ó¿°°®±ª»¼ ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª·» ¿²¼ ¾±²¼ ¾»½¿«» ¬¸» ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¸¿ ´» °®±°»®¬§ ª¿´«» ¬± ´»ª§ ¬¿¨» ¿¹¿·²¬ô ®»«´¬·²¹ ·² ´·¹¸¬´§ ¸·¹¸»® ¬¿¨ ®¿¬»ò ß² »¬·³¿¬» ©¿ ³¿¼» ±º ¬¸· ·³°¿½¬ ±² ¬¸» ³»ÙÔÜÏÕÎÐØÎÆÏØËjÊÉÜÅÛÔÑÑÜÊÙØÉØËÐÔÏØÙÛÄÉÕØ Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»±® º±® ÚÇðçò Ì¸» ¬±¬¿´ ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ º±® ¬¸» ³»¼·¿² ¸±³»±©²»® ©¿ üîôéëìòêíò ×¬ · »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ²±³·²¿´ ·²½®»¿» ·² ¬¿¨» ±² ´»ª·» ¿²¼ ¾±²¼ º®±³ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ º±® ¬¸· ¿³°´» ¬¿¨°¿§»® ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¿¾±«¬ üê º±® ¬¸» §»¿®ô ±® ¿¾±«¬ ðòîû ±º ¬¸» ¿²²«¿´ ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ò Ì¸· ·²½®»¿» ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» »ºº»½¬ ±º ¿´´ ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬¸¿¬ ±ª»®´¿° ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ±² ¬¸· ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ò Ú±® Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ô º±® ·²¬¿²½»ô ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»ÏØÆÜÑØ××ØÚÉÔÏÚÑÈÙØÊÉÕØØ××ØÚÉ×ËÎÐøÈÖØÏØjÊ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿ ©»´´ ¿ ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² Í°®·²¹º·»´¼ô Ý±¾«®¹ô Ê»²»¬¿ ¿²¼ Ú´±®»²½»ò Í½¸±±´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ìÖô Ô¿²» ÛÍÜ ¿²¼ ÔÝÝ ¿´± ±ª»®´¿° ©·¬¸ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² ±¬¸»® ½±«²¬·»ò Ì¸» ·²½»²¬·ª» º±® ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬± «°°±®¬ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ · ¸·¹¸»® °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» ·² ¬¸» ´±²¹ ®«²ò Ë´¬·³¿¬»´§ ©¸»² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ · »²¼»¼ô ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿®» ¿¾´» ¬± ¬¿¨ ¬¸» »²¬·®» ª¿´«» ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ë²¼»® ¬¸» ¬¸»±®§ ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ô ¬¸· ª¿´«» · ¸·¹¸»® ¬¸¿² ·¬ ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ·º ¬¸»®» ¸¿¼ ¾»»² ²± ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² »ºº»½¬ò Ì¸» ¹®± ¿³±«²¬ ±º «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¬¿¨» ¼·ª·¼»¼ º±® ¾±¬¸ ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² ÚÇðç · ¸±©² ±² ¬¸» º±´´±©ó ·²¹ ½¸¿®¬ò Ì¸» ·¬»³ ±² ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ ¬¸¿¬ ½¿² ¾» «»¼ ·² ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ ½¿´½«´¿¬·±² ¿®» ¼·ºº»®»²¬ Urban Renewal Agency Overview º±® ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ô ¿ ¿ ¬¿²¼¿®¼ ®¿¬» °´¿²ô ½¿² ½±´´»½¬ ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» º®±³ ¿´´ ±º ¬¸» ·¬»³ ±² ¬¸» ¬¿¨ ¾·´´ò Ì¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ô ¿ ¿ ®»¼«½»¼ ®¿¬» °´¿²ô ½¿² ±²´§ ½±´´»½¬ ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«» º®±³ °»®³¿²»²¬ ¬¿¨ ®¿¬»ô ¿²¼ ¾±²¼»¼ ¼»¾¬ ¿²¼ ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª·» ¬¸¿¬ ©»®» ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ ª±¬»® °®·±® ¬± Ñ½¬±¾»® îððïò Ì¸»®»º±®»ô ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ´·¬ ¦»®± º±® ¬¸» ´·¾®¿®§ ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª§ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Í½¸±±´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ìÖ ´±½¿´ ±°¬·±² ´»ª§ò Division of Tax Impact on Overlapping Taxing Jurisdictions in FY09 Taxing District Type of Tax Downtown Riverfront Total Í½¸±±´ Ì¿¨» Í½¸±±´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ìÖ Ð»®³¿²»²¬ Ì¿¨ Î¿¬» üëçïôêðê üïèëôçëç üéééôëêë Í½¸±±´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ìÖ Ô±½¿´ Ñ°¬·±² Ô»ª§ ð ëèôíîç ëèôíîç Ô¿²» Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ý±´´»¹» Ð»®³¿²»²¬ Ì¿¨ Î¿¬» éêôèèë îíôìðð ïððôîèì éôèðð íìôëìí Ô¿²» ÛÍÜ Ð»®³¿²»²¬ Ì¿¨ Î¿¬» îêôéìí Ì±¬¿´ Í½¸±±´ Ì¿¨» üêçëôîíì üîéëôìèè üçéðôéîî Ù»²»®¿´ Ù±ª»®²³»²¬ Ì¿¨» Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Ð»®³¿²»²¬ Ì¿¨ Î¿¬» üèéíôêîé üîéíôíëé üïôïìêôçèì Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Ô·¾®¿®§ Ô»ª§ ð èôçîë èôçîë Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ Ð»®³¿²»²¬ Ì¿¨ Î¿¬» ïëèôìíê ìçôðçí îðéôëîç Ì±¬¿´ Ù»²»®¿´ Ù±ª»®²³»²¬ üïôðíîôðêí üííïôíéë üïôíêíôìíè Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ Ì¿¨» Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ üìïôîèí üîïôïçç üêîôìèî Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ ïìôëðë ìôìêí ïèôçêè Í½¸±±´ Ü·¬®·½¬ ìÖ Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ éíôèíé ëîôèéï ïîêôéðè Ô¿²» Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ý±´´»¹» Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ íïôîðð èôçïì ìðôïïì Ì±¬¿´ Þ±²¼»¼ Ü»¾¬ üïêðôèîë üèéôììé üîìèôîéî Ì±¬¿´ üïôèèèôïîî üêçìôíïð üîôëîìôïðî Ò±¬»æ ß ³»²¬·±²»¼ ¿¾±ª»ô ¿´¬¸±«¹¸ °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» ¬± ½¸±±´ ¿®» ®»¼«½»¼ ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼·ª··±² ±º ¬¿¨»ô ½¸±±´ ¾«¼¹»¬ ¿®» ²±¬ ®»¼«½»¼ô ¿´´ »´» ¾»·²¹ »¯«¿´ô ¾»½¿«» ½¸±±´ ¿®» º«²¼»¼ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¿ °»® °«°·´ º±®³«´¿ º®±³ ¬¸» ¬¿¬»ô ¿²¼ ¿²§ ´± ·² °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» · ³¿¼» «° ¾§ ¿² ·²½®»¿» ·² ¬¿¬» º«²¼·²¹ò Í±«®½»æ Ô¿²» Ý±«²¬§ ß»³»²¬ ¿²¼ Ì¿¨¿¬·±²ô Ì¿¾´» ì»ô Ü»¬¿·´ ±º Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ð´¿² ß®»¿ ¾§ Ì¿¨·²¹ Ü·¬®·½¬ô Ì¿¨ Ç»¿® îððèóðçò Bonded Debt Information Ì¸» Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ ß¹»²½§ ¼±» ²±¬ ½«®®»²¬´§ ¸¿ª» ¿²§ ¾±²¼»¼ ¼»¾¬ ±«¬¬¿²¼·²¹ò Ì¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ¸¿ ¿² ±¾´·¹¿¬·±² ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¿² ×²¬»®¹±ª»®²³»²¬¿´ ß¹®»»³»²¬ ¬± °¿§ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¿² ¿³±«²¬ »¯«¿´ ¬± ¬¸» °®·²½·°¿´ ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»¬ °¿§³»²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¼»¾¬ ·«»¼ ¬± º«²¼ ¬¸» ²»© ´·¾®¿®§ ½±²¬®«½¬·±² °®±ó ¶»½¬ò Ì¸» °»½·º·½ º±® »¿½¸ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿®» ¼»½®·¾»¼ ¾»´±©ò Downtown District Ñ² Ö«²» ïô ïççèô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ °´¿² ¬± ¬¿¬» ¬¸¿¬ ö ¿ ²»© ´·¾®¿®§ ©¿ ¬± ¾» ¬¸» ±²´§ ²»© °®±¶»½¬ ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ ß¹»²½§ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ »²¬»®»¼ ·²¬± ¿² ×²¬»®¹±ª»®²³»²¬¿´ ß¹®»»³»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ¬¸» ß¹»²½§ ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸» ¼»¾¬ »®ª·½» °¿§³»²¬ ±² üïèòë ³·´´·±² ±º Ý·¬§ ¼»¾¬ ±¾´·¹¿¬·±² º±® ¬¸» ´·¾®¿®§ ¿²¼ ¬± °®±ª·¼» ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ö ß ³»²¬·±²»¼ °®»ª·±«´§ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ý±«²½·´ «¾»¯«»²¬´§ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ °´¿² ·² îððì ¬± ¿´´±© º±® ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ¬± ¾» «²¼»®¬¿µ»² ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview ½¿¸ ½±²¬®·¾«¬·±² ¬± ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ô ·º »¨½» «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ®»ª»²«» ¿®» ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ·² º«¬«®» §»¿®ò Ì¸» ®»±´«¬·±² ¿«¬¸±®·¦·²¹ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ Ó¿²¿¹»® ¬± ·¹² ¬¸» ×²¬»®¹±ª»®²³»²¬¿´ ß¹®»»³»²¬ ©¿ ¿°°®±ª»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» Ý±«²½·´ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ß¹»²½§ ±² Ú»¾®«¿®§ îèô îðððô ¿´±²¹ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ®»±´«¬·±² ¿«¬¸±®ó ·¦·²¹ ·«¿²½» ±º ¬¸» ¼»¾¬ ±¾´·¹¿¬·±²ò Ñ² ß°®·´ îéô îðððô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ·«»¼ üïèòë ³·´´·±² ±º ¼»¾¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©¿ ¬± ¾» ®»°¿·¼ º®±³ ß¹»²½§ ®»±«®½»ò Ì¸» ¼»¾¬ ©¿ ¬± ¾» ®»°¿·¼ ·² ¿²²«¿´ ¿³±«²¬ ±º ¿¾±«¬ üîòë ³·´´·±² ¿²¼ ¬¸» º·²¿´ ³¿¬«®·¬§ · ±² Ü»½»³¾»® ïô îððçò Riverfront District Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ¼±» ²±¬ ¸¿ª» ¿²§ ¾±²¼»¼ ¼»¾¬ ±«¬¬¿²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ¬¸»®» ¿®» ½«®®»²¬´§ ²± °´¿² º±® ·«¿²½» ±º ¾±²¼»¼ ¼»¾¬ò Maximum Indebtedness Information Ñ®»¹±² Î»ª·»¼ Í¬¿¬«¬» ®»¯«·®» ¬¸¿¬ »¿½¸ «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬¸¿¬ ®»½»·ª» °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨» ·²½´«¼» ÜmÐÜÅÔÐÈÐÔÏÙØÛÉØÙÏØÊÊlÑÔÐÔÉÔÏÉÕØÔËÈËÛÜÏËØÏØÆÜÑÍÑÜÏmðÜÅÔÐÈÐÔÏÙØÛÉØÙÏØÊÊlÔÊÜ ®»¯«·®»¼ °»²¼·²¹ ½¿° º±® ¿´´ °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ±ª»® ¿ °»®·±¼ Î×ÉÔÐØmðÜÅÔÐÈÐÔÏÙØÛÉ ØÙÏØÊÊlÔÊÏÎÉÜÑØÖÜÑÙØÛÉÑÔÐÔÉôÉÔÊÐÎËØÑÔÒØÜÊÍØÏÙÔÏÖÑÔÐÔÉ Adopting a maximum indebtedness figure does not authorize or obligate the Agency to spend money or enter into debt. É·¬¸·² ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬¿¬·±²ô ß¹»²½§ Þ±¿®¼ ¸¿ª» ¬¸» ¿¾·´·¬§ ¬± º«²¼ °®±¶»½¬ ±ª»® ¬·³»ô »·¬¸»® ©·¬¸ ½¿¸ ±® ¾§ ·«·²¹ ¼»¾¬ò Ý»®¬¿·² »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ¿®» ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ½¿´½«´¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ½»®¬¿·² »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ¿®» »¨½´«¼»¼ò Ú±® ·²¬¿²½»ô ·²¬»®»¬ ±² ¼»¾¬ · »¨½´«¼»¼ º®±³ ¬¸» ½¿´½«´¿¬·±²ô ¾«¬ ½¿¸ °¿§³»²¬ º±® °®±¶»½¬ ¿²¼ ¿¼³·²·¬®¿¬·ª» »¨°»²» ¿®» ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» ½¿´½«´¿¬·±²ò Ì¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» °»²¼·²¹ ´·³·¬ ¹±ª»®² ±²´§ ½»®¬¿·² »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«»ò Û¨°»²¼·¬«®» ³¿¼» º®±³ ±«®½» ±¬¸»® ¬¸¿² ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¿®» ²±¬ ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» °»²¼·²¹ ´·³·¬ô «½¸ ¿ Ü±©²¬±©² Î»ª·¬¿´·¦¿¬·±² Ô±¿² Ð®±¹®¿³ º«²¼ò ×² ¿¼¼·¬·±²ô ·²¬»®»¬ ±² ¼»¾¬ · ²±¬ ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²»ô ²±® · ¬¸» ®»º·²¿²½·²¹ ±º »¨·¬·²¹ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²»ò Downtown District Ì¸» ËÎß ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» °´¿² º±® ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ·² ïççè ¬± ·²½´«¼» ¿ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ ±º üíí ³·´´·±²ò Ì¸· üíí ³·´´·±² º·¹«®» ®»°®»»²¬ ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ³¿§ ½«³«´¿¬·ª»´§ °»²¼ ·² ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¬¿®¬·²¹ ·² ïççèò ß ±º ÚÇðçô ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ ±º üíí ³·´´·±² ¸¿ ²»¿®´§ ¾»»² º«´´§ °»²¬ ±® ½±³ó ³·¬¬»¼ô ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¾«´µ ¸¿ª·²¹ ¾»»² °»²¬ ±² ¾«·´¼·²¹ ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ´·¾®¿®§ò Ì¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º ®»³¿·²·²¹ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ¿¬ ¿²§ ¹·ª»² ¬·³» · ¿² »¬·³¿¬» ¾¿»¼ ±² ¾±¬¸ ¿½¬«¿´ ¸·¬±®·½ °»²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ »¬·³¿¬»¼ º«¬«®» ½±³³·¬³»²¬ò Ì¸» ½¸¿®¬ ±² ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ °¿¹» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¾¿´¿²½» ¿ ±º Ó¿®½¸ îððçæ Urban Renewal Agency Overview Downtown District Maximum Indebtedness Amount Amount Total Total SpentAmount Spent or Maximum Thru FY08 Committed Committed Indebtedness ü ·² ³·´´·±² Ì±¬¿´ Ó¿¨·³«³ ×²¼»¾¬»¼²» Ô·³·¬ üííòð Ô»æ Ô·¾®¿®§ Û¨°»²¼·¬«®» üîðòè üìòê üîëòì ñØÊÊûØÜÐoüÚÌÈÔÊÔÉÔÎÏïòè ðòí îòï ñØÊÊûØÜÐoúÎÏÊÉËÈÚÉÔÎÏÏÎÉÉÜÅÔÏÚËØÐØÏÉ×ÈÏÙÊóó óó óó Ô»æ ÉÙ Ð®±¶»½¬ óó ðòì ðòì Ô»æ Ü·¿³±²¼ Ð«®½¸¿» óó ðòí ðòí Ô»æ Ñ¬¸»® Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ ïòî ðòï ïòí Ô»æ ÔÎÝÍ Ý±³°®»¸»²·ª» Ð´¿² ðòï óó ðòï ïòð îòç Ô»æ Ü·¬®·½¬ ß¼³·²·¬®¿¬·±² ¬¸®« êñíðñïï ïòç Ô»æ ß³±«²¬ Í°»²¬ ±® Ý±³³·¬¬»¼ îëòè êòé íîòë Ë²½±³³·¬¬»¼ ß³±«²¬ üðòë ôÉØÐÊÔÏÉÕØmÜÐÎÈÏÉÚÎÐÐÔÉÉØÙlÚÎÑÈÐÏÜËØÉÕØËØÐÜ·²·²¹ ´·¾®¿®§ ¼»¾¬ °¿§³»²¬ ø°®·²½·°¿´ ±²´§÷ ¿ ©»´´ ¿ ¬¸» ÚÇðç ¿²¼ ÚÇïð ¾«¼¹»¬»¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®»ò ×² ¿¼¼·¬·±²ô ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ½±´«³² ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ½±¬ ±º ¿¼³·²·¬»®·²¹ ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬¸®±«¹¸ ÚÇïïô ¿ ¬¸» Þ»¿³ ¿²¼ ÉÙ °®±¶»½¬ ¿®» »¨°»½¬»¼ ¬± ¬·´´ ¾» ·² °®±¹®» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸¿¬ º·½¿´ §»¿®ò Ì¸» ÚÇïð ¾«¼¹»¬ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» «» ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º«²¼ º±® ¬¸» Þ»¿³ ¿²¼ ÉÙ °®±¶»½¬ò Ì¸» ÚÇïð ¾«¼¹»¬ ¸¿ ¾»»² ¾«·´¬ ¿«³·²¹ ¬¸±» °®±¶»½¬ ¼± ²±¬ ±½½«® ·² ÚÇðçô ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ®»¾«¼¹»¬»¼ º±® ¬¸» «°½±³·²¹ º·½¿´ §»¿®ò Ñ¬¸»® °®»ª·±« ½¿°·¬¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ·²½´«¼» ½±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸» Ñª»®°¿®µ ¬¿·®©¿§ô Ú¿®³»® Ó¿®µ»¬ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ô Ð¿®µ Þ´±½µ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ô Í»¿® ¾«·´¼ó ·²¹ ¼»³±´·¬·±² ¿²¼ É»¬ Þ®±¿¼©¿§ ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò ß½½±®¼·²¹ ¬± ¬¸» Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ð´¿²ô ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ °´¿² · ®»¯«·®»¼ ¬± «²¼»®¹± ¿ ®»ª·»© ÙÈËÔÏÖ ÜÏÙÉÕÜÉËØÇÔØÆÆÔÑÑmÚÎÏÊÔÙØËØÅÉØ²¼·²¹ ¬¸» ¼«®¿¬·±² ¾»§±²¼ îðîÅìÃô ³±¼·º§·²¹ ¬¸» ¾±«²¼¿®·»ô ³±¼·º§·²¹ ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²»ô ¿²¼ ³±¼·º§·²¹ »´·¹·¾´» °®±¶»½¬ ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ¬± ¾» ÈÏÙØËÉÜÒØÏÔÏÉÕØùÎÆÏÉÎÆÏèËÛÜÏëØÏØÆÜÑùÔÊÉËÔÚÉl ×º ¬¸¿¬ ®»ª·»© ®»«´¬ ·² ¿² ·²½®»¿» ·² ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» º·¹«®»ô ¬¸»² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ ©·´´ ½±²¬·²«» ¬± ½±´´»½¬ ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º«²¼ ·² º«¬«®» §»¿®ò ×º ¬¸¿¬ ®»ª·»© ¼±» ²±¬ ®»«´¬ ·² ¿² ·²½®»¿» ·² ¬¸» ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» º·¹«®»ô ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ©·´´ ¼·½±²¬·²«» ½±´´»½¬·±² ±º ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º«²¼ ¾»¹·²²·²¹ ·² ÚÇïïô ¿²¼ ¿²§ »¨½» ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º«²¼ ¬¸¿¬ ½¿²²±¬ ¾» °»²¬ «²¼»® ¬¸» ½«®®»²¬ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ ©·´´ ¾» ®»¬«®²»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ì¿¨ ß»±® º±® ¼·¬®·¾«¬·±² ¬± ¬¸» ±ª»®´¿°°·²¹ ¬¿¨·²¹ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Riverfront District Ì¸» ËÎß ¿³»²¼»¼ ¬¸» °´¿² º±® ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ·² îððì ¬± ·²½´«¼» ¿ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ´·³·¬ ±º üíìòè ³·´´·±²ò Ì¸· üíìòè ³·´´·±² º·¹«®» ®»°®»»²¬ ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ³¿§ ½«³«´¿¬·ª»´§ °»²¼ ·² ½»®¬¿·² ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¬¿®¬·²¹ ·² îððìò Ì¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ½¸¿®¬ »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ®»³¿·²·²¹ ·² ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ¿ ±º Ó¿®½¸ îððçò Ì¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ º«²¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² °»²¬ ±² °®±¶»½¬ «½¸ ¿ ½±«®¬¸±«» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ô Ý¸·¯«·¬¿ °®±°»®¬§ ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ô ¿²¼ «²¼»®¹®±«²¼·²¹ ±º «¬·´·¬·»ò Ì¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ½±²¬®·¾«¬»¼ ¿ °±®¬·±² ±º ¬¸» º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¬¸» Ô·¾®¿®§ô Î»½®»¿¬·±² ¿²¼ Ý«´¬«®¿´ Í»®ª·½» Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿²²·²¹ »ºº±®¬ò ×² ¿¼¼·¬·±²ô ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ °»²¬ ·²½´«¼» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¿¼³·²·¬®¿¬·±² ½±¬ò Ì¸» ¿³±«²¬ ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ®»°®»»²¬ ¬¸» ÚÇðç ¿²¼ ÚÇïð ¾«¼¹»¬»¼ »¨°»²¼·¬«®» °´« ¿² »¬·ó Urban Renewal Agency Overview ³¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ½±¬ º±® ¿¼³·²·¬»®·²¹ ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬»®³·²¿¬·±² §»¿®ò ×¬ ¸±«´¼ ¾» ²±¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿¨·³«³ ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ¼±» ²±¬ ·²½´«¼» ·²¼»¾¬»¼²» ·²½«®®»¼ ¾»º±®» ¬¸» °´¿² ¿³»²¼³»²¬ ©¿ °«¬ ·²¬± »ºº»½¬ò Riverfront District Maximum Indebtedness Amount Total Total Amount Spent Amount Spent or Maximum Thru FY08 Committed Committed Indebtedness ü ·² ³·´´·±² Ì±¬¿´ Ó¿¨·³«³ ×²¼»¾¬»¼²» Ô·³·¬ üíìòè Ô»æ Ü·¬®·½¬ ß¼³·² ¿²¼ Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ üïòî üëòï üêòì Ë²½±³³·¬¬»¼ ß³±«²¬ üîèòì Other Revenue Sources Ì¸» ´¿®¹»¬ ·²¹´» ®»ª»²«» ±«®½» ·² ³±¬ §»¿® º±® ¬¸» ¬©± ¼·¬®·½¬ · °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ®»ª»²«»ò Ì¸»®» ¿®»ô ¸±©»ª»®ô »ª»®¿´ ±¬¸»® ®»ª»²«» ±«®½» ¬¸¿¬ ½±²¬®·¾«¬» ¬± ÉÕØüÖØÏÚÄjÊÛÈÙÖØÉ : Loan Repayments ×² ÚÇðìô ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Î»ª·¬¿´·¦¿¬·±² Ô±¿² Ð®±¹®¿³ øÜÎÔÐ÷ ©¿ »¬¿¾´·¸»¼ ¬± »²½±«®¿¹» ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü·¬®·½¬ò Ð®·²½·°¿´ ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»¬ °¿§³»²¬ ¿®» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¬± ¾» ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üèðôððð ·² ÚÇïðò Rental Revenue: Ô»¿» ±º ËÎß ±©²»¼ °¿®µ·²¹ °¿½» ·² ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ©·´´ ¹»²»®¿¬» ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üîëôððð ·² ÚÇïðò Interest Income: ×²ª»¬³»²¬ »¿®²·²¹ ±² ½¿¸ ¾¿´¿²½» ¿®» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¬± ¾» üêêôððð ·² ÚÇïðò Expenditure Summary éÕØèËÛÜÏëØÏØÆÜÑüÖØÏÚÄjÊÍËÔÐÜËÄÖÎÜÑÔÊÉÎÍË±³±¬» ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò ×² ¼±·²¹ ±ô º«²¼ ¿®» »¨°»²¼»¼ ¿³±²¹ ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ¿½¬·ª·¬·»æ District Management: Ð®±³±¬·±² ±º ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ °®±¶»½¬ ¿²¼ ¹»²»®¿´ ±ª»®·¹¸¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ò Î»·³¾«®»³»²¬ ±º ¿¼³·²·¬®¿ÉÔÇØÚÎÊÉÊÉÎÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊöØÏØËÜÑ÷ÈÏÙ Debt Service: Ð®·²½·°¿´ ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»¬ °¿§³»²¬ ¬±©¿®¼ ¼»¾¬ ·«»¼ ¬± º«²¼ ¬¸» ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ³¿·² ´·¾®¿®§ò Loan Disbursements: Ú«²¼·²¹ ±º ²»© ÜÎÔÐ ´±¿² ¬± ¾«·²» ¿²¼ °®±°»®¬§ ±©²»®ô »²½±«®¿¹ó ·²¹ ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ·² ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ¼·¬®·½¬ò Capital Projects: Ð«¾´·½ °¿½» ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ ¿²¼ ·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®» »²¸¿²½»³»²¬ ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² ¿²¼ Î·ª»®º®±²¬ ¼·¬®·½¬ò Urban Renewal Agency Overview Description of Funds Ì¸» ¬©± «®¾¿² ®»²»©¿´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¸¿ª» »°¿®¿¬» ¾«¼¹»¬ ¿²¼ ¿½½±«²¬ º±® ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ·² »°¿®¿¬» º«²¼ò Ì¸»Ý»²¬®¿´ Û«¹»²» Ð®±¶»½¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ±°»®¿¬» ¬¸®»» º«²¼æ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ô ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü»¾¬ Í»®ª·½» Ú«²¼ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ú«²¼ò : URA-Downtown General Fund (Fund 817) Ì¸· º«²¼ ®»½»·ª» ®»ª»²«» º®±³ Ü±©²¬±©² Î»ª·¬¿´·¦¿¬·±² Ô±¿² Ð®±¹®¿³ øÜÎÔÐ÷ ®»°¿§³»²¬ ø°®·²½·°¿´ ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»¬ ±² ±«¬¬¿²¼·²¹ ´±¿²÷ô °®±°»®¬§ ¿´» ¿²¼ ´»¿»ô ·²¬»®»¬ ±² ½¿¸ ¾¿´¿²½» ¿²¼ ·²¬»®º«²¼ ¬®¿²º»® º®±³ ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü»¾¬ Í»®ª·½» º«²¼ò Ì¸»» ®»ª»²«» ¿®» «»¼ ¬±æ Ð®±ª·¼» º«²¼·²¹ º±® ÜÎÔÐ ´±¿² ¬± °®±°»®¬§ ±©²»® ·² ¬¸» ¼·¬®·½¬ ¾±«²¼¿®·» ëØÔÐÛÈËÊØÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊöØÏØËÜÑ÷ÈÏÙ×ÎËÙÔÊÉËÔÚÉÐÜÏÜÖØÐØÏÉÚÎÊÉÊ Ð¿§ ±¬¸»® ±°»®¿¬·²¹ ½±¬ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ °®±°»®¬§ ³¿²¿¹»³»²¬ »¨°»²» URA-Downtown Debt Service Fund (Fund 812): Ì¸· º«²¼ ®»½»·ª» ¿´´ ±º ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¿²¼ «» ¬¸±» ®»±«®½» ¬±æ Ð®±ª·¼» º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¬¸» °®·²½·°¿´ ¿²¼ ·²¬»®»ÊÉÍÜÄÐØÏÉÊÎÏÉÕØúÔÉÄjÊÑÔÛËÜËÄÙØÛÉ Ð®±ª·¼» º«²¼·²¹ ø¬¸®±«¹¸ ·²¬»®º«²¼ ¬®¿²º»®÷ ¬± ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ú«²¼ º±® °»½·º·½ ½¿°·¬¿´ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬ URA Downtown Capital Projects Fund (Fund 813): Ì¸· º«²¼ ¿½½±«²¬ º±® ½¿°·¬¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ·² ¬¸» Ü±©²¬±©² ¼·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» Ü±©²¬±©² Ü»¾¬ Í»®ª·½» Ú«²¼ ¬®¿²º»® ®»±«®½» ¬± °¿§ º±® °»½·º·½ô ¿°°®±ª»¼ ½¿°·¬¿´ »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ½¸¿®¹»¼ ¬± ¬¸· º«²¼ò Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ ½«®®»²¬´§ ±°»®¿¬» ¬©± º«²¼æ ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ ¿²¼ ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ú«²¼ò URA Riverfront General Fund (Fund 821): Ì¸· º«²¼ ®»½»·ª» ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ ¼·¬®·½¬ ¬¿¨ ·²½®»³»²¬ ®»ª»²«» ¿²¼ «» ¬¸±» ®»±«®½» ¬±æ Î»·³¾«®» ¬¸» Ý·¬§ù Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ º±® ¼·¬®·½¬ ³¿²¿¹»³»²¬ ½±¬ Ð¿§ ±¬¸»® ±°»®¿¬·²¹ ½±¬ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ °®±°»®¬§ ³¿²¿¹»³»²¬ »¨°»²» Ð®±ª·¼» º«²¼·²¹ ø¬¸®±«¹¸ ·²¬»®º«²¼ ¬®¿²º»®÷ ¬± ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ú«²¼ º±® °»½·º·½ ½¿°·¬¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ¿²¼ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ´±¿² URA Riverfront Debt Service Fund (Fund 822): Ì¸· º«²¼ ©¿ ½®»¿¬»¼ ¬± ³¿µ» °¿§³»²¬ ±² ¼»¾¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©¿ ¿²¬·½·°¿¬»¼ ¬± ¾» ·«»¼ º±® ¬¸» É¸±´» Ú±±¼ °®±¶»½¬ò É¸»² ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ¼·¼ ²±¬ ¹± º±®©¿®¼ô ¬¸· º«²¼ ©¿ ²± ´±²¹»® ²»»¼»¼ò URA Riverfront Capital Project Fund (Fund 823): Ì¸· º«²¼ ¿½½±«²¬ º±® ½¿°·¬¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ·² ¬¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ü·¬®·½¬ò Ì¸» Î·ª»®º®±²¬ Ù»²»®¿´ Ú«²¼ ¿²²«¿´´§ ¬®¿²º»® ®»±«®½» ¬± °¿§ º±® °»½·º·½ô ¿°°®±ª»¼ ½¿°·¬¿´ »¨°»²¼·¬«®» ½¸¿®¹»¼ ¬± ¬¸· º«²¼ò Urban Renewal Agency Net Budget Detail The Urban Renewal Agency's FY10 total proposed net budget is $20.17 million, an increase of 3.3% over the previous year. The net budget is a more realistic picture of Urban Renewal Agency finances ecause this budget subtracts internal charges, transfers, and loans. b The budget is divided into two categories: Operating (department budgets, including internal charges) and Non-Departmental (Debt Service, Capital Budget, Miscellaneous Fiscal Transactions, Contingencies/Reserves, and Internal Transfers and Loans). Net department operating expenditures across all funds are anticipated to grow by 44.2% in FY10. The total budget is the legal appropriation adopted by the Agency Board. The total budget reflects the actual resources needed by the agency plus internal charges, transfers, and loans in accordance with State Local Budget Law (ORS 294) and accounting requirements. For more details on the changes, see the Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance. FY09FY09FY10% Change FY08Budget*Budget**ProposedFY09 07/01/08 Actual07/01/0812/31/08BudgetFY10 Proposed Total Budget7,208,46019,858,30924,370,53920,945,7635.5% Less Internal Expenditures/Transfers/Loan(1,765,904)(332,000)(332,000) (772,000)132.5% s 5,442,55619,526,30924,038,53920,173,7633.3% Net Budget Resources: Beginning Working Capital9,821,5669,832,30910,953,60910,385,7635.6% Revenues: Property Taxe4,436,6192,540,0002,540,0002,415,000-4.9% s Other Taxes1,146000- Intergovernmenta1,196,1146,700,00010,090,9306,700,0000.0% l Charges for Services/Renta25,44327,00027,00027,0000.0% l Miscellaneous578,581372,000372,000596,00060.2% Interfund Transfers/Loan1,765,904332,000332,000772,000132.5% s Principal on Notes/Assessments42,99255,00055,00050,000-9.1% Total Revenue8,046,79910,026,00013,416,93010,560,000 5.3% Less Interfund Transfers/Loan(1,765,904)(332,000)(332,000) (772,000)132.5% s 6,280,8959,694,00013,084,9309,788,0001.0% Net Revenues Net Resources16,102,46119,526,30924,038,53920,173,7633.3% Requirements: Department Department Operating804,248874,000874,0001,260,00044.2% Net Department Operating804,248874,000874,0001,260,00044.2% Non-Departmental Capital1,340,24003,090,2320- Interfund Transfers/Loan1,765,904332,000332,000772,000132.5% s Miscellaneous Fiscal Transactions3,298,06711,247,28311,698,50011,522,9062.5% Contingency/Reserves02,500,0002,500,0000-100.0% UEFB/Balance Available04,905,0265,875,8077,390,85750.7% Total Non-Departmental6,404,21118,984,30923,496,53919,685,7633.7% Less Interfund Transfers/Loan(1,765,904)(332,000)(332,000) (772,000)132.5% s Net Non-Departmenta4,638,30818,652,30923,164,53918,913,7631.4% l Net Requirements5,442,55619,526,30924,038,53920,173,7633.3% * Less reserves of prior year funds for prior year commitments and prior year Capital carryover. ** Includes changes from December 2008 Supplemental Budget Urban Renewal Agency Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance All Governmental Fund Tpes, Three-Year Comparison y Central Eugene Project(a)Riverfront Urban Renewal District(a) FY09FY09 FY08ExperienceFY10FY08ExperienceFY10 ActualEstimatesProposedActualEstimatesProposed Revenues Taxes$3,781,540$1,820,000$1,730,000$656,225$665,000$685,000 (e)(i) Intergovernmental195,0003,390,9306,700,0001,001,11400 Rental00025,29825,00025,000 Charges for Services14502,000000 Miscellaneous468,645300,500568,000109,93763,00028,000 (b) Interfund Transfers 1,611,800332,000772,000154,10400 (c) Other Financing Sources 42,99240,00050,000000 Total$6,100,122$5,883,430$9,822,000$1,946,678 $753,000$738,000 Operating Expenditures Planning and Development$619,819$352,562$972,000$184,429$249,700$288,000 Total$619,819$352,562$972,000$184,429$249,700$288,000 Capital Projects$1,331,740$2,879,314(f)$0$8,500$210,918(j)$0 Non-Departmental Expenditures Debt Service$0$0$0$0$0$0 (b) Interfund Transfers 1,611,800332,000772,000154,10400 (d) Misc. Fiscal Transactions278,134807,2829,049,156000 (g) Intergovernmental Exp.(h) 3,019,9332,372,5002,473,750000 Total$4,909,867$3,511,782$12,294,906$154,104$0$0 Total Expenditures$6,861,426$6,743,658$13,266,906$347,033$460,618$288,000 Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures($761,304)($860,228)($3,444,906)$1,599,645$292,382$450,000 Fund Balance Beginning of Year$9,364,406$8,603,100$7,742,872(j)$750,865$2,350,509$2,642,891(k) Fund Balance End of Year$8,603,102$7,742,872 $4,297,966$2,350,510$2,642,891$3,092,891 (a)For individual budgets, see pages G.17 to G.22. (b)Internal URA transfers to fund capital projects and administrative costs. FY08 includes transfer to pay costs related to West Broadway property purchases. FY10 includes transfer related to redevelopment of 10th Avenue and Charnelton Street site. (c)Downtown Revitalization Loan Program loan principal repayments. (d)FY10 includes $6.5 million for a construction loan to Beam Development from HUD Section 108 Loan and BEDI Grant funds. Remainder is Downtown Revitalization Loan Program loan disbursements. (e)FY09 includes HUD 108 Loan and BEDI Grant proceeds to purchase Center Court and Washburne buildings. These building were sold to Beam Development for redevelopment. (f)Includes purchasing Centre Court and Washburne buildings, purchase of the Diamond parking lot, and predevelopment costs for the 10th Avenue and Charnelton Street site. (g)URA contribution toward City library debt service obligation. (h)Includes transfer of $640,000 to City for debt reserve for HUD 108 loan related to Beam property purchase. (i)URA contribution toward purchase of East Broadway parking garage was made in FY06 and returned in FY08. (j)Riverfront capital project funding consisting of prior year capital carryover of $210,918 for redevelopment in the Courthouse District area. (k)Includes prior year capital carryover. Urban Renewal Agency Resources/Requirements Summary By Fund DepartmentalCapitalNon- FUND AND SOURCEResourcesOperatingProjectsDepartmental Downtown General Fund$10,071,156$972,000$0$9,099,156 Downtown Debt Service Fund7,445,506007,445,506 Downtown Capital Projects Fund48,2100048,210 Riverfront General Fund3,367,487288,00003,079,487 Riverfront Capital Projects Fund13,4040013,404 Total Amount of Budget 20,945,7631,260,000019,685,763 $$$$ Urban Renewal Agency URA Downtown General Fund (817) To account for non-property tax revenues, the Downtown Revitalization Loan program, and administrative expenditures of the Urban Renewal Agency in the Central Eugene Project District. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Revenues: Intergovernmental0143,9586,700,0007,308,1906,700,000 Charges for Services2,4601452,0002,0002,000 Miscellaneous120,857104,73579,00079,000549,000 Total Revenue 123,317248,8386,781,0007,389,1907,251,000 Other Interfund Transfers372,257619,800332,000332,000772,000 Principal on Notes and Loans37,16342,99255,00055,00050,000 Beginning Working Capital1,993,3142,108,9212,223,7832,066,8101,998,156 Total Other 2,402,7342,771,7132,610,7832,453,8102,820,156 Total Resources2,526,0513,020,5519,391,7839,843,00010,071,156 Requirements: Department Operating Planning and Development372,275619,820532,000532,000972,000 Total Department Operating 372,275619,820532,000532,000972,000 Non-Departmental Balance Available0050,00050,00050,000 Miscellaneous Fiscal Transactions216,250278,1348,809,7839,261,0009,049,156 Total Non-Departmental 216,250278,1348,859,7839,311,0009,099,156 Total Requirements588,525897,9549,391,7839,843,00010,071,156 URA Downtown Debt Service Fund (812) To account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of indebtedness of the Urban Renewal Agency - Central Eugene Project district. The debt service is primarily financed by property taxes. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Revenues: Taxes3,679,5663,781,5401,925,0001,925,0001,730,000 Miscellaneous376,023355,779219,000219,00019,000 Total Revenue 4,055,5894,137,3192,144,0002,144,0001,749,000 Other Beginning Working Capital6,493,0686,493,0685,596,7446,379,5065,696,506 Total Other 6,493,0686,493,0685,596,7446,379,5065,696,506 Total Resources10,548,65710,630,3877,740,7448,523,5067,445,506 Requirements: Non-Departmental Interfund Transfers1,233,1941,611,800332,000332,000772,000 Reserves002,500,0002,500,0000 Balance Available002,471,2443,254,0064,199,756 Intergovernmental Expenditures 2,441,5423,019,9332,437,5002,437,5002,473,750 Total Non-Departmental 3,674,7364,631,7337,740,7448,523,5067,445,506 Total Requirements3,674,7364,631,7337,740,7448,523,5067,445,506 URA Downtown Capital Projects Fund (813) To account for costs of constructing and improving capital facilities in the Urban Renewal Downtown District. Financing is provided by transfers from the Downtown General Fund and interest on investments. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Other Interfund Transfers860,937992,000000 Intergovernmental051,04202,782,7400 Miscellaneous18,7578,13116,00016,0000 Beginning Working Capital004,913,791156,78448,210 Total Other 879,6941,051,1734,929,7912,955,52448,210 Total Resources879,6941,051,1734,929,7912,955,52448,210 Requirements: Total Capital Projects 442,3421,331,7404,901,7912,879,3140 Non-Departmental Balance Available0028,00076,21048,210 Total Non-Departmental 0028,00076,21048,210 Total Requirements442,3421,331,7404,929,7912,955,52448,210 URA Riverfront General Fund (821) To account for tax increment revenues received for the Riverfront Urban Renewal District. Resources are used for improving the condition and appearance of the Riverfront District. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Revenues: Taxes588,902656,225615,000615,000685,000 Intergovernmental0851,114000 Rental25,29825,29825,00025,00025,000 Miscellaneous22,101100,53352,00052,00026,000 Total Revenue 636,3011,633,170692,000692,000736,000 Other Interfund Transfers0154,104000 Beginning Working Capital51,483421,3741,992,7822,131,1872,631,487 Total Other 51,483575,4781,992,7822,131,1872,631,487 Total Resources687,7842,208,6482,684,7822,823,1873,367,487 Requirements: Department Operating Planning and Development134,441184,429342,000342,000288,000 Total Department Operating 134,441184,429342,000342,000288,000 Non-Departmental Balance Available002,342,7822,481,1873,079,487 Intergovernmental Expenditures25,0000000 Total Non-Departmental 25,00002,342,7822,481,1873,079,487 Total Requirements159,441184,4292,684,7822,823,1873,367,487 URA Riverfront Debt Service Fund (822) To account for transfers from the Riverfront General Fund that are used to provide funding for the principal and interest payments on debt and to hold debt reserves. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Revenues: Miscellaneous10,3110000 Total Revenue 10,3110000 Other Beginning Working Capital151,025154,104000 Total Other 151,025154,104000 Total Resources161,336154,104000 Requirements: Non-Departmental Interfund Transfers0154,104000 Debt Service7,2330000 Total Non-Departmental 7,233154,104000 Total Requirements7,233154,104000 URA Riverfront Capital Projects Fund (823) To account for costs of constructing and improving capital facilities in the Urban Renewal Riverfront District. Financing is provided by transfers from the Riverfront General Fund and interest on investments. FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY09 BudgetFY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Resources: Revenues: Intergovernmental0150,000000 Miscellaneous4,4439,4046,0006,0002,000 Total Revenue 4,4439,4046,0006,0002,000 Other Beginning Working Capital65,317510,671226,418219,32211,404 Total Other 65,317510,671226,418219,32211,404 Total Resources69,760520,075232,418225,32213,404 Requirements: Total Capital Projects 1,3428,500219,418210,9180 Non-Departmental Balance Available0013,00014,40413,404 Total Non-Departmental 0013,00014,40413,404 Total Requirements1,3428,500232,418225,32213,404 Urban Renewal Agency Non-Departmental Expenditure Summary by District and Fund FY07FY08FY09FY09FY10 ActualActual7/1/200812/31/2008Proposed Balance Available Downtown District General Fund $0*$0*$50,000$50,000$50,000 Capital Projects Fund 0*0*28,00076,21048,210 Debt Service Fund0*0*2,471,2443,254,0064,199,756 Riverfront District General Fund 0*0*2,342,7822,481,1873,079,487 Capital Projects Fund 0*0*13,00014,40413,404 TOTAL$0$0$4,905,026$5,875,807$7,390,857 Debt Service Riverfront District Debt Service Fund$7,233$0$0$0$0 TOTAL$7,233$0$0$0$0 Interfund Transfers Downtown District Debt Service Fund$1,233,194$1,611,800$332,000$332,000$772,000 Riverfront District Debt Service Fund0154,104000 TOTAL$1,233,194$1,765,904$332,000$332,000$772,000 Intergovernmental Expenditures Downtown District Debt Service Fund$2,441,542$3,019,933$2,437,500$2,437,500$2,473,750 Riverfront District General Fund 25,0000000 TOTAL$2,466,542$3,019,933$2,437,500$2,437,500$2,473,750 Miscellaneous Fiscal Transactions Downtown District General Fund $216,250$278,134$8,809,783$9,261,000$9,049,156 TOTAL$216,250$278,134$8,809,783$9,261,000$9,049,156 Reserves Downtown District Debt Service Fund$0*$0*$2,500,000$2,500,000$0 TOTAL$0$0$2,500,000$2,500,000$0 Total$3,923,219$5,063,971$18,984,309$20,406,307$19,685,763 *No historical data appears since expenditures are not recorded against this account. Urban Renewal Agency Interfund Transfers Financial Summary All Funds FY07FY08FY09FY09FY10 URATransferDetail ActualActual7/1/0812/31/08Proposed From URA Debt Service Fund To URA General Fund $372,257$619,800$332,000$332,000$772,000 To URA Capital Projects Fund 860,937992,000000 TOTAL $1,233,194$1,611,800$332,000$332,000$772,000 From URA Riverfront Debt Service Fund To URA Riverfront General Fund $0$154,104$0$0$0 TOTAL $0$154,104$0$0$0 Urban Renewal Agency Legal Expenses FY07FY08FY09 BudgetFY10 Fund ActualActual12/31/08Proposed Downtown General Fund$52,356120,819235,000285,000 Riverfront General Fund3,21319,70335,00035,000 Total Civil Expenses$55,569$140,522$270,000$320,000 ATTACHMENT C Downtown Urban Renewal: Case Studies Project: Downtown Athletic Club (DAC) Summary: , In the 1970sThe URA acquired the former Ax Billy Department Store building which was built in 1909. The building was mostly vacant and scheduled for demolition. The URA issued an RFQ and selected the DAC proposal. The URA sold the property in 1985 for its appraised value ($213,000), and also provided gap financing in the amount of $150,000 for the renovation. CDBG loan funds in the amount of $300,000 were also used for the initial renovation. Outcome: The Ax Billy building is on the National Register of Historic Places. The DAC is one of the most significant anchors downtown, employing 150 individuals and drawing club members and event visitors to the core of downtown daily. The presence of the DAC is also an attractive amenity for office uses downtown. All financing provided for the DAC project has been repaid in full. Property tax revenue on the property was $3,570 in 1984. Since the historic tax exemption expired in 2005, the DAC properties have paid $375,000 in property taxes. Project: Eugene Public Library Summary: The URA purchased the former Sears property in 1993 for $875,000, which included the land on which the Library was built. The URA contributed the land to the City for the project. The total URA contribution in the amount of $24.6 million represented 68% of the capital cost for the new Library. Outcome: The Library is a major destination and activity generator for downtown, drawing visitors in the thousands every day. The Library is also a significant architectural landmark and cultural attraction that will anchor the west end of downtown for many years into the future. ATTACHMENT C Tiffany Building Project: Summary: Built in the late 1800s, the Tiffany Building was severely damaged by a 1986 fire. The unhabitable structure sat vacant for over 5 years and the improvements had an assessed value of only $500. In 1991, the URA provided gap financing in the amount of $350,000 for the renovation of the building. Outcome: The Tiffany Building is on the National Register of Historic Places. The renovation project included the creation of 18 new downtown housing units. Prior to the renovation, it had been several years since any new housing units were developed in the downtown core. The immediate market success of the Tiffany Building apartments played a major role in stimulating other downtown housing, including Broadway Place and High Street Terrace. The project has also attracted successful, local retailers. Financing provided for the project has been repaid in full. Since the historic tax exemption expired in 2005, the Tiffany Building property has paid over $55,000 in property taxes. ATTACHMENT C Project: U.S. Bank Building th Summary: The URA assembled the half-block along 8 Avenue between Willamette and Olive Streets. The URA issued an RFP for the site and sold the property in 1993 for $688,000. The U.S. Bank Commercial Center office building was constructed which includes ground floor retail along Willamette Street. Outcome: The U.S. Bank building is a major commercial office anchor and employment generator for downtown. The project positively responded to the City’s goal to create density in the core. Previously used as a surface parking lot generating limited tax revenue, the U.S. Bank property currently generates $194,000 in annual property tax revenue. Project: Lane Transit District Downtown Eugene Station Summary: , t In 1989he URA and Lane Transit District initiated a study to site a new off-street downtown transit station to replace the on-street station. Two quarter-block, URA-owned surface parking lots were sold to LTD for the new station. The LTD agreement required the loss of surface parking to be mitigated. URA funds totaling $2.2 million were used to help construction of the Pearl Street parking structure and make elevator and access improvements for the Overpark parking structure. Outcome: The LTD Downtown Eugene Station offers an alternative transportation option for downtown visitors and employees. It is a significant amenity that will support the City’s goal for dense commercial, residential, educational, and cultural development. In 2008, LTD ridership surpassed 11 million boardings. With the addition and future expansion of the EmEx line, the Downtown Eugene Station will continue to be the major transportation hub and a significant activity generator downtown. ATTACHMENT C Project: Broadway Place Summary: The URA assembled the two half-blocks that were used to develop the Broadway Place mixed-use project. The URA conveyed the properties, previously surface parking lots, to the City for construction of two parking structures. URA funds in the amount of $2.6 million were contributed to the parking structure construction costs. The City sold development rights for housing to be constructed on top of the parking structures. Outcome: The Broadway Place mixed-use project includes 170 apartment units, ground floor commercial space, and 740 structured parking spaces. It has become a major anchor for the west end of downtown and a popular residential destination with very low vacancy rates. The Broadway Place development received the 1999 Governor’s Livability Award. The property’s Multi-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) will expire in FY10, and the property will begin to generate significant new property tax revenue in FY11. Hult Center/Hilton Hotel/Conference Center Project: Summary: In 1978, voters supported an $18.5 million general obligation bond issue to finance the Hult Center construction, which was built on URA property that was donated to the project. In 1980, the URA sold the adjacent property to the Hilton developers, the construction of which was financed privately. In 1980, the URA issued urban renewal bonds in the amount of $2,040,000 to finance the parking structure upon which the Conference Center was built. In 1981, certificates of participation in the amount of $6,920,000 were sold in order to construct the Conference Center. Urban renewal tax increment, primarily new property taxes generated from the Hilton construction, was used to repay the certificates of participation. The market analysis for the hotel development clearly indicated that the Hilton project would not have been economically feasible without the support of the conference center activity and the shared parking. Outcome: The Hult Center, Hilton Hotel and Conference Center together are considered to be one of the most important anchors downtown. The Hult Center, regarded as the finest performing arts venue between Portland and San Francisco, hosts over 700 events per year which draw thousands of visitors. The Hilton Hotel ATTACHMENT C and Conference Center also bring thousands of visitors to the downtown core daily which supports local downtown business activity. The debt for the conference center was completely paid off using tax increment revenues. The Hilton property generates over $124,000 in annual property tax revenue. Project: Downtown Art Summary: URA funds have traditionally been used to place new art downtown. When Willamette Street was reopened in 1996, URA provided $75,000 for art including the Four Seasons sculptures. The URA has also commissioned art pieces placed downtown, including the nature sculpture located on Olive Street near the corner of Broadway and the animal sculptures featured along Broadway. Outcome: Downtown art reinforces downtown’s role as the cultural center for the community, enhances the pedestrian experience, and creates landmarks that identify arts districts downtown. ATTACHMENT C Project: Full City Coffee Summary: In 1990, the URA made a $10,000 loan to help establish Full City Coffee at its Pearl Street location. As a start-up business with limited capital, the project required URA assistance to fund tenant improvements for the new coffee shop. Outcome: Full City Coffee has established itself as a retail and social destination, helping create local flavor and identity in the downtown core. The URA financing has been repaid in full. ATTACHMENT E Draft Public Involvement Plan Goal Ensure that residents, property owners, businesses, and other interested parties have convenient opportunities to become fully informed about the proposed downtown projects and to provide input on the decision-making process. Objectives ? By October 2009, stakeholders will have a clear understanding of the proposed projects and the amendment process. ? Multiple strategies for involving the public will result in a broad range of comments received and recorded prior to Council action. Key Audiences ? Eugene voters ? Downtown residents and the Downtown Neighborhood Association ? Arts community (Lord Leebrick, DIVA, McDonald Theatre, WOW Hall, etc.) ? Business community (Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Eugene Inc., Downtown Merchants Association etc.) ? Neighborhood Leaders and Associations ? Eugene 4J School Board and Lane ESD ? Lane County Board of Commissioners ? Veterans organizations ? Saturday and Farmers’ Market vendors and patrons ? Lane Community College ? Elected and Appointed Officials ? Local media Strategies ? Two public forums in August and September to share information and collect comments. ? Public hearing with City Council ? Public notice sent with information about the proposed changes, the public hearing, and the availability of information on the City website. ? Event outreach to share information and collect comments at the Eugene Celebration, Saturday Market and Farmers’ Market. ? A City website to share information and collect public feedback on proposed projects and urban renewal issues. A Frequently Asked Questions section will be maintained an updated based on feedback received via the internet or at other outreach events. ? Paid media ads in the Register Guard and Eugene Weekly to promote the public forums, public hearing and the website. ? Press releases to provide information on proposed projects and promote the public forums, public hearing and the website. ? Articles submitted to Neighborhood newsletters and other key audience newsletters to provide information on proposed projects and promote the public forums, public hearing and the website. ? The draft public involvement plan will be referred to the Planning Commission for its review. The comments, suggestions, and amendments of the Planning Commission will be incorporated into the final public involvement plan. Implementation AUGUST 2009 SEPTEMBER 2009 ?? Official Notice, ERAC meeting (July) Public Hearing at Council Meetings, ? Taxing districts notice Hearings ? Public notice mailing ? Planning Commission meeting ?? Event outreach Outreach and information sharing at Outreach and information sharing at Saturday & Farmers’ Markets Eugene Celebration stnd ?? 1 Public forum – in collaboration 2 Public forum with ERAC nd ?? Website Launch website to provide Announce 2 Public forum information about proposed projects ? Announce Public Hearing st ? Announce 1 Public forum ? Continue to collect online feedback ? Create a feedback site to receive and comments public input and questions ? Maintain and update FAQs ? Post FAQs ? Post presentations and links ?? Media Register Guard & Eugene Weekly Register Guard & Eugene Weekly ads to promote events/forums and ads to promote forum, hearing and website website ?? Press releases to over 20 Press releases to over 20 community community media resources to media resources to provide provide information and promote information and promote events events ? Ordinance public hearing notice in ? Articles submitted to Neighborhood newspaper runs for 10 days prior to newsletters to promote forums, hearing hearings and website ATTACHMENT F Example Level of Project Information Park Blocks Improvements & Local Business Assistance 1.Park Blocks Improvements – project information Estimated Item Cost* Lighting Imp. $ 400,000 Traffic & Street Imp. $ 80,000 Restrooms $ 420,000 Art & Water $ 150,000 Covered Stage $ 300,000 Water, Power, Landscaping $ 50,000 Park Blocks Total $1,400,000 * General estimates in current dollars based on costs of similar projects. The Park Blocks are Eugene’s historic town square and were included in the original city plat. They provide a quiet place for downtown employees to have lunch, a focal point for small and large celebrations, and a home for two important Eugene institutions: Saturday Market and Farmers’ Market. Some of the Park Blocks infrastructure is old and inadequate for today’s needs. The Park Blocks Master Plan was developed in 2006 with the involvement of a broad range of stakeholders. The Plan identifies a series of recommended improvements. Some have been implemented while others were delayed pending available funding. The following projects are identified in the Master Plan but have not yet been fully implemented: 1.Lighting Improvements Improved lighting would enhance energy efficiency and safety. New lighting could include historic fixtures. 2.Traffic Management & Street Improvements th Creating curb bulbs along 8 Avenue would result in safer pedestrian crossings. Creating curb-less streets on portions of the block face along Park Street could aid both Farmers’ Market and Saturday Market. 3.Restrooms There is an ongoing demand for safe, accessible public restrooms downtown. Saturday Market and Farmers’ Market regularly rent portables. Designing and constructing restrooms that meet current standards for access, safety and durability would provide long-term community benefits and would be welcomed by visitors, businesses and customers. The cost estimate in the table above is based on a free standing, above ground facility with two fixtures on each side. 4.Art & Water Art features, if commissioned from prominent national or regional artists, could increase the cost but provide additional benefits. Interactive art, possibly in the form of an at-grade fountain (an example is in EWEB’s River’s Edge Plaza) could become popular with children and a focal point at times when the Market is closed. 5.Covered Stage The raised sidewalk area on the eastern park block could be an improved covered performance stage area for the Saturday Market and other special events if the current roof structure is replaced. A new cover could also be designed to accommodate performance lighting. Currently the roof only covers park benches and is not ideally situated for the Saturday Market or other events at the Parks Blocks. 6.Water, Power & Landscaping Other Park Blocks projects related to landscaping (particularly with native species) and service improvements to assist the Farmers’ Market and Saturday Market with additional power or water may be identified in the future. HOW Improvements would be managed by the City’s Facilities Division in consultation with key stakeholders including Lane County and the two markets. Street improvements would be managed by Public Works Engineers. The Downtown Urban Renewal District boundary would need to be expanded through a plan amendment to fund projects on the eastern Park Block. WHEN Projects would be prioritized over a an estimated five to seven year period depending on the Facilities Division’s work load and funding availability. 2.Local Business Assistance – project information Estimated Item Cost* Building Improvements $ 1,100,000 Steam Conversion $ 1,425,000 Other Green Upgrades $ 100,000 Local Business Assistance Total $ 2,000,000 Avg. Annual Expenditure $ 142,900 * General estimates in current dollars based on costs of similar projects. Local businesses and employers are vital to a thriving and productive downtown and could benefit from urban renewal assistance to locate downtown and enhance offerings of goods and services. Urban Renewal funds can support a multi-faceted, proactive approach to make downtown livelier, safer, and more inviting. Enabling the projects described below will also provide much needed near- and long-term employment opportunities. Specifically, local businesses and employers could benefit from and have expressed a need for: 1.Building Improvements Both interior and exterior improvements including entrances, windows, awnings and signage enhance the pedestrian experience, make spaces more amenable to business activities, increase marketability of spaces, and attract more interest. The pictures above show the exterior improvements made to One East Broadway that were completed in 2005. 2.Steam Conversion Steam infrastructure is aging and will be obsolete in a few years. Currently, 23 privately owned buildings are on steam within the Downtown District. (Lane Council of Governments also has two buildings on steam in the Downtown District.) EWEB plans to decommission steam service within two to five years. The City is pursuing opportunities to convert city-owned buildings to high efficiency gas. Although operating cost and energy savings are available from converting from steam, the cost of conversion is quite significant. (The estimated cost for converting the 25 non- City buildings is $2.85 million.) Additionally, whenever a customer converts from steam the price of operating on steam increases for the remaining customers. It would, therefore, be cost efficient to convert all users from steam simultaneously. 3.Other Green Upgrades In addition to steam conversion, other green upgrades could decrease occupancy costs and improve the appeal of downtown buildings. EWEB promotes energy efficiency by offering business customers rebates and a streamlined way to replace existing lighting systems, equipment, and windows with energy efficient products. Some of EWEB’s offerings could be matched with urban renewal resources to increase the number of upgrades completed in the downtown core. Example for building improvements, green upgrades & steam conversion: The new owner of a commercial building within the Downtown District is exploring opportunities for improvements. Specifically, the owner is interested in adding new signage, installing skylight tubes to make currently vacant space more appealing for potential tenants, converting from steam to natural gas, replacing the multi-zone heating and cooling system, replacing the roof and potentially including a portion with a green garden, and improving the window shading on one side to optimize solar gain and loss. The approximate total cost is $400,000 with the resulting energy savings estimated to reduce the annual energy cost by half, a savings of about $50,000 per year. The benefits of the improvements are obvious and yet obtaining financing for the improvements is difficult in these economic times. HOW Create a matching grants program for building owners or tenants for building improvements, green upgrades, and steam conversion. Urban renewal funds would be matched dollar for dollar with private investment in other building improvements occurring at the same time. HOW MUCH 1.Building Improvements: Interior and exterior improvements estimated at $100 per square foot will support approximately seven projects. Awnings and signage estimated at $300 per foot will support awnings and signage on approximately nine block faces. 2.Steam Conversion: The cost range for conversion is $2.70 to $7.00 per square foot. EWEB has estimated a cost of $2.85 million to convert the 25 non-City buildings within the Downtown District. 3.Other Green Upgrades: The financial details of this item depend on the types of upgrades that EWEB and business and building owners deem appropriate. Given the magnitude of the steam conversion item cost and energy savings, a small amount was allocated to other green upgrades. WHEN The matching grants program could be made available immediately and would operate on an ongoing basis until the funds are depleted or FY24, whichever comes first. ATTACHMENT G Draft Timeline Urban Renewal Plan Amendment Substantial Plan Amendment Process: The need for a “substantial amendment” to the district’s plan is determined by Oregon Statute and the district’s plan. Certain types of substantial amendments require a special City-wide notice. These substantial amendments include: Changes in the maximum indebtedness; and o Expansion of the district boundaries by more than 1% o A draft timeline with key dates is provided below. July 16 Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee (ERAC) discussion and recommendation to staff Aug 10Urban Renewal Agency Board work session on amendments Aug 14 Notification of taxing districts Aug 19 Postcard to the general public – include hearing date and web address for more information Aug 24 Planning Commission review and comment Sept 16Urban Renewal Agency Board work session to review comments from effected taxing jurisdictions Sept 21City Council Public Hearing on Ordinance Amending Plan Oct 12Council Action on Ordinance to amend the Plan th Nov 12 Ordinance becomes law (30 day following approval)