[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6662476,"mediaKeyId","3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7","parentId",3588838,"title","Council backs competitive grant approach for managed resting site and navigation services; staff to return with draft and public forum","audioSeconds",3534,"startMs",5676000,"endMs",9210000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7&start=5676&end=9210","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7/thumbnail_5676000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6662476/Grants-Pass-City/Josephine-County/Oregon/Council-backs-competitive-grant-approach-for-managed-resting-site-and-navigation-services-staff-to-return-with-draft-and-public-forum","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6662476-52e0369cba1e91abfbf172c690f23a19/orig.mp4?Expires=1771198188&Signature=d4qOzVZz8r2XX8nLqChmSCFuM~HtIttTFIKWdIJbi3C66A21bp8rdxt9djiVERGEw6sOjjDvmFmmIdrDHj2WXw~2KKE0xZTTnCcEgdQEC-73Z0Oal1oasf~rwCCH18p0QqzyFIAyS9b1dYy9DKBOZmBaxRz4w22sAleEH5mXr5GufRQ~bHHigGoNWFpzlFoMeJSQVWv8RLBANBil5EM2BzVTpc6TJTGKb331BMjjqMMm8wTjiCP8uPgHEr-z5OVRV2tL7w8P~Nc2JcTkdbhkIULzIA7NPtFnSGDwk3rwG1~C9uLEdiPkEs3OKDnrVsLVOrj9TXx3hNn7XxaHXw3OCA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Grants Pass, OR","date","2025-05-21T16:30:14.46Z","article","Councilors directed staff to draft a competitive grant program to fund one or more community proposals to provide managed resting sites and navigation services for people experiencing homelessness, a city staff attorney said after a presentation of options.

Stephanie (city attorney) framed the options and legal risks, saying a competitive grant process would minimize city liability compared with purchasing or leasing property directly or giving a single noncompetitive grant. She described elements council would need to decide: the city’s objective (for example, whether the primary goal is to remove people from city property, reduce homelessness overall, or expand services), who may apply (nonprofits, businesses or partnerships), allowed uses of city funds (capital costs, acquisitions, operations), award structure (reimbursement, advance, milestone payments), required performance measures, and timelines. She said the city must set objective measures of success and build recovery provisions in case a provider fails to meet obligations.

Key features discussed by council and staff included: limiting city funding primarily to capital (purchase/lease and infrastructure) rather than open‑ended operational subsidies; requiring applicants to demonstrate a path to long‑term operations and other funding sources; and using milestones and reimbursements to protect public dollars. Staff and the city manager recommended a transparent, competitive process that would invite multiple proposals and weigh experience, partnerships and financial sustainability.

Council action and schedule: Councilor Victoria moved and Councilor Rick seconded a motion directing staff to develop a draft competitive grant program and return to council in a workshop; the motion passed by consensus (Victoria yes; Eric yes; Rick yes; Kathleen yes; Rob yes; Joel yes; Seth yes; Indra yes). Staff said they will prepare a draft for the June 2 workshop, provide the draft to council in advance for comment, then host a public forum about the draft roughly one week after the workshop to collect public feedback before finalizing any program. JC (finance staff) will prepare fiscal scenarios and a memo on likely funding levels and impacts to support the council’s later decisions.

Council members asked staff to include specific matters in the draft: minimum site capacity or range of capacities (council discussed 50 as an example and noted a local judge previously referenced 150 as an “objectively reasonable” number), definitions for terms such as “low‑barrier” and “navigation center,” proof of experience and partnerships, documentation showing how applicants would minimize neighborhood impacts, and performance metrics (for example, transitions to permanent housing, shelter occupancy and outreach outcomes).

Staff emphasized this would be a hypothesis‑driven draft to solicit community feedback and that no grant awards or property acquisitions would occur until council adopts a final program in open session. Stephanie said that even with a well‑designed program there is no guarantee the city will be able to close all unmanaged sites; court guidance remains unsettled. Council members asked that staff include recovery clauses, deed restrictions or other tools to protect public investment if a grantee stops providing the promised services.

Why it matters: The directive launches a public, competitive process to identify local organizations that can operate managed resting sites and navigation services and is intended to reduce unmanaged camping on city property while minimizing city legal and financial exposure.

Next steps: Staff will produce a draft RFP/grant program and circulate it to council for comment, present it at a June 2 workshop, then hold a public forum about the draft approximately one week later; JC will provide fiscal options and a memo on possible funding caps and sources.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Grants Pass City Council Workshop February 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","To reduce unmanaged camping and comply with state rules, council directed staff to develop a competitive grant program that would fund site acquisition/infrastructure for a managed resting site and navigation center; staff will return with a draft for a June workshop and hold a public forum.","taxTitle","Grants Pass City, Josephine County, Oregon","taxId",48732,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6662481,"Council requests workshop, outreach after overview of urban renewal and economic development grants",2529,3121000,5650000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7&start=3121&end=5650","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7/thumbnail_3121000.jpg","/articles/6662481/Grants-Pass-City/Josephine-County/Oregon/Council-requests-workshop-outreach-after-overview-of-urban-renewal-and-economic-development-grants","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6662481-ef1b0329cf5de9ef5ff5c739a01886ec/orig.mp4?Expires=1771198188&Signature=fZu7cbJtE~ukdHqcYD9qGutFwlLKMlhr0eo7QgUe0SNG~dIosaIjf-SPOakJ8~v5E8T33MBr7kGlWbFA4d9tXVslwEkhk3bHF0LZj6Zc9KnoPXPyG-2yBe2nly2D3ktmHLU3GeLxm~MvyiEdKZdK9ZFfb1NKWBNNu1E1iNt349HwJkYM24fJTmtYrQuyVEHDZtSVOcKF7lCvXPU9HRtr2YKK7gnxRMvGnII4mvrjtQcVFzJ1wTxdoN3p9jqqC5wPYCzcHuESzH27GqiicSJWyiry08maJlZypKcMG9ETHczgZCqFgAj2YK4sriWiqk-SqcVf-rUs0p9Yzuawrd9xdg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dana Pierce, economic development staff, briefed the council on Grants Pass’s suite of economic development and urban renewal grant programs, describing program purposes, eligibility, boundaries and recent awards.

Pierce said the urban renewal grant program targets building rehabilitation, a North Sixth/Seventh Street corridor beautification, blighted building removal/replacement, and underdeveloped land infrastructure. Examples cited included awards of $55,000 to the Bohemian for building rehabilitation and $50,000 awards to Dwell House and the King’s Jeweler building; the Greenfield RV Park reimbursement award of $50,000 was also described. She explained match requirements: 25% private match for private improvements and 50% match for public infrastructure, and said the URA budget recommendation for FY26 was $250,000 for awards. Pierce also described other programs: the Business Retention and Relocation Assistance grant (max $35,000, 50% match), a storefront lighting and security camera program (50% match, $1,000 max), a commercial facade program (50% match, $5,000 max on an annual cycle), and the tourism promotion grant (max $5,000, funded by lodging tax) with semiannual cycles.

Councilors asked about program boundaries, accountability for reimbursement grants (staff said grants are processed on reimbursement and staff review receipts and permits), and how to increase outreach. Staff said the industrial loan fund has been reduced by an accounting adjustment; the program will run minimally off interest until the fund balance recovers.

Council discussion focused on doing more outreach and evaluating potential changes to program match and caps. Several councilors suggested a workshop and inviting previous applicants to share experiences. The council reached consensus to direct staff to prepare a follow‑up workshop and do additional outreach to applicants and potential recipients; staff confirmed they will assemble materials and seek participants. Staff also said they will prepare an urban renewal mailer and consider targeted outreach to geographic areas near the URA boundary.

Why it matters: These small grant programs are intended to leverage private investment for downtown and corridor improvements, provide incentives for redevelopment and help attract businesses. Council requested additional outreach and a workshop so policymakers can consider adjustments, funding levels and the five‑year urban renewal implementation plan.

Next steps: Staff will schedule a workshop, pursue greater outreach (including inviting prior applicants), and return with options for any program modifications and the five‑year implementation plan.

","Staff outlined urban renewal and other small grant programs, their boundaries, and FY26 budget recommendations; council asked staff to hold a workshop and boost outreach to increase program participation.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6662485,"Council directs rate review after FEMA BRIC cancellation leaves $66 million financing gap for water plant",1567,1529000,3096000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7&start=1529&end=3096","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3588838-17c950a144c9f8745fcbafd8117cb6c7/thumbnail_1529000.jpg","/articles/6662485/Grants-Pass-City/Josephine-County/Oregon/Council-directs-rate-review-after-FEMA-BRIC-cancellation-leaves-66-million-financing-gap-for-water-plant","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6662485-8ce75184a242dc3b45f0c4bc5c7bb155/orig.mp4?Expires=1771198188&Signature=Q9PmNjj54qrgf0HhyTuHHjiSK5y5PisgTujkkFuYyQ1inT3j8LFag7gvAatjJM2b6gjR56n1ehAC3-9JQmim2LoE-y8n1mPQw5LSk2Ja7OEQe8BvNY7o61hYv83Wqg7~kC1opBLNaAkeRMUCOoO5VVLpx0qBp0HudB61IDvlsLdP2MDcE9KVGrM-BiSx3LoM8P9HF33dVqEq3LGIUsmxMmVpb760tLplPlmtnhl4TJBnFVoxRvxet4~ERfHvW5LYT~4DAqqdo7ALJkvJWkSz0Iiu8NYsgOmRCf9lXX~zPn5JlIdz7XxdU6hrRzyELQ49DSJTWpa3ih83oKcrNl6Zaw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Grants Pass City Council members directed staff on May 1 to begin a formal rate review after staff said the city must borrow roughly $66 million to complete the replacement water treatment plant following the April 4 cancellation of FEMA’s BRIC program.

City staff presented updated costs and financing options for the replacement water treatment plant, including a previously approved guaranteed maximum price (GMP) of $98,817,005.74 and a revised estimate for remaining construction and related costs. Jason, the city’s staff presenter on the project, told the council that the BRIC cancellation removed $50,000,000 from the project plan and that staff have since refined intake structure costs and other scopes. He said the intake work was estimated at $9,240,000 (a 30% estimate) and the team has identified remaining funding sources and gaps.

The financing picture, as presented, includes a mix of cash on hand, confirmed and uncontracted loans, grants and future deposits. Jason said the city has about $24,000,000 in cash, confirmed Business Oregon loans totaling roughly $4,000,000 and other expected sources such as congressionally directed spending and state drinking‑water loan funds. After accounting for those items and expected future cash deposits, he reported the city will need to borrow about $66,000,000 to finish the project.

Because of that gap, staff advised issuing bonds. Jason explained the two main bond types under consideration: revenue bonds (backed only by the water utility) and full faith and credit (FFC) bonds, which would use the city’s taxing authority as a credit enhancement but would still be repaid from water revenues. He said revenue bonds without FFC would show a larger rate increase in the worst‑case scenario; using FFC for a portion of the debt could shave that increase modestly but would expose general fund balance and credit considerations.

To maintain a desirable bond coverage ratio (staff cited 1.5 as the target used by bonding agencies, with 1.25 as the legal minimum), staff recommended implementing rate changes earlier than previously planned. Staff’s consultant, FCS, modeled a “worst‑case” scenario that would require a 2.5% annual rate increase for three years, timed to begin by January 2026, in addition to the scheduled CPI adjustments. Jason said that combination would keep the coverage ratio above bonding thresholds when borrowing up to the estimated $70,000,000 range and that the average single‑family customer using six units per month would see the water portion of the bill rise by about $6.78 per month by Jan. 1, 2028 (the figure includes the modeled increases and CPI assumptions used in the presentation).

Staff also reported the city obtained an EPA Buy America (BA/”BABA”) design waiver that reduces costs and schedule risk for several long‑lead items; Jason said complying with Build America Buy America requirements would have substantially increased costs and delayed the project because much membrane and specialty equipment is not domestically manufactured.

Council discussion focused on energy savings from variable frequency drives, coverage ratios, the difference between revenue and FFC bonds, and timing. Councilor Joel asked about present coverage ratios; JC (finance staff) and Jason replied the water fund’s coverage ratio is currently about 2.0 but would drop below the minimum without a rate adjustment once additional borrowing occurs. Several councilors said they are uncomfortable using the general fund as backing; Jason said staff will likely avoid pursuing a FFC pledge unless conditions change.

Motion and vote: Councilor Victoria moved and Councilor Kathleen seconded a motion directing staff to initiate the rate review process (to evaluate and return with implementation options for a 2.5% annual increase scenario and alternatives). The motion passed in a roll‑call vote: Victoria yes; Eric yes; Rick yes; Kathleen yes; Rob yes; Joel yes; Seth yes; Indra no. Following the vote, staff confirmed they would prepare the rate‑setting analysis and continue working bond structure options (revenue bonds preferred; FFC off the table for now). Jason said if council directed staff to proceed he would notify the contractor to begin scheduling work that afternoon.

Why it matters: The council’s direction begins a formal process to change rates and to structure borrowing to complete a multi‑year, multi‑tens‑of‑millions construction project that supplies potable water to the city. Staff repeatedly framed the rate decision as necessary to maintain debt coverage and bondability and to avoid placing greater pressure on the general fund.

Next steps: Staff will return with a detailed rate study, bond‑structure options, and updated cost and funding schedules. JC will provide detailed fiscal scenarios for council review; staff noted timing is important for bonding markets and recommended implementing changes earlier rather than later to preserve credit metrics and lower long‑term cost.

","After FEMA cancelled the BRIC program that would have provided $50 million, Grants Pass City staff presented updated financing for the replacement water treatment plant and the council directed staff to start a rate review to cover new debt while declining a full‑faith‑and‑credit pledge.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council backs competitive grant approach for managed resting site and navigation services; staff to return with draft and public forum

Council requests workshop, outreach after overview of urban renewal and economic development grants

Council directs rate review after FEMA BRIC cancellation leaves $66 million financing gap for water plant