Board members discussed the recent capital finance study session and whether the city should move forward with debt options to fund Project Downtown and other major infrastructure needs.

A board member summarized the study session as showing agreement among councilors to pursue a mix of financing tools — short-term certificates of participation (COPs) and longer-term general obligation or revenue bonds — to fund priority projects. Board members said more detailed design and cost estimates will be needed before issuing debt, and that staff will return with firmer proposals on debt amounts and what each issuance would fund.

Public comment: Pam Chaperone, who identified herself as a resident, urged the board and city not to sell Geneva Village. In public comment she said the city lacks long-range budget projections and a full inventory of assets, and asked that the council and staff “ask for that data” before transferring public property. She also said some city charters in other places require a public vote before selling municipal property.

Geneva Village and land-use options: City staff and board members discussed the ULI technical-assistance findings and whether to pursue an RFI/RFQ to see what developers would propose for the roughly 2.8-acre Geneva Village parcel. Staff described initial ULI takeaways that the site could support housing, public gathering space, boutique lodging and community gardens, and noted that making housing affordable would likely require subsidy or an ongoing public role.

Budget and housing context: Participants discussed the city’s housing fee-in-lieu and affordable-housing obligations (currently discussed at about a 5% on-site affordable-housing target for new developments). Board members asked for greater clarity about the housing fund balance and options to use fee proceeds for preserving or creating affordable units. A staff member described the housing fund as limited and in use for several current priorities; the exact fund balance was not confirmed during the meeting.

Next steps and priorities: Board members proposed producing high-level, long-lived ("evergreen") recommendations — for example, priorities and boundary conditions the board would expect for Project Downtown and Geneva Village — rather than detailed design direction at this early stage. Staff said both the Project Downtown financing decisions and any Geneva Village process will likely take several months and may include RFI/RFQ steps, stakeholder outreach and phased design to refine costs.

Ending: The board agreed to review the final reports and to meet again with staff; several members volunteered to research financing and prioritization topics ahead of the next meeting.