West Linn moves toward a housing production strategy; planning commission delays construction excise tax decision

The West Linn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the city's Housing Production Strategy (HPS) at the April 21 work session and agreed to schedule the plan for formal adoption, with one change: the Planning Commission advised delaying implementation of a construction excise tax (CET) to wait for early outcomes from other strategies.

MIG consultant Matt Hasty walked council members through the HPS strategies, which aim to increase housing supply and affordable options over a multi-year implementation schedule. The strategy package includes rezoning opportunities to enable mixed-use and higher-density housing near commercial corridors and activity centers, updates to system development charges (SDCs) and scaling options by unit size, tax-exemption and incentive tools (multiple-unit property exemptions and nonprofit rental exemptions), use of tax increment financing for site acquisition, and outreach and fair-housing supports. The HPS is intended to align with other city planning efforts including Vision 43 and waterfront planning.

Hasty summarized the planning commission’s action: the commission recommended adoption of the HPS as presented by the appointed working group but suggested pushing the CET action item later in the implementation timeline to give staff, the council and stakeholders time to assess how the initial set of strategies performs.

Darren Wise, planning manager, told the council the HPS had already undergone a DLCD (Department of Land Conservation and Development) review and staff had adjusted limited language to ensure consistency with state administrative rules before bringing it forward for adoption. "DLCD provided early comments and we revised the document to be consistent with their administrative rules," Wise said.

Council members asked several implementation questions. Several members noted that the CET was the most debated possible revenue tool in the HPS and asked staff to compile comparative analyses of how neighboring jurisdictions handle a CET and other revenue tools. Councilors discussed how a CET, if adopted, is often structured so a portion funds SDC waivers and direct affordable-housing investments; they asked for more detail on rates, exemptions, and how the CET would interact with other incentives.

Staff said the HPS is tentatively scheduled for formal adoption at the May 12 council meeting; the city must complete adoption steps before the end of June to align with state program timelines and potential grant opportunities. Matt Hasty and staff reminded the council that many HPS actions are flexible and intended to be phased: some measures (zoning changes, incentives and technical assistance) can proceed early, while others (tax exemptions, CET design) require additional public process and legal/financial analysis.

Council President Baumgartner and other members emphasized careful engagement with neighborhoods and equitable distribution of benefits across the city. Several councilors also asked staff to prepare information on how a phased package — for example, a bond or targeted grant strategy combined with annual local revenue — could be used to support near-term affordable housing projects.

Next steps: staff will bring the HPS to the May 12 meeting for adoption, and will seek state consultant funding available to jurisdictions that adopt an HPS. The Planning Commission’s recommendation and the delayed CET timing will be part of the adoption record.