Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
URA reviews downtown enhancement program guidelines; board calls for edits, marketing subcommittee and clearer funding paths
Summary
The Livingston Urban Renewal Agency reviewed proposed downtown enhancement program guidelines, asked staff to clarify direct-pay vs. reimbursement paths, consider changing scoring to 1–5, soften a three-year maintenance requirement to a scoring factor, and place a marketing-subcommittee action on the March agenda.
The Livingston Urban Renewal Agency reviewed draft downtown enhancement program guidelines Feb. 20 and directed staff to return with edits clarifying funding paths, scoring and enforcement language. Board members asked revisions to make the program more accessible to small-scale and short-term projects while retaining incentives for longer-lasting improvements.
Key points from the discussion included a request to add a form field indicating whether a project seeks direct payment or reimbursement; an edit to simplify the proposed scoring scale from 1–10 to 1–5; and a recommendation to change mandatory language requiring improvements to remain in place for three years into a scoring criterion so shorter-term activations would not be automatically disqualified. Staff said most other URAs use reimbursement models, but some allow limited direct-pay amounts for small projects; the draft included a low direct-pay option (example: $2,000) and a higher reimbursement path (a higher ceiling at a percentage of total cost). Several members suggested $2,000 might be low for some projects and proposed raising that direct-pay cap to better support applicants without capital to front expenses.
Board members asked staff to change instances of the word “reimburse” to “fund” where the program intends to provide a direct payment, and to add clearer examples and capitalized references to the Downtown Master Plan. Staff offered to assemble program marketing materials and suggested the board form a marketing subcommittee to prepare outreach collateral. Commissioner Lisa Garcia proposed adding a marketing-subcommittee agenda item for the March meeting; the board voted to put that on the March agenda and authorized members to form the subcommittee then.
Staff said they would bring a revised guideline packet to the next meeting with the discussed edits, examples, and clarified language about direct-pay versus reimbursement, project initiation timelines and duration considerations. Board members also discussed outreach events (a proposed early-April information session for downtown building and business owners) and the possibility of inviting downtown master-plan consultants to a future meeting for technical Q&A.
