St. Helens urban renewal agency adopts budget amendment amid concern over Arcadia development

The St. Helens Urban Renewal Agency voted unanimously to adopt a FY24–25 budget amendment that transfers appropriation from contingency into capital outlay to complete Phase 1 of the riverfront cleanup and avoid taking on an additional loan.

The agency’s finance staff and city officials said the change, recorded as Resolution UR010 during the meeting, reallocates funds already held by the urban renewal agency so they are legally available for project spending. Gloria Bush, city staff responsible for the urban renewal budget, told the agency that the amendment follows prior planning and that staff ran conservative revenue models to account for uncertainty about the major Arcadia development.

The amendment matters because property tax increment financing (TIF) revenues will fund debt service on loans taken for redevelopment. A resident during public comment warned that without Arcadia the district “is bankrupt,” saying the tax base is negative after the departure of Cascades and urging caution. City staff and a councilor asked for follow-up analyses showing best-, worst- and most-likely revenue scenarios and clarification on when loan repayments begin.

Gloria Bush said the agency does not owe on the principal loan until roughly three years and 90 days after project close — she stated the repayment window would fall around July 1, 2029, under current assumptions — and that the agency’s most recent modeling used conservative (low-growth) estimates.

Council members pressed staff on several points during the discussion: how much of projected TIF is already committed to debt service (staff did not provide a precise percentage at the meeting), which debt instruments the agency holds (staff said the agency’s loan with IFA is roughly $15.7 million, described in discussion as an estimate), and whether reimbursements for prior city-administered urban renewal expenses would count against the agency’s maximum indebtedness. Staff said those reimbursable costs are being tracked and would only be captured if the council later decides it is appropriate.

Agency staff also said the FY24–25 amendment does not exhaust contingency. One figure referenced in the discussion was $600,000 budgeted in contingency for FY24–25; staff said the amendment under consideration is smaller than that full contingency amount and another amendment could be needed later in the fiscal year if circumstances change.

The agency approved several procedural items by voice vote earlier in the meeting, including the consent agenda minutes (draft minutes dated 06/05/2024) and the appointment of Council President Jessica Chilton as chair and Councilor Mark Gunderson as vice chair. The meeting packet included an executed 2022 intergovernmental agreement between the St. Helens Urban Renewal Agency and the City of St. Helens as an informational item; staff characterized that agreement as a fiscal-services arrangement executed in 2022.

Decisions - Approved: Draft Urban Renewal Agency minutes dated 06/05/2024 (voice vote; ayes recorded from councilors present). - Approved: Chair appointment of Council President Jessica Chilton (voice vote). - Approved: Vice chair appointment of Councilor Mark Gunderson (voice vote). - Approved: Resolution UR010, FY24–25 budget amendment to transfer contingency to capital outlay to complete Phase 1 waterfront cleanup (voice vote; unanimous among those voting).

Discussion (key points) - Public comment: A resident said the district’s tax base is negative following Cascades’ departure and argued Arcadia or another industry must materialize to support obligations. - Staff response: Gloria Bush and agency staff said revenue projections were run conservatively, that payment on the loan does not begin until mid-2029 under current assumptions, and that staff track reimbursable city expenses separately. - Council questions: Which portion of projected TIF is already committed; whether balloon payments exist in current debt; when the agency would trigger reimbursements for city-incurred urban renewal expenses; and whether to pause further borrowing until revenues are clearer.

What remains open Staff agreed to follow up with more detailed scenario modeling (best-, worst-, and most-likely cases), a clearer accounting of committed TIF revenue vs. projected debt service, and whether additional budget amendments will be necessary before the end of FY24–25. No new borrowing was approved at the meeting.

Ending The agency adjourned after completing the scheduled items. Staff said they will provide follow-up information by email and may return with further amendments if needed.