Bend planning commission recommends Emblem site-specific TIF plan to city council

The Bend Planning Commission on Monday voted to recommend that the City Council approve the Emblem site-specific tax increment finance (TIF) plan, a proposal to use tax-increment rebates and limited SDC (system development charge) coverage to encourage housing development on an 8.38-acre site in southeast Bend.

The commission's recommendation came after a staff presentation and discussion; the motion to recommend approval was made and seconded and carried with commissioners voting in favor. The commission's action is a recommendation to City Council, which will hold public hearings and make the final decision.

The Emblem site is described in the staff report as located near Ferguson Road and Southeast 27th Avenue (parcel referenced as 6161105 Ferguson Road) and is zoned medium- and high-density residential. Staff identified blighted conditions relevant to ORS 457 criteria as infrastructure deficiencies and long-term underuse of the land. The plan identifies a maximum indebtedness figure of $22,100,000, a plan term of 26 years and a rebate timeline of 24 years; the current assessed value cited in the staff report is $101,000.

Urban renewal manager Jonathan Taylor, representing the Bend Urban Renewal Agency (BURA), told the commission the program is a "pay-as-you-go" model that rebates a portion of tax increment to developers that agree to deliver housing meeting the affordability standards in the site-specific policy. "This policy allows for the implementation of site specific urban renewals for property tax rebates for developments that include housing at 90% AMI or less," Taylor said. He said Emblem's applicant elected to reserve 20% of units at lower affordability levels, "going down as far as 70% AMI to 90%."

Taylor said the plan would not require a large up-front payment from the city or BURA unless the agency elects to provide SDC coverage via a promissory note. He explained that if SDC coverage is provided, BURA would enter a promissory note with the city to pay SDCs on behalf of the developer and then collect rebates over time to repay that obligation. "There is no debt being issued in this. That is the amount of money that we can spend on both the rebate portion... The plan term is 26 years, but the rebate timeline is 24," he said.

Commissioners asked about program details and protections. Staff said rebates are tied to annual certification of affordability commitments, and if a developer fails to certify, the TIF rebate for that year would revert to taxing districts. Staff also said development agreements (not yet executed for Emblem) could include provisions to recover rebates already provided if affordability commitments are not met.

Commissioners and staff discussed the program's affordability targets in the context of local median income. Staff noted that the current program baseline is 90% area median income (AMI) and that the agency is seeing more projects proposing deeper affordability within that framework. Taylor told the commission that, if implemented at scale, the agency expects the program could support roughly 1,200 units over three years under its current assumptions, with a portion of those units targeted at lower AMI bands.

BURA staff described an extended consult-and-confer period of 77 days (longer than the typical 45 days) for notifying taxing districts and coordinating with other jurisdictional stakeholders. The timeline given in the staff presentation calls for public notice through September, a City Council first public hearing on Oct. 1, and potential council adoption on Oct. 17 if the council votes to adopt.

After staff presentation and brief deliberations, a commissioner moved "to recommend that the City Council approve the project Emblem site-specific tax increment finance plan based on draft findings that the plan conforms to the City of Bend comprehensive plan." The motion was seconded and carried; commissioners recorded aye votes and no oppositions were stated on the record. The commission's action is a recommendation only; the City Council will receive the plan and hold its own hearings.

The commission opened the item as a quasi-judicial hearing, received no public testimony in person or online during the meeting, and closed the hearing before deliberating. Staff emphasized the procedural requirement that testimony be directed to applicable criteria and cautioned parties about the effect of failing to raise issues with sufficient specificity for the administrative record and possible appeals under ORS 457.

Next steps: the consult-and-confer notice to taxing districts begins the day after the meeting; the City Council's initial public hearing is scheduled for Oct. 1 with potential adoption on Oct. 17, per the timeline presented.