Hayden council authorizes publication of public‑hearing notice for urban renewal expansion

Hayden City Council on Oct. 7 voted to authorize publication of a notice of public hearing for a first amendment to the Hayden urban renewal capital improvement plan that would add roughly 19 acres to the city’s revenue allocation area.

The vote authorizes publication only — it does not expand the district or adopt the amendment. The publication would allow a public hearing to be held Nov. 18 and begin the statutorily required notice process under Idaho law. Council members who voted in favor were Council Member DePreece, Council Member Schaeffer and Council President Roeder; Council Member White cast the lone vote against authorizing publication.

City staff and consultants told the council the expanded area is intended to allow the urban renewal agency to apply revenue allocation dollars to safety and infrastructure improvements along Government Way and to preserve flexibility for other projects the agency may choose to fund. Staff said the additional 19 acres are expected to generate only modest tax increment — roughly $19,000 in total increment over the remainder of the agency’s term, with earlier estimates discussed indicating smaller annual amounts — but including the parcels in the revenue allocation area would allow the agency to use its overall capacity to support intersection and road projects.

Megan Conrad, outside counsel for the city, summarized the legal framework for the amendment and emphasized that the amendment does not extend the district’s duration; she said the existing district terminates in 2029 and that the final year of revenue would be used by the agency in February 2030. "The First Amendment looks at the existing plan and just touches the sections that need to be amended by virtue of adding the area," Conrad said.

Olivia Metz, author of the eligibility report and economic feasibility study, told the council the project list included in the plan is intended to be comprehensive and does not mean every listed project will be built immediately. "The list is partly a wish list — it identifies projects the city and agency might pursue, and priorities would be set later," Metz said. She added that the civic center listed in the plan is a higher‑cost item and the agency’s cash‑flow analysis treats that ordering in evaluating feasibility.

Council members pressed staff on several topics: why the special meeting and accelerated timeline were necessary (staff said meeting dates and publication deadlines made the schedule tight); whether the city could still spend its own funds on roads in the area (staff confirmed the city could use other funding sources); how surplus funds would be handled if the agency terminated before projects were completed (outside counsel described that non‑obligated surplus funds would generally be returned to overlapping taxing districts and that termination timing can create challenges); and whether the urban renewal agency would seek input from the city council before major acquisitions or projects (staff said such procedures vary and council could remand items back to the agency if it desired further review).

Staff estimated publication of the full notice — which must include the plan amendment text, maps and statutory language — would cost in the low thousands of dollars because the legal notice runs several pages. Council discussed options to remand the amendment back to the urban renewal agency for further revision, to postpone publication for more information, or simply to authorize publication and then hear the amendment at public readings starting Nov. 18. One council member asked for three public readings rather than suspending the rules to adopt an ordinance on the first reading.

After discussion, a council member moved to publish the notice and a second was recorded; a roll‑call vote followed and the motion passed 3–1. Council Member White said she would vote no because "this decision is moving too quickly and the public hasn't had enough time to review it," voicing concerns about shifting emphasis from intersections to higher‑cost items such as a civic center and park improvements. The council directed staff to proceed with publication for the Nov. 18 hearing, where council can take subsequent readings, hear public comment and consider adoption.

If the amendment is approved, staff said the agency and city would need to decide project priorities, pursue any necessary design and land acquisition work, and determine whether additional grant funding is required to complete major intersections or civic projects before the agency’s termination.

What happens to funds if the agency terminates before projects are completed depends on timing and obligations, counsel told the council; non‑obligated surplus would generally be returned to overlapping taxing districts and termination requires a settlement plan to address outstanding projects and funding obligations.