Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
URA reviews draft implementation grant program for downtown master plan; members debate reimbursement, timelines and outreach
Summary
The Urban Renewal Agency reviewed a draft grant program to implement the Downtown Master Plan, discussing reimbursement rules, award limits, a 90‑day commencement preference, who may apply, outreach and marketing, and the formation of a subcommittee to refine guidelines before formal adoption.
The Livingston City Urban Renewal Agency reviewed a draft downtown master-plan implementation grant program and directed staff to return revised guidelines at the next meeting after board feedback on several policy points, including reimbursement versus upfront grants, applicant eligibility, project timelines, and communications.
City Manager Grant Gager outlined the draft: grants would be reimbursement-based, limited to $25,000 or 75% of project costs (whichever is lower), with a preference for projects that can be implemented within 90 days of award. Gager said the program was intended to produce "quick wins" that implement the Downtown Master Plan and noted the draft left some elements intentionally broad.
Board members and staff discussed several specific items: - Reimbursement model vs. upfront payments: Lisa Garcia and others said reimbursement can deter applicants who cannot pay up front; staff noted the existing façade program includes a small initial payout ($1,000) and that non‑reimbursement options are possible if paired with performance guarantees or draw requests. - Applicant eligibility and property interest: The draft requires applicants to have a vested property interest (ownership or a lease of at least five years) to avoid the city appearing to broker projects on private property; board members asked for pathways that allow community proponents who lack property rights to partner with owners, including letters of support or targeted calls for projects. - Timeline preference: Staff proposed a 90‑day commencement preference; the board asked to clarify that "commence" means starting physical work or otherwise being contractually ready, and agreed that some projects (murals, projects requiring artist scheduling, or seasonal construction) may need flexibility. - Oversight and site access: A board member expressed concern about allowing volunteer board members to conduct site visits; staff proposed clarifying language to indicate staff (planning/inspection or qualified third parties) will perform verification visits to manage liability and insurance exposure. - Outreach and scoring: Members recommended adding imagery and example projects to the application, tying application scoring explicitly to Downtown Master Plan objectives, and developing a communications plan. Several members volunteered for a subcommittee to create sample projects and marketing plans; Lisa Garcia and at least one other board member volunteered.
There was no formal vote to adopt the draft; staff will return a revised draft incorporating the board's input at a future meeting.
Quotes "The guidelines really were intended to provide small grants of money to folks in the downtown area to implement some of those projects . . . and really to kind of get some 'quick wins'," City Manager Grant Gager said. "I was just curious if there's a way to include anything as sort of a grant option . . . reimbursements are a deterrent to people coming forward," Vice Chair Lisa Garcia said.
Ending Staff will return a revised draft with clarified language on commencement, applicant eligibility pathways for community proponents, oversight/site-access procedures, and options for limited upfront funding or draw requests. The board discussed forming a subcommittee to help produce imagery and a communications plan.
