Oswego trustees direct staff to broaden eligible facade grant items, cap parking-lot awards

Kevin, a village staff member, presented proposed clarifications to the Economic Development Incentive Award grant program and asked the board which maintenance items should be eligible for funding.

The board’s discussion centered on whether to limit awards to permanent, visible facade and structural work or to also allow routine maintenance such as parking-lot sealcoating and exterior painting. Kevin said the program “goes back to 2014,” was expanded in 2018 to include interior and exterior improvements, and that the Economic Development Commission recommended allowing some maintenance items but with a cap.

Why it matters: The grant program is intended to “enhance downtown real estate,” according to Kevin’s presentation. Trustees said they want to preserve the program’s focus on improvements that remain with the property after a tenant leaves while also avoiding rapid depletion of the village’s grant fund on repeatedly recurring maintenance needs.

Key board guidance and program mechanics

- Trustees signaled support for making masonry work, exterior painting, and exterior windows and doors fully eligible for grant funding. Several board members said those items align with the original facade-improvement intent.

- Roof repairs were moved by consensus to a partially eligible category, with trustees noting roofs are often costly and could quickly exhaust the fund.

- Parking-lot improvements were discussed at length. Kevin said four recent business inquiries for parking-lot work prompted the review because “we told businesses in the past parking lots are not eligible” and staff wanted to avoid the fund becoming a recurring parking-lot program. The Economic Development Commission recommended allowing parking-lot work with limits; trustees agreed to treat parking-lot improvements as partially eligible and to cap such awards at $5,000 per application.

- Trustees confirmed the grant remains limited to the downtown business district and noted the grant program’s structure: the village caps awards at $40,000 per project and generally funds 50% of eligible costs (staff noted applicants submit contractor quotes and paid invoices before the village remits payment).

Process and next steps

Trustees and staff agreed staff should revise the program criteria and produce a clarified eligible/partially eligible/ineligible list that includes the $5,000 cap on parking-lot work. Kevin said he had “everything I need” to proceed and staff will prepare updated language for future review. No formal motion or vote was recorded during the discussion; the record reflects a direction to staff rather than an adopted ordinance change.

Context and budget

Trustees referenced the program’s history: created as a facade improvement program in 2014 and broadened in 2018. Board members noted past years with little or no uptake and, more recently, increased interest in downtown investment. One trustee noted the village budgets approximately $80,000 annually for these incentives; another trustee described an example grant that approached the $40,000 cap to support tuckpointing, roof and awning work on a single downtown building.

Quotations

- Kevin (staff member): “The economic Development Incentive Award grama goes back to 2014…[it] was revised, to allow interior and exterior improvements, and that is still the case today.”

- A trustee: “I think the money ought to be used to help make businesses more marketable…by things that we can see.”

- A trustee on parking-lot risk: “If they are eligible, watch how quick that money goes because everybody always has to maintain their parking lots. So this would just become a parking lot grant.”

Ending

Staff will update the Economic Development Incentive Award program criteria to reflect the board’s direction—masonry, exterior painting, and exterior windows/doors as fully eligible; roof repairs as partially eligible; parking-lot improvements partially eligible with a $5,000 cap—and return to the board with revised language. The board did not take a formal vote during the meeting.