Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the TIF topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council weighs small TIF subsidy for 101 Washington Square roof replacement

Washington City Council (Committee of the Whole) · April 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A TIF application for roof replacement at 101 Washington Square (projected cost $75,927.08) scored in the lowest funding tier under staff's model; staff recommended a 20% subsidy (not to exceed $15,001.85) and council provided feedback to draft a redevelopment agreement.

City staff presented a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) application on April 14 from Josie Wells, representing CPT LLC, to replace the back half of the roof at 101 Washington Square. The lower of two contractor quotes attached to staff's packet was $75,927.08.

John Oliphant said the property has received several TIF-funded projects over the last 20-plus years; he estimated the building and related properties have received roughly $600,000 in TIF assistance since 2004. Oliphant reported a TIF fund balance near $520,000, but noted commitments (including about $328,000 subject to payment for another project and an event-space payment contingent on project completion) that reduce available discretionary funds.

Under the city's scoring model the 101 Washington Square roof project scored 38.19, placing it in the lowest funding tier for exterior improvements and recommending a 20% subsidy (a not-to-exceed amount of $15,001.85). Oliphant told council staff recommends drafting a redevelopment agreement if council desires to proceed, and suggested structuring the payment in at least two disbursements as used for prior projects.

Council reaction split along stewardship and investment lines: several council members noted the property has received significant past TIF assistance and questioned whether limited TIF dollars should be reserved for other properties; others said targeted assistance protects existing downtown businesses and leverages private investment. Council asked staff to include return-on-investment considerations in the redevelopment draft; Oliphant said the scoring model does attempt to account for projected increment and he conservatively estimated a 6–7 year payback period under some assumptions.

What happens next: staff will use council feedback to prepare a redevelopment agreement and bring a draft for council consideration.