Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pelican project secures bank financing but still needs private investors, project representative says
Summary
A developer update said the White Pelican downtown project has secured bank financing and aligned project costs but still needs private investors to reach a roughly $30 million budget; permitting and contractor bidding remain next steps.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mr. Went, the project representative for the White Pelican redevelopment, told the Klamath Falls City Council on April 6 that the project has aligned its costs and secured bank financing through Sage Credit Union but remains short of private equity commitments.
The project rep said the development is "a $30 million project" and that the primary remaining obstacle is "getting the rest of the investors" to sign on. He said the team has 90% of engineering and architectural work complete and is finalizing permitting and contractor bids.
Councilors asked about visible progress on the site; one councilor suggested installing signage such as "future home of" artwork to show momentum. Mr. Went said signage is under consideration but cautioned against listing partners prematurely. He also said that once financing is in place he will request any necessary extension on project deadlines from city staff.
City staff members present were praised by the project rep for project coordination; he said he might ask staff to assist with county permitting where previous coordination had hiccups. Councilors and the mayor repeatedly endorsed continued progress and pledged support for addressing permitting and sidewalk/access concerns raised by residents.
The representative said final permitting and contractor bid packages will follow once investors are secured; he estimated the project is closer but still requires private commitments before construction can begin. The council did not vote on any action related to the project at the April 6 meeting.
The council indicated it will keep the item on future agendas for updates and potential extension requests if the developer formally seeks more time.

