Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council member faults 15-year CRA deal tied to DHL, says council may move to rescind
Summary
A council member criticized a 15-year community reinvestment agreement (CRA) that grants DHL a 100% tax abatement and said the village may seek to rescind the CRA for undeveloped parcels; the speaker argued the arrangement diverts school tax revenue and cited possible legislation at upcoming meetings.
A council member told the council that a recent meeting with DHL over joining the village’s NCA revealed DHL already benefits from a 15-year CRA that leaves the village with little financial benefit.
"They already have a CRA in place. They have a CRA in place that gives them 15 year 100% tax abatement. They get 70% of the school's money," the council member said, arguing the village’s planned incentives would not deliver sufficient return. The speaker said the village had considered $650,000 in grants to support development but concluded the arrangement was a "bad deal for the village" and that they had pulled the grant request from consideration.
Why it matters: the council member framed the CRA as shifting most tax revenue away from local schools and limiting the village’s ability to benefit from incoming commercial development. The speaker said they have spoken with Brian Zets and expect legislation in a coming meeting to rescind the CRA for most of the affected parcels, with the exception of lots already purchased.
The speaker also described objections to proposed building heights: the developer reportedly wants 40-foot buildings where the village's current code limits height to 18 feet, and the speaker said the village aims to preserve the village character by preventing large, wall-like structures.
The council member raised additional financial numbers during the exchange: the village would receive about $5,000 a year in income tax for 15 years under the developer’s estimates, and the speaker contrasted that small revenue against the millions being discussed in infrastructure support. The speaker said ODOT and other contacts had referenced other sums (mentions of approximately $629,000 and $573,000 in related grant figures), but the transcript does not provide a single clear breakdown of how those amounts relate, and the council member indicated they would return with legislation and more details.
No formal vote on rescission occurred at the meeting; the speaker said a proposal to rescind parts of the CRA is likely to appear on an upcoming agenda.
