Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City council hears community development budget, PRT property work and CRA funding options
Summary
Community development detailed regional planning, building services and problem-resolution work; CRA staff reviewed TIF activity, a Fourth Street property purchase and recommended maintaining the current levy while saying a higher levy (up to 2.6 mills) could be considered if council identifies specific redevelopment projects.
Chad (community development) presented budgets for regional planning, building services and community development programs, flagging modest personnel changes and several operating carryovers. Building services showed a larger operating increase (driven mostly by a $40,000 carryover for contract services tied to problem-property abatement), and staff described the Problem Resolution Team (PRT) that brings legal, building, planning, police, sheriff and health together quarterly to move difficult properties toward remediation or demolition.
Ed explained PRT procedures and said roughly a half-dozen properties are on the active list; some cases require court action and can take months or years depending on owner response. Council discussed the financial trade-offs of paying for abatement versus pursuing legal remedies and recognized the need for case-by-case decisions.
On the CRA (Community Redevelopment Authority) budget, staff said the authority manages over 90 active TIF projects and recommended holding the CRA levy at 1.54 mills to raise an estimated $822,000 (assuming ~3% valuation growth). The CRA reported purchasing the Miller property on Fourth Street and intends to sell two-thirds to utilities while using CDBG funds for the remaining parcel to create a publicly accessible plaza; the CRA would recycle defederalized CDBG proceeds back into downtown improvements. Council discussed whether to raise the CRA levy toward the statutory 2.6-mill cap; CRA members said they would support a levy increase if council identifies a concrete, long-term redevelopment plan to spend the additional funds (for example, complex life/safety or aquatics investments). No formal vote was taken.
