Consultant briefs Astoria City Council on urban renewal mechanics, limits and possible port funding

A consultant walked Astoria City Council members through how urban renewal and tax-increment financing work in Oregon and what projects the city can and cannot fund, stressing the need to coordinate with the assessor and affected taxing districts before promising assistance.

Elaine Howard, of Elaine Howard Consulting, told the council at a Nov. 12 work session that urban renewal in Oregon functions as an economic development tool that captures the increase in assessed value inside a designated area. "All urban renewal areas are limited to a certain amount of spending," Howard said, explaining the concept of a "frozen base assessed value" and that only the increment above that base flows to the urban renewal agency.

Why it matters: TIF diverts growth in property-tax revenue from other taxing districts to the urban renewal agency; council members asked whether that trade-off makes sense for projects such as Heritage Square and potential port investments. Howard said many projects — streets, sidewalks, building rehabilitation, utilities and some property acquisition — are typical urban renewal uses, but the law limits spending to capital and related improvements.

Howard walked the council through local figures. She said Astoria East (adopted in 1980) shows an excess assessed value in the millions and listed the plan's maximum indebtedness at about $17,000,113 and estimated next-year TIF revenue around $390,000; Astoria West reached its maximum indebtedness and was terminated, with a historical maximum indebtedness of roughly $9,119,000 and program income remaining to spend.

Councilors pressed for operational detail. One asked whether a $25,000 improvement typically triggers reassessment and additional TIF capture; Howard said assessor rules vary and recommended the council consult the local assessor about the specific threshold and permit practices. "What I would do if I were you ... is contact your assessor and find out what threshold they use," she said.

On public buildings and major projects, Howard said state law was changed to require concurrence from three of the top four impacted taxing districts for an urban renewal agency to spend on public buildings (the top four depending on which districts receive the most impact). She also cautioned that increasing a plan’s "maximum indebtedness" requires a substantial amendment process akin to establishing a new plan and may require interagency concurrence.

Using TIF for the port? Multiple councilors asked whether the city could use urban renewal money for port projects (a public, often non‑taxable entity). Howard said it can be done in some ways — for example, a single-property urban renewal area, a minor amendment, or partnership structures — but the city should analyze likely tax outcomes, the timing of revenue, and whether projects would satisfy the statute's capital-project requirements.

Howard recommended a priority-setting session in January to list potential projects (including Heritage Square and port ideas), compare them with statutory limits and the city's financial capacity, and work with finance staff and the assessor to understand reassessment, capture and borrowing options. There were no formal votes or motions at the session; the meeting adjourned at 7:37 p.m.

Quotes used in this story are taken from the work session transcript and are attributed to the speakers who made them. The council and staff plan follow-up briefings to refine project priorities and technical details for potential use of urban renewal funds.