Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate over tax-increment exemption for 94 Pleasant Street exposes procurement and precedent concerns
Summary
Councilors debated a proposed tax-increment exemption (TIE) to encourage redevelopment of 94 Pleasant Street. Supporters said it could spur market-rate housing; opponents warned the incentive sets a precedent and could trigger procurement protests because the property was sold 'as is' after an RFP.
The committee debated a proposal to authorize a tax-increment exemption for a developer of 94 Pleasant Street, a dilapidated downtown property. Mayor Wright described the measure as a tool to encourage redevelopment and said the city has a written agreement from the developer; he emphasized the potential for market-rate housing in the downtown core.
Several councilors pushed back. One councilor said they "can't see us making an exception for a 6 unit property" and expressed concern about setting precedent and altering procurement expectations for other developers. Procurement staff (Director Cormier) explained the original RFP process and cautioned that adding incentives post-RFP could require changes to RFP language and might prompt protests from other proposers. Cormier noted the RFP stated the property was sold "as is," limiting seller-side contingencies, and recommended that if the city wishes to offer such incentives it should adjust future RFPs.
Council President Barrows and others said they wanted to avoid leaving the property fallow and offered to gather data on other city-owned properties sold for housing since the TIE program began. The committee agreed to keep the item for more information, including a list of city-owned properties sold in the last two years and corrected financial schedules and any draft agreement language for council review.
