Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Incentives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks for incentive ideas as panel weighs construction excise tax, abatements and waivers
Summary
Panelists suggested carrots — height allowances, property tax abatement, SDC waivers and targeted density bonuses — while warning Sisters' limited scale, three‑story preference and fire/rescue capacity constrain some tools; a construction excise tax sparked debate about who should pay.
Councilors asked the industry and nonprofit panelists for concrete incentives the city could offer to help offset the cost of required affordable housing. Suggestions included allowing greater building height for projects that provide affordable units, property tax abatements, SDC waivers, targeted density bonuses and local revolving loan programs. One developer said height or tax abatements can materially change project feasibility; another cautioned Sisters’ three‑story preference and limited fire department ladder reach make taller buildings challenging.
The construction excise tax (CET) drew mixed reactions. Some favored a CET because it can create a predictable local revenue stream for subsidies, pointing to Bend’s CET as a supporting example; others said applying excise taxes to commercial or industrial development could discourage job‑generating projects and argued any fee should be analyzed for revenue potential before adoption.
