Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council questions deferrals to certificate of occupancy as option to ease developer cash flow
Summary
Councilors discussed allowing SDCs to be paid at certificate of occupancy rather than at permit issuance to ease carrying costs for developers; staff warned of administrative and enforcement tradeoffs and suggested tying payment to final or temporary COOs with clear conditions.
Councilors pressed staff on whether the city could let developers defer SDC payment until certificate of occupancy (COO) or offer financing terms, a practice sometimes used to ease carrying costs during construction.
John Guillerducci summarized tradeoffs: deferring to COO can help developers avoid front‑loading cash early in a project, but it changes who bears collection risk and may complicate enforcement. He noted some jurisdictions allow deferral to COO and others offer installment financing; the consultant said "it is an option to require payment later in the process."
City staff described enforcement levers tied to final inspections and planning signoffs: a final or temporary certificate of occupancy could be withheld until outstanding SDCs are paid, or staff could memorialize a set of conditions for temporary occupancy. Councilors also raised the possible use of municipal financing or third‑party lenders to offer payment terms; staff said they currently rely on external lenders in some financing roles and would need to assess collection capacity if they offered in‑house financing.
Council directed staff to research specific ordinance language for deferrals, enforcement mechanisms tied to temporary/final COOs, and possible financing arrangements, and to return with draft language.
