Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2024 05 22

Home Browse Search

Revitalization Commission Minutes April 17, 2024 Page 6 of 9 Previous feedback received from the LRC was that the original limits felt too rich, though the public disagreed. The proposed cap limits are for new or expanding businesses capping at $125k. Businesses seeking to modify existing space is capped $50k because the project impact is different. The EV Manager requested feedback from the LRC on funding caps and the reimbursement schedule. She noted that many programs have a 50/50 reimbursement schedule, to allow the LRC to be a partner in helping to fund larger scale projects. This proposal includes a schedule that mirrors the fagade improvement program. The application and program management processes were reviewed for the commission. Commissioner Comments: Commissioner Harald commented that option 2 seems complicated and makes due diligence more difficult. He did not have any concern about the funding levels. He commented that the support provided to the med spa is the model for this program and the caps listed won't make a very big impact. He supports the structure of sharing the costs. His main concern is that more criteria are needed to make consistent determinations about funding the full $125K level. He suggested that the LRC needs to give careful thought to whether a project really warrants this level of funding and do a better job of outlining clearly defined criteria to be consistent, most especially for requests to go over the limits. He suggested including a question asking what about blight remediation warrants additional funding. The EV Manager noted that the application and project narrative should provide this information by asking what the actual impact is related to things such as how many employees are affected, how many jobs will be created for construction, what are the sales tax impacts, what are the impacts for blight remediation, how long has the building been vacant, what is the private sector leverage for the project, etc. Commissioner Harald feels strongly about having clear criteria to be more deliberate, thoughtful, and consistent in the process. Commissioner Tofte agreed with Commissioner Harald. He commented that making the process clear to the applicants initially is important and that the city has received negative feedback from builders because the process is unclear. Commissioner Tofte supports option 1. Commissioner Williams commented that the LRC hasn't put limitations on this before, and there are multiple programs available. She asked if a business can apply for all the available programs. It was noted that businesses often apply for and receive funding from multiple programs. It was noted that this should be part of due diligence in determining other funding sources for the same business. Commissioner Wiliams feels like this program would overlap a lot with the direct financial assistance program. She expressed concern that this program is geared toward the investment community because an applicant would have to have plans and architect investment to get to the application point. She also noted that most property landlords have a tenant improvement budget, which varies. She suggested the pushback from the business community is that the barrier to entry is already too high and she isn't sure that this is the LRC's problem to solve. But as an incentive package, she asked how many businesses will likely participate. The EV Manager noted that some of these questions are philosophical and that incentives are not intended to fund the entire project but rather they should be "but, for" — but for this money this project couldn't happen. There was a discussion around program criteria.