Voice your views on urban renewal areas
Wednesday, the Sandpoint City Council is setting the boundaries of urban renewal areas that could affect not only the quality of community services you enjoy but also the amount of property tax you will pay for them. It is in your best interest to attend this meeting starting at 5:30 p.m. at Sandpoint City Hall.
The City Council is asked to approve the boundaries of two proposed URAs (urban renewal areas) proposed by city staff. URAs increase the property tax load on everyone outside the district while at the same time improving infrastructure and services inside the district.
In other words, all taxes resulting from increased property valuations inside URAs are used in their backyard — not in yours or mine. Now if the businesses and people located within the URA promised to stay behind chain link fences and not use citywide services such as fire and police protection, not drive on any roads outside the district, not use city parks, the library, or the hospital, and operate their own school facilities then maybe they would have no impact on city or countywide services. But they do. And who will pay for the needed improvements or maintenance — those of us outside the URA. The result? Higher property taxes for us outside the district.
The idea behind an URA is not a bad one. It is designed to encourage development in blighted or deteriorated areas of a city — areas where no private developer would consider investing without government assistance or a subsidy. The city of Coeur d'Alene established one that included the midtown area as well as the waterfront in hopes that the "blighted" midtown would again become attractive to private developers. Can you guess the result? The waterfront developers (who probably would have invested anyway) proceeded to build luxury condos and high rise office buildings with government assistance but only one small project was located in the midtown area. So much for helping a blighted area!
Our city is now proposing a similar approach. Not only is the waterfront included in the proposed downtown URA but also the PSB and Seasons projects. URAs are meant to encourage private investment where none is likely to occur. Is city staff trying to tell us that PSB and Seasons are likely to halt their future private investment unless we provide taxpayer subsidy and assistance?
One other feature of the laws allowing URAs — areas have to be defined as "blighted." Is the Seasons project blighted? A significant criterion of blight is "diversity of ownership." In other words, if an area is comprised of many small property owners it meets the test of blight. Why? When I called the URA in Coeur d'Alene I was told that it is difficult to acquire land for a "large footprint" project when you have to deal with many small property owners. The URA can consolidate properties to foster development either by buying small landowners out (or if that is not possible) then through "eminent domain." That right was just reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Interested enough to attend tonight's City Council meeting and testify during the public comment time at the beginning? I hope so!
Gretchen Albrecht-Hellar
Sandpoint