This is the final installment of a four-day series examining the urban renewal district proposed for downtown Corvallis on the May 19 ballot.

Renewal could help public projects, private developers

By BENNETT HALL

Gazette-Times reporter

Backers of the downtown Corvallis urban renewal district say there are many reasons to vote yes on Measure 02-68, but it really boils down to one issue: keeping downtown vital.

"I think we have a wonderful downtown," said Barbara Ross, who co-chairs Sustaining the Heart of Corvallis, a political action committee formed to promote the urban renewal ballot measure. "I think it's really important that we continue to invest in that area."

If approved by voters, Ross said, the urban renewal district would provide funding to support downtown in a variety of ways. Those could range from public projects such as an extension of the riverfront path or directional signage for visitors to loans or grants to help private developers renovate old buildings or restore historic properties.

"The riverfront is wonderful, but we still have a number of empty storefronts downtown, and we will have more as the economy continues to deteriorate," Ross said. "I see this as prevention. I see this as an investment that can keep us from going downhill."

No specific projects have been designated in advance for urban renewal funds. Rather, a Downtown Commission has been appointed to recommend ways to spend the $35 million that would be collected over the estimated 20-year life of the district. The City Council, as the designated urban renewal agency, would determine how the money is actually spent.

"This is not going to bear fruit for us - this is going to bear fruit for the future," said Pat Lampton, a downtown business owner who co-chairs the pro-urban renewal PAC with Ross.

As property values within the district rise, the incremental increase in property tax revenues will go toward urban renewal projects. Lampton argued those projects would further enhance downtown's assessed value, expanding the overall tax base to create a legacy for the entire community that would continue to pay dividends after the district expires.

"That's an annuity," he said. "That's every year."

Mayor Charlie Tomlinson, another champion of the urban renewal measure, also argues it would benefit the entire community. By helping downtown, he said, the district would help prevent urban sprawl.

"Downtown represents dense commercial development," the mayor said. "We want that to thrive. If it doesn't, we're going to be looking at greenfield development."

Another alternative, Tomlinson warned, could be even worse.

"Or you're going to find yourself in the same situation Albany did 10 years ago, where a mall came in and drove commercial development out of downtown," he said.

Debt, vagueness top objections to renewal vote

By Matt Neznanski

Gazette-Times reporter

In the past week, those opposing a plan for an urban renewal district in downtown Corvallis have posted repeatedly to an e-mail group dedicated to the Corvallis Sustainability Coalition.

But that's not the only online presence of those who stand against the idea.

Formed and monitored by Will and Marilyn Koenitzer, a Corvallis couple who has for years dogged Evanite Corporation, the Web site Corvalliswatch.org is dedicated to reporting on land use and environmental laws. But this month, the site is chock-full of letters and arguments against the plan.

"This whole urban renewal thing is a struggle to really be up with," Will Koenitzer said. "We wanted people to be able to see these documents and decide for themselves."

But it is primarily the inclusion of Evanite into the proposed renewal zone that got them to sit up and take notice.

"When we found out about Evanite, that's when we began to question how all the decisions were made," Koenitzer said.

For many who've taken the time to sound off about the plan, the numbers just don't add up.

Opponents warn that the plan isn't a free ride for taxpayers, as proponents claim. They argue that the plan's $35 million cost locks down property tax money in one part of the city that could be used for police and other services for everyone.

Further, the plan relies on debt to pay for projects - although backed by the district's collections over time - something that doesn't sit well with opponents.

"The present proposal for the Urban Renewal District is essentially giving permission to the mayor and City Council to borrow $33,300,000, and to pay a projected $2,500,000-plus in interest over the life of the UR District," wrote Kirk Nevin in a letter to the Gazette-Times and featured on Corvalliswatch.

Above all, opponents balk at the lack of specifics surrounding the plan.

"We have very few written commitments for exactly how our taxes would be used," Koenitzer wrote in a statement outlining opponents' arguments. "The Urban Renewal Plan is full of maybes and uncertainties."

Matt Neznanski can be reached at 758-9518 or matt.neznanski@lee.net.

Evanite question dogs urban renewal plan

By BENNETT HALL

Gazette-Times reporter

Much of the criticism of the proposed Corvallis Downtown Urban Renewal District has focused on the inclusion of the Evanite Fiber Corp. property within its borders.

Proponents argue including Evanite would bring more money into the urban renewal district and allow the district to spend money on public projects such as a riverfront path through the property.

Opponents counter that the 35-acre tract could end up being a drag on the district's value. They also say the path might never be built, and some have suggested the city could get saddled with responsibility to clean up toxic waste on the site.

Evanite employs about 120 people making glass fiber for high-tech filtration systems and specialty batteries for telecommunications facilities, but the company has downsized over the years and is looking to sell off part of its holdings. Currently, a 13.5-acre parcel along the Willamette River is up for sale for $6 million.

The Evanite property was rezoned mixed-use transitional in 2006. The idea is to allow redevelopment of the property over time for less-intensive uses, including residential, office and retail.

The big question mark hanging over that plan is trichloroethylene contamination. About 1,400 gallons of the toxic solvent was spilled at the site in 1978, spreading through the soil and groundwater.

After many years of cleanup work, including removal of contaminated soil and pumping of tainted groundwater, most of the TCE plume has been pulled back to a 1-acre section of the property. Contamination levels in that zone remain high, with much lower levels on some other parts of the property, and cleanup efforts continue.

Under a consent order with the state Department of Environmental Quality, Evanite is legally obligated to pay for the cleanup. Company officials say they've spent about $3.5 million on the project so far and have budgeted about that much for the next several years.

The parcel that's for sale is adjacent to the TCE contamination zone, but a DEQ official says that wouldn't necessarily preclude redevelopment there - even residential uses such as condos or townhouses.

"We know where it is, and we know where it isn't," said Max Rosenberg, manager of DEQ's western region cleanup section. "We would make sure there's no way the TCE could affect those condos."

In general, Rosenberg said, TCE vapors rising out of soil or groundwater move straight up. Unless the vapors rise directly into a building, he said, they tend to dissipate harmlessly in the open air.

While DEQ doesn't have veto power on development issues, Rosenberg said, it is the authority on toxic cleanups in Oregon.

"What we would do is if there were any development on or near the contamination, we would evaluate it to make sure there is no threat to people's health or the environment," he said.

Bennett Hall can be reached at 758-9529 or bennett.hall@lee.net.

URD would have 'small, negative' effect on schools

By Alex Paul

Gazette-Times reporter

The Corvallis 509J School District would likely feel a minute effect if the proposed Urban Renewal District is passed, according to Kathy Rodeman, the district's director of business services.

"Some urban renewal advocates have stated that there would be no effect on the school district because if there is a loss in property tax revenue, the state would make it up," Rodeman said in an e-mail. "I don't think that's completely accurate. There would likely be a small effect on the Corvallis School District because the loss of tax revenues would be shared with all other districts in the state. Our share of it would be about 1 percent of the actual effect, because our (enrollment count) is about one-one hundreth of the state's."

Rodeman said the State School Funding Formula in broad terms includes:

• Money from the state general fund and lottery fund.

• Money from local property taxes collected by each district.

• Money from timber taxes, common school fund, etc.

"They take the total of the expected money (after deducting transportation reimbursement and teacher average experience amounts) and divide it by the number of weighted students across Oregon," Rodeman said. "If any of these elements falls short, then every district in Oregon shares a prorated amount."

Rodeman said that on a district level, "they estimate the total amount of formula, then subtract expected local property taxes and revenues to determine what the state actually sends to us. When people say that there's no effect on schools, they are assuming that the state will make up the difference."

Debt service on bonds issued before 2001 are treated differently, Rodeman said.

"We had issued the Aquatic Center bonds before the date and our last payment directly on the old bonds is this June," Rodeman said. "So, if you had asked me a year ago, I would have said that there was a small direct, negative effect on us."