Comments on: New Portland URA to focus on blight

By: Urban Renewal causing rift « Daily Journal of Commerce – Building and Construction News in Portland, Oregon and the Pacific Northwest

Wed, 13 Oct 2010 22:57:12 +0000

[…] in July the PDC went on a media campaign of sorts, pitching its newest urban renewal area – a 325 acre URA covering bits and pieces of the downtown […]

By: Nick Bjork

Nick Bjork — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:09:05 +0000

Sam,

Good points all around. I get that some people don’t agree with URAs. That is ok. But are you all really going to say that URAs haven’t helped other taxing districts? I get that money is diverted away from them, but if you are going to make that argument, than at least try to quantify the benefits of improved infrastructure and blight removal from those districts on the other end. It seems that people that don’t like URAs love to throw out the lost general funds argument, but never mention how those taxing districts benefit on the other end. Take Lincoln H.S. for an example here. PDC is looking at safe school routes and the possibility of helping fund a mixed-use development near the school. That doesn’t help the school?

By: SAM GALBREATH

SAM GALBREATH — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:54:10 +0000

“Blight”?! “New”?! There is nothing new about this approach except for dusting off the term “blight” and using in in discussions of why this, why here, why now? Remember, PDC got its knuckles rapped by the courts in the recently settled lawsuit by the Friends of Urban Renewal. This proposal has little to do with blight and much to do with looking for ways to fund some projects favored by folks in power (Remember the Flanders Street Pedestrian/Bike bridge folly?) There is little blight in the area. And, most of what there is has been inside URA’s for years. Watch for the next installment of this ruse in the proposed reconfiguration of the Convention Center/North Interstate URAs to direct funds to the wholly unnecessary redevelopment of the Rose Quarter by the Blazer Organization……..The purpose of Urban Renewal has long ago been lost on PDC, which simply seeks to keep the money flowing to its projects. The intent of Urban Renewal is to use Tax increment to incentivize community beneficial development which would not otherwise occur, to increase the tax base, and then, in a reasonable time, return the properties to the tax roles to benefit all taxing bodies: City, County, Schools. All one needs to do to see tat this is not happening is to look at how long current URA’s have been on the books.

By: Old Zeb

Old Zeb — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:35:43 +0000

Yes, blight indeed! Why the KGW television studios (in the “blight-zone) are so nasty to look at and and attract the worst sort of riff-raff. They definitely should be paid off and told to take a bucket of money and move on. …or have they already? Hmmm….

By: Old Town

Old Town — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:10:16 +0000

Commenter Howard is so on point.

Blight? Please! If blight was a concern – Old Town would be a developed neighborhood. PDC has become a self-perpetuating agency that continues to dream away with public funds that come at a cost to public services.

A Perspective

By: Howard

Howard — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:38:43 +0000

This is an astounding load of bull coming from the PDC. Reading between the lines revelas this will be not much different that any previous UR schemes Despite the suggestive and outright misrepresentations made by the PDC. Tax Increment Financing is a ponzi schemer pure and simple. The PDC has been distorting this financing tool for decades. This is how TIF really works. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:TIF_graph.pdf&page=1 TIF is dead and the PDC better get over it soon. If this new scheme were appproved it would continue the perpetual expansion of UR and ever increasing misappropriation of basic services budgets. Look for strong oppostion coming from the public at large who have caught on to the scheming.