Comments on: Beaverton hits brakes on urban renewal

By: Howard

Howard — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:09:49 +0000

Craig, Are you being sarcastic and delusional all at once? How about the Round and other heavily subsidized "Mixed Use" flops versus 100% private Bridgeport Village and long time success Kruze Way. Urban Renewal that uses TIF to devlelop Metro's repeatedly failed model is in no way preferable. TIF is a ponzi scheme politicians like to abuse. Eevn TIF Bonds are more costly msking TIF a reckless choice. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:TIF_graph.pdf&page=1 I know the Clackamas County petition has been filed and the entire county government knows about it. They are also going to get another pettiion filed to stop the car tax and Sellwood bridge ripoff. Neither Beaverton or Clackamas County has a prayer of passing either schemes. The reason Beaverton's blew up is the Urban Renewal Committee had adults applying genuine due diligence and it revelaed that the emerging scheme made no sense at all.

By: A Perspective

A Perspective — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 21:17:06 +0000

While the Journal includes a definition of urban renewal – it fails to breathe those words essential to urban renewal – tax increment financing (TIF) – in the main article. Of course – gentrification is omitted.

Let’s hope that Beaverton property owners, residents and businesses grasp the fact that TIF diverts taxes away from the ordinary use and purpose of property taxes to pay for projects that they will have no control over. To maintain those services as the need increases over the next 39 years, assuming no extension, new sources of revenue will be needed – more property taxes.

Urban renewal – a Pandora’s box.

By: Nick Bjork

Nick Bjork — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 18:07:29 +0000

Hey Howard, I’m not 100 percent sure I get your comment. Are you refering to the rumored petition to make voter approval necissary for urban renewal activity in Clackamas County? If so I would like to hear more. I heard something about this a month ago, but no one at the county offices seem to have any information. It seems that other parts of the state should look into it. Beaverton citizens have to vote on urban renewal and it really seems to be helping their process.

Craig, not sure the vacancy rates for retail are quite that high. But I do get your point. SE/E Clackamas was at 5.9 percent vacant at the end of quarter 3, Sunset Corridor was at 5.8, Gresham was at 7.3 and, surprisingly, downtown Portland was at 9.3. Those numbers are from NAI Norris, Beggs & Simpson. My guy feeling is that they are all probably a little higher, but not that much.

By: Craig

Craig — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 17:16:04 +0000

Good point Howard. Who needs planning when you can just build more strip malls in Beaverton and Clackamas, to join the existing ones which by the way are about 40% vacant. That will surely make for a livable, vibrant community.

By: Howard

Howard — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 19:05:34 +0000

Yes Lynn brakes.
The same thing Clackamas County will have applied by voters as the Comissioners attempt the same kind of Urban Renewal scam to fund Milwaukie Light Rail and Metro’s subsidized development plans for McLoughlin.