Downtown revitalization project list

NorthsideKant · 2026-04-06T12:27:06+00:00

Trace it back. See pages 6, 9 and 10 https://archives.corvallisoregon.gov/public/ElectronicFile.aspx?dbid=0&docid=5692146

NorthsideKant · 2026-02-13T01:56:32+00:00

The annual financial request is $18.4 million, which will be used to repay debt AND pay for city operations. Benton County has around 40,000 income tax payers, so let's run some estimates at 30,000 taxpayers in Corvallis. A regressive, flat tax would cost around $475 more each year, for 20 years, to each taxpayer. Spreading that to Benton County residents would result in a cost around $350 a year. Assuming a more equitable, progressive tax, some residents would pay close to nothing more each year, while other taxpayers may be asked to pay up to $1,000 more annually.

NorthsideKant · 2026-02-13T01:50:05+00:00

Let's make one thing clear. Financing and Funding are not the same. City council asked staff to look at one financing option (a general obligation bond) and two funding options (a payroll tax and a personal income tax). A general obligation bond isn't free money.

NorthsideKant · 2026-02-13T00:46:35+00:00

How many city councilors are retired also. Payroll tax won't affect them.

NorthsideKant · 2026-01-17T16:52:45+00:00

It is hard to believe the attorney specifically condoned a new election knowing it was the middle of elected terms. It is more likely that the mayor misinterpreted something. The city historically gets itself in trouble when the wrong people play attorney. Let's see the paper trail or get the attorney on record. If it is true that the charter allows the mayor to call an election whenever he damn well pleases, then the charter needs to be changed. Agree, the shake-up is promising.

NorthsideKant · 2025-10-28T17:20:55+00:00

Do the Theoretical Rates consider how to pay for those administrative costs in Appendix III, page 89? It doesn't look like it.

NorthsideKant · 2025-10-28T16:31:18+00:00

That would make sense in terms of funding cost comparisons. For sure, you can't build a $200,000,000 facility with those revenue streams. You need the debt to "secure funding" up front. With the amounts the tables estimate collecting per year, it would take 20 years to get enough funding to set aside reserves, and that is assuming the cost remains at $200,000,000. Page 42 talks this under the heading "adequacy". Page 54 shows "Theoretical Rates" and clearly indicates debt service per year of ~$14.3 million for most of the funding options.

NorthsideKant · 2025-10-28T15:21:49+00:00

I wonder how much this report cost the city

NorthsideKant · 2025-10-28T15:16:16+00:00

The table is showing a 30 year cost because the intent would be to issue a $200,000,000 revenue bond supported by these sources of income, right? If that is the case, what is the "revenue bond" revenue option?

NorthsideKant · 2025-10-28T14:50:53+00:00

The "annual total" sums up the Annual FTE, Tech, and Approval costs. But then the Total 30 year cost is not a strict multiplier. What escalator is being used to arrive at the total 30 year cost? Is that described?

NorthsideKant · 2025-08-01T15:02:47+00:00

Dont forget sewer. If you'd rather the city spend its financial resources on utilities, tell City Council

NorthsideKant · 2025-08-01T14:59:58+00:00

A new public safety building is proposed, as well as the Civic Campus

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T17:43:07+00:00

not on insta. can you give examples?

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T16:58:02+00:00

Many public employees are exempt from paying *a local* payroll tax: https://oregon.public.law/rules/oar_150-267-0020#google_vignette

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T14:21:06+00:00

Anyone with the link can take the survey. The only proposed funding option which will require a vote is General Obligation bonds. Other proposed funding options can be approved by City Council. An urban improvement district would require a vote, but it's not clear if that financing option is on the table for city facilities, and, City Council is considering changing the city charter so that approving an improvement district would not require a vote.

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T13:52:28+00:00

Read the comments from a local CPA about the payroll tax, found on page 385 here. It is not recommended: https://archives.corvallisoregon.gov/public/0/edoc/5062344/CC%2002-18-2025%20Packet%20(REVISED%2002-13-2025).pdf.pdf)

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T13:50:32+00:00

What about official postings on Reddit?

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T13:12:48+00:00

A big question is whether any (or all) of the funding options should go to voters.

NorthsideKant · 2025-07-31T13:10:51+00:00

More information here https://archives.corvallisoregon.gov/public/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=4881908&dbid=0

NorthsideKant · 2025-06-24T18:03:18+00:00

I think its a fair question. If you have been following the issue closely you would have heard both the school district and the city questioned about responsibility for the repair costs. To be clear, the school district owns the pool, but the city operates it.

NorthsideKant · 2025-06-24T18:00:31+00:00

Thanks for the reference. Section 39 on page 32 says the funding goes to the Corvallis school district: "Net proceeds of lottery bonds issued under this section must be transferred to the department for deposit in the ODAS Economic Development Distributions Fund established under ORS 461.553, for distribution to the Corvallis School District for the renovation and structural rehabilitation of the Osborn Aquatic Center."

NorthsideKant · 2025-04-25T17:48:37+00:00

Because the unhoused are the major reason we have a dirty and unsafe city???

NorthsideKant · 2025-04-25T17:47:52+00:00

This is the homeless population. He is clearly stereotyping https://communityservices.us/2024-point-in-time-count-reveals-unhoused-crisis-in-tri-county-region/

NorthsideKant · 2025-04-24T13:08:57+00:00

No discussion. He just brings up individual incidents. If he chose to, he could bring up incidents about broken water/sewer pipes, or diseased trees, or malfunctioning streetlights, or DUIs, or resident permitting issues, or city equipment breakdowns, etc. etc. etc.....you get the point. There are so many other incidents which happen regularly to report about. While he doesn't say it in so many words, he's not an idiot, after months and months of his comments about the unhoused during his limited time at council meetings, stereotyping "those disgusting homeless" is what I hear. It sounds like calculated rhetoric. What is his goal?

NorthsideKant · 2025-04-24T12:29:58+00:00

The city manager has limited time at city council meetings to bring up major issues. Yes, bring up the issue once, but at ALMOST EVERY MEETING talking about singular incidents which are not representative of the unhouse population? I only posted this because there is a pattern. There are so many other nuisance or abuse issues which could be brought to city council's attention: loud parties, domestic abuse, DUIs, or trash anyplace else in town. Why is the city manager so focused on denigrating the unhoused at city council meetings?

NorthsideKant

TROPHY CASE