The Forest Grove Urban Renewal Agency held a work session on February 9, 2026, to discuss the Building Improvement Grant program. The board reviewed seven qualified applications, scored them based on recommendations from the Economic Development Commission (EDC), and approved full funding for all projects. The session also included robust discussions on future program improvements, including potential minimum score thresholds, weighted scoring rubrics, and aligning the program more closely with the Vision 2040 plan.
Okay, we're gonna completely start over. I'd like to call to order this work session of the urban renewal agency. Uh it's a public, it's a work session, so no public comment will be taken, and the board will take no formal action. The topic of tonight's urban renewal agency work session are building grants, and we're gonna turn it over to our economic development coordinator, uh Miles Glowacke. Thank you, uh Chair. Um next slide, please. Um, tonight's agenda, we'll go over the vision 2040 plan purpose, background, the applications. Um you'll have time to score the applications um and talk about the rubric and then give any other program feedback towards the end. Um the 24 actions include 1.2 increase the volume and diversity of commercial business development and 1.10 city incentive programs to support retain small local businesses. Purpose of the presentation is to provide an overview of the building improvement grant, review the EDC's recommendations on the grant awards, score the applications, award grants, and highlight potential program changes for next year. Just some background. The URA established a building improvement program in June of 24. Um we awarded our first grants last March in 2025, and then the window for this grant cycle was open from July to December, and the economic development commission met at their last meeting and reviewed the applications and make a recommendation. Um the purpose of the billing improvement program is to provide financial assistance projects within the urban renewal area that do all these things that um and we expanded this list last year to include some of the board's um recommendations. The eligibility requirements, so all the applications you see tonight went through the eligibility requirements and they meet those. Um includes that it must be in the urban renewal area. It must be a for profit business or nonprofit that's paying city taxes. Um part commercial purposes, so it's not for necessarily residential use. This is we put a cap on the amount um of funding a single property can receive in five years, and it's 105,000. Um the project must comply with all local registr regulations, and you have to answer all the questions to be eligible. And the the application doesn't let you proceed unless you answer all the questions. Next slide, please. So we received um seven qualified applications this cycle, and there's a map and see they're kind of spread out across the district. We have 350,000 budgeted this year, um, and there's 337,000 in project asked or grant request. Um, the anticipated match from the applicant is 342,000, so over a half million dollars in potential investment in the URA through this program for this cycle. Next slide, please. So before we go through scoring, go through the applications and score them. Um is there a minimum score that you'd like the applications to meet to even be considered um by the board? So it's kind of this came up a little bit at EDC if there should be a minimum threshold that applications have to score. Um currently there isn't one, and um in this situation where there's more funding than asked, it may be beneficial to establish one, um, or in situations where there's more requests and funding available to make in the future help um clarify which projects meet the best qualifications. Is there any feedback from council for staff? I I have a quick question. So are you asking? I guess how do I want to put this? So did we communicate with the applications for the people, the owners that there would be a minimum score? Are we gonna say after the fact? Like, hey, we're scoring this now, but the council decided that you had to reach it. The only thing we provided um on the website was the rubric as it as you see it. As it as you see it. Okay, would council like um a minimum scoring? Go ahead, Counselor Schimmel. All right, to your point, Mayor. Uh not this cycle. Plug it in if we're going to plug it into the next cycle. Um but it might my question would be you know, I certainly want to go along with the staff's recommendation. How did you arrive at that recommendation? Was it based on the discussion in the EDC? I think it was more based on questions that came out of the EDC. Um so we looked at what would make sense, and that is that's just a recommendation, it's not necessarily the perfect number if the board has a different number in mind a discussion about it. So I heard from Council Shimmel that he would be not for this round of applications, but go moving forward open to an idea of a minimum score for eligible funding.