Toledo Economic Development Committee Meeting: Shovel Ready Sites Loan Agreement, February 19, 2026
Toledo Economic Development & Innovation Committee Meeting: Shovel Ready Sites Loan Agreement
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2026, 1:00 PM
Location: City Council Chambers, One Government Center, Toledo, OH
Committee Members Present: Sam Melden (Chair), Mac Driscoll, Brittany Jones, Nick Komives, Adam Martinez, George Sarantou (6 present). Absent: Cerssandra McPherson, John Hobbs III, Theresa Morris (3 absent).
The committee convened to discuss a proposed $18.7 million bond issuance to fund a Shovel Ready Sites Loan Agreement with the Toledo Community Improvement Corporation (TCIC). The presentation, led by Chief Growth Officer Brandon Sellhorst and General Counsel Paul Searing, framed this as a proactive strategy to address Toledo's population decline and $52 million budget deficit by stimulating economic growth and creating new housing opportunities.
Discussion Items
-
Context and Need: Sellhorst explained that over 63% of city revenue comes from income tax, but expenses are outpacing growth. Toledo faces a $52 million budget deficit this year and continues to lose population (over 113,000 residents lost since 1970). He argued that the most sustainable solution is growth, requiring proactive redevelopment of sites to attract new jobs and residents.
-
Return on Investment Analysis: Sellhorst presented data on the number of new jobs or residents needed to generate $1 million in new income tax revenue: approximately 1,560 jobs at $12.43/hour, 770 jobs at $25/hour, or 400 jobs at $100,000/year. He emphasized that proactive site preparation is essential to attract these opportunities.
-
Case Studies of Past Success: Sellhorst highlighted successful city-led redevelopment projects, including the Overland Industrial Park (Willie's Overland Jeep plant: 2,600+ jobs), the Gulf Oil Refinery site (Cleveland-Cliffs: 212 jobs, $130,000 average salary, $1 billion+ investment), Textile Leather and Medcourt properties (Vehicle Customization Facility: 300 UAW jobs), Southwick Mall (Amazon delivery station: 410 jobs), and Northtown Mall (Toledo Trade Center: 185 jobs at MOBIS, with a new 400,000 sq ft building planned). These projects collectively created over 3,700 jobs, $115 million in annual payroll, $3 million in new annual income tax revenue, and $1.3 billion in capital investment.
-
Competitive Disadvantage: Sellhorst noted that most established industrial parks in Toledo (e.g., Overland, Toledo Trade Center) are now full, leaving few shovel-ready sites for new business. He cited state data: in 2024, Toledo could only submit 30 responses to 88 statewide site searches, with 13 of those submissions being the same site (Toledo Trade Center). Over 60% of site searches requested an existing building (spec buildings), and 40% required over 100 acres. He warned that without new sites, the city will be unable to compete for new job-creating projects, especially with a new vehicle being built at the Jeep plant.
-
Funding Mechanism: The proposed $18.7 million bond would be issued by the city as non-tax revenue debt and loaned to the TCIC. The loan is coterminous with the bond (matures 2056). Annual debt service is estimated at $1 million. Critically, repayment would come not from the city's general fund but from income tax revenue the TCIC receives from the 1992 Toledo-Rossford Joint Economic Development Zone (JEDZ). Finance Director Melanie Campbell confirmed this dedicated revenue source means the debt would not count against the city's internal debt limit.
-
TCIC Structure and Governance: The Toledo Community Improvement Corporation was established in 2014 but has been dormant. It is a 501c3 entity governed by a board of four ex-officio members (including the mayor and council president) and four non-city appointments (recommended by mayor, confirmed by council). Board meetings are public and subject to Ohio Sunshine Laws. The new fund would create a dedicated, flexible capital source for site readiness (acquisition, remediation, demolition, and preparation).
-
Strategic Prioritization: Councilmembers questioned how sites would be prioritized (housing vs. jobs, specific geographies). Sellhorst said the TCIC board has discussed focusing on both jobs and housing, considering community needs (as identified by the Forward Toledo plan and comprehensive housing study) and market data (e.g., industrial companies seek proximity to I-75, rail, port). He proposed thinking like a developer to identify sites with the best return on investment (not just sale proceeds, but long-term tax revenue, permits, and construction jobs). Councilmember Martinez emphasized the need to avoid concentrating poverty and to work with the state on affordable housing tax credit placement.
-
Infrastructure and Tools: Sellhorst acknowledged that all successful past projects required city investment in infrastructure (e.g., roads, water/sewer). The city's Capital Improvement Fund (CIP) would need to be coordinated. He also mentioned tools like TIFs and a new state tool, the New Community Authority, to create dedicated long-term revenue streams to revolve the fund. Councilmember Driscoll suggested the TCIC could potentially loan money at low interest to the city for infrastructure, with payments going back into the revolving fund.
-
Council Questions and Concerns:
- Councilman Driscoll: Requested an amortization schedule (Finance Director Campbell agreed to provide it). Clarified that the debt is the city's debt but because repayment is from a dedicated source, it does not affect the internal debt limit.
- Councilman Sarantou: Inquired about the Dana site (now Overland Industrial Park) and the potential for housing at Franklin Park Mall and Westgate. Sellhorst noted the city does not own Franklin Park Mall land, limiting its ability to dictate use. A key takeaway: owning land gives the city control over its destiny.
- Councilman Martinez: Asked about target industries (advanced manufacturing, automotive, food processing, logistics) and the importance of focusing on small to medium-sized businesses. He emphasized the need to retain homegrown manufacturers who leave due to a lack of available land. He also raised concerns about concentrated poverty in affordable housing tax credit projects, urging coordination with the state.
- Councilman Melden (Chair): Praised the 501c3 structure for potential access to research and grant opportunities. Drew a distinction between wanting development (e.g., housing at Westgate) and making it possible (owning the land allows the city to set the terms).
- Councilman Sarantou: Noted Wall Street would view the fund positively as a sign of proactive economic development, improving bond rating discussions.
Key Outcomes
- No formal vote was taken. This was a committee hearing for discussion and information.
- The two ordinances authorizing the bond and loan agreement will be placed on the next City Council agenda for Tuesday, February 25, 2026.
- Councilman Driscoll requested additional financial detail (amortization schedule), and the administration committed to provide it.
- Councilmember Martinez requested further information on the placement of affordable housing tax credits (deferred to Rosalind Clemens).
- The committee expressed strong support for the initiative, with Chair Melden stating it was a "no-brainer" and Councilman Sarantou calling it "enormously important."
Meeting Transcript
Okay, good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order of today's economic development and innovation committee. Thursday, February nineteenth, one PM. Clerk, please call the role. Here. Habs. Jones. Here. Comrades. Martinez. Morris. Thank you so much. Pretty exciting. Pretty exciting day, I think, we have here. Um you never know how news is going to kind of roll out. But yeah, this is the presentation to council that we heard about yesterday. After the mayor's uh work announcements. Okay, well, I'll call you that then. Um Brandon, take it away. We're excited to be here and to hear what you have to say. Good, great. Thank you, members of the council. Uh Brandon Sellhorst, Chief Growth Officer for the City of Toledo, joined by Paul Searing, General Counsel. I want to thank you for your time. This is a really exciting uh proposal that we're bringing forward today. Um we wanted to spend some time with you to kind of walk through uh this in greater detail, uh, but there will be two ordinances on your agenda for next Tuesday. And so the thought is using this time uh to kind of walk through that instead of using the time during agenda is a better way to use uh to use your time. Um so today um what we bring before you is a is a proposal. Um, at a time where we're grappling with do we cut the budget, do we raise revenues? Um we believe this proposal presents the third solution, the most sustainable solution, which is growth. And so I want to give you some context as to what we mean by that, um, and then dive into a little bit of the details of the two ordinances that will be on your agenda. So, as council is very well aware, um, the overwhelming majority of the revenue that the city brings in is from income tax. Over 63% of our revenue comes from income tax. That's on withholding taxes on personal wages and also on net profits taxes that businesses pay within the city. Our income tax is growing, that has been growing for um you know, as long as this chart shows, which is 2015, it's projected to grow in the upcoming year, um, which is a good sign. However, as you all know, while this grows, our expenses continue to outpace our growth. Last year we faced a pretty substantial budget deficit, and this year we are also grappling with a $52 million budget deficit, as you all are deliberating that now. While these two things are true, we are bringing in more income tax than we ever have, and our expenses are greater than they ever have. We continue to spend less on our residents than any other major city in the state of Ohio. This graph shows here while our income tax is consistent with every major city in Ohio except Cincinnati, the amount of income tax that we bring in per capita is less than every other city in Ohio. And what that means to us is that our tax base continues to decline, and we have a less wealthy tax base than many other cities in Ohio. That coupled with our continued loss of population in this city since 1970, we've lost over 113,000 residents over that 50 year time period. And unfortunately, we continue to lose population. This is these are population estimates by the American Community Survey for what the population was projected to be in Toledo over the past four years. As you can see, we are the only major Ohio city that is continuing to lose population. So we started to ask ourselves the question well, what would it take to grow our revenues inside the city? What does it take to bring in a million dollars, let's say, of new income tax revenue, whether that's new jobs or new residents? So we started at the level that most Toledoans feel, which is the per capita income in this city, which is $12.43 an hour. That means they have an annual income of $25,000. In order to bring in one million dollars of new tax revenue to this city, we would have to attract over $1,500 new jobs or Toledoans at that wage per hour.
openpublica.com