I was appalled with St. Helens City Councilmen Phil Barlow and his comments on the local talk radio show KOHI last Friday. Barlow said that the city was pushing Urban renewal within the city limits, and describing how great it is, and that it would be no cost to the taxpayers.  Come On Phil! Do you think the people in this county are so stupid and naive that they will swallow your misrepresentation on urban renewal. Tell me who will pay for it? Where will the money come from? like not the taxpayers? like the money will come from the special districts? like who in the hell pays for the special districts Phil?  Like the taxpayers! Let's get real.  All you politicians start laying out all the facts regarding who will be footing the bill on development, who will be getting free taxes?  Quit making it sound like you get money from a special place, a place where money is free and it appears magically into a account. Nothing in life is free and when it comes to urban renewal and enterprise zones the taxpayers will all be sent the bill.
Look on your tax statement you will see COLCO Dev Agency.  That people, is Urban Renewal for Port Westward projects in Clatskanie.   PGE and the Ethanol plant get huge tax breaks and you are subsidizing them through Urban Renewal money.  Right now, the county is in debt approximately $38 million and at 6% interest for Port Westward, that bill will be about $54 million pay back by you the taxpayers. If I remember correctly PGE just got another extension on free property taxes. How many working people in the county got a free tax break or a reduction in their property taxes? How many peoples' taxes have stayed the same? None if very few.
Urban renewal plans are funded, to a large extent, from portions taken out of local government property tax levies. A taxing district seeking new taxing ability should consider if the tax would be subject to urban renewal division of taxes. Urban Renewal will reduce the tax available to a district. Because of this it is very likely that the district will have to ask the voters for enough tax authority to provide them with adequate funds after the urban renewal division of tax's,  The urban renewal amount would be subtracted from the over all budget of the district. In other words, the taxpayers of the county/ city will have to bear the burden of urban renewal plus the burden of sustaining  "other districts" normal budgetary amounts. It is a common event for the districts to come back to the voters for an increase in levied taxes to make up their operating budget shortfalls because of the expenditure of money contributed to urban renewal plans.
Urban renewal was suppose to be a way to help blighted areas to develop infrastructure and attract new businesses.  I can understand the principle of this idea but regardless of how urban renewal is presented or portrayed the final expectation of this idea always goes back to one thing; the taxpayer. 
While companies or businesses that have been rewarded with urban renewal money often pay little or NO taxes for at least 5-7 years. At that time the urban renewal pot of gold will be reviewed and the free ride given to the businesses is more often than not renewed for another period of time, this can go on for the entirety of their business life.
Oregon law says cities and counties can set aside property taxes from an urban renewal area to pay for improvements to spur growth in the same area.
Urban renewal was set up because it was hard to get private money to develop sites. Corporations did not want to spend their own money to develop sites for their companies. They were looking for the golden goose to pay for their development and the cost for the goose was laid on to the working people of the area.  Tax payers paid for the improvements to bring new businesses in. These businesses were able to construct their companies for a lot less because of the free infrastructure provided by urban renewal. They were also given free tax breaks that allowed the company to put free money into their stocks and a nicely added profit to their accounts.
Corporate America wants us to know that they are short of cash and need a never-ending flow of funds, they tell us that they need a free give away.   How do we solve this problem?  The answer is simple, charge the working family the taxpayers of the area. There you can ave a steady flow of cash, that would never dry up, and corporations can cash in on the cash cow that happens to be you the taxpayers.
Another problem with urban renewal is that once you get it you cant get rid of it. The rules and regulations are crafted to benefit urban renewal - not taxpayers. The next time that you hear a politician talk about how great urban renewal is ask them a few direct questions. Watch them stutter and stammer, and while you are at it, be sure to also watch your pocket book.