Economic Development Committee — Portland, ME
Date: 2018-09-18

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
 DATE: September 18, 2018 (Tuesday)
 TIME: 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.
 LOCATION: Room 209
 Portland City Hall

 1. Review and accept Minutes of previous meeting held on September 4, 2018.

 2. Review and discuss possible Portland Impact Fee Ordinance.
 a. See enclosed memo from Jeff Levine and possible impact fee ordinance.

 3. Review and Vote to Recommend to City Council Assignment of the McAuley
 Place/Baxter Woods Tax Increment Financing Credit Enhancement Agreement
 a. See enclosed memo from Greg Mitchell

 4. Review and Vote to Recommend to the City Council the Proposed Real Estate
 Option to sell Lot 1 located in the Portland Technology Park.
 a. See enclosed memo from Greg Mitchell.
 NOTE: Pursuant to 1 M.R.S.A. 405(6)(C), the Committee may go into executive session to
 discuss negotiations for the sale of this real estate.

 5. Review and Vote to Recommend to City Council Proposed Amendments to the
 following Three Area-wide Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts and Ordinance:
 a. Bayside TIF District to expand allowable public investment options of TIF District
 revenue;
 b. Downtown Transit Oriented Development TIF District to increase the annual TIF
 District capture rate and expand allowable public investment options of TIF
 District revenue;
 c. Waterfront TIF District to expand allowable public investment options of TIF
 District revenue and geographic expansion of the TIF District; and,
 d. Ordinance Amendment to Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic
 Redevelopment Zone to expand the “growth” area for future Waterfront TIF
 District expansion to include the western waterfront from the Casco Bay Bridge to
 Sprague Energy.
 Note: See enclosed three memos from Greg Mitchell – one for each TIF District.

 6. Executive Session: Pursuant to 1 M.R.S.A. 405(6)(C), the Committee will go into executive
 session to provide staff guidance related to the following:
 a. Negotiations for extension of Lease Agreement with Casco Bay Island Transit District.
 Note: See enclosed confidential material from Brendan O’Connell and Greg Mitchell.

 Councilor Justin Costa/Chair
NOTE: No public comment will be taken on non-action items.
Next Meeting: October 2, 2018
 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683
 EDC Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2018
 Draft

 Economic Development Committee
 Draft Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2008, 5:30pm
 City Hall, Room 209
Committee Members attending:
 Justin Costa, Chair, District 4
 Nick Mavodones, at Large
Councilors attending:
 Mayor Ethan Strimling
 Pious Ali, at Large
 Kim Cook, District 5
Staff attending:
 Jon Jennings, City Manager
 Greg Mitchell, Economic Development Director
 Brendan O’Connell, Finance Director
 Bill Needelman, Waterfront Coordinator (Notes)
Outside TIF Counsel:
 Jim Saffian, Pierce Atwood
Additional attendees:
 Amy Geren, Portland Downtown



Chair Costa (JC) brought the meeting to order at 5:30
1. Accepting Minutes of Previous Meeting.

Councilor Mavodones (NM) moved to accept the minutes from the 7/17/18 meeting, 2nd by JC, Vote 2-
0 by all present, motion passed.

2. TIF Amendments:

The Chair noted that the TIF amendments proposed would not be acted on at the meeting, but this was
the first of a series of meetings on the topic.

Greg Mitchell (GM) introduced the topic by noting the goal was to increase utilization of TIF District
financing for City uses. This was not a proposal to increase so-called Credit Enhancement Agreements
(CEA.)

GM described the maps and districts that were included in the packet: Bayside, Downtown Transit ,
Waterfront. GM referred to a table in the packet that described uses and potential changes to uses.



 1
 EDC Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2018
 Draft

Bayside: 130 acres, runs to year 2033, currently at 100% capture. Changes proposed to uses include
workforce training, infrastructure financing, prorated contribution to staffing. No changes proposed to
capture or geography.
Downtown Transit: 421 acres, runs to year 2045. Changes to allowable uses proposed (pages 8-10 of
packet) are comparable to Bayside, with parking, transit services added. No changes to geography, but
increase in capture from 22% to 100%.
Waterfront: Runs to year 2032. Proposed changes (described on pages 11and 12 of the packet) include
comparable financing and staffing provisions as proposed for Bayside and Downtown. Additionally, add
multi-modal transit, new pier construction, environmental studies, climate change planning and
infrastructure, and dredging. Keep the 100% capture.

The Waterfront is also proposed to add 15 specific sites and to expand the potential growth area to
include the Western Waterfront. The 15 sites were chosen due to on-going or near-term construction
plans, including public streets. The sites were listed with reference to the map.

GM also provided a primer on “why TIF?” describing district wide infrastructure advantages and the cost
savings created through “sheltering” new taxes from County taxes, State school funding formula
penalties, and State revenue sharing penalties. Two recent additions to the Waterfront TIF District were
noted (WEX and Union Wharf) as examples. Municipal sites were added due to zero valuation and
planned or potential projects.

Brendan O’Connell (BO) circulated supporting material describing the magnitude of the “sheltering”
effect.

Committee members asked clarifying questions on the magnitude of sheltering potential and dollar
value savings. BO noted that other communities are more aggressive in using TIFs to maximize the
sheltering effect.

City Manager, Jon Jennings (JJ) noted the use of such tools to finance critical infrastructure, as was done
in South Portland with sewer projects. The City Manager recommended the changes.

The Committee and Attorney Saffian (JS) clarified the distinction between capture rate and basis
valuation.

NM asked if property owners of effected parcels would see any impacts?

GM: No, payments would be the same to tax payer with funds set aside in a district specific TIF account.

The Committee and staff discussed the origin of the Waterfront Growth Area lines.



 2
 EDC Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2018
 Draft

Mayor Strimling (ES) asked clarifying questions regarding the location of data and the distinction
between “in district”, “out of district” and City wide. GM clarified.

ES looked to confirm that workforce training was available city-wide. GM confirmed.

JC noted that majority of use of funds to date has been for infrastructure and these changes look to
expand use of funds.

ES, JC, GM, and JS held a discussion on use of funds allowed for training and education under state
restrictions. It was clarified that apprentice programs would qualify under the general category of “skills
development.” A general discussion on adult ed followed where it was noted that State review would
likely influence outcomes. The need for English language training was noted.

GM noted the need for broad, flexible use categories.

ES requested clarification on why, in the Waterfront, “maritime industry” was added as a qualifier in the
use table for training. A discussion followed exploring both state rules and the city Waterfront TIF
ordinance.

ES requested a description of the tradeoffs between sheltered funds from TIF capture versus impacts to
the general fund.

GM noted that the Council can always reduce the capture from budget to budget.

JJ followed by noting the constriction of CIP funding and the opportunity to offset the squeeze on the
CIP by using TIF dollars. A general discussion related to sheltering and offsets to the general fund
followed. The City Manager concluded by noting the importance of establishing value now so that new
value moving forward can be captured.

ES questioned whether the potential for the City to become a “minimum receiver” community under
state school funding might offset the capturing advantages. Others noted the county and revenue
sharing issues.

Following statements from ES describing a hope for use of funds for affordable housing, the committee
and staff discussed the distinction between Affordable Housing TIFs and Commercial TIF Districts. GM
noted the practice of removing projects from Commercial TIFs to create or add them to AH TIFs. The
committee and JS explored the use of TIF funds for affordable housing, concluding that Commercial TIFs
were not likely suitable.

JS clarified that Waterfront training was likely mostly a local issue.


 3
 EDC Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2018
 Draft


Councilor Cook (KC) asked for a breakdown of capture rates historically.

BO noted 22% Downtown, 66% Bayside, 71 % Waterfront.

KC followed with a question regarding use of funds for finance costs versus project costs.

BO described the potential to bond projects through the CIP and then pay the debt service with TIF
funds.

GM added that the proposed changes would allow finance costs to be paid by TIF in all 3 districts.

KC asked if that included Portland Landing and redevelopment of the POT.

GM replied that Ocean Gateway and the POT, yes. Portland Landing, only partially as “parks” were
excluded from use of TIF funds under state rules.

Councilors concluded with thanks to staff and support for continued conversations on the topic.

3. Annual TIF Report

JC noted the good timing of the report to allow the Finance Committee to benefit from the information.

GM: Noted that this is the 5th year of an annual report. The report is a high level look at the program
for the Council and the public providing a complete list of TIF fund uses. While CEAs get most of the
attention, there are only 12 active single site TIFS; 6 affordable housing (AH), 6 Commercial – 3 of which
will expire within the next fiscal year, returning those tax $ to the general fund. GM drew attention to
Page 10 of the packet explaining base value and non-capture value. Within the appendix, there is a
project by project breakdown for every TIF. GM concluded by noting the transparency of the reporting
and staff’s pride in the work.

JC noted the constituent value of the report.

Other Councilors thanked staff for the work.

ES thanked staff and inquired if the performance of projects, such as job creation/retention, was tracked
and reported?

GM noted that would be additional work.



 4
 EDC Meeting Minutes
 September 4, 2018
 Draft

ES requested results of such inquiries be reported in the table. GM agreed. There followed a general
discussion by members on reporting.

Councilor Ali (PA) asked what remedy was in place to address non-performance?

GM noted that there was no “claw back” provision in the agreements. Additional research would be
needed, noting that such provisions were more typically required in a sale of property and not in a TIF
agreement.

ES inquired on the Imucell TIF and valuation totals.

GM noted the Personal Property was not subject to TIF, but will look into potential discrepencies.

KC asked if the City was maximizing value and if there was room for expansion?

GM clarified the size of the areas was totaled (page 6 of packet) and that there was room to expand
currently and more so after TIFs expire.

JJ noted the potential to expand to off-peninsula areas such as Woodfords Corner after cleaning up
issues on the peninsula.

Committee and staff held a general discussion on expansion potential.

MOTION: Councilor Mavodones made a motion to recommend forwarding to the City Council for
approval. 2nd by JC. VOTE: 2-0, passed by all present. Motion passed.

4. Executive Session to discuss potential sale of City land near the Westbrook Line

ES asked for disclosure of location of site.

GM described that the subject parcel was located along the boundary of Westbrook adjacent to the Pike
Industries site. Committee discussed the location and it was confirmed that the site was not along Rand
Road.

MOTION: Councilor Mavodones made a motion to go into executive session, consistent with state
statute cited. 2nd by JC. VOTE: 2-0, passed by all present. Motion passed.
Committee went into executive session. No additional motions were made prior to adjournment.

Respectfully submitted.
Bill Needelman, Waterfront Coordinator


 5
 MEMORANDUM
 PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
 PLANNING DIVISION
 To: Economic Development Committee
 From: Nell Donaldson, Senior Planner, Department of Planning & Urban Development
 Date: September 13, 2018
 Re: Impact Fee Study Update
 Meeting Date: September 18, 2018

 I. INTRODUCTION
 Earlier this year, the city’s Planning Division, with the assistance of the
 Department of Public Works and the Department of Parks, Recreation,
 and Facilities, began the process of developing an impact fee study for
 the city. The intent of the study is to explore the potential for three
 municipal impact fees, for parks and recreation facilities,
 transportation, and wastewater, as a means of establishing a
 predictable, transparent, and equitable system for mitigating the
 impacts of development as it occurs in Portland over the next 10 years.

 Planning Division staff met with the Economic Development
 Committee to introduce the Impact Fee Study in June of this year.
 That meeting included an overview of impact fees, a discussion on the
 ways that the city currently addresses mitigation of development
 impacts, and a brief synopsis of the scope of work for the study
 (Attachment 2). The purpose of this second EDC meeting is to
 provide an update on the study, present a set of preliminary maximum
 defensible fee calculations, share draft ordinance language, and gather
 committee feedback prior to presenting to the full Council in a
 workshop scheduled for September 24.

 2. BACKGROUND ON IMPACT FEES
 A. What are impact fees?
 Impact fees are charges paid by new development to fund the
 cost of providing municipal facilities to serve that development.
 This idea is premised on the concept that when development
 occurs, it can bring many benefits, but it also affects the existing
 infrastructure around it by adding more cars, bikes, and
 pedestrians to the streets, increasing sewer and stormwater flows
 into city systems, and infusing additional visitors into the city’s
 parks and open spaces. In turn, these facilities require additional
 capital investment. As a result of this thinking, impact fees are
 widely used throughout the United States. Impact fees have been
 used in some communities in the United States for the past 50+
 years.

Figure 1: Impact fee process
Economic Development Committee 9/18/18 Impact Fee Study: Update

Table 1: Sample of Maine Communities with Impact Fees
 Transportation Sewer/Water Open Fire/EMS Schools
 Space/Recreation
Brewer ⏺ ⏺
Brunswick ⏺ ⏺
Freeport ⏺
Gorham ⏺ ⏺
Lewiston ⏺ ⏺
Pownal ⏺ ⏺
Saco ⏺ ⏺ ⏺
Scarborough ⏺ ⏺
Windham ⏺ ⏺
York ⏺ ⏺


 B. Where are impact fees?
 Although impact fees are particularly common in U.S. states that have experienced rapid population growth in the
 west and south, they are found in the majority of states nationwide. Concord and Manchester, NH have impact
 fees, as does Burlington, VT. In Maine, the legislature laid the foundation for impact fees with the Comprehensive
 Planning and Land Use Regulation Act of 1987. In the time since, communities across the state, mostly in southern
 Maine, have developed and implemented impact fee ordinances (Table 1).

 C. How may impact fees be used?
 The uses of impact fees vary widely, depending on state enabling legislation, but in all cases impact fees may only
 be used on capital projects to construct, expand, or replace infrastructure required to serve new development. In
 Maine, impact fees may be used for transportation projects, public safety facilities, sewer and water systems,
 parks and open space, and school improvements. Impact fees may not be used to pay for operations or
 maintenance, and may not be used to address existing deficiencies in these systems.

3. MAXIMUM DEFENSIBLE FEE CALCULATIONS
Regardless of where impact fees are used, courts have established that there must be a rational nexus and rough
proportionality between the type and scale of development and the fee imposed. Per guidance from the former
Maine State Planning Office, “the expansion of the facility and/or service must be necessary and must be caused by the
development; the fees charged must be based on the costs of the new facility/service apportioned to the new
development; and the fees must benefit those who pay” (Maine State Planning Office, 4). Given these standards, in
order for impact fees to be charged, a community must conduct an analysis that identifies growth-related
infrastructure costs and apportions those costs to projected development, often by development type, on a square
foot, unit, or per trip basis.

The City of Portland’s Impact Fee Study is meant to provide such an analysis. To date, the study has included the
following work:
 A. Development of population, employment, and land use assumptions. The first step of the study involved the
 development of 10-year growth projections (i.e. the projected change in population, employees, trips, and
 wastewater flows for which impacts could potentially be assessed)(Attachment 3). This step included the
 collection of background data on population, employment, land use, and wastewater flows in the city, a
 review of trends, and a survey of data from other sources (e.g. estimates from GPCOG, PACTS).




 2
Economic Development Committee 9/18/18 Impact Fee Study: Update


 B. Determination of capital facility needs and current levels of service. The second step of the study involved
 the collection of data necessary to identify capital costs associated with projected growth:
 • The Department of Parks, Recreation, and Facilities provided an inventory of current parks and
 recreation facilities and identified replacement costs for each. This inventory was used to calculate
 existing level of service for parks and recreation facilities on a per capita and per job basis.
 • The Department of Public Works generated capital transportation and wastewater project lists
 based on recent Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) requests. Given the volume of the transportation
 projects, projects were subsequently categorized as high-, medium-, and low-readiness. DPW staff
 then determined the proportion of these capital projects, if any, attributable to future growth, based
 on project location and project type.
 C. Development of maximum defensible fee calculations. In the third step of the study, different commonly-
 used impact fee methodologies were reviewed for suitability with respect to the three impact fee categories
 under consideration. Subsequently, maximum defensible fee calculations were developed:
 • The existing parks and recreation inventory, replacement cost figures, and growth factors from the
 demographic analysis were combined to calculate maximum defensible parks fees for residential and
 non-residential land uses. This fee is based on an incremental expansion model, which is premised
 on the concept that, as growth occurs, it pays to maintain existing levels of service for parks and
 recreation facilities.
 • Transportation fees were calculated using a plan-based approach. The share of high-readiness
 capital projects that could be attributed to growth was allocated across projected increases in
 person trips associated with population and employment projections, resulting in maximum
 defensible transportation fees for both residential and non-residential land uses.
 • Likewise, for the wastewater fee calculations, a plan-based approach was used. Again, the share of
 capital project costs that could be attributed to growth was apportioned over projected increases in
 wastewater flows, resulting in maximum defensible wastewater fee calculations based on meter size.
 D. Stakeholder outreach. In late July, these initial maximum supportable fee calculations were shared with the
 study’s stakeholder group, consisting of neighborhood representatives, developers, and representatives of
 organizations with a stake in economic development in the community more broadly. This group reviewed
 the calculations and provided valuable feedback on methodology, assumptions, and the level of the maximum
 defensible fee calculations.
 E. Revisions to maximum defensible fee calculations. In response to these comments, DPW, Parks and
 Recreation, and Planning staff met to discuss ways in which to respond to comments and modify
 assumptions to develop a revised set of fees. As a product of these discussions, several changes were made
 to the assumptions, including:

 • Adding additional non-residential uses to the parks fee
 • Eliminating parks vehicles and recreation facilities for which the city is unlikely to expand capacity in
 the future
 • Modifying assumptions regarding future MaineDOT/federal funding
 • Modifying city/growth shares for some transportation capital projects
 • Broadening land use categories on the transportation fee
 • Modifying the wastewater fee to include a credit for future stormwater and wastewater fees that will
 cover existing debt service

 The resulting fee calculations are those presented here (Attachment 4). These revised fee calculations are
 significantly lower than the calculations prepared in the early summer and originally presented to the



 3
Economic Development Committee 9/18/18 Impact Fee Study: Update


 stakeholder group. This means that the fees will not go as far as those initially calculated in terms of covering
 growth-related infrastructure costs in the city. As a result, the City will need to look to the General Fund and
 other sources to cover a larger portion of these costs.

 F. Analysis of maximum defensible fee calculations. In addition to gathering feedback on the revised maximum
 supportable fee calculations from this committee, the Planning Board, and the full City Council over the
 coming week, staff has shared the revised fee calculations with the stakeholder group and offered to meet
 with members of the group to review and discuss. Staff has also engaged a third party to assess the potential
 impact of the fee calculations on various development types. Last, the impact fee consultant has begun an
 analysis to examine the effect of the maximum supportable fee calculations on housing affordability within
 the city.

4. DRAFT ORDINANCE
In order to collect impact fees, municipalities must have enacted a council-adopted ordinance that meets a series of
requirements established by state statute. These requirements include the provision of language to address the
relationship between fees and growth’s share of infrastructure costs, the treatment of revenues generated from
impact fees, timely use of impact fees, and refunds (Title 30-A MRSA §4354). Staff has used the state statute, impact
fee ordinances from communities in Maine and nationwide, and guidance from the former State Planning Office to
develop draft ordinance language to accompany the fee calculations (Attachment 5). This ordinance language
addresses not only the technical requirements of the statute but issues critical to the administration of impact fees:
 A. Applicability. The draft ordinance is written such that any development on a site that generates an increase
 in impact would be subject to impact fees. This would include new development, additions to existing
 buildings which result in net new residential units, non-residential square footage, or wastewater meters, and
 changes of use which result in a net increase in impact per the impact fee schedule.
 B. Impact fee schedule and basic guidelines for the calculation of the fee. The draft ordinance includes
 language designed to clarify methods for calculating fees for mixed-use development, redevelopment,
 additions, and changes of use.
 C. Provisions for the modification of the fee amount. The draft ordinance has been written to allow the
 Planning Board, based on a property-owner’s application, to grant a credit against required impact fees for
 any infrastructure improvements made by a developer which are part of or equivalent to the projects for
 which impact fees are being collected. Likewise, the draft ordinance includes language allowing the Planning
 Board to modify or waive impact fees for developers that can prove that a proposed use will have no or
 significantly-diminished demands on the capital facilities for which impact fees are being collected.
 D. Waivers for affordable housing. The draft ordinance includes a reference to Division 30, which provides for
 fee reductions for affordable housing developments. Under the draft ordinance, the existing fee reductions
 granted in Division 30 would apply to impact fees.
 E. Administration of funds. Lastly, the draft ordinance language also addresses the timing of impact fee
 collection, accounting procedures, and procedure for refunds as necessary.

The draft ordinance has been reviewed by Corporation Counsel. It is anticipated that Corporation Counsel will
continue to review as future revised drafts are developed. Simultaneously, staff has begun discussions with Finance
and Inspections on how fees would be collected and administered.

5. COMPARISON WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM
At previous meetings on the Impact Fee Study, questions have been raised about the city’s current system for
collecting mitigation for projects that have impacts on municipal infrastructure. The City of Portland’s existing site
plan ordinance allows the city to require mitigation “so as to be consistent with City Council approved master plans
and facilities plans and with off-premises infrastructure, including but not limited to sewer and stormwater, streets,


 4
Economic Development Committee 9/18/18 Impact Fee Study: Update


trails, pedestrian and bicycle network, environmental management or other public facilities” (City of Portland Land
Use Code 14-526(c)1.a). Further, the city’s Technical Manual requires that developments that generate more than 100
passenger car equivalents obtain a Traffic Movement Permit (TMP) under the city’s delegated review authority. The
issuance of a TMP includes a “summary of findings and recommendations for improvements and other impact
mitigation measures” (City of Portland Technical Manual, 2). Under these regulations, the city negotiates mitigation
on a case-by-case basis predicated on an analysis of impacts identified through the site plan or subdivision review
process.

As a product of this process, in some cases, developers make in-kind physical improvements, upgrading a traffic light
or installing pedestrian signalheads and ramps at a nearby intersection. In other cases, developers are required to
make financial infrastructure contributions proportionate to their impacts. These contributions are held in separate
“infrastructure accounts” until they can be drawn down to pay for the improvement identified through the review
process. For reference, data shows that, as mitigation of impacts for site plans approved between May of 2013 and
May of 2018, the Planning Board and/or the Planning Authority required infrastructure contributions totaling just over
$1 million. It should be noted that this figure does not include in-kind work completed by developers and some
substantial contributions yet to come, including that from the Portland Company redevelopment. The majority of
infrastructure contributions collected as mitigation during that timeframe were for traffic improvements.

Our current system for collecting mitigation has some significant weaknesses:
 • It involves a negotiated process that creates uncertainty for developers, neighbors, and the City. This
 negotiation process takes additional time, and also involves expending costs that could otherwise be put
 directly into mitigation.
 • The staff audit of infrastructure contributions over the past five years indicates that the City is not
 adequately planning for growth. Projects are generally not fully mitigating their impacts and allowing the
 City’s plan for growth to be implemented in a timely fashion. As a result, the backlog of needed infrastructure
 projects increases without a financial plan to adequately fund the work.

6. NEXT STEPS
 1. Presentation to Planning Board at workshop on 9/20/18;
 2. Presentation to City Council at workshop on 9/24/18;
 3. Completion of analysis and revisions to fee calculations and draft ordinance as necessary;
 4. Planning Board and Council hearings

7. ATTACHMENTS
 1. Memo to the Economic Development Committee, Jeff Levine, Director, Planning & Urban Development
 Department, 8/31/17
 2. Memo to the Economic Development Committee, Nell Donaldson, Planning & Urban Development
 Department (without attachments), 6/5/18
 3. Demographic Data and Development Projections for Impact Fee Study, Tischler Bise, 6/5/18
 4. Revised Preliminary Maximum Defensible Fee Calculations, TischlerBise, 9/12/18
 5. Draft Impact Fee Ordinance, 9/13/18




 5
 Memorandum
To: Economic Development Committee

From: Jeff Levine, Director, Planning & Urban Development

Date: August 31, 2017

Re: Impact Fees


One of the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan is to look at a system of Impact
Fees for the City as a way of both funding city infrastructure, and providing predictability
for developers. This memo outlines what Impact Fees are, how they have been applied
elsewhere, and a general approach to an Impact Fee system for Portland.

What Are Impact Fees?
Impact Fees are a systematic way of having new development pay for the infrastructure
demands it creates. Cities that use Impact Fees choose certain types of infrastructure they
feel needs to be improved and develop a baseline and needs assessment for each of them.
Costs are developed for future needs and then assigned to new development as it comes
in. When sufficient funds have been collected, the improvements are made. Often there is
a feedback system in place – as improvements are made, a new needs assessment is
conducted and the Impact Fee system is revised accordingly.

Impact fees can be a logical and fair way to address public impacts of new development.
Developers are able to plug a mitigation cost into their pro forma and plan for it, rather
than having to negotiate mitigation and deal with the uncertainty of that process. The City
is able to devote energy into implementing these improvements, rather than into
extensive negotiations with each developer based on their documented impacts.
Neighbors and community groups will know what projects in their neighborhood are
being funded and more confidence that they will be completed.

Commonly, impact fees are collected to mitigate impacts on transportation systems; parks
& open space; schools; and stormwater/sewer systems. Costs are charged on either a
square foot basis or on a per unit basis. For example, Concord, NH, has an impact fee for
transportation improvements that charges $2,110 per new single family home, $1,449 per
multifamily unit, and $1.70 per square foot of office space. Concord also charges a per
unit fee for recreational facilities and for schools.
 Impact Fees Memorandum to Economic Development Committee 8/31/17
 Page 2

It is critical that any impact fee system be based on solid data regarding current and
future needs, as well as meeting tests established by the U.S. Supreme Court related to
the fees having a rational nexus to the development (Nollan v. California Coastal
Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987)) and have rough proportionality to the actual impact of
the project (Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994).)

The American Planning Association has a policy guide on impact fees that provides a
solid basis for thinking about their utility:

 “Impact Fees, when based on a comprehensive plan and used in conjunction with
 a sound capital improvement plan, can be an effective too for ensuring adequate
 infrastructure to accommodate growth where and when it is anticipated”

Where Are They Used Nationally?
Impact fees are used in a majority of states nationwide. A 2015 survey looked at 270
communities using impact fees as part of their development review process in 29 states
and found the average impact fee for single family homes was $11,868 and the average
impact fee for office development was $4,356/1000 square feet. 1




1
 National Impact Fee Survey 2015, Clancy Mullen, Duncan Associates, Austin, TX
 Impact Fees Memorandum to Economic Development Committee 8/31/17
 Page 3



Impact fees are most common in Florida, Colorado, the southwest, and the far west.
However, communities in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont use Impact Fees.
Municipalities in Massachusetts are not permitted to charge impact fees for development,
except in very limited cases.

Only 10 states (including Maine) have specific state legislation authorizing the use of
impact fees generally. In many other states, local governments have pursued impact fees,
either through home rule authority or other mechanisms.

Some communities similar to Portland have well established impact fee systems,
including Concord, NH; Manchester, NH; and Burlington, VT. Generally larger cities
have not implemented impact fee systems, although Chicago has an impact fee system for
parks and open spaces.

In Oakland, California, there is a proposed impact fee system that is a useful example for
Portland, in that it is comprehensive in approach and does not tie the fees to specific
improvements. Their zone approach is an interesting methodology for a densely-
developed city.

What About in Maine?
Maine’s legislature authorized the use of impact fees in 1987 as part of an overall update
to the state’s planning and land use laws. Title 30-A M.R.S. §4354allows cities to pass an
ordinance to require collection of impact fees for a variety of uses, including wastewater
collection and treatment; solid waste facilities; fire protection; transportation; and parks
and open space. While public education is not listed as an explicitly authorized purpose,
it has been accepted as another authorized use for impact fees in Maine.

Several communities in Maine have adopted impact fees for a variety of uses. These
include:

 • York, where they collect impact fees for schools, water, and sewer infrastructure;
 • Scarborough, where they collect impact fees for specific transportation
 improvements and for schools;
 • Gorham, where they collect impact fees for water improvements; open space and
 recreation; and schools; and
 • Saco, where they collect impact fees for wastewater improvements.

What Types of Impact Fees are Used?
As mentioned above, impact fees are used for a variety of public infrastructure needs.
The most common fees are for:

 • Schools
 • Wastewater and Stormwater
 Impact Fees Memorandum to Economic Development Committee 8/31/17
 Page 4

 • Water Supply
 • Transportation Infrastructure
 • Parks, Recreation and Open Space
 • Libraries
 • Public Safety

Fees were traditionally charged at a uniform level for each use. More recently there has
been some stratification of fees. For example, some communities charge school impact
fees for homes with three or more bedrooms only, or charge a lower fee for smaller units.
Similarly, some impact fee systems charge less or nothing for developments utilizing
existing infrastructure, such as in a traditional town center.




 Source: National Impact Fee Survey 2015, Clancy Mullen, Duncan Associates, Austin, TX

What Current City Policies and Ordinances are Similar to Impact Fees?
As part of the City’s site plan review process, and as delegated by the state to issue
Traffic Movement Permits (TMP) for the Maine Department of Transportation,
mitigation is currently negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Applicants submit a
transportation study, stormwater analysis, and other documentation outlining their
estimates of the impact of the development on City infrastructure. Sometimes these
studies suggest mitigation proposals, and sometimes they find that no mitigation is
required. City staff and consultants review these studies and offer a response. As part of
the process, a mitigation package is approved as part of the site plan approval and TMP
process.
 Impact Fees Memorandum to Economic Development Committee 8/31/17
 Page 5

Sometimes the mitigation involves a physical improvement, such as a new traffic light.
Sometimes they involve an in-kind contribution to a future improvement. These
contributions are held in discrete accounts in the City system until sufficient funds have
been found to complete these improvements. These contributions have some similarity to
impact fees but are not as comprehensive. As a result, the City may have half of the cost
of a particular improvement in an account for some time, but does not have the funds
needed to complete that improvement.

The current system, particularly for TMP’s, is based on a “first past the threshold”
trigger. In other words, until an intersection fails, developers are not asked to fund any
improvements. Once the intersection fails, the cost of addressing that failure falls to the
developer whose project created that last increment of impact. While that can both help
and hurt the same development, it creates conflict and is not as fair as an impact fee
system that would have been collecting funds from developers all along.

There is a limited form of impact fees in effect in Portland for projects that wish to
reduce their parking requirement. This voluntary fee-in-lieu-of parking system in effect
on the Peninsula in certain zones. That system, created in 2010, allows developers to pay
a fee rather than provide some of their parking on-site. That fee goes into the Sustainable
Transportation Fund and is used to fund transportation alternatives, such as transit
improvements, bike parking, and sidewalks. While this ordinance has had some
successes, it is very limited in scope. Similarly, the inclusionary zoning ordinance is
based on a study that connects new housing development and affordable housing needs.

At present City mitigation efforts are limited to transportation, sewer and stormwater,
and, very occasionally, school impacts. There is no systematic process for funding
mitigation for the other categories listed above. As part of the 58 Fore Street TMP, staff
negotiated a pilot impact fee system for transportation improvements. That methodology
worked well, though it was isolated in that case to improvements specific to that
geographic area.

What is the Process to Create an Impact Fee System?
While it is tempting to simply create an impact fee system and implement it, there are
several important steps that must be taken to establish the public policy and legal
framework for an effective program.

 1. A city should first complete a Comprehensive Plan or comparable document that
 establishes the planning goal of an impact fee system and, as much as possible,
 sets city goals for infrastructure baselines. The recently approved Comprehensive
 Plan does much of this work, as do other studies completed in the past few years,
 such as the Trust for Public Land parks and open space study.

 2. The City needs to determine in what areas impact fees will be pursued. Currently
 Portland only seeks mitigation for transportation and stormwater impacts in most
 cases. The more areas in which impact fees will be implemented, the more
 Impact Fees Memorandum to Economic Development Committee 8/31/17
 Page 6

 upfront work will be needed. The cost to developers will also be higher, but
 greater public benefit will be provided.

 3. Those infrastructure baselines need to be refined and turned into a set of public
 improvements that will be needed based on expected development. The City’s
 Capital Improvement Plan does a good job at outlining these improvements, but it
 is fiscally constrained based on the City’s existing financial resources and
 bonding capacity. A more extensive list of needs, with estimated costs attached,
 will need to be developed. This can be very simple, as in the case of Scarborough
 where they simply sought to fund a few specific roadway projects, or more
 complicated. Alternatively, they can be comprehensive and address a number of
 impacts at once, as Oakland is doing. That would be our current recommendation.

 4. An impact fee study needs to be completed to link these costs and project new
 development. While it is tempting to skip the study phase, this study is especially
 important given U.S. Supreme Court rulings in Nolan and Dolan regarding
 establishing a rational nexus and rough proportionality for impact fee systems.

 5. The City needs to approve an impact fee ordinance with a fee schedule, and
 amend any other ordinances that may need changing to create such a system in
 accordance with 30-A M.R.S. §4354.

 6. Staff needs to be educated on the new system, and educate the development and
 neighborhood groups on it as well, to ensure that everyone is familiar with the
 new process.

 7. Staff needs to track the various accounts and complete the funded improvements
 when collections are sufficient.

 8. The list of projects and fee structure will need regular revisiting and updating. At
 a minimum, this should be completed every few years. Ideally this work would be
 ongoing as part of the CIP process.

What are our Next Steps?
With the approval of the Comprehensive Plan, the policy basis is in place for next steps.
The planned rewrite of Chapter 14 into an updated Unified Development Code is
compatible with replacing the current process with a more systematic impact fee system.

Our next step is to complete the nexus study that will document the rationale for the
amount of the Impact Fees. Staff has completed a Request for Proposals for a consultant
to complete that study with the $25,000 appropriated in the FY18 budget for this purpose.
Planning has been working with Public Works; Economic Development; Parks,
Recreation & Facilities, and other departments to prepare for this work. We hope to have
a consultant selected in September and the nexus study completed this calendar year. We
will then submit a proposed ordinance for Planning Board and City Council review.
MEMORANDUM
PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
To: Economic Development Committee
From: Nell Donaldson, Senior Planner, Planning & Urban Development Department
Date: June 1, 2018
Re: Impact Fee Study Update
Meeting Date: June 5, 2018

 I. INTRODUCTION
 In late 2017, on the recommendation of the city’s recently-adopted
 comprehensive plan, at the request of the City Manager, and with
 the support of the Council’s Economic Development Committee,
 the city’s Planning Division began an investigation into the “potential
 of a more robust framework for assessing development-related
 impacts” in the city (Portland’s Plan, 67). The purpose of this
 exploration, as stated in Portland’s Plan, is to
 “generate additional funding [for facilities and services], while also
 adding clarity and predictability to existing [review] procedures.”
 This investigation began in earnest with staff research and
 engagement of a consultant with national experience in impact fee
 design. This Economic Development Committee meeting will
 provide an introduction to this consultant and to the scope of work
 for the Impact Fee Study.

 2. WHAT ARE IMPACT FEES?
 Impact fees are charges paid by new development to fund the cost
 of providing municipal facilities to serve that development. This idea
 is premised on the concept that when development occurs, it can
 bring many benefits, but it also affects the existing infrastructure
 around it by adding more cars, bikes, and pedestrians to the streets,
 increasing sewer and stormwater flows into these city systems, and
 infusing additional visitors into the city’s parks and open spaces,
 which, in turn, require additional capital investment. As a result of
 this thinking, impact fees are widely used throughout the United
 States to assess the cost of new development’s share of growth-
 related infrastructure needs. Impact fees have been used in some
 communities in the United States for the past 50+ years.

 3. WHERE ARE IMPACT FEES?
 Although impact fees are particularly common in states that have
 experienced rapid population growth in the west and south, they are
 found in the majority of states nationwide. Concord and
 Figure 1: Impact fee process Manchester, NH have impact fees, as does Burlington, VT. In Maine,
Economic Development Committee 6/5/18 Impact Fee Study: Introduction

Table 1: Sample of Maine Communities with Impact Fees
 Transportation Sewer/Water Open Fire/EMS Schools
 Space/Recreation
Brewer ⏺ ⏺
Brunswick ⏺ ⏺
Freeport ⏺
Gorham ⏺ ⏺
Lewiston ⏺ ⏺
Pownal ⏺ ⏺
Saco ⏺ ⏺ ⏺
Scarborough ⏺ ⏺
Windham ⏺ ⏺
York ⏺ ⏺

the legislature laid the foundation for impact fees with the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Regulation Act of
1987. In the time since, communities across the state have developed and implemented impact fee ordinances (Table
1).

4. HOW ARE IMPACT FEES USED?
The uses of impact fees vary widely, depending on state enabling legislation, but in all cases impact fees may only be
used to construct, expand, or replace infrastructure required to serve new development. Many communities use
impact fees to address growth-related capital costs associated with roads, parks, water, and sewer infrastructure. Fire
and police-related impact fees are also fairly common, as are school impact fees. In Maine, impact fees may be used
for transportation projects, public safety facilities, sewer and water systems, parks and open space, and school
improvements. Impact fees may not be used to pay for operations or maintenance, and may not be used to address
existing deficiencies in these systems.

5. HOW MUCH ARE IMPACT FEES?
Regardless of where impact fees are used, courts have established that there must be a rational nexus and rough
proportionality between the type and scale of development and the fee imposed. Per guidance from the former
Maine State Planning Office, “the expansion of the facility and/or service must be necessary and must be caused by the
development; the fees charged must be based on the costs of the new facility/service apportioned to the new
development; and the fees must benefit those who pay” (Maine State Planning Office, 4). Given these standards, in
order for impact fees to be charged, a community must conduct an analysis that identifies growth-related
infrastructure costs and apportions those costs to projected development, often by development type, on a square
foot, unit, or per trip basis. The resulting fees must be established through a council-adopted ordinance that meets a
series of state requirements around the provision of language to address the relationship between fees and growth’s
share of infrastructure costs, the treatment of revenues generated from impact fees, timely use of impact fees, and
refunds (Title 30-A MRSA §4354).

As a product of the great variation in communities that have adopted impact fees, and the great variation in uses of
impact fees, the amount of impact fees varies widely from state to state and community to community. A 2015 study
of impact fees across the country by Duncan Associates, a national firm specializing in impact fee work, found that
state-wide average non-utility (i.e. excluding water and wastewater) impact fees for single-family residential projects
ranged from less than $1,000 in Arkansas to almost $25,000 in California (Duncan Associates). In New Hampshire,
the study found total residential fees ranging from approximately $3,000 for a 3-br single-family home in Manchester
to $5,000 in Concord. In Burlington, the study estimated a $5,000 fee for a 3-br single-family home. The same study
found that fees across the country averaged approximately $6,000 per KSF for retail uses, approximately $4,000 per
KSF for office uses, and approximately $3,000 per KSF for industrial uses.



 2
Economic Development Committee 6/5/18 Impact Fee Study: Introduction



6. HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO PORTLAND’S CURRENT ORDINANCE?
The City of Portland’s existing site plan ordinance allows the city to require mitigation “so as to be consistent with City
Council approved master plans and facilities plans and with off-premises infrastructure, including but not limited to
sewer and stormwater, streets, trails, pedestrian and bicycle network, environmental management or other public
facilities” (City of Portland Land Use Code 14-526(c)1.a). Further, the city’s Technical Manual requires that
developments that generate more than 100 passenger car equivalents obtain a Traffic Movement Permit (TMP) under
the city’s delegated review authority. The issuance of a TMP includes a “summary of findings and recommendations
for improvements and other impact mitigation measures” (City of Portland Technical Manual, 2). Under these
regulations, the city negotiates mitigation on a case-by-case basis predicated on an analysis of impacts identified
through the site plan or subdivision review process.

As a product of this process, in some cases, developers make in-kind physical improvements, upgrading a traffic light
or installing pedestrian signalheads and ramps at a nearby intersection. In other cases, developers are required to
make financial infrastructure contributions proportionate to their impacts. These contributions are held in separate
“infrastructure accounts” until they can be drawn down to pay for the improvement identified through the review
process.

Because this process is conducted on a case-by-case basis, it is neither as systematic or predictable as many would
prefer. Further, the system often penalizes the “last one in,” whose development causes an intersection level of
service to fail, rather than addressing the incremental impact of all prior developments. An impact fee framework for
the City of Portland would establish a more predictable, transparent, and equitable way of assessing the impact of
incremental growth on public facilities and services. An impact fee system would also provide the city with some
measure of efficiency.

7. IMPACT FEE STUDY SCOPE & SCHEDULE
In mid-2017, the City Council adopted Portland's Plan 2030, a new comprehensive plan designed to guide the city’s
growth and change over the next ten years. Among the plan’s recommendations is a strong commitment to exploring
new ways of funding our critical facilities and services, particularly as they are used by a growing number of residents,
workers, and visitors. The plan anticipates future population and employment growth in the city and suggests an
exploration of impact fees as a means of assessing capital costs associated with that growth.

In August 2017, the Economic Development Committee met to review the impact fee concept (Attachment 1). With
the support of the committee, and working with the Departments of Public Works and the Parks, Recreation, and
Facilities, Department of Planning & Urban Development staff released an RFP for an Impact Fee Study in October of
2017. The purpose of the study, as written in the RFP, is to develop impact fee systems for multi-modal transportation
infrastructure, parks and open space, and wastewater infrastructure. In January 2018, the Planning & Urban
Development Department, with the assistance of DPW and the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Facilities, hired
TischlerBise, a consulting firm with national experience in impact fee design, to complete the Impact Fee Study.

The study’s first step is to compile the data, including population and employment growth projections, that will serve
as the foundation for the impact fee analysis. In late April, Tischler developed a final draft memo summarizing
demographic and development assumptions for the study (Attachment 2). This memo was based on data provided by
the Department of Planning & Urban Development, the Department of Public Works, and the Department of Parks,
Recreation, and Facilities, and includes discussion of population, development, employment, traffic, and wastewater
usage trends in the city.




 3
Economic Development Committee 6/5/18 Impact Fee Study: Introduction




 Figure 2: Impact Fee Study timeline

The next phase of the study will determine capital facility needs and desired service levels for each of the three fee
types under consideration. The study will explore various standard methodologies for deriving fees on a per unit, per
trip, or per square foot basis and identify the most appropriate methodology for each fee type. The last step of the
study will analyze projected funding and cash flow to understand the likely revenue stream and capital expenditures
associated with the fees. Draft and final impact fee reports, including potential impact fee schedules, will be prepared.
Ultimately, a draft impact fee ordinance, including fee structures based on these reports, will be presented to the
Planning Board and City Council.

8. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Throughout the process, the Impact Fee Study will include a public involvement component designed to engage key
stakeholders at major points in the process:
 A. Stakeholder Group – In mid-May, staff gathered an informal group of stakeholders for an introduction to the
 Impact Fee Study. This informal stakeholder group is meant to include a range of community members with
 a stake in the outcome of the study – from developers to neighborhood association representatives to those
 with a broad interest in economic development in the city. The purpose of the group is to provide feedback
 on major work products over the course of the study. At the May meeting, Tischler gave an overview of the
 study and the demographic and land use assumptions that will underpin the analysis in future phases.
 Subsequent workshops will address capital needs, fee calculation methodologies, and potential fees.
 B. Planning Board – Also in mid-May, the Planning Board met for the first of several workshops on the Impact
 Fee Study. This workshop, like the first stakeholder group meeting, focused on providing an overview of the
 study and presenting early demographic and land use assumptions. Subsequent workshops will address
 capital needs, fee calculation methodologies, and potential fees. Ultimately, the Planning Board will be
 responsible for reviewing not only the technical elements of the Impact Fee Study, but also reviewing
 ordinance language for potential adoption by the City Council.
 C. Economic Development Committee – Updates will be provided to the EDC at important study milestones.
 D. City Council – For impact fees to be implemented, the Council would need to adopt ordinance language,
 including a set of fees as generated by the Impact Fee Study.
 E. Other - A project website has also been developed (https://www.recodeportland.me/impact-fee-study/). This
 website will be updated over the course of the Impact Fee Study.

Early engagement with both the stakeholder group and with the Planning Board has yielded important feedback,
focused primarily on large questions around the city’s existing capital funding mechanisms and the economic
implications of impact fees. Questions arising from these early meetings included:
 A. How would impact fees fit within the city's existing framework for funding capital projects?
 − How do we fund capital improvements for each of the three impact fee categories now?
 − What is our financial exposure with a plan-based approach to impact fees (i.e. the way we're thinking
 about transportation and wastewater projects), and do we have a funding strategy for filling any
 gaps?
 − What is our broader strategy for filling capital funding gaps in the city?
 − What happens if growth slows or we enter a recession?




 4
Economic Development Committee 6/5/18 Impact Fee Study: Introduction


 − Can we quantify how development is/isn't 'paying for itself' with tax revenue right now? (and related,
 if developers are paying taxes, isn't this double-dipping?) What about the revaluation?

 B. How would impact fees compare to our current system of collecting mitigation?
 − Will it really replace the existing system?
 − Will it cost developers more out-of-pocket?
 − How much time and money will it cost the city to administer? Do we have the capacity for this?
 − How will revenues compare to what we're generating in mitigation right now?

 C. How will this affect the economy, housing choice, etc. down the line?
 − Who actually bears the cost of impact fees?
 − Will an impact fee have a negative impact on housing affordability?
 − Will an impact fee have a negative effect on the pace of growth and the city's economy more
 broadly?
Continued discussion on these topics is expected at the next round of meetings on the study.

 9. NEXT STEPS
 1. Staff and the consultant to continue work on the needs analysis phase of the study;
 2. Staff to schedule a second round of meetings with the Planning Board and stakeholder group to review
 work products and, ultimately, a draft impact fee ordinance.

10. ATTACHMENTS
 1. Memo to the Economic Development Committee, Jeff Levine, Director, Planning & Urban Development,
 8/31/17 (Not included in attachments for 9/13/18 memo.)
 2. Draft Demographic Data and Development Projections for Impact Fee Study, Tischler Bise, 4/23/18 (Not
 included in attachments for 9/13/18 memo.)




 5
 DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTION MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine




 MEMORANDUM


TO: Helen Donaldson, City of Portland, Planning and Urban Development

FROM: Carson Bise, AICP, TischlerBise
 Colin McAweeney, TischlerBise

DATE: June 5, 2018

RE: DRAFT Demographic Data and Development Projections for Impact Fee Study

As part of our Work Scope, TischlerBise has prepared documentation on demographic data and
development projections that will be used in the Impact Fee Study for Transportation, Parks and Open
Space, and Wastewater. The data estimates and projections are used in the study’s calculations and to
illustrate the possible future pace of service demands on the City’s infrastructure. Furthermore, the memo
demonstrates the history of development and base year development levels in Portland. The base year
assumptions are used in the impact fee calculations to determine current levels of service.

The factors provide assumptions for the final impact fee model and, once finalized, this memo will become
part of the final report and/or model documentation.

This memo includes discussion and findings on:
 • Household/ Housing Unit Population
 • Current population and housing unit estimates
 • Residential projections
 • Current employment and nonresidential floor area estimates
 • Nonresidential projections
 • Current and projected person vehicle trips
 • Current and projected wastewater flows

Note: calculations throughout this technical memo are based on an analysis conducted using Excel
software. Results are discussed in the memo using one-and two-digit places (in most cases), which
represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal
places; therefore, the sums and products generated in the analysis may not equal the sum or product if
the reader replicates the calculation with the factors shown in the report (due to the rounding of figures
shown, not in the analysis).




 1
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


POPULATION AND HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS

Impact fees often use per capita standards and persons per housing unit or persons per household to
derive proportionate share fee amounts. Housing types have varying household sizes and, consequently,
a varying demand on City infrastructure and services. Thus, it is important to differentiate between
housing types and size.

When persons per housing unit (PPHU) is used in the fee calculations, infrastructure standards are derived
using year-round population. In contrast, when persons per household (PPHH) is used in the fee
calculations, the fee methodology assumes all housing units will be occupied, thus requiring seasonal or
peak population to be used when deriving infrastructure standards. From the Maine Office of Tourism,
the Greater Portland and Casco Bay region saw 5.4 million visitors in 2016. As a result, it is not just
permanent residents occupying housing units in Portland. In response, City infrastructure and operating
service levels are sized to accommodate not just permanent residents, but seasonal residents, seasonal
workers, and visitors as well. Thus, TischlerBise recommends that fees for residential development in the
City of Portland be imposed according to the persons per household (PPHH).

Persons per household (PPHH) will be held constant over the projection period since the study represents
a “snapshot approach” of current levels of service and costs. Based on household characteristics,
TischlerBise recommends using two housing unit categories for the impact fee study: (1) Single Family and
(2) Multifamily. “Single family/Duplex” units include single family detached, single family attached,
duplexes, and mobile homes, as defined in the City’s land use code. Multifamily units include structures
with more than 2 units. Figure 1 shows the US Census, American Community Survey 2016 5-Year Estimates
data for the City of Portland. Single family/Duplex units have a household size of 2.38 persons per unit
and multifamily units have a household size of 1.59 persons per unit.

Additionally, single family/duplex units have a vacancy rate of 9.8 percent and are 70 percent of the
housing stock in Portland. Multifamily units have a vacancy rate of 9.4 percent and are 30 percent of the
housing stock in Portland.

Figure 1. Persons per Household
 House- Persons per Housing Persons per Housing Vacancy
 Type of Structure Persons
 holds Household Units Housing Unit Mix Rate
Single Family/Duplex Unit1 50,010 21,052 2.38 23,338 2.14 69.8% 9.8%
 2
Multifamily Unit 14,542 9,149 1.59 10,098 1.44 30.2% 9.4%
 Total 64,552 30,201 2.14 33,436 1.93 9.7%
Source: Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s ; U.S. Cens us Burea u, 2012-2016 Ameri ca n Communi ty Survey, 5-Yea r Es ti ma tes
[1] Incl udes deta ched, a tta ched, dupl exes , a nd mobi l e home uni ts .
[2] Incl udes s tructures wi th more tha n 2 uni ts .




 2
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


BASE YEAR POPULATION AND HOUSING UNITS

Permanent Residents

Along with the population estimate for residents in single family and multifamily units, the American
Community Survey provides population estimates for those residing in group quarters (i.e. student
housing and military residents). Found in Figure 2, the household population and group quarters are
considered the City’s permanent population. In 2016 it is estimated that the permanent population was
66,627.

Figure 2. Permanent Population, 2016
 Type of Structure Persons %
 Single Family/Duplex Unit 50,010 75.1%
 Multifamily Unit 14,542 21.8%
 Group Quarters 2,075 3.1%
 Total 66,627 100.0%
 Source: U.S. Cens us Burea u, 2012-2016 Ameri ca n
 Communi ty Survey, 5-Yea r Es ti ma tes


In the recently published Portland’s Plan 2030, several population growth scenarios, modeled by the
Greater Portland Council of Governments (GPCOG), are played out. The comprehensive plan shows that
a medium-level growth scenario would result in a 2030 population of 71,374. Using this projection for the
impact fee study, by 2030 the City of Portland is forecasted to have a permanent population of 71,374. To
estimate the City’s population in the interim years, a straight-line approach is used. Figure 3 illustrates the
growth in permanent population. In the base year, 2018, there is estimated to be 67,305 permanent
residents in Portland.

Figure 3. Base Year Permanent Population
 5-Year Increments
 Base Year Total
 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2025 2030 Increase
 Permanent Population 66,627 66,966 67,305 67,644 67,983 69,679 71,374 4,747
 Percent Increase 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 7.1%
 Source: U.S. Cens us Burea u, 2012-2016 Ameri ca n Communi ty Survey, 5-Yea r Es ti ma tes ; Ci ty of
 Portl a nd Pl a nni ng Depa rtment; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s



Seasonal Residents

As mentioned, the impact fee study will be using a peak population of Portland because of the large
tourism industry. It is assumed that City infrastructure and services are sized to serve a peak population
not just the permanent population. In this case, two additional populations need to be calculated:
seasonal and visitor. The seasonal population includes residents who have second homes in Portland and
the seasonal labor influx during peak tourism months. The visitor population includes overnight and day
visitors.


 3
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


To calculate the seasonal population, the study assumes full occupancy of the housing units in the city.
From the US Census data, in 2016, there were 2,286 vacant single family/duplex homes and 949 vacant
multifamily homes. The seasonal population is calculated by multiplying the units by the corresponding
the persons per household factor (PPHH). In 2016, there was a seasonal population of 6,950.

Figure 4. Seasonal Population, 2016
 Vacant Persons per Seasonal
 Type of Structure
 Units Household Population
 Single Family/Duplex Unit1 2,286 2.38 5,441
 2
 Multifamily Unit 949 1.59 1,509
 Total 3,235 2.15 6,950
 Source: Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s ; U.S. Cens us Burea u, 2012-2016
 Ameri ca n Communi ty Survey, 5-Yea r Es ti ma tes
 [1] Incl udes deta ched, a tta ched, dupl exes , a nd mobi l e home uni ts .
 [2] Incl udes s tructures wi th more tha n 2 uni ts .


Seasonal Visitors

The visitor population for Portland is found by first analyzing the state and regional totals. In 2016, there
were 41.2 million visitors to Maine. The majority of the visitors came in the summer, resulting in the
average daily number of visitors in the summer being 185 percent of the annual average.

Figure 5. State of Maine Visitor Totals, 2016
 Average Daily Percent of
 Season Total Visitors Visitors Annual Ave.
 Winter 5,615,670 46,156 41%
 Summer 25,328,066 208,176 185%
 Fall 10,230,660 84,088 75%
 Total 41,174,396 112,807 100%
 Source: Ma i ne Offi ce of Touri s m, 2016 Calendar Year Annual Report


According to the Maine Office of Tourism (MOT), there were 5,360,000 visitors (overnight and day visitors)
to the Greater Portland and Casco Bay Region in 2016. Results of the MOT’s visitor survey indicate that
the Portland’s Waterfront was the top attraction for 33 percent of overnight visitors and for 30 percent
of day visitors. The study will use a conservative method and use these percentages to allocate the
regional visitor total to the City of Portland.

In Figure 6, the City of Portland’s daily peak visitor population is calculated. The estimated total of
overnight visitors to Portland is 745,800. The estimated total of day visitors to Portland is 930,000. As a
result, the total annual visitors to the City of Portland is 1,675,800, or an average of 4,591 per day. Found
above, during the summer statewide, the visitor population spikes to 185 percent of the annual average.
This factor is applied to the City’s average to calculate the daily peak season visitor total. As a result, in
2016, it is estimated that the City of Portland’s daily peak season visitor population was 8,473.




 4
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Figure 6. City of Portland Peak Season Visitor Population, 2016
 Overnight Visitors to Region 2,260,000
 City's Proportion of Region 33%
 Overnight Visitors to Portland 745,800
 Day Visitors to Region 3,100,000
 City's Proportion of Region 30%
 Day Visitors to Portland 930,000
 Total Annual Visitors to Portland 1,675,800
 Average Daily Visitors 4,591
 Peak Season Multipler 185%
 Daily Peak Season Visitor Total 8,473
 Source: Ma i ne Offi ce of Touri s m, 2016;
 Ti s chl erBi s e Ana l ys i s


The study assumes that the visitor population will have a positive relationship and follow the permanent
population’s growth. From 2016 to 2018 there is a 1.02 percent increase in permanent population in
Portland; this is applied to the visitor population to calculate the base year total. It is assumed that during
the peak seasonal period the City’s seasonal population (seasonal residents and workers) occupies the
vacant housing units. As a result, the seasonal population is calculated based on housing growth,
described in the next section of the report. In 2018, it is estimated that the peak population for the City
of Portland is 83,250.

Figure 7. Base Year Peak Population
 Base Year
 2016 2017 2018
 Peak Population
 Permanent 66,627 66,966 67,305
 Seasonal 6,950 7,168 7,386
 Visitor 8,473 8,516 8,559
 Total 82,049 82,650 83,250
 Source: Ti s chl eBi s e a na l ys i s


Base Year Housing Stock

To understand the housing growth in the City of Portland, the building permit data from the last five years
is collected in Figure 8. Over the past 5 years there has been an increase of 1,435 housing units in Portland
and, on average, there have been 33 single family/duplex and 254 multifamily housing units constructed
annually. It is assumed this trend will continue and the averages are used to project housing development
in the City of Portland.

Figure 8. Permitted Housing Units
 Housing Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total Average
 Single Family/Duplex 26 53 23 38 26 166 33
 Multifamily 168 97 187 611 206 1,269 254
 Total 194 150 210 649 232 1,435 287
 Source: City of Portland Planning Department


 5
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


By examining parcel data provided by the City with a GIS (Geographic Information System) software, the
base year housing stock is estimated in Figure 9. In total, 56 percent of the housing in the City of Portland
is single family/duplex and 44 percent multifamily. Consistent with the City’s land use code, single family
units include single family detached, single family attached, duplexes, and mobile homes. Multifamily
units include structures with 3 or more units.

Figure 9. Base Year Housing Stock (Housing Units)
 Base Year
 Housing Type 2018 %
 Single Family/Duplex 21,047  56%
 Multifamily 16,575  44%
 Total 37,622 100%
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd GIS Da ta


POPULATION AND HOUSING UNIT PROJECTIONS

Illustrated in Figure 10, by using the projections from Portland’s Plan 2030 for permanent population, a
growth of 3,391 residents is projected by 2028. The seasonal population is assumed to grow with housing
development. The vacancy rates found in Figure 1 are assumed to hold through the projection period and
the seasonal population is found by combining the estimated vacant units with the corresponding PPHH
factor. Lastly, to project the daily peak visitor population growth, the annual percent increase in
permanent population is applied. Overall, there is a peak population increase of 4,279. Of the total
population in 2028, 81 percent is permanent, 9 percent is seasonal, and 10 percent is visitor population.

To project the housing unit growth in Portland, the five-year annual average of building permits is used
(see Figure 8). Over the ten-year projection period, the housing stock in the city is estimated to increase
by 2,870 units (88 percent multifamily units).

Figure 10. City of Portland Annual Residential Development Projections
 Base Year Total
 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
Peak Population
 Permanent 67,305 67,644 67,983 68,322 68,661 69,001 69,340 69,679 70,018 70,357 70,696 3,391
 Seasonal 7,386 7,432 7,478 7,523 7,569 7,615 7,660 7,706 7,752 7,797 7,843 457
 Visitor 8,559 8,602 8,645 8,688 8,731 8,775 8,818 8,861 8,904 8,947 8,990 431
 Total 83,250 83,678 84,106 84,534 84,962 85,390 85,818 86,246 86,673 87,101 87,529 4,279
Housing Unit
 Single Family/Duplex 21,047 21,080 21,113 21,147 21,180 21,213 21,246 21,279 21,313 21,346 21,379 332
 Multifamily 16,575 16,829 17,083 17,336 17,590 17,844 18,098 18,352 18,605 18,859 19,113 2,538
 Total 37,622 37,909 38,196 38,483 38,770 39,057 39,344 39,631 39,918 40,205 40,492 2,870
Source: Portl a nd's Pl a n 2030; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s




 6
 DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTION MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


CURRENT EMPLOYMENT AND NONRESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA

The impact fee study will include nonresidential development as well. According to the U.S. Census
Bureau’s web application, OnTheMap, there were 65,203 jobs in Portland in 2015. The education, health
care, and social assistance services accounted for the largest percentage of the total (26.2 percent).

Figure 11. Employment by Industry Sector, 2015
 Industry Sector Employment %
 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 18 0.0%
 Utilities 395 0.6%
 Construction 2,015 3.1%
 Manufacturing 2,714 4.2%
 Wholesale trade 2478 3.8%
 Retail trade 5,302 8.1%
 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 2,065 3.2%
 Information 1,529 2.3%
 Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 8,114 12.4%
 Professional, scientific, mgmt. , admin., and waste mgmt. services 11,893 18.2%
 Educational services, and health care and social assistance 17,057 26.2%
 Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services 7,354 11.3%
 Other services, except public administration 2,475 3.8%
 Public administration 1,794 2.8%
 Total 65,203 100.0%
 Source: U.S. Cens us Burea u, OnTheMa p 2015


The fourteen industry sectors in Figure 11 have been compiled into four industries: retail, office, industrial,
and institutional. The City of Portland’s employment is pretty well dispersed between the industries, with
the institutional and office industries accounting for the highest percentages of employment, Figure 12.

Figure 12. Employment by Industry, 2015
 Industry Jobs %
 Retail 12,656 19%
 Office 24,011 37%
 Industrial 9,685 15%
 Institutional 18,851 29%
 Total 65,203 100%
 Source: U.S. Cens us Burea u, OnTheMa p 2015


Since the breakdown is for 2015, a projection is necessary to estimate the job totals for the base year. To
estimate the current employment in the City of Portland, employment projections from Portland Area
Comprehensive Transportation System (PACTS) are used. Based on employment projections at the Traffic
Analysis Zone (TAZ) level, PACTS forecast an employment increase of 27.5 percent from 2014 to 2040. The
annual percent increase of the PACTS projection is used to calculate the employment growth in Figure 13.
The breakdown by industry in Figure 12 is then applied to total increase to calculate the growth in each
industry. In the base year, it is estimated that there are 67,270 jobs in Portland.



 7
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Figure 13. Base Year Employment
 Base Year
 2015 2016 2017 2018
 Employment
 Retail 12,656 12,790 12,923 13,057
 Office 24,011 24,265 24,518 24,772
 Industrial 9,685 9,787 9,890 9,992
 Institution 18,851 19,050 19,249 19,449
 Total 65,203 65,892 66,581 67,270
 Source: Portland Area Comprehensive Transportation
 System (PACTS); TischlerBise analysis


Base year nonresidential floor area for the retail, office, industrial, and institutional industry sectors are
calculated with GIS parcel data provided by City staff. In Figure 14, there is a total of 35.3 million square
feet of nonresidential floor area in Portland in 2018, with all sectors accounting for at least 20 percent.
Additionally, the figure lists the City’s land use categories used to determine the floor area of each
industry.

Figure 14. Base Year Nonresidential Floor Area
 Nonresidential
Industry Sq. Ft. % Land Use Categories
Retail 9,816,540 28% Multiuse Commercial, Retail & Personal Services
Office 9,317,766 26% Office & Business Services, Communications, Commercial Condos
Industrial 7,224,665 20% Manufacturing & Constr., Multiuse Ind., Transport., Warehouse, Wholesale
Institutional 8,909,498 25% Charitable, Government, Scientific Inst., Religious, Other Exempt by Law
Total 35,268,468 100%
Source: City of Portland GIS data




 8
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


NONRESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS

To project nonresidential floor area, square feet per employee factors from the Institute for
Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation (2017) are used. To estimate the factor for retail, the shopping
center factor is used, for office the general office factor is used, for industrial the manufacturing factor is
used, and for institutional the hospital factor is used (Figure 16).

Figure 15. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Land Use Factors
 ITE Demand Emp Per Sq Ft
 Code Land Use Unit Dmd Unit Per Emp
 110 Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 1.63 615
 130 Industrial Park 1,000 Sq Ft 1.16 864
 140 Manufacturing 1,000 Sq Ft 1.59 628
 150 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 0.34 2,902
 254 Assisted Living bed 0.61 na
 320 Motel room 0.13 na
 520 Elementary School 1,000 Sq Ft 0.93 1,076
 530 High School 1,000 Sq Ft 0.63 1,581
 540 Community College student 0.08 na
 550 University/College student 0.18 na
 565 Day Care student 0.19 na
 610 Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 2.83 354
 620 Nursing Home 1,000 Sq Ft 2.28 438
 710 General Office (avg size) 1,000 Sq Ft 2.97 337
 760 Research & Dev Center 1,000 Sq Ft 3.42 292
 770 Business Park 1,000 Sq Ft 3.08 325
 820 Shopping Center (avg size) 1,000 Sq Ft 2.34 427
 Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017)


Found in Figure 17, job growth over the next ten years is projected to follow PACTS’ annual percentage
increase forecast. In total, 6,890 new jobs are projected by 2028. Each industry sector is projected to have
an increase over 1,000 jobs, with office topping the four with an increase of 2,537 jobs.

To project floor area, the square foot per job factors are applied to the corresponding job totals. Over the
next ten years, it is projected that there will be a growth of 2.8 million nonresidential square feet in the
City of Portland. The office and institutional industries are projected to have the largest increases in floor
area, both over 700,000 square feet.




 9
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Figure 16. Employment and Nonresidential Floor Area Projections
 Base Year Total
Industry 2018 2019 2020 2021  2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
Employment
  Retail 13,057 13,191 13,325 13,458 13,592 13,726 13,860 13,993 14,127 14,261 14,395 1,337
  Office 24,772 25,026 25,280 25,533 25,787 26,041 26,295 26,548 26,802 27,056 27,309 2,537
  Industrial 9,992 10,094 10,197 10,299 10,401 10,504 10,606 10,708 10,811 10,913 11,015 1,023
  Institution 19,449 19,648 19,847 20,046 20,245 20,445 20,644 20,843 21,042 21,241 21,441 1,992
  Total 67,270 67,959 68,648 69,337 70,026 70,715 71,404 72,093 72,782 73,471 74,160 6,890
Nonresidential Floor Area (1,000 sq. ft.)
  Retail 9,817 9,874 9,931 9,988 10,045 10,102 10,159 10,216 10,273 10,330 10,387 571
  Office 9,318 9,403 9,489 9,574 9,660 9,745 9,830 9,916 10,001 10,087 10,172 854
  Industrial 7,225 7,289 7,353 7,418 7,482 7,546 7,611 7,675 7,739 7,804 7,868 643
  Institution 8,909 8,980 9,050 9,121 9,191 9,262 9,332 9,402 9,473 9,543 9,614 704
  Total 35,268 35,546 35,823 36,100 36,378 36,655 36,932 37,209 37,487 37,764 38,041 2,773
Source: Portland Area Comprehensive Transportation System (PACTS); City of Portland; TischlerBise analysis


PERSON TRIP GENERATION

Portland is a unique community with residents and workers using varying modes to travel. In general, an
impact fee study calculates future developments’ impact on the City’s transportation infrastructure. In
suburban, greenfield communities that concentrate on roadway expansion to accommodate new
vehicles, a development’s impact is best estimated by calculating the new vehicle trips or vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) generated by the development. However, based on the urban environment and residents’
travel behaviors, a multimodal approach is necessary for the City of Portland. This is also consistent with
the capital improvements identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. As such, the multimodal
approach will calculate the daily person trips generated by the varying development types in the study.
To encompass the varying modes of travel used in Portland, the methodology includes persons per vehicle
trip, transit trip, and non-motorized trips.


Person Trip Methodology

According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), there are several elements necessary to
calculate person trips. The following equation is provided in the ITE’s Trip Generation Handbook (2017):

 Person trips = [(vehicle occupancy) x (vehicle trips)] + transit trips + walk trips + bike trips

To create a more streamlined approach, this study uses “non-motorized trips” as the sum of walk trip and
bike trips. The Trip Generation Handbook outlines the general approach to calculating person trips
(further detail of methodology used is described in following sections):

 1. Estimate vehicle trips generated by development type.
 a. This study uses the vehicle trip rates found in ITE’s Trip Generation Manual (2017).




 10
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


 2. Determine mode share and vehicle occupancy.
 a. Trip survey data from the National Household Transportation Survey (2017) is used to
 calculate needed factors.
 3. Convert vehicle trips to person trips.
 a. This conversion calculates the total person trips by combining the vehicle trip mode share
 and vehicle occupancy.
 4. Calculate the estimated person trips by mode.
 a. The mode share split is applied to the total person trip rate to calculate the specific person
 trip rate for vehicle, transit, and non-motorized trips per land use.


Residential Vehicle Trips

A customized vehicle trip rate is calculated for the single family and multifamily units in the City of
Portland. In Figure 18, the most recent data from the American Community Survey is inputted into
equations provided by the ITE to calculate the vehicle trip ends per housing unit factor. A single
family/duplex unit is estimated to generate 7.6 trip ends on an average weekday and a multifamily unit is
estimated to generate 3.6 trip ends on an average weekday.

Figure 17. Customized Residential Vehicle Trip End Rates
 Hous ehol ds (2) Vehi cl es per
 Vehi cl es Si ngl e Mul ti fa mi l y Tota l Hous ehol d
 Ava i l a bl e (1) Fa mi l y/Dupl ex Uni ts HHs by Tenure
 Owner-occupi ed 23,000 12,312 680 12,992 1.77
 Renter-occupi ed 17,976 8,740 8,469 17,209 1.04
 TOTAL 40,976 21,052 9,149 30,201 1.36
 Hous i ng Uni ts (6) => 23,338 10,098 33,436
 Pers ons per Hous i ng Uni t => 2.14 1.44 1.93

 Pers ons Tri p Vehi cl es by Tri p Avera ge Trip Ends per
 (3) Ends (4) Type of Hous i ng Ends (5) Tri p Ends Housing Unit
  Si ngl e Fa mi l y/Dupl ex 50,010 154,055 30,926 202,330 178,192 7.60
 Mul ti fa mi l y 14,542 33,220 10,050 39,892 36,556 3.60
 TOTAL 64,552 187,275 40,976 242,222 214,748 6.40
  (1) Vehi cles a vailable by tenure from Ta ble B25046, 2012-2016 Ameri can Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.
  (2) Hous eholds by tenure and units in structure from Ta ble B25032, American Community Survey, 2012-2016.
  (3) Pers ons by units i n s tructure from Table B25033, American Community Survey, 2012-2016.
  (4) Vehi cle tri ps ends based on persons using formulas from Tri p Generation (ITE 2017). For single family housing (ITE
  210), the fi tted curve equation i s EXP(0.89*LN(persons)+1.72). To a pproximate the a verage population of the ITE studies,
  pers ons were divided by 286 a nd the equation result multiplied by 286. For mul tifamily housing (ITE 221), the fitted curve
  equation is (2.29*persons)-81.02.
  (5) Vehi cle trip ends based on vehicles a vailable using formulas from Tri p Generation (ITE 2017). For single family housing
  (ITE 210), the fi tted curve equation is EXP(0.99*LN(vehicles)+1.93). To a pproximate the average number of vehicles in the
  ITE s tudies, vehicles available were divided by 485 a nd the equation result multiplied by 485. For multifamily housing (ITE
  220), the fi tted curve equation i s (3.94*vehicles)+293.58 (ITE 2012).
  (6) Housing units from Table B25024, American Community Survey, 2012-2016.




 11
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Nonresidential Vehicle Trips

Vehicle trip generation for nonresidential land uses are calculated by using ITE’s average daily trip end
rates found in their recently published 10th edition of Trip Generation. To estimate the trip generation in
Portland, the weekday trip end per 1,000 square feet factors highlighted in Figure 19 are used. To estimate
the trip generation for retail the shopping center factor is used, for office the general office factor is used,
for industrial the manufacturing factor is used, and for institutional the hospital factor is used.

Figure 18. Institute of Transportation Engineers Nonresidential Land Use Factors
 ITE Demand Wkdy Trip Ends Wkdy Trip Ends
 Code Land Use Unit Per Dmd Unit Per Employee
 110 Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 4.96 3.05
 130 Industrial Park 1,000 Sq Ft 3.37 2.91
 140 Manufacturing 1,000 Sq Ft 3.93 2.47
 150 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 1.74 5.05
 254 Assisted Living bed 2.60 4.24
 320 Motel room 3.35 25.17
 520 Elementary School 1,000 Sq Ft 19.52 21.00
 530 High School 1,000 Sq Ft 14.07 22.25
 540 Community College student 1.15 14.61
 550 University/College student 1.56 8.89
 565 Day Care student 4.09 21.38
 610 Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 10.72 3.79
 620 Nursing Home 1,000 Sq Ft 6.64 2.91
 710 General Office (avg size) 1,000 Sq Ft 9.74 3.28
 760 Research & Dev Center 1,000 Sq Ft 11.26 3.29
 770 Business Park 1,000 Sq Ft 12.44 4.04
 820 Shopping Center (avg size) 1,000 Sq Ft 37.75 16.11
 Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017)


Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy

Data from the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) is used to approximate the percentage split of
total person trips by transportation modes in the City of Portland. NHTS has been conducting stratified,
random surveys for nearly 50 years with the aim to understand the modes and purposes of travel in the
US. For this study, the most recent survey, 2017, is refined to create a database of survey responses that
is both from similar cities to Portland and statistically significant. Initially, the national database of
responses is refined by location and population, the results are limited to New England metropolitan
statistical areas (ME, NH, VT, CT, MA, RI) with less than 1 million residents. The City of Portland is within
the Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, Maine metropolitan statistical area that had a population of
523,874 in 2016 (US Census American Community Survey, 2016). The database is further filtered to only
include responses from urban areas and urban clusters. Lastly, only responses for trips on weekdays are
included. As a result, there are 2,656 NHTS responses in the database that are used to approximate the
mode splits and vehicle occupancy.




 12
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Data from NHTS indicates the purpose of a trip which allows for the mode share and vehicle occupancy
to be calculated for residential and nonresidential land uses separately. It is assumed that trips for
residential and nonresidential purposes have different characteristics, so by calculating separately the
analysis results in more accurate trip factors. There are 1,447 survey responses that are attributed to
residential and 1,209 responses attributed to nonresidential land uses. Both databases are well within a
95 percent confidence level with a confidence interval (margin of error) of less than 3. 1

The transportation mode split for residential purpose trips is listed in Figure 20. Of the 1,447 total trips,
86 percent are by vehicle, 1 percent transit, and 13 percent non-motorized. Additionally, during the
vehicle trips there were 1,877 passengers, resulting in an average vehicle occupancy of 1.51 passengers
per vehicle trip.

Figure 19. Residential Purpose Person Trips by Mode
 Mode Trips %
 Vehicle 1,246 86%
 Transit 18 1%
 Non-Motorized 183 13%
 Total 1,447 100%
 Source: National Household Travel
 Survey, 2017; TischlerBise analysis


The transportation mode split for nonresidential purpose trips is listed in Figure 21. Of the 1,209 total
trips, 82 percent are by vehicle, 2 percent transit, and 16 percent non-motorized. Additionally, during the
vehicle trips there were 1,669 passengers, resulting in an average vehicle occupancy of 1.69 passengers
per vehicle trip.

Figure 20. Nonresidential Purpose Person Trips by Mode
 Mode Trips %
 Vehicle 989 82%
 Transit 22 2%
 Non-Motorized 198 16%
 Total 1,209 100%
 Source: National Household Travel
 Survey, 2017; TischlerBise analysis




1
  A confidence level expresses the certainty that the true mean of the population falls within the confidence
interval, the margin of error of the results.


 13
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Vehicle Trip Ends to Find Total Person Trip Ends

The total person trip end rate for each land use can be calculated using the vehicle trip end rate, vehicle
occupancy rate, and vehicle mode share. The following formula to calculate vehicle trip ends is provided
in the ITE’s Trip Generation Handbook (2017):

 Vehicle trip ends = [(person trip ends x (vehicle mode share)]/(vehicle occupancy)

This is rearranged to calculate total person trips:

 Person trip ends = [(vehicle trip ends) x (vehicle occupancy)]/(vehicle mode share)

By inputting the vehicle trip rate, vehicle occupancy, and vehicle mode share factors found in earlier
sections, the daily person trip rate for each land use is found. For example, the daily vehicle trip rate for a
single family/duplex housing unit is 7.60 (Figure 18), the vehicle occupancy is 1.51, and the vehicle mode
share is 86 percent (Figure 20). By inputting these factors into the formula, a daily person trip end rate of
13.34 is calculated ([7.60 vehicle trips x 1.51 occupancy rate] / [86% vehicle mode share] = 13.34). Figure
22 lists the calculated daily person trip end rate for each land use.

Figure 21. Daily Person Trip End Rate by Land Use
 Daily Vehicle Vehicle Daily
 Vehicle Occupancy Mode Person
 Development Type Trip Ends Rate Share Trip Ends
 Single Family/Duplex 7.60 1.51 86% 13.34
 Multifamily 3.60 1.51 86% 6.32
 Retail 37.75 1.69 82% 77.80
 Office 9.74 1.69 82% 20.07
 Industrial 3.93 1.69 82% 8.10
 Institutional 10.72 1.69 82% 22.09
 Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on
 (2017); Na ti ona l Hous ehol d Tra vel Survey da ta , 2017; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s



Residential Trips Adjustment Factors

A person trip end is the out-bound or in-bound leg of a trip. As a result, so to not double count trips, a
standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to trip ends to calculate a person trip. For example, the out-
bound trip from a person’s home to work is attributed to the housing unit and the trip from work back
home is attributed to the employer.

However, an additional adjustment is necessary to capture residents’ work bound trips that are outside
of the City. The trip adjustment factor includes two components. According to the NHTS (2009), home-
based work trips are typically 31 percent of out-bound trips (which are 50 percent of all trip ends). Also,
utilizing the most recent data from the Census Bureau's web application "OnTheMap”, 49 percent of the



 14
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


City of Portland's workers travel outside the city for work. In combination, these factors account for 8
percent of additional production trips (0.50 x .31 x 0.49 = 0.08). Shown in, the total adjustment factor for
residential housing units includes attraction trips (50 percent of trip ends) plus the journey-to-work
commuting adjustment (8 percent of production trips) for a total of 58 percent.

Figure 22. Trip Adjustment Factor for Commuters out of the City
 Employed Portland Residents (2015) 35,405
 Portland Residents Working in the City (2015) 17,958
 Portland Residents Commuting Outside of the City for Work 17,447
 Percent Commuting out of the City 49%
 Additional Production Trips 8%

 Standard Trip Adjustment Factor 50%
 Residential Trip Adjustment Factor 58%
 Source: U.S. Cens us , OnTheMa p Appl i ca ti on, 2015


To calculate nonresidential trips, the standard 50 percent adjustment is applied to office, industrial, and
institutional. A lower trip adjustment factor is used for retail uses because this type of development
attracts person trips while they pass-by. Pass-by trips do not generate further traffic as it is only a stop on
a trip for ultimately a different purpose. For example, when someone stops at a convenience store on
their way home from work, the convenience store is not their primary destination.


Person Trips by Mode

In Figure 24, the trip adjustment factor and mode share are applied to the person trip end rate of each
land use to calculate the person trips. For example, for single family/duplex housing units the trip
adjustment factor is 58 percent and the vehicle mode share is 86 percent, resulting in a daily person trip
rate of 6.66 for the vehicle mode (13.34 person trip ends x 0.58 trip adjustment factor x 0.86 vehicle mode
share = 6.66 person trips).

Figure 23. Person Trips by Mode
 Trip Person Trips/Unit
 Person Trip Adjustment Non-
 Development Type Ends Factor Total Vehicle Transit  motorized
 Single Family/Duplex 13.34 58% 7.74 6.66 0.08 1.01
 Multifamily 6.32 58% 3.67 3.16 0.04 0.48
 Retail 77.80 38% 29.56 24.24 0.59 4.73
 Office 20.07 50% 10.04 8.23 0.20 1.61
 Industrial 8.10 50% 4.05 3.32 0.08 0.65
 Institutional 22.09 50% 11.05 9.06 0.22 1.77
 Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017); Na ti ona l
 Hous ehol d Tra vel Survey da ta , 2017; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s
 Note: Tri p ra tes a re s hown per hous i ng uni t for res i denti a l l a nd us es a nd per 1,000 s qua re feet
 of fl oor a rea for nonres i denti a l l a nd us es .




 15
 DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTION MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


VEHICLE TRIP PROJECTION

The base year person trip totals and trip projections are calculated by combining the person trip factors and the residential and nonresidential
assumptions for housing stock and floor area. Found in Figure 25, in the base year, residential land uses generate 223,734 person trips (30 percent)
and nonresidential land uses generate 511,437 person trips (70 percent) in the City of Portland. Through 2028, there will be an increase of 47,721
daily person trips in Portland with retail, multifamily, and office development being the three largest contributors to the increase.

In the base year, 83 percent of the person trips are by vehicle, 2 percent is by transit, and 15 percent is by non-motorized modes. The majority of
the person trip increase over the 10-year projection period is from vehicles as well.

Figure 24. Total Daily Vehicle Trip Projections
 Base Year Total
 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
  Residential Person Trips
 Single Family/Duplex 162,904 163,161 163,418 163,675 163,932 164,189 164,446 164,703 164,960 165,216 165,473 2,570
 Multifamily 60,830 61,762 62,693 63,625 64,556 65,487 66,419 67,350 68,282 69,213 70,145 9,314
 Subtotal 223,734 224,922 226,111 227,299 228,488 229,676 230,865 232,053 233,241 234,430 235,618 11,884
  Nonresidential Person Trips
 Retail 290,177 291,864 293,551 295,238 296,925 298,612 300,299 301,987 303,674 305,361 307,048 16,871
 Office 93,550 94,408 95,266 96,124 96,982 97,840 98,698 99,555 100,413 101,271 102,129 8,579
 Industrial 29,260 29,520 29,781 30,041 30,302 30,562 30,823 31,083 31,344 31,604 31,865 2,605
 Institutional 98,450 99,228 100,006 100,785 101,563 102,341 103,119 103,897 104,676 105,454 106,232 7,782
 Subtotal 511,437 515,021 518,604 522,188 525,772 529,356 532,939 536,523 540,107 543,690 547,274 35,837
 Grand Total Person Trips 735,171 739,943 744,715 749,487 754,260 759,032 763,804 768,576 773,348 778,120 782,892 47,721

  Person Trips by Transportation Mode
  Total Vehicle Person Trips 611,790 615,750 619,711 623,672 627,632 631,593 635,554 639,514 643,475 647,436 651,396 39,607
  Total Transit Person Trips 12,466 12,550 12,633 12,717 12,800 12,884 12,967 13,051 13,135 13,218 13,302 836
  Total Non-Motorized Trips 110,915 111,643 112,371 113,099 113,827 114,555 115,283 116,011 116,738 117,466 118,194 7,279
 Grand Total Person Trips 735,171 739,943 744,715 749,487 754,260 759,032 763,804 768,576 773,348 778,120 782,892 47,721
  Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017); Na ti ona l Hous ehol d Tra vel Survey da ta , 2017; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s




 16
 DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTION MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


BASE YEAR WASTEWATER USAGE

Water and sewer account data has been provided by the Portland Water District (PWD) and the City’s
Department of Public Works. Within the database, residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional
wastewater usage is calculated. Additionally, with account data, the wastewater usage of an Equivalent
Residential Unit (ERU) is calculated as well. The ERU is the estimate of the daily average wastewater usage
from a household with a water meter that is 5/8 inches. In the impact fee calculation, a capacity ratio
factor is applied when calculating the wastewater usage and resulting impact fee for developments with
larger meters.


Base Year Estimates

Shown in Figure 26, on average there is a total of 5.7 million gallons per day of wastewater flowing through
the City’s sewer system from these four development types. The majority of the wastewater flows from
residential development, but commercial development creates a significant demand as well.

Figure 25. City of Portland Daily Wastewater Usage, 2018
 Base Year
 Development Type (gals/day) %
 Residential 2,933,364 52%
 Commercial 1,998,656 35%
 Industrial 542,244 10%
 Institutional 187,205  3%
 Total 5,661,470 100%
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Publ i c Works
 Depa rtment


Equivalent Residential Unit

The wastewater component of the impact fee study will use the wastewater flow calculated for residential
units that have a water meter of 5/8 inches to represent the Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). To calculate
the ERU, the wastewater account database is filtered by active residential accounts that use the City’s
sewer system. Additionally, the database is further limited by only year-round accounts. These accounts
are occupied households that reside in Portland permanently. Year-round accounts are approximated by
accounts that have activity every month. Illustrated in Figure 27, there is an average of 61 hundred cubic
feet (HCF) of wastewater per year from a year-round active residential account flowing into the City’s
sewer system. That equates to an average of 126 gallons per day, rounded.




 17
 DRAFT DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS MEMORANDUM
 Portland, Maine


Figure 26. Equivalent Residential Unit
 Meter Size Total Water Active Annual Average per Annual Average Daily Average
 (inches) (HCF) Accounts Account (HCF) (gallons) (gallons)
 5/8 866,230 14,134 61 45,846 126
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Publ i c Works Depa rtment; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s
 Note: Provi ded da ta mea s ured wa s tewa ter tota l s i n hundred cubi c feet (HCF), equa l to 748.05 ga l l ons


WASTEWATER PROJECTIONS

To project wastewater flows, is it assumed that the average consumptions will stay constant. As a result,
the wastewater from residential accounts will increase at the same rate as the projected housing units
and wastewater from nonresidential accounts will increase at the same rate as the projected growth in
floor area for the respective industry. Over the next ten years, a total increase of 500,000 gallons per day
is projected. Residential and commercial land uses account for the majority of the projected increase.

Figure 27. Wastewater Projections, Million Gallons Per Day (MGD)
 Base Year Total
Development Type 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
Residential 2.93 2.96 2.98 3.00 3.02 3.05 3.07 3.09 3.11 3.13 3.16 0.22
Commercial 2.00 2.02 2.04 2.06 2.08 2.10 2.12 2.14 2.16 2.18 2.20 0.20
Industrial 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.06
Institutional 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.02
Total 5.66 5.71 5.76 5.81 5.86 5.91 5.96 6.01 6.06 6.11 6.16 0.50
Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Publ i c Works Depa rtment; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s




 18
Impact Fee Study Overview
REVISED PRELIMINARY MAXIMUM DEFENSIBLE FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Portland, ME
September 12, 2018
  City of Portland Impact Fee Study
 o Impact Fee Fundamentals
 o Changes Made Based on Comments of 1st Draft
 Fees
 o Parks & Recreation
 o Transportation
 o Wastewater




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 2
 Impact Fee Fundamentals
o Authorized under the Comprehensive Planning and Land
  Use Regulation Act of 1987, Title 30-A MRSA, Section 4354
o One-time payment for growth-related infrastructure, usually
  collected at the time buildings permits are issued
o Can’t be used for operations, maintenance, or replacement
o Not a tax but more like a contractual arrangement to build
  infrastructure, with three requirements:
 o Need (system improvements, not project-level improvements)
 o Benefit
 oShort range expenditures
 oGeographic service areas and/or benefit districts
 o Proportionate
o Compared to negotiated agreements, streamlines approval
 process with known costs (predictability)

 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 3
 Changes Since 1st Draft
o Parks & Recreation
 o Incremental expansion methodology has been expanded to include
 nonresidential demand on facilities.
 o Workers use Parks & Recreation facilities during breaks and
 lunch.
 o The vehicle component was removed.
 o Adjusted facilities included in the level of service calculations.
 Parks & Rec Parks & Rec Increase/
 Development Type
 1st Draft Revised Draft Decrease
 Residential (per housing unit)
 Single Family/Duplex $2,442 $1,126 ($1,316)
 Multifamily $1,631 $752 ($879)
 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
 Retail & Service - $534 $534
 Office - $677 $677
 Industrial - $363 $363
 Institutional - $645 $645
 Accommodation (per hotel room)
 Hotel $1,898 $875 ($1,023)



 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 4
 Changes Since 1st Draft
o Transportation
 o Revised methodology to include five nonresidential land use
 categories.
 o Adjusted the multimodal projects included in the plan-based
 methodology.
 Transportation Transportation Increase/
 Development Type
 1st Draft Revised Draft Decrease
 Residential (per housing unit)
 Single Family/Duplex $3,698 $2,159 ($1,539)
 Multifamily $1,752 $1,023 ($729)
 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
 Hospital $5,280 - -
 Congregated Care/Assisted Living $2,065 - -
 School $9,615 - -
 Place of Assembly $3,422 - -
 Retail & Personal Services $14,132 - -
 Recreational $14,197 - -
 Office $4,797 - -
 Industrial $2,443 - -
 Industrial Transportation $691 - -
 Retail & Service - $8,248 -
 Office - $2,800 -
 Industrial - $1,130 -
 Institutional - $3,082 -
 Accommodation (per hotel room)
 Hotel $4,118 $2,404 ($1,714)

 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 5
 Changes Since 1st Draft
o Wastewater
 o Included additional projects into future debt payments, increasing
 the Debt Service Credit.
 Meter Size Wastewater Wastewater Increase/
 (inches) 1st Draft Revised Draft Decrease
 All Development (per meter)
 5/8 $2,069 $1,886 ($183)
 3/4 $3,104 $2,829 ($275)
 1 $5,173 $4,715 ($458)
 1.5 $10,345 $9,430 ($915)
 2 $16,552 $15,088 ($1,464)
 3 $33,104 $30,176 ($2,928)
 6 $103,450 $94,300 ($9,150)
 8 $165,520 $150,880 ($14,640)




 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 6
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Consumption-Based/Incremental Expansion Methodology
 PARKS & RECREATION
 IMPACT FEE

 Residential & Nonresidential
 Development


 Persons per Household/Hotel Room Multiplied By Net Capital Cost per
 or Jobs per 1,000 Square Feet Person/Job



 Parks Cost per Person/Job



 Single-track Trails Cost per
 Person/Job


 Recreational Facilities Cost per
 Person/Job


 Credit for Future Debt Payment per
 Person/Job


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 7
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Park Component – Existing Level of Service &
 Cost per Demand Unit
 Basketball Community Dog Park Base/Softball Pickleball
 Acres Athletic Field Baseball Field Courts Gardens Area Fields Courts
City of Portland Total 316.3 5.0 11.0 10.0 8.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
Average Replacement Cost $59,172 $350,000 $175,000 $45,000 $30,000 $50,000 $175,000 $45,000
Replacement Cost Subtotal $18,716,104 $1,750,000 $1,925,000 $450,000 $240,000 $100,000 $350,000 $180,000

 Volleyball
 Picnic Tables Playgrounds Pools Skate Park Softball Fields Splashpads Tennis Courts Courts
City of Portland Total 22.0 18.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 5.0 15.0 2.0
Average Replacement Cost $750 $175,000 $2,000,000 $350,000 $175,000 $30,000 $45,000 $45,000
Replacement Cost Subtotal $16,500 $3,150,000 $2,000,000 $350,000 $700,000 $150,000 $675,000 $90,000

 Land Replacement Cost $18,716,104 Total Park Acres 316.3
 Improvement Replacement Cost $12,126,500 Total Replacement Cost $30,842,604
 Total Replacement Cost $30,842,604 Replacement Cost per Park Acre $97,511
Source: City of Portland Parks and Recreation; Assessor's Office

Residential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard Nonresidential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard
 Share of Impact Days 72% Share of Impact Days 28% Share of Impact Days calculation
 Share of Park Acres 227.7 Share of Park Acres 88.6 found in Appendix.
 2018 Peak Population 83,250 2018 Jobs 67,270
 LOS: Acre per 1,000 Persons 2.74 LOS: Acre per 1,000 Jobs 1.32

Cost Analysis Cost Analysis
 Replacement Cost per Acre $97,511 Replacement Cost per Acre $97,511
 LOS: Acre per 1,000 Persons 2.74 LOS: Acre per 1,000 Jobs 1.32
 Replacement Cost Per Capita $267 Replacement Cost Per Job $129


 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 8
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Single-Track Trail Component – Existing Level of
 Service & Cost per Demand Unit
 Single-Track
 Trail Trail (miles)
 Citywide Passive Trails 36.2
 Total 36.2
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Pa rks a nd Recrea ti on

 Residential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard Nonresidential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard
 Share of Impact Days 72% Share of Impact Days 28%
 Share of Trail Miles 26.1 Share of Trail Miles 10.1
 2018 Peak Population 83,250 2018 Jobs 67,270
 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Persons 0.31 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Jobs 0.15

 Cost Analysis Cost Analysis
 Costs per mile $15,000 Costs per mile $15,000
 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Persons 0.31 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Jobs 0.15
 Replacement Cost per Person $5 Replacement Cost per Job $2




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 9
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Recreational Facility Component – Existing Level
 of Service & Cost per Demand Unit
 Square Replacement
 Recreational Facilities Feet Cost
 East End Community Center 23,500  $5,875,000
 Peaks Island Community Center 2,000 $550,000
 Portland Ice Arena 29,273  $3,125,896
 Reiche Community Center 25,000  $8,750,000
 Riverton Community Center 31,500 $11,970,000
 Total 111,273 $30,270,896
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Pa rks a nd Recrea ti on

 Residential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard Nonresidential Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard
 Share of Impact Days 72% Share of Impact Days 28%
 Share of Rec. Square Feet 80,117 Share of Rec. Square Feet 31,156
 2018 Peak Population 83,250 2018 Jobs 67,270
 LOS: Square Feet per Person 0.96 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Jobs 0.46

 Cost Analysis Cost Analysis
 Costs per Square Foot $272 Costs per Square Foot $272
 LOS: Square Feet per Person 0.96 LOS: Miles per 1,000 Jobs 0.46
 Replacement Cost per Person $261 Replacement Cost per Job $125




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 10
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Credit for Future Debt Payment Component
 o To avoid future growth double paying for Parks &
 Rec facilities, a credit is necessary for future debt
 payments.
 Residential Credit Nonresidential Credit
 ProjectedPayment/ Projected
 Payment/
 Fiscal Year Payment Fiscal Year Payment
 Population Capita Jobs Job
 Base Year $617,060 83,250 $7.41 Base Year $239,968 67,270 $3.57
 2019 $715,720 83,678 $8.55 2019 $278,336 67,959 $4.10
 2020 $676,719 84,106 $8.05 2020 $263,169 68,648 $3.83
 2021 $628,339 84,534 $7.43 2021 $244,354 69,337 $3.52
 2022 $606,452 84,962 $7.14 2022 $235,842 70,026 $3.37
 2023 $554,947 85,390 $6.50 2023 $215,813 70,715 $3.05
 2024 $478,117 85,818 $5.57 2024 $185,935 71,404 $2.60
 2025 $461,771 86,246 $5.35 2025 $179,578 72,093 $2.49
 2026 $434,672 86,673 $5.02 2026 $169,039 72,782 $2.32
 2027 $386,672 87,101 $4.44 2027 $150,372 73,471 $2.05
 2028 $364,280 87,529 $4.16 2028 $141,665 74,160 $1.91
 Total $5,924,749 $69.62 Total $2,304,071 $32.81
 Discount Rate 3.00% Discount Rate 3.00%
 Total Credit $60 Total Credit $28
 Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Fi na nce Depa rtment Source: Ci ty of Portl a nd Fi na nce Depa rtment




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 11
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Maximum Defensible Fee
 Fee Cost Cost
 Component per Person per Job
 Parks $267 $129
 Single-Track Trails $5 $2
 Rec. Facilities $261 $125
 Debt Service Credit ($60) ($28)
 TOTAL $473 $228

 Residential (per housing unit)
 Persons per Maximum
 Type of Unit
 Household Defensible Fee
 Single Family/Duplex 2.38 $1,126
 Multifamily 1.59 $752

 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
 Jobs per 1,000 Maximum
 Type of Unit
 Square Feet Defensible Fee
 Retail & Service 2.34 $534
 Office 2.97 $677
 Industrial 1.59 $363
 Institutional 2.83 $645

 Nonresidential (per room)
 Persons per Maximum
 Type of Unit
 Room Defensible Fee
 Hotel 1.85 $875


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 12
 Parks & Rec Impact Fee Analysis
 o Parks & Recreation Fee Revenue
 Total Cost to Cost Attributable
 Maintain LOS to Growth
 Parks $1,950,220 $1,950,220
 Single-Track Trails $34,500 $34,500
 Rec Facilities $1,979,344 $1,979,344
 Total Expenditures $3,964,064 $3,964,064

 Projected Development Impact Fee Revenue
 Capital Cost Capital Cost
 per Person per Job
 $473 $228
 Year Population Jobs
 Base 2018 83,250 67,270
 Year 1 2019 83,678 67,959
 Year 2 2020 84,106 68,648
 Year 3 2021 84,534 69,337
 Year 4 2022 84,962 70,026
 Year 5 2023 85,390 70,715
 Year 6 2024 85,818 71,404
 Year 7 2025 86,246 72,093
 Year 8 2026 86,673 72,782
 Year 9 2027 87,101 73,471
 Year 10 2028 87,529 74,160
 Ten-Year Increase 4,279 6,890
 Projected Revenue => $2,023,810 $1,570,948
 Projected Revenue => $3,594,757
 Total Expenditures => $3,964,064
 General Fund's Share => $369,307


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 13
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Plan-Based Methodology – Person Trips
 TRANSPORTATION
 IMPACT FEE

 Residential & Nonresidential
 Development

 Average Weekday Person
 Trip Ends by Land Use

 Multiplied by Adjustment
 Factors

 Multiplied by Capital Cost
 Per Person Trip

 Plan-Based Capital Cost

 Capacity Improvements
 to Multimodal Facilities

 Capacity Improvements
 to Signals

 Credit for Future
 Debt Payment


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 14
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Multimodal Component – High Readiness Projects
 Length of Project Growth's
Project Readiness (linear feet) Total City Cost Share Growth's Cost
W. Commercial Street Path High 5,000 $750,000 50% $375,000
Thames Street High 1,200 $1,450,000 25% $362,500
Franklin Street: I-295 to Somerset High 700 $4,050,000 75% $3,037,500
Congress Square Intersection Construction High 650 $1,300,000 25% $325,000
Marginal Way: Hanover to Plowman High 5,600 $1,000,000 25% $250,000
Kennebec Street Realignment at Forest Avenue High 450 $500,000 50% $250,000
Somerset Street High 1,800 $1,500,000 50% $750,000
Forest Avenue (Morrill's Corner Intersections) High 1,600 $2,280,000 50% $1,140,000
Brighton Avenue High 13,000 $1,100,000 25% $275,000
Washington Avenue Rehabilitation High 1,500 $2,000,000 25% $500,000
 TOTAL 31,500 $15,930,000 $7,265,000

 Growth's Cost of Transportation Projects $7,265,000
 10-Year Increase in Average Daily Person Trips 47,721
 Capital Cost per Trip $152




 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 15
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Signal Component – High Readiness Projects
 Project Readiness Total Cost Growth's Share Growth's Cost
 Modernize Signal Systems High $9,375,000 75% $7,031,250
 Arterial Street Crossings High $2,000,000 50% $1,000,000
 TOTAL $11,375,000 $8,031,250

 Growth's Cost of Transportation Projects $8,031,250
 10-Year Increase in Average Daily Person Trips 47,721
 Capital Cost per Trip $168




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 16
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Credit for Future Debt Payment Component
 o To avoid future growth double paying for
 Transportation facilities, a credit is necessary for
 future debt payments.
 Projected
 Payment/
 Fiscal Year Payment Ave. Daily
 Person Trip
 Person Trips
 Base Year $3,751,763 735,171 $5.10
 2019 $4,314,139 739,943 $5.83
 2020 $4,060,134 744,715 $5.45
 2021 $3,772,123 749,487 $5.03
 2022 $3,633,359 754,260 $4.82
 2023 $3,323,658 759,032 $4.38
 2024 $2,916,044 763,804 $3.82
 2025 $2,815,726 768,576 $3.66
 2026 $2,591,944 773,348 $3.35
 2027 $2,374,976 778,120 $3.05
 2028 $2,147,023 782,892 $2.74
 Total $35,700,889 $47.24
 Discount Rate 3.00%
 Total Credit $41.00



TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 17
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Maximum Defensible Fee – High Readiness only
 Input Variables Cost per Trip for Multimodal Projects => $152
 Cost per Trip for Signals => $168
 Debt Service Credit per Trip => ($41)
 Capital Cost per Person Trip $279
 Avg Wkdy Person Trip Rate Maximum
 Development Type
 Trip Ends Adjustment Defensible Fee
 Residential (per housing unit)
 Single Family/Duplex 13.34 58% $2,159
 Multifamily 6.32 58% $1,023
 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet of floor area)
 Retail & Service 77.80 38% $8,248
 Office 20.07 50% $2,800
 Industrial 8.10 50% $1,130
 Institutional 22.09 50% $3,082
 Nonresidential (per room)
 Hotel/Motel 17.23 50% $2,404




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 18
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis
 o Transportation Impact Fee Revenue
 Cost Attributable
 Total Cost to Growth
 Multimodal Projects $15,930,000 $7,265,000
 Signals $11,375,000 $8,031,250
 Total Expenditures $27,305,000 $15,296,250

 Projected Transportation Impact Fee Revenue
 Retail &
 Single Family Multifamily Service Office Industrial Institutional
 Year Housing Units Housing Units 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1,000 Sq. Ft.
 Base 2018 21,047 16,575 9,817 9,318 7,225 8,909
 Year 1 2019 21,080 16,829 9,874 9,403 7,289 8,980
 Year 2 2020 21,113 17,083 9,931 9,489 7,353 9,050
 Year 3 2021 21,147 17,336 9,988 9,574 7,418 9,121
 Year 4 2022 21,180 17,590 10,045 9,660 7,482 9,191
 Year 5 2023 21,213 17,844 10,102 9,745 7,546 9,262
 Year 6 2024 21,246 18,098 10,159 9,830 7,611 9,332
 Year 7 2025 21,279 18,352 10,216 9,916 7,675 9,402
 Year 8 2026 21,313 18,605 10,273 10,001 7,739 9,473
 Year 9 2027 21,346 18,859 10,330 10,087 7,804 9,543
 Year 10 2028 21,379 19,113 10,387 10,172 7,868 9,614
 Ten-Year Increase 332 2,538 571 854 643 704
 Transportation Impact Fee $2,159 $1,023 $8,248 $2,800 $1,130 $3,082
 Revenue Subtotal $716,788 $2,596,374 $4,709,608 $2,391,200 $726,590 $2,169,728
 Source: Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s
 Projected Revenue => $13,310,288
 Total Expenditures => $15,296,250
 General Fund's Share => $1,985,962


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 19
 Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
 o Plan-Based Methodology
 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE


 Residential & Nonresidential
 Development


 Wastewater Flow from Equivalent
 Residential Unit (ERU)


 Multiplied by Capital Cost Per
 Gallon


 Plan-Based Capital Cost


 Growth Related Costs for
 Capacity Improvements


 Credit for Future Debt
 Payment



TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 20
 Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
 o Sewer & Stormwater Component – Future
 Wastewater Projects
 Growth's Growth's
 Project Title Total Share Cost
  CSO - Close CSO #42 $2,000,000 10% $200,000
  CSO - Mackworth Street and Ocean Avenue Sewer Separation Project $6,850,000 10% $685,000
  CSO - Dartmouth Street Sewer Separation Project $2,520,000 10% $252,000
  CMOM - Inflow and Infiltration Program $4,050,000 50% $2,025,000
  CMOM - Pump Station Rehabilitation $3,350,000 25% $837,500
  Eastern Waterfront Sewer / Stormwater Extension & Outfall (Thames St) $1,025,000 85% $871,250
  Franklin Street Storm Drain $5,300,000 75% $3,975,000
  Warren Ave Storm Drain - 517 Warren Ave to 659 Warren Ave $990,000 10% $99,000
 TOTAL $26,085,000 $8,944,750

 Growth's Cost of Wastewater Projects $8,944,750
 10-Year Increase in Wastewater Flow (gallons) 403,049
 Capital Cost per Gallon $22.19




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 21
 Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
 o Credit for Future Debt Payment Component
 o To avoid future growth double paying for wastewater
 facilities, a credit is necessary for future debt
 payments on past sewer and stormwater projects.
 Projected
 Payment/
 Fiscal Year Payment Wastewater
 Gallon
 Flow (gals)
 Base Year $4,984,702 5,661,470 $0.88
 2019 $5,301,355 5,701,775 $0.93
 2020 $5,185,898 5,742,080 $0.90
 2021 $5,039,052 5,782,385 $0.87
 2022 $4,943,283 5,822,690 $0.85
 2023 $4,435,393 5,862,995 $0.76
 2024 $4,084,329 5,903,299 $0.69
 2025 $4,023,542 5,943,604 $0.68
 2026 $3,924,669 5,983,909 $0.66
 2027 $3,833,159 6,024,214 $0.64
 2028 $3,671,719 6,064,519 $0.61
 Total $49,427,101 $8.47
 Discount Rate 3.00%
 Total Credit $7.22


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 22
 Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
 o Maximum Defensible Fee
 Growth Capital Cost per Gallon => $22.19
 Debt Service Credit per Gallon => ($7.22)
 Capital Cost per Gallon of Capacity => $14.97
 Max Daily Gallons per ERU => 126
 Meter Size Maximum
 Capacity Ratio
 (inches) Defensible Fee
 All Development (per meter)
 5/8 1.00 $1,886
 3/4 1.50 $2,829
 1 2.50 $4,715
 1.5 5.00 $9,430
 2 8.00 $15,088
 3 16.00 $30,176
 6 50.00 $94,300
 8 80.00 $150,880
 Source: American Water Works Association, Principles
 of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges, M1, 7th ed., 2017;
 TischlerBise analysis




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 23
 Wastewater Impact Fee Analysis
 o Wastewater Impact Fee Revenue
 Cost Attributable
 Total Cost to Growth
 Wastewater Facilities $26,085,000 $8,944,750
 Total Expenditures $26,085,000 $8,944,750

 Projected Wastewater Impact Fee Revenue
 Residential Nonresidential
 Year Population Jobs
 Base 2018 83,250 67,270
 Year 1 2019 83,678 67,959
 Year 2 2020 84,106 68,648
 Year 3 2021 84,534 69,337
 Year 4 2022 84,962 70,026
 Year 5 2023 85,390 70,715
 Year 6 2024 85,818 71,404
 Year 7 2025 86,246 72,093
 Year 8 2026 86,673 72,782
 Year 9 2027 87,101 73,471
 Year 10 2028 87,529 74,160
 Ten-Year Increase 4,279 6,890
 Water Demand, per Pop./Job 35.2 40.6
 Cost per Gallon $14.97 $14.97
 Revenue Subtotal $2,254,793 $4,187,618
 Source: Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s
 Projected Revenue => $6,442,411
 Total Expenditures => $8,944,750
 General Fund's Share => $2,502,339


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 24
 Comments/Questions




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 25
 Comparables
 o Impact fees from comparable communities
 compared to Portland’s Maximum Defensible Fee
 Maximum National
 Development Type Supportable Fee Burlington, VT Concord, NH Freeport, ME Bozeman, MT Boulder, CO Eugene, OR Averages (2015)*
 Parks and Recreation (per housing unit/hotel room/1,000 square feet)
 Single Family/Duplex $1,126 $1,486 $1,094 - - $5,603 $4,246 $2,812
 Multifamily $752 $743 $664 - - $3,936 $2,686 $2,099
 Retail $534 $418 - - - - $413 n/a
 Office $677 $418 - - - - $1,134 n/a
 Industrial $363 $422 - - - - $694 n/a
 Institutional $645 $418 - - - - $1,134 n/a
 Hotel $875 $418 - - - - $1,697 n/a
 Transportation (per housing unit/hotel room/1,000 square feet)
 Single Family/Duplex $2,159 $386 $2,110 $1,500 for the $4,497 $216 $2,113 $3,256
 Multifamily $1,023 $196 $1,450 first 2,500 GFA $3,053 $149 $1,226 $2,201
 Retail $8,248 $736 $3,330 plus $300 for $10,476 $540 $5,093 $5,605
 Office $2,800 $676 $1,700 each additional $4,535 $220 $3,212 $3,403
 Industrial $1,130 $262 $1,090 250 GFA. Not $2,866 $140 $2,050 $2,063
 Institutional $3,082 $676 $2,207 exceeding $5,435 $180 $1,965 n/a
 Hotel $2,404 $676 $1,817 $30,000. $2,315 $168 $1,268 n/a
 Wastewater (per meter)
 Single Family/Duplex $1,886 - - - $775 - $2,396 $3,694
 Multifamily $2,829 - - - $1,545 - $2,040 $1,777
 Retail $4,715 - - - $3,556 - $683 $663
 Office $4,715 - - - $3,556 - $1,036 $640
 Industrial $4,715 - - - $3,556 - $687 $642
 Institutional $4,715 - - - $3,556 - $2,163 n/a
 Hotel $4,715 - - - $3,556 - $2,817 n/a
 *Source: Na ti ona l Impa ct Fee Survey: 2015, Dunca n As s oci a tes , November, 2015
 Note: Si ngl e fa mi l y uni ts a re a s s umed to be 2,000 s qua re feet a nd mul ti fa mi l y uni ts to be 1,000 s qua re feet. A 5/8 i nch meter i s s hown for s i ngl e fa mi l y
 devel opment, 3/4 i nch for mul ti fa mi l y devel opment, a nd a 1 i nch meter i s s hown for nonres i denti a l devel opment, however, the wa s tewa ter fee wi l l be
 a s s es s ed ba s ed on the devel opment's meter s i ze. To es ti ma te genera l tra ns porta ti on fees for Sca rborough, ME the PM pea k hour tri p genera ti on ra tes
 from Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017) a re us ed.
 Not shown in the figure are the additional impact fees the comparable communities assess including school, fire, and police.


TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 26
 Appendix
 o Share of Impact Days Calculation
 o The calculation multiples the number of peak season
 residents (permanent, seasonal, and visitors) and
 inflow commuters by the number of days within the
 City of Portland.
 o Local workers are included within the total for
 residents.
 Residents and Inflow Commuters in 2015
 Cumulative Impact Days per Year Cost Allocation for Parks
 Inflow
 Residents Residential¹ Nonresidential² Total Residential Nonresidential
 Commuters
 82,049 47,245 29,948,016 11,811,250 41,759,266 72% 28%
 1. Da ys per Yea r = 365 365
 2. Da ys per Yea r = 250 (5 Da ys per Week x 50 Weeks per Yea r) 250
 Source: U.S. Cens us Burea u, OnTheMa p 6.1.1 Appl i ca ti on a nd LEHD Ori gi n-Des ti na ti on Empl oyment Sta ti s ti cs .




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 27
 Appendix
 o Residential Development Projections
 o To capture the full demand on City facilities,
 projections include seasonal and visitor populations
 o The seasonal population is considered those that
 have a second home in Portland
 o The visitor population includes overnight and day
 visitors to the City
 Base Year Total
 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
Peak Population
 Permanent 67,305 67,644 67,983 68,322 68,661 69,001 69,340 69,679 70,018 70,357 70,696 3,391
 Seasonal 7,386 7,432 7,478 7,523 7,569 7,615 7,660 7,706 7,752 7,797 7,843 457
 Visitor 8,559 8,602 8,645 8,688 8,731 8,775 8,818 8,861 8,904 8,947 8,990 431
 Total 83,250 83,678 84,106 84,534 84,962 85,390 85,818 86,246 86,673 87,101 87,529 4,279
Housing Unit
 Single Family/Duplex 21,047 21,080 21,113 21,147 21,180 21,213 21,246 21,279 21,313 21,346 21,379 332
 Multifamily 16,575 16,829 17,083 17,336 17,590 17,844 18,098 18,352 18,605 18,859 19,113 2,538
 Total 37,622 37,909 38,196 38,483 38,770 39,057 39,344 39,631 39,918 40,205 40,492 2,870
Source: Portl a nd's Pl a n 2030; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 28
 Appendix
 o Nonresidential Development Projections
 Base Year Total
 Industry 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
 Employment
 Retail 13,057 13,191 13,325 13,458 13,592 13,726 13,860 13,993 14,127 14,261 14,395 1,337
 Office 24,772 25,026 25,280 25,533 25,787 26,041 26,295 26,548 26,802 27,056 27,309 2,537
 Industrial 9,992 10,094 10,197 10,299 10,401 10,504 10,606 10,708 10,811 10,913 11,015 1,023
 Institution 19,449 19,648 19,847 20,046 20,245 20,445 20,644 20,843 21,042 21,241 21,441 1,992
 Total 67,270 67,959 68,648 69,337 70,026 70,715 71,404 72,093 72,782 73,471 74,160 6,890
 Nonresidential Floor Area (1,000 sq. ft.)
 Retail 9,817 9,874 9,931 9,988 10,045 10,102 10,159 10,216 10,273 10,330 10,387 571
 Office 9,318 9,403 9,489 9,574 9,660 9,745 9,830 9,916 10,001 10,087 10,172 854
 Industrial 7,225 7,289 7,353 7,418 7,482 7,546 7,611 7,675 7,739 7,804 7,868 643
 Institution 8,909 8,980 9,050 9,121 9,191 9,262 9,332 9,402 9,473 9,543 9,614 704
 Total 35,268 35,546 35,823 36,100 36,378 36,655 36,932 37,209 37,487 37,764 38,041 2,773
 Source: Portland Area Comprehensive Transportation System (PACTS); City of Portland; TischlerBise analysis




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 29
 Appendix
 o Projected Average Daily Person Trips
 Base Year Total
 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Increase
Residential Person Trips
Single Family/Duplex 162,904 163,161 163,418 163,675 163,932 164,189 164,446 164,703 164,960 165,216 165,473 2,570
Multifamily 60,830 61,762 62,693 63,625 64,556 65,487 66,419 67,350 68,282 69,213 70,145 9,314
Subtotal 223,734 224,922 226,111 227,299 228,488 229,676 230,865 232,053 233,241 234,430 235,618 11,884
Nonresidential Person Trips
Retail 290,177 291,864 293,551 295,238 296,925 298,612 300,299 301,987 303,674 305,361 307,048 16,871
Office 93,550 94,408 95,266 96,124 96,982 97,840 98,698 99,555 100,413 101,271 102,129 8,579
Industrial 29,260 29,520 29,781 30,041 30,302 30,562 30,823 31,083 31,344 31,604 31,865 2,605
Institutional 98,450 99,228 100,006 100,785 101,563 102,341 103,119 103,897 104,676 105,454 106,232 7,782
Subtotal 511,437 515,021 518,604 522,188 525,772 529,356 532,939 536,523 540,107 543,690 547,274 35,837
Grand Total Person Trips 735,171 739,943 744,715 749,487 754,260 759,032 763,804 768,576 773,348 778,120 782,892 47,721

Person Trips by Transportation Mode
Total Vehicle Person Trips 611,790 615,750 619,711 623,672 627,632 631,593 635,554 639,514 643,475 647,436 651,396 39,607
Total Transit Person Trips 12,466 12,550 12,633 12,717 12,800 12,884 12,967 13,051 13,135 13,218 13,302 836
Total Non-Motorized Trips 110,915 111,643 112,371 113,099 113,827 114,555 115,283 116,011 116,738 117,466 118,194 7,279
Grand Total Person Trips 735,171 739,943 744,715 749,487 754,260 759,032 763,804 768,576 773,348 778,120 782,892 47,721
Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017); Na ti ona l Hous ehol d Tra vel Survey da ta , 2017; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s




 TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 30
 Appendix
 o Average Daily Person Trips by Development Type
 Trip Person Trips/Unit
 Person Trip Adjustment Non-
 Development Type Ends Factor Total Vehicle Transit motorized
 Single Family/Duplex 13.34 58% 7.74 6.66 0.08 1.01
 Multifamily 6.32 58% 3.67 3.16 0.04 0.48
 Retail 77.80 38% 29.56 24.24 0.59 4.73
 Office 20.07 50% 10.04 8.23 0.20 1.61
 Industrial 8.10 50% 4.05 3.32 0.08 0.65
 Institutional 22.09 50% 11.05 9.06 0.23 1.76
 Hotel 17.23 50% 8.62 7.07 0.17 1.38
 Source: Tri p Genera ti on, Ins ti tute of Tra ns porta ti on Engi neers , 10th Edi ti on (2017); Na ti ona l
 Hous ehol d Tra vel Survey da ta , 2017; Ti s chl erBi s e a na l ys i s
 Note: Tri p ra tes a re s hown per hous i ng uni t for res i denti a l l a nd us es a nd per 1,000 s qua re feet of
 fl oor a rea for nonres i denti a l l a nd us es , except Hotel i s s hown per hotel room.




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 31
 Appendix
 o Water Meter Capacity by Size
 Meter Size Meter Capacity
 (inches) Capacity Ratio
 5/8 20 1.00
 3/4 30 1.50
 1 50 2.50
 1 1/2 100 5.00
 2 160 8.00
 3 320 16.00
 6 1,000 50.00
 8 1,600 80.00
 Capacity ratios are based on meter capacity standards
 published by American Water Works Association, Principles
 of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges, M1, 7th ed., 2017




TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 32
City of Portland Impact Fee Ordinance
9/13/18 DRAFT

1. Authority
This ordinance is enacted pursuant to the authority of 30-A M.R.S.A. § 4354 and 30-A M.R.S.A. § 3001.

2. Purpose
The purpose of these impact fee provisions is to ensure that new development in the City of Portland bears a
proportional or reasonably-related share of the cost of new, expanded, or replacement infrastructure necessary
to service that development through: 1) the payment of impact fees dedicated to funding improvements made
necessary by development, or 2) the construction of improvements as provided for herein.

3. Applicability
The following shall be subject to impact fees:
 1. Any new building or addition to existing buildings which results in net new residential dwelling units,
 non-residential building square footage, or water/wastewater meters, and
 2. Any change of use which results in a net increase in impact fee per Section 5F.

4. Impact Fee Schedules 1
 Table of Parks & Recreation Facilities Impact Fees
 Land Use Type Unit of Measure Impact Fee
 Single-family/Two-family per unit
 Multi-family (3+ units) per unit
 Retail/Service per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Office per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Industrial per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Institutional per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Hotel/Motel per room

 Table of Transportation Impact Fees
 Land Use Type Unit of Measure Impact Fee
 Single-family/Two-family per unit
 Multi-family (3+ units) per unit
 Retail/Service per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Office per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Industrial per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Institutional per 1,000 SF gross floor area
 Hotel/Motel per room



1 Land use types included in the impact fee schedule correspond to those in the city’s most recent Impact Fee Study.



 1
 Table of Wastewater Impact Fees
 Meter Size Capacity Ratio Impact Fee
 5/8 inches 1.00
 ¾ inches 1.50
 1 inch 2.50
 1 ½ inches 5.00
 2 inches 8.00
 3 inches 16.00
 6 inches 50.00
 8 inches 80.00

5. Calculation of Impact Fee
Impact fees shall be calculated as follows:
 A. Impact fees shall be calculated based on the impact fee schedule in effect at the time of submittal of a
 complete application for a building permit.
 B. Determination of Use: The determination of the applicable land use category in the impact fee
 schedule shall be made by the [Department of Permitting and Inspections] with reference to the City of
 Portland’s most recent Impact Fee Study. If the proposed development is of a type not listed in the
 impact fee schedule, then the impact fees applicable to the most nearly comparable type of land use
 listed in the impact fee schedule shall be used.
 C. Mixed-Use Development: In the event there is more than one principal use within a building, impact
 fees will be calculated separately for each principal use.
 D. Redevelopment: In calculating the impact fee for new development that involves the full or partial
 demolition of a building housing an existing, legally established use or uses, such new development shall
 be credited with an amount equal to the fee that would have been charged to the use or uses which
 occupied the structure at the time of demolition permit. If the impact fee calculation for the post-
 development condition is greater than the credit, the applicant shall pay the difference. If the impact
 fee calculation for the post-development condition is less than the credit, then the applicant shall not
 be required to pay an impact fee. The City shall not grant credits for demolitions not associated with
 new development or demolitions for which a permit was issued more than 12 months prior to the
 complete application for a building permit.
 E. Building Additions: In calculating the impact fee for building additions, each developed property shall
 be credited with an amount equal to the fee that would have been charged to the existing use at the
 time of the addition of floor area. If the impact fee calculation for the post-development condition is
 greater than the credit, the applicant shall pay the difference. If the impact fee calculation for the post-
 development condition is less than the credit, then the applicant shall not be required to pay an impact
 fee.
 F. Changes of Use: In calculating the impact fee for changes of use, each developed property shall be
 credited with an amount equal to the fee that would have been charged to the existing use at the time
 of application for building permit. If the impact fee calculation for the proposed use is greater than the
 credit, the applicant shall pay the difference. If the impact fee calculation for the proposed use is less
 than the credit, then the applicant shall not be required to pay an impact fee. The City shall not grant
 credits for uses which have been discontinued for a period of 12 months or more prior to the complete
 application for a building permit.




 2
6. Annual Adjustment of Impact Fee
To account for inflation, there shall be an automatic annual increase in the impact fee schedule reflected in this
ordinance every January 1 based on the change in the construction cost index as published by Engineering News
Record. The fee adjustment shall be calculated by dividing the index amount published on January 1 of the
current year by the index amount published on January 1, 2018 [XXXX] and multiplying the resulting ratio by
each fee amount. Adjusted fees shall be made available for public reference.

7. Modification of Impact Fees
The Planning Board may by formal vote waive the payment of a required impact fee, in whole or in part, in the
following instances:
 A. Any site plan, subdivision, or building permit applicant may formally request a credit against impact fees
 otherwise due, up to but not exceeding the full obligation of impact fees to be paid pursuant to the
 provisions of this chapter, in the following instances:
 a. The developer or property owner who would otherwise be responsible for the payment of the
 impact fee voluntarily agrees to make infrastructure improvements for which the impact fee
 would be collected or an equivalent improvement approved by the Planning Board, or
 b. The developer or property owner is required, as part of a development approval by the City or
 a state or federal agency, to make or to pay for infrastructure improvements for which the
 impact fee would be collected or an equivalent improvement approved by the Planning Board.

 Credit amounts shall be determined based on plans, details, and cost estimates for the proposed
 infrastructure improvements for which the credit is requested. Such plans, details, and cost estimates
 shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and submitted at the time of site plan or building
 permit application. On-site improvements required under subdivision or site plan regulations shall not
 be considered eligible under this section.

 B. Any site plan, subdivision, or building permit applicant may formally request a modification of impact
 fees, up to but not exceeding the full obligation of impact fees to be paid pursuant to the provisions of
 this chapter, where documentation is provided to demonstrate that a proposed use will impose no or
 substantially-reduced demands on capital facilities for which impact fees have been adopted. Such
 documentation shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and include an analysis of the
 demand for capital facilities generated by the proposed use based on industry standards and the most
 recent Impact Fee Study. Documentation shall be submitted at the time of site plan or building permit
 application.

8. Affordable Housing Waiver
Any residential development including low-income or workforce housing units and qualifying as an eligible
project under Division 30 shall be eligible for a reduction of fees in accordance with Section 14-486.

9. Collection of Impact Fee
The City of Portland shall not issue any certificate of occupancy required under the Land Use Code until the
applicant has paid any impact fees required by this ordinance.

10. Segregation of Impact Fees from General Revenues
Impact fees collected pursuant to this ordinance shall be maintained in separate, non-lapsing impact fee
accounts for each of the facilities for which impact fees are assessed, and shall be segregated from the City’s
general revenues. These accounts shall be dedicated for funding of the improvements for which the fee is
collected, as determined through the City’s most recent Impact Fee Study. Funds from these accounts shall be


 3
distributed to City departments, upon authorization by the City’s Finance Department, solely for the purpose of
capital projects identified in the City of Portland’s most recent Impact Fee Study.

11. Use of Impact Fees
Impact fees collected by the City pursuant to this ordinance may be used only for financing facility improvements
which the City Council, through the City of Portland’s most recent Impact Fee Study, has determined are made
necessary by new development. The City Council has determined that fees imposed by schedules in this ordinance
are reasonably related to the demands created by new development. Impact fees collected pursuant to this
ordinance shall be used exclusively for capital improvements, and the City of Portland shall expend funds collected
from impact fees solely for the purposes for which they were collected.

12. Refund of Unused Impact Fees
Impact fees collected pursuant to this ordinance shall be used by the City according to the timeline specified in
the City of Portland’s most recent Impact Fee Study for the completion of specific capital improvements, but in
no event later than ten years after the date upon which the impact fee was collected. Any impact fees which are
not so used and any impact fees collected which exceed the City’s actual costs of implementing the infrastructure
improvements for which such fees were collected shall be refunded. Refunds shall be paid to the owner of record
of the property for which the impact fee was collected, determined as of the date the refund is made.

13. Review and Revision
The impact fees established in this ordinance are based upon the best estimates of the costs of the construction
of the facilities for which the fees are collected as determined through the City’s most recent Impact Fee Study.
The Council may, by amendments to this ordinance, change the amounts of the impact fees from time to time as
warranted by new information or changed circumstances.




 4
 MEMORANDUM



DISTRIBUTE TO: ​Members of the Economic Development Committee

FROM: ​Brendan T. O’Connell - Finance Director
 Chris Huff - Assessor

DATE: ​August 12, 2018

SUBJECT: Impact Fee - Questions and Answers from Finance Director & Assessor



Several questions have been passed along from the Planning and Urban Development Department on
behalf of residents and businesses in regards to impact fees, the existing tax levy and City budget,
property valuation growth and the upcoming revaluation, and building permit fees and stormwater
service charges. This memo is intended to summarize responses to many of the frequently asked
questions (“FAQ”).




Frequently Asked Impact Fee Questions for Finance and Assessors

 1. I read the FY19 budget includes $100M of new estimated valuation and I know property values
 continue to grow. Why are my impact fees necessary during a time when there is so much new
 value in the City of Portland? Isn’t the existing growth enough to cover all City needs?

 2. Will the upcoming revaluation help alleviate budget pressure and provide more tax dollars for
 City needs?

 3. Building permit fees were increased recently. Wasn’t this increase intended to fund some of the
 same things impact fees are intended to fund (i.e. growth related infrastructure)?

 4. What about the Stormwater Service Charge? Was that created in response to growth-related
 infrastructure needs?




 1
Question 1: I read the FY19 budget includes $100M of new estimated valuation and I know
property values continue to grow. Why are my impact fees necessary during a time when there
is so much new value in the City of Portland? Isn’t the existing growth enough to cover all City
needs?

Property valuation has grown by $100 million in the current year due to significant new projects
breaking ground and continues our upward trajectory in overall valuation. This $100 million of new
property valuation creates an additional approximately $1,133,000 in tax revenue for municipal use.
While this may seem like a significant amount, it represents only a 0.128% overall increase to our FY18
valuation of approximately $7.8 billion, and can only fund a fraction of the cost increases and budget
challenges we face in FY19, many of which are outside of City control. These include the increases in
Cumberland County tax ($381k), increases in pension obligation bond debt service ($872k and
increasing by around $1M annually through 2026), contractually obligated union compensation
increases (approximately $3.2M) and health insurance cost increases ($2M). As you can see, the
increase in valuation can only fund a fraction of the cost increases that are outside of City control.



Question 2: Will the upcoming revaluation help alleviate budget pressure and provide more tax
dollars for the City needs?
Staff Response: No – the revaluation has no impact on total funds collected for the budget. Each year
the City Manager will recommend a budget, calling for the required amount of tax dollars to be levied on
property owners. ​The revaluation will have no impact on the dollar amount levied – the total amount of
tax dollars required for City / School operations will be the same both before and after the revaluation​.
The revaluation will only impact how the dollars levied are split between City taxpayers. In general
about 1/3 of the residents will pay more after the revaluation, 1/3 of the residents will pay the same
amount, and 1/3 of the residents will pay less, but in total the amount of tax dollars collected will remain
the same. When property values rise overall as a result of the revaluation, the mil rate will see a
corresponding drop. For example, if total City property value increased 25% during the revaluation
from $8B to $10B as a result of the revaluation (i.e. adjusting property values to their just values) the
mil rate would then see a corresponding 25% percentage decrease.

EXAMPLE:

Pre-City Revaluation:
Total City Valuation: $8,000,000,000
Mil Rate: $20.00
Total Tax Levy Needed for City/School Operations: $160,000,000 ($8,000,000,000 / 1000 * $20.00)

Post-City Revaluation:
Total City Valuation: $10,000,000,000
Mil Rate: $16.00 (drops because we still only need a tax levy of $160,000,000)
Total Tax Levy Needed for City/School Operations: $160,000,000 ($10,000,000,000 / 1000 * $16.00)


 2
Question 3: Building permit fees were increased recently. Wasn’t this increase intended to
fund some of the same things impact fees are intended to fund (i.e. growth related
infrastructure)?

Staff Response: In 2017 a separate Permitting & Inspections Department was created. The new
Department was created in direct response to the 2016 City Council goal to create a more efficient
permitting process, including online functionality. This new Department including significant levels new
staff and a new Department Head, a new software system (EnerGov) and new policies and procedures,
was funded by an increase in Building Permit fees. No part of the previous increase in building permit
fees was intended to fund growth-related infrastructure. Additionally, there are no excess building
permit revenues available to address growth-related infrastructure.



Question 4: What about the ​Stormwater Service Charge​? Was that created in response to
growth-related infrastructure needs?

Staff Response: No. The Stormwater Service Charge was created to fund and implement projects
related to the Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) mandate for combined sewer overflow
requirements. Instituting a stormwater charge more fairly and equitably distributes costs among the
users of the sewer and stormwater systems rather than putting the burden entirely on sewer users.
Stormwater service charges will raise approximately $7M towards the DEP mandate in FY19. The City
estimates between $20M and $30M will be spent annually over the next 5-10 years to address the DEP
mandate (revenues from both sewer fees and stormwater service charges will support this effort).
There will be no excess of either Stormwater Service Charges or Sewer Fees to address growth related
infrastructure needs.




 3
 Economic Development Department
 Gregory A. Mitchell, Director



 MEMORANDUM

TO: Economic Development Committee

FROM: Gregory A. Mitchell, Economic Development Director
 Mary Davis, Housing and Community Development Division Director

DATE: September 10, 2018

SUBJECT: Request to Assign the McAuley Place Tax Increment Financing District Credit
 Enhancement Agreement



  I. ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY

  The request is to consent to the assignment of a portion of the McAuley Place Tax Increment
  Financing (TIF) District Credit Enhancement Agreement (CEA) from Sea Coast at Baxter Woods
  Associates, LLC to DC Baxter Woods LLC, DC Baxter Woods II LLC, and DC Baxter Woods III
  LLC due to changes in ownership associated with property located in the TIF District.

  II. AGENDA DESCRIPTION

  Changes in corporate entities are taking place to support the redevelopment of the Motherhouse
  Project and surrounding property located in the McAuley Place TIF District. This necessitates
  City Council approval to Assign the McAuley Place TIF CEA which is permitted under the
  existing City Council approved CEA per Section 7.3.

  III. BACKGROUND

  The City Council approved the McAuley Place TIF District on May 16, 2009. The terms of this
  TIF District include returning sixty (60) percent of the new property taxes to the Motherhouse
  Project developer for a period of thirty (30) years and the remaining forty (40) percent will be
  placed in the City’s General Fund. It is noted that this property was originally tax exempt
  because it was owned by St. Joseph Convent and Hospital. Also, it is noted that the TIF District
  approval date started the TIF District term in 2009, but it was not activated at that time because
  the planned redevelopment project investment did not occur at that time.

  The City Council, on August 3, 2015 approved the investment of $426,262 in HOME funding to
  support the redevelopment of the Motherhouse Project to create senior affordable housing.




 1 of 23
Motherhouse Project Overview (2016 Low Income Housing Tax Credit Senior Project)

 88 total (66 with affordable restrictions and 22 market rate) units located in the
 Motherhouse; and,
 21 market rate residential units located between the Motherhouse and Baxter Woods.
 TIF funds dedicated to the operation of the Motherhouse Project were an essential leverage
 source to secure the Maine State Housing Authority Low Income Housing Tax Credit
 financing.

 TIF District Gross Property Tax Estimates

 Capture Rates
 Years 60% Project 40% City
 1-30 $4.156 Million $2.770 Million


 Non TIF District Property Tax Estimates

 It is noted that 140 residential units are planned to be located on the remainder of the former
 McAuley Campus which are located outside the TIF District. The estimated total taxable
 value for this portion of the project when complete is $37,100,000 with property taxes at a
 22.48 mil rate equals $834,008 per year on previously tax exempt property. These units and
 their corresponding tax revenues were not a part of the 2009 Development Plan.

IV. INTENDED RESULT OR COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED

City Council approval of the Assignment of the McAuley Place TIF District CEA.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no financial impact related to City Council approval to assign the McAuley Place TIF
District CEA.

VI. STAFF ANALYSIS AND BACKGROUND THAT WILL NOT APPEAR IN THE
 AGENDA DESCRIPTION

Staff reviewed the request and determined that the requested McAuley Place TIF District CEA
assignment is allowed under the City Council approved CEA. Consenting to the assignment will
affirm the investment of $426,262 in HOME funding to the project which was approved by the
City Council at its August 3, 2015 meeting (Council Order 35-15/16).

VII. RECOMMENDATION

The Economic Development Committee is asked at their September 18, 2018 meeting to vote, in
the form of a recommendation to the City Council, approval of the requested TIF CEA
Assignment.




 2 of 23
 VIII. LIST ATTACHMENTS

  Consent of City of Portland
  Agreement and Consent (Collateral Assignment of CEA)
  McAuley Place TIF CEA

Prepared by: Greg Mitchell

Date: September 10, 2018




 3 of 23
 CONSENT OF CITY OF PORTLAND


 The undersigned City of Portland (the “City”) hereby acknowledges and consents to the
assignment of that certain Credit Enhancement Agreement dated May 2009 (the “Agreement”)
between the City and McAuley Place at Baxter Woods Retirement Community, Inc., a Maine
nonprofit corporation (“MPBWRC”), as assigned by MPBWRC to Sea Coast at Baxter Woods
Associates, LLC, a Maine limited liability company (“SCBWA”) by Assignment and
Assumption dated December 16, 2016 (the “Assignment;” collectively with the Agreement, the
“CEA”) by SCBWA to DC Baxter Woods LLC, DC Baxter Woods II LLC and DC Baxter
Woods III LLC (collectively, “Assignee”), each a Maine limited liability company.

 The City hereby represents that the CEA is valid and has not been modified to date other
than by Partial Assignment of the CEA by SCBWA to Motherhouse Associates LP dated June 1,
2017, and that, to the City’s knowledge, SCBWA is not in default under the CEA. The City
agrees hereafter to look solely to Assignee for performance under the CEA

 Duly executed as of _______ ____, 2018.

WITNESS: CITY OF PORTLAND



__________________________________ By:_________________________________
 Jon P. Jennings, its City Manager




O:\MAS\20981 DC Predevelopment LLC\Sea Coast Buyout\Transfer documents\Consent to assignment of TIF_City.docx




 4 of 23
 AGREEMENT and CONSENT
 Re: Collateral Assignment of Credit Enhancement Agreement dated May, 2009


 THIS AGREEMENT AND CONSENT is made and entered into by and among CITY
OF PORTLAND,MAINE,a Maine body corporate and politic (the "City") with a mailing
address of 389 Congress Street, Portland Maine 04101 Attn: Jon Jennings, City Manager, and
DC BAXTER WOODS LLC,DC BAXTER WOODS II LLC,and DC BAXTER WOODS
III LLC,each a Maine limited liability company with a mailing address of 100 Commercial
Street, Suite 414, Portland, Maine 04101 (collectively the "Borrower"), and BATH SAVINGS
INSTITUTION, a Maine banking organization with a mailing address of 105 Front Street, P.O.
Box 548, Bath, Maine 04530("Lender").

 RECITALS:

A. The City entered into a Credit Enhancement Agreement with McAuley Place at Baxter
 Woods Retirement Community, Inc. dated on or about May,2009(the "TIF Agreement"),
 which was assigned by McAuley Place at Baxter Woods Retirement Community, Inc. to Sea
 Coast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC by Assignment dated December 16, 2016, and
 further assigned by Sea Coast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC to the Borrower by
 Assignment and Assumption Agreement of near or even date herewith, with respect to the
 Borrower's property located at 605 Stevens Avenue, in the City of Portland, Maine (the
  "Property").

B. Borrower has acquired title to the Project as defined in the TIF Agreement, being Lot #2 and
 Lot #4 as shown on the Overall Subdivision Plan 605 Stevens Avenue, Stevens Avenue
 and Walton Street, Portland, Cumberland County, Maine, and the real estate located at Units
 2 & 3 in 605 Steven Avenue Condominium,605 Stevens Avenue, Portland, Cumberland
 County, Maine, all more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A.

C. Lender has agreed to extend a loan in the amount of $3,200,000.00, evidenced by a certain
 Promissory Note in the amount of $3,200,000.00 from Borrower to Lender of near or even
 date herewith (together with any extensions, renewals or replacements thereof, the "Loan"),
 which is to be secured, inter alia, by a Collateral Assignment of Credit Enhancement
 Agreement encumbering the TIF Agreement and related rights (all collectively together with
 any amendments, extensions, renewals or replacements thereof, the "Loan Documents"),
 which Loan is to fund Project Costs as defined in the TIF Agreement.

D. The extension of the Loan by the Lender is based in part upon the agreement of City to enter
 into this Agreement, expressly consenting to the Collateral Assignment of the Credit
 Enhancement Agreement to Lender and providing various assurances to Lender as set forth
 herein.

 NOW THEREFORE for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:




 5 of 23
 1. Status of TIF Agreement. City and Borrower hereby represent to Lender that the TIF
 Agreement has been duly executed, is presently in full force and effect, that the TIF Agreement
 constitutes the valid and binding obligations of the City and, to the City's knowledge, Borrower,
 that the Borrower is entitled to payment of amounts payable to the owner of the Property in
 accordance with the terms of the TIF Agreement, and that the TIF Agreement has not been
 subsequently modified or amended, except for the partial Assignment thereof to Borrower and
 the partial assignment of the TIF Agreement to Motherhouse LP with respect to the real estate
 owned by Motherhouse Associates LP, which assignments have been approved by the City.

 No notice of default is outstanding from City to Borrower regarding in default in the
 performance of Borrower's obligations to City under the TIF Agreement.

 To the best of City's knowledge, to date the Borrower has complied with and fulfilled its
 obligations to the City under the TIF Agreement and no events of default are outstanding.

 2. Consent to Assignment. City acknowledges receipt of a copy of and consents to the
 Borrower's Collateral Assignment ofthe TIF Agreement to Lender, its successors and assigns, as
 security for Borrower's obligations to Lender, with right of reassignment (the "Assignment").

 Upon an Event of Default in Borrower's obligations to Lender, which is not cured within
any applicable grace period, Borrower hereby authorizes Lender to collect all payments from
City arising or accruing under that portion of the TIF Agreement then held by Lender as
Collateral as they become due, and hereby irrevocably authorizes and directs the City to pay all
amounts thereafter arising or accruing under the TIF Agreement and assigned to Lender to
Lender and to continue to do so until otherwise directly notified by Lender. Borrower further
agrees that the City shall have the right to conclusively rely upon such demand by Lender without
any obligation or right to inquire as to whether any Event of Default exists and notwithstanding
any assertion, demand or claim of Borrower to the contrary, and that Borrower shall have no right
or claim against the City for any amounts paid by the City to Lender following receipt of such
demand by Lender.

 Upon written certification and demand from Lender based on the foregoing, the City
 agrees to pay and perform the City's obligations under the TIF Agreement to Lender, its
 successors and assigns, including without limitation, a receiver, a purchaser of the Project as
 defined in the TIF Agreement at a mortgage foreclosure/secured party's sale, or assignee
 pursuant to an assignment entered into by Borrower with the express written consent of Lender
(all collectively the "Assignee"), which obligations of the City shall include the payments due
from the Company TIF Account established under the TIF Agreement, provided that the
 preconditions to the City's obligations to make payments established under the TIF Agreement
 have been satisfied. Such payment shall be forwarded to Lender, its successors and assigns, or
Lender's designee even if the Lender's right to receive the payment is disputed by Borrower.

 Any sale or transfer of Assignee's interest in the TIF Agreement, by mortgage
foreclosure/secured party's sale, assignment or otherwise, shall release such Assignee from any
and all liability under the TIF Agreement provided however, that the subsequent Assignee shall
assume and agree to perform Borrower's obligations under the TIF Agreement arising thereafter.


 2

 6 of 23
 The Lender and the City acknowledge that the Lender has previously consented to a
transfer of a portion of the rights under the TIF Agreement to Motherhouse Associates LP and
that Lender has released its security interest in the portion of the TIF Agreement assigned to
Motherhouse Associates LP. The amounts payable to Lender or any Assignee under the TIF
Agreement following an Event of Default by Borrower to Lender shall be only those amounts
related to the portion of the TIF Agreement that Lender now holds as Collateral for the Loan.

 3. Modifications, etc. City agrees not to alter, modify, terminate or change the terns of
the TIF Agreement without the prior written consent of Lender, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned.

 4. Defaults under the TIF Agreement. City agrees that so long as the Assignment or
any extension or renewal thereof remains outstanding, the following provisions shall apply:

 (a) City shall serve upon Lender copies of any written notice of any default given to
 Borrower under the TIF Agreement, either as provided in the TIF Agreement for a
 notice of default to Borrower, or in any event, not less than thirty (30)days prior to
 any termination ofthe TIF Agreement for failure to perform Borrower's obligations
 thereunder, provided that if the City does not serve Lender with such copies, then the
 Lender's cure period shall be automatically extended by one day for each day in
 which the notice was not served on Lender.

 (b) In case Borrower shall be in default under the TIF Agreement, beyond any applicable
 grace or cure period, Lender or any Assignee shall have the right to remedy such
 default or cause the same to be remedied, and City shall accept such performance by
 or at the instance of Lender or Assignee as if the same had been made by Borrower.

 (c) No event of default under the TIF Agreement shall be grounds for termination as
 against Lender if steps shall, in good faith, have been commenced within the time
 permitted therefor to rectify the same and shall be prosecuted to completion with
 diligence and continuity, including without limitation, time (i) to obtain possession of
 the Property (including possession by a receiver), or (ii) to institute, prosecute and
 complete foreclosure proceedings or otherwise acquire Borrower's interest in the
 Property with diligence. Provided, however, that: (i) Lender or an Assignee shall not
 be obligated to continue such possession or to continue such foreclosure proceedings
 after such defaults shall have been cured;(ii) nothing herein contained shall preclude
 the City, subject to the provisions of this Agreement, from exercising any rights or
 remedies under the TIF Agreement with respect to any other default by Borrower
 during the pendency of such proceedings other than termination of the TIF
 Agreement; and (iii) Lender or such Assignee shall agree with City in writing to
 comply during the period of such forbearance with such of the terms, conditions and
 covenants of the TIF Agreement as are reasonably susceptible of being complied with
 by Lender. Any default by Borrower not reasonably susceptible of being cured by
 Lender on account of insolvency or voluntary and involuntary insolvency or
 reorganization proceedings, receivership, or an assignment for the benefit of creditors
 or the like shall be deemed to have been waived by City upon completion of such

 3

 7 of 23
 foreclosure proceedings or upon such acquisition of Borrower's interest in the TIF
 Agreement, except that any of such events of default which are reasonably susceptible
 of being cured after such completion and acquisition shall then be cured with
 reasonable diligence.

 5. Notices. Any notice or other communication which is required under the TIF
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be served by certified mail, addressed as set forth in this
Agreement or at such other address as shall be designated by notice in writing given by certified
mail.

 6. General.

 (a) Waiver. No waiver of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, and no
 waiver of any default or failure of compliance, shall be effective unless in writing, and
 no waiver furnished in writing shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other term or
 provision or any future condition of this Agreement.

 (b) Miscellaneous. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of Maine.
 The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement will not affect
 any other provision. The captions of the Paragraphs of this Agreement are for
 convenience only and do not limit any ternis or provisions.

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Lender, City and the Borrower have executed this
Agreement under seal as of August 15, 2018.



 City:

 CITY OF PORTLAND,MAINE


 By:
Witness Jon Jennings
 Its City Manager




 Additional signature pagefollows.




 4

 8 of 23
 Lender:

 BATH SAVINGS INSTITUTION


 B-
Witness 1VIa a K. Pennell
 Its Vice President



 Borrower:

 DC BAXTER WOODS LLC


 B
Witness Kevin R. Bunker
 Its Manager



 (To DC BAXTER WOODS II LLC


 By:
Witness Kevin R. Bunker
 Its Manager


 DC BAXTER WOODS III LLC


 By: (114
Witness Kevin R. Bunker
 Its Manager




 9 of 23
 EXHIBIT A


 Certain lots or parcels of land together with all buildings and improvements thereon
located in the City of Portland, County of Cumberland and state of Maine, being Lot # 2 and
Lot # 4 as shown on the Overall Subdivision Plan 605 Stevens Avenue, Stevens Avenue and
Walton Street, Portland, Maine, made for Seacoast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC by
Titcomb Associates dated June 24, 2015, has revised through June 15, 2016 and recorded in
the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Plan Book 216, Page 433, as amended by First
Amended Overall Subdivision Plan 605 Stevens Avenue, Stevens Avenue and Walton Street,
Portland, Maine, dated April 10, 2017, recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds
in Plan Book 217, Page 151.

 Said premises are subject to and have the benefit of, as applicable, the following:

 Such state of facts as shown on the Overall Subdivision Plan 605 Stevens
 Avenue, Stevens Avenue and Walton Street, Portland, Maine, made for Sea Coast
 at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC by Titcomb Associates, dated June 24, 2015, as
 revised through June 15, 2016, and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of
 Deeds, Plan Book 216, Page 433, as amended by the First Amended Overall
 Subdivision Plan, 605 Stevens Avenue, Stevens Avenue and Walton Street,
 Portland, Maine, made for Sea Coast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC by Titcomb
 Associates, dated April 10, 2017, and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry
 of Deeds, Plan Book 217, Page 151, and on the Plan of Lot 3 Sectional Subdivision
 Plat Motherhouse-88 Units made for Motherhouse Associates LP by Titcomb
 Associates, dated June 24, 2015 recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of
 Deeds in Plan Book 216, Page 434, as amended by the First Amended Plan of Lot
 3 Sectional Subdivision Plat Motherhouse-88 Units made for Motherhouse
 Associates LP by Titcomb Associates, dated April 10, 2017 recorded in the
 Cumberland County Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 217, Page 152, and on the
 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey 605 Stevens Avenue, made for Sea Coast at Baxter
 Woods Associates LLC by Titcomb Associates, dated March 24, 2016, as revised
 through March 16, 2017.

 2. City of Portland Certificate of Subdivision Waiver Approval, dated September 8,
 2015 and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Book 32584, Page
 153.

 3. Rights and easements excepted and reserved by St. Joseph's Convent and Hospital
in its deed to Sea Coast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC, dated December 16, 2016 and
recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Book 33698, Page 187.

 4. Rights, covenants and easements set forth in the Stormwater Drainage System
Maintenance Agreement from Sea Coast at Baxter Woods Associates, LLC to the City of
Portland, dated December 23, 2016 and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds,
Book 33752, Page 170, as amended by an Addendum, dated June 1, 2017 and recorded in said
Registry, Book 34050, Page 80.

 6

 10 of 23
 5. Rights, easements and covenants set forth in the Declaration of Covenants and
 Easements dated May 5, 2017 and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds,
 Book 33992, Page 172.

 Also certain condominium units in Portland, Maine, designated as Units 2 and 3
(collectively the "Units") of605 Stevens Avenue Condominium located in the City of
Portland, County of Cumberland and State of Maine (the "Condominium") created pursuant to
 the provisions of the Maine Condominium Act(the "Act") by the Declaration of
 Condominium of605 Stevens Avenue Condominium dated May 5, 2017 and recorded in the
Cumberland County Registry of Deeds in Book 34016, Page 205, as the same may be
 amended from time to time (hereinafter called the "Declaration") and by the Plats and Plans
 incorporated into the Declaration and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds,
Plan Book 217, Pages 180-182, and Plan Book 217, Pages 183-186, as same may be amended
from time to time (the "Plats and Plans") together with the Allocated Interests, Limited
Common Elements and Limited Common Expenses allocated to the Units as defined and
described in the Declaration. The Units are subject to and have the benefit ofthe Declaration,
the Plats and Plans and the Act, which are incorporated herein by reference, to which reference
is hereby made for a more particular specification of the definition, location and description of
the real property hereby conveyed and of the rights, obligations, easements, development
rights, special declarant rights, restrictions, covenants and conditions pertaining thereto.

 The Units are conveyed with the benefit of and subject to all easements, rights,
covenants, obligations, conditions, restrictions, reservations and encumbrances contained in or
referred to in the Declaration, including, but not limited to, those referenced in the description
of the property attached as Schedule A to the Declaration, and all provisions of the
Declaration, the By-laws of605 Stevens Avenue Condominium Association and the Plats and
Plans recorded and filed simultaneously with and as part of the Declaration, as the same may
be duly amended or modified from time to time and evidenced by instrument recorded or filed
in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, which shall constitute covenants running with
the land and shall bind any person having at any time any interest or estate in the Unit, its
agents, servants and visitors, as if those provisions were recited and stipulated at length herein.

 Being a portion of the premises conveyed to Sea Coast at Baxter Woods Associates,
LLC by deed of St. Joseph's Convent and Hospital dated December 14, 2016, and recorded in
said Registry of Deeds in Book 33698,Page 187.




 11 of 23
12 of 23
13 of 23
14 of 23
15 of 23
16 of 23
17 of 23
18 of 23
19 of 23
20 of 23
21 of 23
22 of 23
23 of 23
 Economic Development Department
 Gregory A. Mitchell, Director

 MEMORANDUM

TO: Economic Development Committee

FROM: Greg Mitchell

DATE: September 10, 2018

SUBJECT: Real Estate Option for Lot 1 in the Portland Technology Park


 I. ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY

 Proposed real estate option to sell Lot 1 located in the Portland Technology Park to Capricorn
 Products, LLC for $420,000.

II. AGENDA DESCRIPTION

 The sale of Lot 1, with 3.47 acres, located in the Portland Technology Park, for $420,000 to
 Capricorn Products, LLC to support their relocation and retention in Portland.

 At present, Patron’s Oxford Insurance Company is the first tenant in the Portland Technology
 Park. Three additional lots served by public infrastructure and all utilities are available for
 sale.

III. BACKGROUND

 Phase I infrastructure, including the road and stubbed utilities, was completed at the Portland
 Technology Park in October of 2013 with Federal grant public infrastructure assistance from
 the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration. One tenant,
 Patron’s Oxford Insurance, constructed a 19,000 square foot new office building on Lot 4 that
 was completed in July 2017. Three additional lots are available for sale. Capricorn Products
 is interested in acquiring Lot 1. See attached aerial photo of the Portland Technology Park for
 Lot references.

 Capricorn Products, LLC is a primary manufacturer and supplier of bulk immunodiagnostic
 raw materials to in-vitro diagnostic, biotechnology, and veterinary diagnostic test kit
 manufacturers based in Europe, Asia, and the Americas.

 Product lines include: goat polyclonal antisera for turbidimetric and nephelometric serum
 protein assays; standard and custom calibrators and controls; OEM reagents manufactured to
 customer specifications; and, an extensive range of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies and
 antigens used in immunochemistry and infectious disease testing.

 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683
 Jane Havey, President, established Capricorn Products LLC in 1994. The Company is ISO
 9001 certified and observes FDA Good Manufacturing Practices.

 Company headquarters and laboratories are located at 12 Rice Street, Portland, Maine, 04103.
 The company 10-acre USDA-registered farm facility is located in a nearby rural agricultural
 community and houses their substantial goat herd.

IV. INTENDED RESULT AND/OR COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED

 City Council approval of the real estate option for Lot 1 located in the Portland Technology
 Park.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACT

 Highlights of the real estate Option include:

 Purchase Price: $420,000

 Cost of Option: $5,000 non-refundable, but applicable to purchase price

 Term of Option: Twelve (12) months

 Purchase and Sale Agreement Terms: See Exhibit 1 to Real Estate Option

 Additionally, Capricorn is proposing to construct a 15,000-18,000 square foot building and
 create additional employment. New construction will generate new property taxes to the City,
 in addition to new spending power associated with new employment.

VI. STAFF ANALYSIS AND BACKGROUND

 Staff recommends approval of the Proposed Real Estate Option.

VII. RECOMMENDATION

 Seeking the EDC vote, in the form of a recommendation to the City Council, to approve the
 Proposed Real Estate Option.

VIII. LIST ATTACHMENTS

 - Aerial Map of Portland Technology Park
 - Proposed Real Estate Option between the city of Portland and Capricorn, LLC.




 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683
 Site #1

 Site
 #2 1


 Site #3
Site #4
Patron’s Oxford
 OPTION AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF PURCHASE REAL ESTATE

 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that, the CITY OF PORTLAND, a body
politic and corporate with a mailing address of 389 Congress Street, Portland, Maine 04101 (the
“City” or “Seller”), for and in consideration of the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), the
receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, herby grants to CAPRICORN PRODUCTS LLC, a
Maine limited liability company with a mailing address of ___________________ (“Buyer”), its
successors and assigns, the exclusive option and right to purchase certain premises owned by the
City and described in the attached Exhibit 1, located in Portland, Cumberland County, Maine (the
“Premises”), subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Premises shall be Four Hundred Twenty
 Thousand Dollars ($420,000.00).

2. Consideration for Option. Consideration for the option set forth herein shall be Five
 Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) (the “Option Consideration”), which Buyer shall pay to the
 City upon execution of this Option. The Option Consideration shall be nonrefundable but
 shall be credited to the Buyer against the Purchase Price at the closing of the sale of the
 Premises.

3. Term of Option. Buyer may exercise this Option at any time on or before the date that is
 twelve (12) months after the Effective Date set forth below. Such 12-month period is
 referred to herein as the “Option Period.”

 Prior to the expiration of the Option Period, Buyer, at its sole option, may terminate this
 Option at any time and for any reason by delivering a written notice of termination to the
 City.

4. Exercise of Option. To exercise this Option, Buyer must give written notice to the City of
 its intent to do so (the “Option Notice”) by Certified U.S. Mail, return receipt requested, or
 hand delivery, to the address set forth below. Such notice must be received by the City by
 the end of the Option Period.

5. Purchase and Sale Terms and Conditions. Upon exercise of the Option, the parties shall be
 bound by the Terms and Conditions for the Purchase and Sale of Condominium Unit at
 Portland Technology Park Condominium, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and made a
 part hereof (the “Terms and Conditions of Sale”).

6. Inspections.

 a. During the Option Period, Buyer and its employees, consultants, contractors and
 agents shall have the right, at Buyer’s expense, to enter on the Premises at
 reasonable times in order to (i) inspect the same, (ii) conduct engineering studies,
 percolation tests, geotechnical exams, environmental assessments, and other such
 studies, tests, exams, and assessments, and (iii) do such other things as Buyer
 determines, it is sole discretion, to be required to determine the suitability of the

 1
 Premises for Buyer's intended use (collectively, the “Inspections”). The City
 acknowledges that such Inspections may include the digging of test pits, which
 the City hereby approves.

 b. Buyer agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any
 mechanics liens that may arise from the activities of Buyer and its employees,
 consultants, contractors and agents on the Premises.

 c. Buyer shall exercise the access and inspection rights granted hereunder at its
 sole risk and expense, and Buyer hereby releases the City from, and agrees to
 indemnify, defend, and hold the City and the Portland Technology Park
 Condominium Association harmless against, any and all losses, costs, claims,
 expenses and liabilities (including without limitation reasonable attorney fees
 and costs) (collectively, "Damages") suffered by the City or the Portland
 Technology Park Condominium Association on account of any injury to person
 or damage to property arising out of the exercise by Buyer of its rights
 hereunder, except to the extent that such Damages result from the act or
 omission of the City.

 d. Buyer shall cause any contractors, consultants or any other party conducting the
 Inspections to procure automobile insurance, if applicable, and general public
 liability insurance coverage in amounts of not less than Four Hundred Thousand
 Dollars ($400,000.00) per occurrence for bodily injury, death and property
 damage, listing the City and Portland Technology Park Condominium
 Association as an additional insured thereon, and also Workers’ Compensation
 Insurance coverage to the extent required by law; the forms of all such insurance
 to be subject to City’s Corporation Counsel’s reasonable satisfaction.

 e. In the event that Buyer does not exercise this Option, Buyer agrees to either
 return the Premises as nearly as possible to its original condition after conducting
 the Inspections, or, at the City’s option, reimburse the City for any physical
 damage caused to the Premises in connection with the Inspections.

7. Recording of Option. The parties agree that this Option Agreement will not be recorded, but
 that Buyer may record a memorandum of this Option in a form satisfactory to the parties.

8. Release of Option. If Buyer does not exercise this Option within the Option Period, or if the
 parties fail to timely close on the purchase and sale of the Premises in accordance with the
 attached Terms and Conditions of Sale, Buyer shall, on request of the City, execute and
 deliver to the City a written release or other instrument in the form reasonably satisfactory to
 the City, evidencing Buyer’s non-exercise and release of the option and all other rights
 hereunder. The instrument shall be signed and acknowledged in recordable form by Buyer.
 In the event Buyer refuses or fails to deliver such instrument to the City, Buyer
 acknowledges and agrees that the City may execute and record an affidavit stating that
 Buyer failed to timely exercise its option to purchase the Premises and that this Agreement



 2
 is terminated and all of Buyer’s rights under this Agreement are therefore terminated and
 released.

9. Notices. Any notice under this Option Agreement shall be delivered or sent by certified,
 postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows:

 If to Buyer, to: Dwight G. Havey
 Capricorn Products LLC
 12 Rice Street
 Portland, Maine 04103

 With a copy to: Charles Katz-Leavy, Esq.
 Jensen Baird Gardner & Henry
 10 Free Street
 P.O. Box 4510
 Portland, Maine 04112-4510

 If to City, to: Jon P. Jennings, City Manager
 City of Portland
 389 Congress Street
 Portland, ME 04101

 With a copy to: Office of the Corporation Counsel (at the same
 address).

10. Miscellaneous Provisions.

 a. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the
 successors, administrators and assigns of the parties hereto, except that Buyer
 will not assign its interest in this Agreement to anyone other than a related entity
 without the written consent of the City, in its reasonable discretion. As used in
 this Agreement, the term “Related Entity” shall mean any entity other than Buyer
 (i) which owns beneficially, directly or indirectly, a majority of the shares of
 stock or partnership interests in Buyer, or (ii) which controls or is under common
 control with Buyer. The term “control” means the possession, directly or
 indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and
 policies of a person, whether through ownership of voting securities, by contract
 or otherwise.

 b. This Agreement represents the entire and complete agreement and understanding
 between the parties and supersedes any prior agreement or understanding, written
 or oral, between the parties with respect to the acquisition or exchange of the
 Premises hereunder. This Agreement cannot be amended except by written
 instrument executed by Seller and Buyer.




 3
c. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in any number of counterparts,
 each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original, but
 all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

d. This Agreement shall be construed in all respects in accordance with, and
 governed by, the laws of the State of Maine. All parties hereto hereby consent to
 the exclusive jurisdiction of the Superior Court for the County of Cumberland in
 the State of Maine, for all actions, proceedings and litigation arising from or
 relating directly or indirectly to this Agreement or any of the obligations
 hereunder, and any dispute not otherwise resolved as provided herein shall be
 litigated solely in said Court.

e. If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, such
 finding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision
 hereof.

f. No waiver of any breach of any one or more of the conditions of this Agreement
 or its attachments by either party shall be deemed to imply or constitute a waiver
 of any succeeding or other breach hereunder.

g. The City and Buyer each confirm and agree that each of the time periods set forth
 herein are essential provisions of the terms of this Agreement.




 Signature pages follow.




 4
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the
____ day of ____________, 2018 (the “Effective Date”).




 CITY OF PORTLAND


 By:
WITNESS Jon P. Jennings
 Its City Manager



STATE OF MAINE
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ______________, 2018


 Personally appeared the above-named Jon P. Jennings, City Manager of the City of Portland,
as aforesaid, and acknowledged the foregoing to be his free act and deed in his said capacity, and
the free act and deed of said City of Portland.


 Before me,

 _______________________________
 Attorney-at-Law/Notary Public
 Commission Expires:
 Print Name:




Approved as to form: Approved as to funds:

_________________________ _____________________
City Corporation Counsel City Finance Director




 5
 CAPRICORN PRODUCTS LLC


 By:
WITNESS Print Name:____________________
 Its ___________________________




STATE OF MAINE
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND _______________, 2018


 Personally appeared the above-named ________________, __________________ of
Capricorn Products LLC, as aforesaid, and acknowledged the foregoing to be his/her free act and
deed in his/her said capacity, and the free act and deed of said Capricorn Products LLC.


 Before me,

 _______________________________
 Attorney-at-Law/Notary Public
 Commission Expires:
 Print Name:




 6
 EXHIBIT 1

 TERMS AND CONDITIONS
 FOR THE PURCHASE AND SALE
 OF CONDOMINIUM UNIT AT
 PORTLAND TECHNOLOGY PARK CONDOMINIUM


 1. Premises to be Sold. Seller agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to buy Unit 1 at the
Portland Technology Park Condominium located on Rand Road, Portland, Maine, together with
said Unit's percentage allocated interest in the Common Elements and Limited Common Elements,
all as more particularly described in the Declaration of Condominium, Portland Technology Park
(the "Declaration") dated March 10, 2016, and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of
Deeds in Book 32969, Page 97, and as shown on the Condominium Plat pertaining thereto; said Plat
being recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 216, Pages 62-63; and
subject to such state of facts and conditions as shown on a First Amended Subdivision Plat of
Portland Technology Park Condominium prepared by SGC Engineering, LLC dated September 29,
2011 and revised through May 1, 2015, as recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds in
Plan Book 215, Page 250. The Premises to be conveyed is hereinafter called the "Unit." Title
reference is made to a Deed from Simon A. Snyder et alia to the City of Portland dated December 7,
1999 and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Book 15211, Page 31. The
Premises are more particularly described in Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

 2. Purchase Price. Subject to any adjustment and prorations hereinafter described,
Buyer agrees to pay for the Unit the sum of Four Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($420,000.00),
payable to the City at closing by wire transfer.

 3. Title. City shall convey the Unit to Buyer at the closing in fee simple with good and
marketable or insurable title that is acceptable to Buyer, subject to: (a) easements, privileges,
restrictions, conditions, development rights, special declarant rights, and agreements created by or
referred to in the Declaration, as well as the matters showed or disclosed on the plats or plans
mentioned above; (b) provisions of (i) the Maine Condominium Act, and all amendments thereto;
(ii) the Declaration, the By-Laws and the Plats for The Portland Technology Park Condominium
Association and all amendments or modifications thereto; (iii) building, zoning and land use
ordinances; (c) all restrictions required because the Premises were improved, in part, with funding
from the United States Economic Development Administration (EDA), United States Department of
Commerce, a draft of which restrictions is attached hereto as Schedule B; and (d) such taxes and
assessments, including Common Expenses allocable to the Unit, if any, as are not due and payable
on the date of delivery of the deed, and (e) a deed restriction stating that in the event that the
Premises or any portion thereof shall be exempt from real and personal property taxes, by transfer,
conversion, or otherwise, then the then-owner of the exempt portion shall make annual payments to
the City in lieu of taxes in the amount equal to the amount of property taxes that would have been
assessed on the exempt portion of the real and personal property situated on the Premises had such
property remained taxable; such restriction shall also confirm that Buyer and its successors and
assigns shall possess and be vested with all rights and privileges as to abatement and appeal of
valuations, rates, and the like as are accorded owners of real and personal property in Maine. At
the closing, Seller shall execute and deliver to Buyer, against payment of the balance of the

 7
purchase price, a Municipal Quitclaim Deed without Covenant (the "Deed"). In the event that
Seller is unable to convey title as aforesaid, Seller shall be given a reasonable period of time in
which to remedy any title defects. In the event that said defects cannot be corrected or remedied or
in the event that Seller elects not to remedy same, then this Agreement, and Seller's and Buyer's
obligations hereunder, will terminate. Buyer may, at Buyer's option elect to close notwithstanding
such defects as may exist. Seller and Buyer understand and agree that any mortgages and liens on
the Premises shall not be considered title defects provided that the same shall be discharged at or
prior to closing at Seller’s expense. Seller may use purchase money proceeds for this purpose. The
Unit shall be sold and conveyed strictly on an “as is, where is, and with all defects” basis, without
representation, warranty or covenant, express, implied or statutory, of any kind whatsoever,
including, without limitation, representation, warranty or covenant as to condition, past or present
use, tax ramifications or consequences, compliance with law, merchantability or fitness or
suitability for any purpose, all of which are hereby expressly disclaimed. Acceptance by Buyer of
the deed at closing and payment of the purchase price shall be deemed to be full performance and
discharge by the City of every agreement and obligation contained herein.

 4. Closing. This transaction shall be closed on or before the day that is 30 days after
Seller receives Buyer’s Option Notice at a time mutually agreeable to the parties (the “Closing
Date”) at the offices of Buyer’s counsel, or if the Seller and Buyer shall mutually agree in advance
at another time and place. At the closing:

 (a) Seller shall deliver to Buyer an executed Quitclaim Deed without Covenant to the
 Premises and such other customary instruments, documents and affidavits as may be
 associated with said closing in form satisfactory to Seller;

 (b) Buyer shall deliver to Seller the Purchase Price, less the $5,000.00 Option
 Consideration, by wire transfer;

 (c) Buyer shall deliver to Seller such other documents, certificates and the like as may
 be required herein or as may be necessary to carry out the obligations under this
 Agreement.

 (d) Buyer shall deliver evidence, reasonably satisfactory to City’s Corporation Counsel,
 that the entity receiving title to the Premises is in good standing under Maine law,
 and that the individuals acting and executing documents on behalf of Buyer are
 authorized to do so, and such other documents, certificates and the like as may be
 required herein or as may be necessary to carry out the obligations under this
 Agreement.

 5. Risk of Loss, Damage, Destruction and Insurance. Before closing, Seller shall bear
the risk of any loss to the Premises by fire or otherwise.

 6. Possession. Seller shall deliver the Premises to Buyer at closing free and clear of all
leases, tenancies and occupancies by any person.




 8
 7. Adjustments, Proration and Closing Costs.

 (a) Real estate taxes, assessments, and utilities shall be prorated as of the closing.

 (b) The Condominium Association assessments for the Unit's Allocated Interest, as
defined in the Declaration, shall be prorated as of the closing.

 (c) The Maine real estate transfer tax shall be paid by Buyer in accordance with 36
M.R.S.A., §4641-A. Seller is exempt from Maine real estate transfer tax.

 (d) The recording fee for the deed of conveyance and any expenses relating to any
Buyer's financing or closing shall be paid for by Buyer.

 8. Default and Remedies. In the event that Buyer fails to close hereunder for a reason
other than the default of the Seller, Seller shall have available to it all remedies at law and in equity.
In the event Seller defaults under this Agreement, other than the default of Buyer, Buyer shall have
available to it all remedies at law and in equity, including, without limitation, the remedy of specific
performance.

 9. Brokers. Seller and Buyer each represents and warrants that neither has dealt with a
real estate broker in connection with this transaction. Buyer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless
Seller from any claims made by any broker should Buyer's representation in this paragraph be false.
Subject to the immunities, defenses, and limitation available to Seller pursuant to the Maine Tort
Claims Act, Seller agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Buyer from any claims made by any broker
should Seller's representation in this paragraph be false. The foregoing indemnities shall include all
legal fees and costs incurred in defense against any such claim, and shall survive closing.




 9
 SCHEDULE A
 (Legal Description of Premises)

The Unit designated as Unit 1 (the "Unit") of Portland Technology Park Condominium, located in
the City of Portland, County of Cumberland and State of Maine ("Condominium") created pursuant
to the provisions of the Maine Condominium Act (the "Act") by the Declaration of Condominium,
dated March 10, 2016 and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds in Book 32969,
Page 97, as the same may be amended from time to time (hereinafter called the "Declaration") and
by the Condominium Plat of Portland Technology Park Condominium prepared by SGC
Engineering, LLC dated March 17, 2014, as revised March 9, 2016, incorporated into the
Declaration and recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Plan Book 216, Page 62.
The Unit is subject to and has the benefit of the Declaration, the Plats, Plans and the Act which is
incorporated herein by reference, to which reference is hereby made for a more particular
specification of the definition, location and description of the real property hereby conveyed and of
the rights, obligations, easements, common elements, limited common elements, development
rights, special declarant rights, restrictions, covenants and conditions pertaining thereto. The Unit is
conveyed subject to such taxes and assessments, including Common Expenses, allocable to the
Unit, if any, as are not due and payable on the date of delivery of this deed and subject to all terms,
easements, covenants, obligations, conditions, restrictions, reservations and encumbrances
contained in or referred to in the Declaration. Said Unit is conveyed together with an undivided
interest in the Common Areas of the Condominium and the interest in the Limited Common Areas
allocated thereto.




 10
 SCHEDULE B

 COMPLIANCE WITH EDA RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS

The Seller and Buyer acknowledge that the premises were improved, in part, with funding from the
United States Economic Development Administration (EDA), United States Department of
Commerce, EDA Project Number 01-01-08630 and are subject to the terms and conditions of the
EDA financial assistance award. Consequently, all recipients or owners and/or their successors and
assigns, agree as follows:

Real Property or tangible Personal Property acquired or improved with EDA Investment Assistance
must be used in a manner that is consistent with the authorized general and specific purposes of the
Award, in this case, industrial purposes and EDA policies concerning adequate consideration and
environmental compliance; and any applicable provisions of 13 CFR §314. It may not be used in
violation of the nondiscrimination requirements set forth in 13 C.F.R. §302.20 or for inherently
religious activities prohibited by applicable federal law.

Buyer agrees to provide Seller and/or EDA with any document, evidence or report required to
assure compliance with federal and state law, including, but not limited to, applicable federal and
state environmental laws.

Any deeds or instruments of conveyance shall contain a covenant which shall prohibit the use of the
subject property for any purpose other than the authorized purpose of the EDA grant, which in this
case, are commercial uses. This covenant shall remain in effect for a period of twenty (20) years.




 11
 Economic Development Department
 Gregory A. Mitchell, Director

 MEMORANDUM


TO: Economic Development Committee

FROM: Greg Mitchell
 Brendan O’Connell

DATE: September 11, 2018

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to City Bayside Area-wide Tax Increment
 Financing District


I. ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY

 A public hearing will be held at the September 18, 2018, EDC meeting for a vote, in the form
 of a recommendation to the City Council, to approve the Proposed Amendments to the
 Bayside TIF District.

II. AGENDA DESCRIPTION

 Amendments to the Bayside Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District are proposed to
 maximize utilization of the TIF District revenue by adding more public investment options for
 use of TIF revenue. It is noted that the City staff proposed amendments do not involve credit
 enhancement agreements.

III. BACKGROUND

 Bayside (Existing and Proposed Amendments)

 Geography. 129.18 acres bounded by Franklin Street, Cumberland Avenue, Forest Avenue
 and I-295.

 TIF Term. Fiscal Years 2004-2033

 Capture Rate. 100%




 1 of 30
 Overview of TIF District Expenditures FY2016 to Date:

 Bayside TIF Expenditures From FY2016 thru FY2018
 Uses Expenditures
 Public Infrastructure $541,950
 Credit Enhancement Agreements  $1,376,957
 Debt Service $1,208,616
 Total Invested: $3,127,524

 Existing and Proposed Amendments to Uses of Revenue. See attached Bayside TIF District
 Program which shows existing and proposed amendments to allowable uses of TIF District
 revenue in a strike through and underline format. Adding additional uses of TIF revenue
 creates the maximum flexibility to use TIF revenue.

 There are no proposed amendments to the capture rate or geography.

IV. INTENDED RESULT AND/OR COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED

 City Council approval of the proposed amendments to the Bayside TIF District to support
 increased private sector investment and associated job creation.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACT

 TIF District Estimates. See attached spreadsheet for estimated property revenue funds
 available to the City General Fund and one Credit enhancement Agreement which expires in
 FY2023.

 Tax Shelter (Financial Benefits). Probably the most important, but least understood public
 benefit associated with TIF districts, is the tax shelter or local financial benefits.

 Municipalities realize “savings” from the tax sheltering effect of TIF Districts. The following
 direct financial impacts occur when municipal valuation increases:

 A. State Education Aid is reduced,
 B. State Municipal Revenue Sharing is reduced, and
 C. A municipality pays a higher percentage of the County budget.

 This amount of “savings” is significant and one of the most important benefits of
 establishing TIF Districts.

 For Portland, tax shelter savings is conservatively estimated at 30%, meaning that for every
 new tax dollar, Portland saves 30 cents which would otherwise be lost for property tax value
 not included in a TIF District. The estimated tax shelter savings for the remainder of the
 Bayside TIF District term – FY2020 through FY2033 - at a 100% capture rate is just under $13
 Million, or a yearly average of $927,000.

 Net Impact to the General Fund

 The savings referenced above is a direct benefit to the general fund – both to the City and the
 School Department via an increase in revenue from the State of Maine for education,


 2 of 30
 increased revenues for the City from municipal revenue sharing, and decreased expenses for
 county tax. It is important to note that whenever the TIF capture rate is adjusted upward
 there will change in how property tax revenue flows between the general fund and the area
 TIFs. Via careful TIF budgeting, subject to annual budget approval by City Council, certain
 types of approved expenditures can be moved from the general fund into area TIFs. If the
 impact of the revenue shift is able to be fully offset the end result is the 30 cent savings on the
 dollar. A good example is what was done in the FY19 budget. TIF capture rates were
 adjusted upward by approximately 5% in the Waterfront and Bayside TIF. Although this
 resulted in slightly less revenue to the general fund, expenses related to Economic
 Development Department staff, in an amount approximately equal to the revenue shift, were
 shifted into the TIF. The net result was an increased capture rate in both TIFs, more sheltering
 savings (approximately 30% in benefits) and no other negative impact on the City or School
 budgets. It is this type of calculated TIF budgeting which is expected to continue to be
 utilized moving forward to increase capture rates, maximize sheltering, and ensure only
 positive impacts to the City and School budgets.

VI. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION

 City staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Bayside TIF District.

VII. LIST ATTACHMENTS
 - Updated Spreadsheets for Actual and Estimated TIF Revenue and Tax Shelter Savings
 - Marked Revision and Clean Version of TIF Narrative and updated Spreadsheets; additional
 attachments noted in the Narrative are available upon request.




 3 of 30
 Revised Exhibit 1 for Bayside TIF Amendment #9




City of Portland - Bayside TIF Model Total OAV ao 4/1/2001: $1,608,190
 Total OAV ao 4/1/2006: $44,066,380
 Total OAV ao of 4/1/2013: $122,318,180
Note: These numbers are actuals through FY2019 (Tax Year 4/1/2018); estimates for FY2020 through End of FY2033 (Tax Year 4/1/2032).
 9/7/2018

 Bayside TIF
 TIF Years 1 (FY2004) through 16 (FY2019) Actual Numbers; Years 17 (FY2020) through 30 (FY2033) Estimates
 Captured
 Revenue to Captured
 Municipal City Non- Revenue to
 Increased Total Projected Project and Captured Municipal Capture
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Assessed Value % of Value Captured Projected New Taxes CEAs General Fund OAV General Fund Project Revenue to
 TIF Year April 1 Year Real Prop. Captured Valuation Mill Rate Captured Account Revenues Revenue Account CEAs
 1 2003 FY2003/2004 $5,468,950 1.00% $54,690 26.80 $1,466 $1,466 $145,102 $43,099 $1,466
 2 2004 FY2004/2005 $7,295,740 1.00% $72,957 26.53 $1,936 $1,936 $191,620 $42,665 $1,936
 3 2005 FY2005/2006 $9,171,480 54.16% $4,967,274 20.13 $99,991 $99,991 $84,631 $32,373 $99,991
 4 2006 FY2006/2007 $11,052,960 27.74% $3,066,091 16.31 $50,008 $50,008 $130,266 $718,723 $50,008
 5 2007 FY2007/2008 $23,657,250 1.00% $236,573 17.10 $4,045 $4,045 $400,494 $753,535 $4,045
 6 2008 FY2008/2009 $49,496,900 100.00% $49,496,900 17.74 $878,075 $878,075 $0 $781,738 $452,194 $425,881
 7 2009 FY2009/2010 $69,217,260 78.00% $53,989,463 17.74 $957,773 $957,773 $270,141 $781,738 $602,773 $355,000
 8 2010 FY2010/2011 $68,355,920 71.00% $48,532,703 17.92 $869,706 $869,706 $355,232 $789,670 $395,064 $474,642
 9 2011 FY2011/2012 $62,808,110 73.00% $45,849,920 18.28 $838,137 $838,137 $309,996 $805,533 $483,137 $355,000
 10 2012 FY2012/2013 $66,477,790 47.00% $31,244,561 18.82 $588,023 $588,023 $663,089 $829,329 $141,688 $446,335
 11 2013 FY2013/2014 $65,716,350 97.72% $64,218,017 19.41 $1,246,472 $1,246,472 $29,083 $855,328 $800,235 $446,237
 12 2014 FY2014/2015 $65,131,890 83.00% $54,059,469 20.00 $1,081,189 $1,081,189 $221,448 $881,328 $634,952 $446,237
 13 2015 FY2015/2016 $67,362,090 54.58% $36,766,229 20.63 $758,487 $758,487 $631,193 $2,523,424 $294,738 $463,749
 14 2016 FY2016/2017 $70,121,790 54.97% $38,545,948 21.11 $813,705 $813,705 $666,566 $2,582,137 $349,899 $463,806
 15 2017 FY2017/2018 $82,037,690 58.27% $47,803,362 21.65 $1,034,943 $1,034,943 $741,173 $2,648,189 $571,631 $463,312
 16 2018 FY2018/2019 $80,301,620 63.27% $50,806,835 22.48 $1,142,138 $1,142,138 $663,043 $2,749,713 $817,138 $325,000 Actual Above This Line
 17 2019 FY2019/2020 $82,327,818 100.00% $82,327,818 22.93 $1,887,744 $1,887,744 $0 $2,804,707 $1,562,744 $325,000 Estimates Below This Line
 18 2020 FY2020/2021 $84,374,278 100.00% $84,374,278 23.39 $1,973,362 $1,973,362 $0 $2,860,801 $1,648,362 $325,000
 19 2021 FY2021/2022 $86,441,203 100.00% $86,441,203 23.86 $2,062,138 $2,062,138 $0 $2,918,017 $1,737,138 $325,000
 20 2022 FY2022/2023 $88,528,796 100.00% $88,528,796 24.33 $2,154,178 $2,154,178 $0 $2,976,377 $1,829,178 $325,000
 21 2023 FY2023/2024 $90,637,266 100.00% $90,637,266 24.82 $2,249,593 $2,249,593 $0 $3,035,905 $2,249,593
 22 2024 FY2024/2025 $92,766,821 100.00% $92,766,821 25.32 $2,348,497 $2,348,497 $0 $3,096,623 $2,348,497
 23 2025 FY2025/2026 $94,917,671 100.00% $94,917,671 25.82 $2,451,007 $2,451,007 $0 $3,158,556 $2,451,007
 24 2026 FY2026/2027 $97,090,029 100.00% $97,090,029 26.34 $2,557,245 $2,557,245 $0 $3,221,727 $2,557,245
 25 2027 FY2027/2028 $99,284,111 100.00% $99,284,111 26.87 $2,667,335 $2,667,335 $0 $3,286,161 $2,667,335
 26 2028 FY2028/2029 $101,500,134 100.00% $101,500,134 27.40 $2,781,408 $2,781,408 $0 $3,351,884 $2,781,408
 27 2029 FY2029/2030 $103,738,317 100.00% $103,738,317 27.95 $2,899,595 $2,899,595 $0 $3,418,922 $2,899,595
 28 2030 FY2030/2031 $105,998,882 100.00% $105,998,882 28.51 $3,022,036 $3,022,036 $0 $3,487,301 $3,022,036
 29 2031 FY2031/2032 $108,282,053 100.00% $108,282,053 29.08 $3,148,872 $3,148,872 $0 $3,557,047 $3,148,872
 30 2032 FY2032/2033 $110,588,055 100.00% $110,588,055 29.66 $3,280,250 $3,280,250 $0 $3,628,187 $3,280,250
 30 Year TIF Total $2,150,149,224 $1,876,186,426 $45,849,352 $45,849,352 $5,503,077 $62,620,736 $39,884,153 $5,965,199
30 Year Average $71,671,641 $62,539,548 $1,528,312 $1,528,312 $183,436 $2,087,358 $1,329,472 $198,840




 O:\TIF\Bayside\Amendments Fall 2018-Spring 2018 TIF Model Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update-Actual and Est
 4 of 30
 Revised Exhibit 2 for Bayside TIF Amendment #9




City of Portland Bayside TIF Model
9/7/2018




  Tax Shifts-Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation: City of Portland- Bayside TIF Model
  TIF Years 1 (FY2004) through 16 (FY2019) Actual Numbers with Varying Percentage Captures; Years 17
 (FY2020) through 30 (FY2033) Estimates at 100% Capture

 Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation


 Avoided Loss of Avoided Loss of
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Total Added Sheltered State Aid to for  State Municipal Avoided Increase Total Avoided
 TIF Year April 1 Year Valuation Valuation Education Revenue Sharing in County Tax Impacts
 1 2003 FY2003/2004 $5,468,950 $54,690 $0 $32 $30 $62
 2 2004 FY2004/2005 $7,295,740 $72,957 $0 $43 $40 $83
 3 2005 FY2005/2006 $9,171,480 $4,967,274 $0 $2,906 $2,742 $5,649
 4 2006 FY2006/2007 $11,052,960 $3,066,091 $13,046 $1,794 $1,693 $16,533
 5 2007 FY2007/2008 $23,657,250 $236,573 $2,013 $138 $131 $2,282
 6 2008 FY2008/2009 $49,496,900 $49,496,900 $421,219 $28,959 $27,300 $477,478
 7 2009 FY2009/2010 $69,217,260 $53,989,463 $459,450 $31,587 $29,775 $520,813
 8 2010 FY2010/2011 $68,355,920 $48,532,703 $413,013 $28,395 $26,769 $468,177
 9 2011 FY2011/2012 $62,808,110 $45,849,920 $390,183 $26,825 $25,291 $442,299
 10 2012 FY2012/2013 $66,477,790 $31,244,561 $265,891 $18,280 $17,240 $301,412
 11 2013 FY2013/2014 $65,716,350 $64,218,017 $546,495 $37,572 $35,408 $619,475
 12 2014 FY2014/2015 $65,131,890 $54,059,469 $460,046 $31,628 $29,814 $521,488
 13 2015 FY2015/2016 $67,362,090 $36,766,229 $312,881 $21,511 $20,284 $354,676
 14 2016 FY2016/2017 $70,121,790 $38,545,948 $328,026 $22,552 $21,266 $371,843
 15 2017 FY2017/2018 $82,037,690 $47,803,362 $406,807 $27,968 $26,367 $461,142
 16 2018 FY2018/2019 $80,301,620 $50,806,835 $432,366 $29,725 $28,022 $490,113
 17 2019 FY2019/2020 $82,327,818 $82,327,818 $700,610 $48,167 $45,375 $794,152
 18 2020 FY2020/2021 $84,374,278 $84,374,278 $718,025 $49,365 $46,500 $813,890
 19 2021 FY2021/2022 $86,441,203 $86,441,203 $735,615 $49,365 $47,637 $832,616
 20 2022 FY2022/2023 $88,528,796 $88,528,796 $753,380 $51,795 $48,785 $853,961
 21 2023 FY2023/2024 $90,637,266 $90,637,266 $771,323 $53,029 $49,945 $874,297
 22 2024 FY2024/2025 $92,766,821 $92,766,821 $789,446 $54,275 $51,116 $894,836
 23 2025 FY2025/2026 $94,917,671 $94,917,671 $807,749 $55,533 $52,298 $915,581
 24 2026 FY2026/2027 $97,090,029 $97,090,029 $826,236 $56,804 $53,493 $936,533
 25 2027 FY2027/2028 $99,284,111 $99,284,111 $844,908 $58,088 $54,699 $957,695
 26 2028 FY2028/2029 $101,500,134 $101,500,134 $863,766 $59,384 $55,917 $979,067
 27 2029 FY2029/2030 $103,738,317 $103,738,317 $882,813 $60,694 $57,147 $1,000,654
 28 2030 FY2030/2031 $105,998,882 $105,998,882 $902,050 $62,016 $58,389 $1,022,456
 29 2031 FY2031/2032 $108,282,053 $108,282,053 $921,480 $63,352 $59,644 $1,044,476
 30 2032 FY2032/2033 $110,588,055 $110,588,055 $941,104 $64,701 $60,911 $1,066,717
 30 Year TIF Total $2,150,149,224 $1,876,186,426 $15,909,942 $1,096,484 $1,034,030 $18,040,457
 30 Year Average $71,671,641 $62,539,548 $530,331 $36,549 $34,468 $601,349




O:\TIF\Bayside\Amendments Fall 2018-Spring 2018 TIF Model Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update-Actual and Est

 5 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


I. Introduction/Updated 2018

East and West Bayside continue to be gateways to Portland’s peninsula. A lot of changes to
East and West Bayside have occurred since the Bayside (West) TIF District was adopted by
the City Council on March 17, 2003. Relocation of one scrap yard and the addition of new
medical office buildings, new housing for college students, , two new grocery stores,
pharmacies, and financial institutions have transformed West Bayside’s industrial heritage to
a more compact urban development pattern, which extends the Central Business District to I-
295. Additionally, City Council approval, during 2017 and 2018, of the sale of six Bayside
properties formerly occupied by the Public Works Department will continue to support area
wide economic revitalization.

East Bayside has been experiencing its own transformation with new coffee shops, artist
studios, and new housing. Continued attention to the West Bayside TIF District is needed to
fulfill the Bayside Vision.

History

In 1996, the process began when the City of Portland obtained funding from the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to undertake a Brownfield’s Pilot Project in
Bayside. The City designated a ten-lot, 14-acre parcel between Oxford Street and Marginal
Way as the Bayside Brownfield’s Project Area and has since created a $500,000 loan fund
for the express purpose of cleaning up the site to clear the way for future development. The
study area was subsequently enlarged to incorporate the area from Congress Street to I-295,
and from Franklin Arterial to Forest Avenue, which is approximately 129 acres.

Since 1996, the City of Portland has been working with a team of consultants on planning for
opportunities for the reuse of the Bayside land. An extensive public participation process,
which involved hundreds of participants, produced a plan entitled “A New Vision for
Bayside”. The Bayside plan identifies the following eleven development principles and five
critical actions in order to transform this area into a vital, productive and diverse urban
neighborhood:

Development Principles
  Urban Gateway  Multi-level Parking Structures
  Economic and Employment  A Neighborhood Center
 Opportunities  Recreation and Open Space
  A Walkable District  A Social Service Network
  A Critical Mass of Dwellings  Environmental Remediation
  Transit Oriented Development  Scrap yard Redevelopment




 1
 6 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9




Critical Actions
  Acquire the Railroad Property  Create Transit Oriented
  Redevelop the Scrap yard Parcels Development
  Build More Housing  Secure the Future of Portland’s
 Social Service Network

Public participation continues to be an ongoing aspect of the Plan’s implementation. The
Bayside Neighborhood Association and the Bayside Community Development
Corporation include neighborhood property owners, residents, commercial owners and
tenants.

Since adopting the Bayside Vision Plan in December 1999 as a part of the
Comprehensive Plan, the City has moved forward on several of the identified critical
actions. After several years of complex negotiations with Guilford Transportation and
the Maine Department of Transportation, the City purchased the Railroad property.
Using Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and Economic Development
Administration (“EDA”) funding, this 6+ acre parcel made the City a major property
owner in the area of Bayside slated primarily for commercial redevelopment.

EDA and City Capital Improvement Funds have been used to rebuild the sewer system
along Somerset Street, adjacent to the railroad parcel, as well as to extend Chestnut Street
from Somerset Street to Marginal Way. These improvements were key infrastructure
investments for new development in Bayside. The City continues to be committed to
investing in Bayside as funding becomes available, but clearly a variety of financing
mechanisms have been and will continue to be needed.

With these first actions completed, attention has been focused on the need for structured
parking associated with the Federated Midtown Project. At meeting after meeting, then
Bayside Development Committee (BDC) members stated unequivocally that the Bayside
Plan cannot be implemented to its fullest without structured parking; and that the entire
redevelopment plan hinges upon the relocation of the scrap metal recycling facilities.
Furthermore, it is clear that the private sector cannot afford to make new investments in
Bayside that include the cost of creating structured parking, nor can the market alone bear
the cost of relocating the scrap metal recycling facilities.

The first such private development project which included constructing garages occurred
on property that was sold by the City to two private developers (Capital, LLC and
Southern Maine Student Housing, LLC) who planned a then estimated $38,400,000 in
new taxable commercial investment. The project consisted of a 72,000 sq. ft. office
building, perched upon a 430 space parking garage with ground floor retail, alongside a
405 bed student housing facility with a 130 space parking garage. The cost of
constructing the structured parking added more costs to the project than market rents
could support, so financing relief was sought through the use of Credit Enhancement
Agreements (Exhibit 5) so that the project moved forward with the density sought for


 2
 7 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


Bayside. This entire investment occupies just over 3 acres by reducing the footprint and
allowing for vertical expansion.

Amendment #7 Approved by MDECD March 28, 2016

The purpose of this Amendment #7 to this TIF application iswas to amend the
Development Program to include municipal use of TIF funds for costs of public
transportation improvement projects – including traffic signals, costs associated with
environmental site assessment and remediation work to support commercial
development, costs associated with environmental sea level adaptation planning and
public infrastructure to support commercial development, as well as other development
principles and critical actions items contained in the Bayside Vision Report I and II

 The public benefits associated with an amended Bayside TIF District include:

 - Provide support for Portland’s continued economic development;
 - Help increase the vibrancy and stability of the Bayside neighborhood;
 - Create employment opportunities for area residents;
 - Produce tax shift benefits averaging an estimated savings to the City of
 $680,307 annually at that time;
 - Improve the general economy of Portland and the State of Maine;
 - Improved public transportation infrastructure investment;
 - Clean up contaminated property to support commercial development;
 - Planning for environmental sea level adaptation, and public infrastructure to
 support commercial development.

Amendment #8 Proposed toApproved by the Portland City Council July 16,
2018/MDECD Approval Pending

Amendment #8 includes a single property in the Expanded Bayside TIF District located
at 178 Kennebec Street, Assessor Chart, Block, and Lot Number 034 F001001. The City
is in the process of selling this property to a private developer. This developer proposes
an elderly affordable housing project on that property with two condominium units. Unit
1 would be ground level commercial space and Unit 2 (air rights above Unit 1) is
proposed to be an elderly affordable housing project.

The amendments will exclude all floors above the first floor in a multi-story building to
be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres presently owned by the City of
Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris
Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant thereto
including without limitation in the land comprising said parcel. It is the intention of the
Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 2 in the Furman at Bayside Condominium
following acquisition of the land from the City of Portland. Such specified area is
referred to below as “178 Kennebec Street Unit 2” or “Unit 2”.




 3
 8 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


The amendments will provide that the following specified area will remain: the first floor
in a multi-story building to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres
presently owned by the City of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to
be conveyed to 100 Parris Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all
rights appurtenant thereto including without limitation in the land comprising said
parcel. It is the intention of the Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 1 in the
Furman at Bayside Condominium following acquisition of the land from the City of
Portland.

II. Amended Development Program

A. The Amended Project

 Amendment #8/Pending with MDECD

 With this amended and restated Development Program, the City of Portland seeks to
 amend the Bayside Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District to allow for 178
 Kennebec Street, Condominium Unit 1 on the ground level/commercial space to
 remain in the Bayside TIF District; and, Condominium Unit 2, floors above the
 ground level commercial space, to be an Affordable Housing TIF District.

 The amendments will exclude all floors above the first floor in a multi-story building
 to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres presently owned by the City
 of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris
 Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant
 thereto including without limitation in the land comprising said parcel. It is the
 intention of the Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 2 in the Furman at
 Bayside Condominium following acquisition of the land from the City of Portland.
 Such specified area is referred to below as “178 Kennebec Street Unit 2” or “Unit 2”.

 The amendments will provide that the following specified area will remain: the first
 floor in a multi-story building to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22
 acres presently owned by the City of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street,
 Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris Street, LP or its designee (the
 “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant thereto including without limitation
 in the land comprising said parcel. It is the intention of the Developer to declare this
 specified area as Unit 1 in the Furman at Bayside Condominium following acquisition
 of the land from the City of Portland.

 Municipal uses of TIF revenue consistent Bayside Vision Plans I and II are detailed in
 Table 1 in Section II(D) below.

 The success of these efforts will enhance the City’s ability to attract new investment
 to Bayside, leading to a densely developed commercial district, which will create new
 taxable value and provide expanded opportunities for employment and housing.




 4
 9 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 The City’s Economic Development Department will continue to market other City
 land as potential building sites to prospective businesses and developers, in addition
 to promoting Bayside as a whole.

Amendment #9 – Proposed to Portland City Council

Amendment #9 would increase and clarify the allowable uses of Municipal TIF Revenue
in the District. Proposed additional uses include:

 - Professional service costs to administer the TIF District Program and to assist
 the City’s Economic Development Department to market and prepare for
 Bayside Redevelopment;
 - Pro-rated salaries of the City’s Finance Director, and the City’s Planning staff;
 - Workforce training funds.

B. The Development District

 Properties that are to be designated as part of the TIF District are shown on the
 attached map (Exhibit 4), containing approximately 129.18 acres with an original
 assessed value as shown on Exhibit 11 as $122,318,180

 The TIF District will apply to only new value generated within the District and will
 not affect the current property tax base.

C. The Amended Development Program

 The City of Portland, by designating the Amended Bayside Redevelopment TIF
 District, will capture all new investments made within the Amended District. The
 City is projecting to capture up to 100% of the new assessed value over the original
 assessed value, and retain from the district the new tax revenues generated from that
 captured assessed value. These revenues will be allocated to the Project Cost
 Account for the purposes described in II.A. above and further detailed in Section
 II(D) below. Each year, the City Council may adjust the specific amount to be
 captured and retained for purposes of this Amended TIF, based upon the needs of the
 Amended District, and the commitments made through Credit Enhancement
 Agreements, collateral for loan or bond repayment, and the like.

D. The Projects

The projects/public benefits associated with an amended Bayside TIF District include:

 - Provide support for Portland’s continued economic development;
 - Help increase the vibrancy and stability of the Bayside neighborhood;
 - Create employment opportunities for area residents;
 - Produce tax shift benefits averaging an estimated savings to the City of $1.3
 Million annually;



 5
 10 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 - Improve the general economy of Portland and the State of Maine;
 - Improved public transportation infrastructure investment;
 - Clean up contaminated property to support commercial development;
 - Planning for environmental sea level adaptation, and public infrastructure to
 support commercial development.

 The City of Portland seeks authorization to utilize the revenues generated from the
 Amended Bayside TIF District to support economic development in Bayside, all as
 more detailed in Table 1 below: See Table 1 Below for Municipal Use of TIF
 Revenues, Statutory Citation, and Cost Estimates – Citations all refer to Title 30-A,
 Chapter 206, Section 5225.
 Table 1

 Municipal Use of TIF Revenues Statutory Citation Cost Estimate
In District: Create Additional Parking (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $10,000,000
Structures
In District: Existing Credit Enhancement (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $6,000,000 over life
Agreements; others as negotiated, of TIF District for
executed with public process per Section existing CEAs
II ACity of Portland TIF Policy as may be
amended from time to time
In District: Relocate one remaining scrap (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
metal recycling facility and acquisition of
scrap metal yard site
In District: Infrastructure and financing (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
costs (roadway, sidewalk, and
transportation improvement projects)
located in District
In District: Pledging TIF revenue as a (1)(A)(2) $6,000,000 over life
repayment source to HUD or any other of TIF District
agency or entity that finances public
Bayside investment
In District: Public infrastructure (1)(A) )(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)(8) T/B/D
improvements for both pedestrians and
transit, lighting, and open space/trails
In District: Funding the Economic (1)(A)(4)(5) $500,000
Development Department, including
salaries, to market and prepare for
Bayside Redevelopment and professional
service costs to administer the TIF District
Program
In and out of District:
 a.) Cover the City’s Economic (1)(A)(5) and (1)(C)(1) $250,000/annual or
 Development Department costs, $47,500,000 over life
 including pro-rated salaries of City of TIF District (30
 Manager, Finance Director, and Years)


 6
 11 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 Planning and Urban Development
 Director and Planning staff*;
 b.) Environmental site assessment and (1)(C)(2) $150,000
 remediation to support commercial
 development;
 c.) Environmental sea level adaptation (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 planning and public infrastructure
 to support commercial
 development;
 d.) Workforce training funds. Costs (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 of services and equipment to
 provide skills development and
 training, including scholarships to
 in-state educational institutions or
 to online learning entities when in-
 state options are not available, for
 jobs created or retained.
 c.)e.) Professional services costs. (1)(A)(4); (1)(C)(1) T/B/D
Total: $2730,150,000
 *This item is not unique to this TIF District; it is also partially included in the
 Riverwalk TIF District, and is proposed to be fully included Downtown TIF District
 and the Waterfront TIF District.

 E. Operational Components

 1. Public Facilities

 The City will invest in projects to further goals of the Bayside Vision, and as
 outlined in Table 1 above.

 2. Uses of Private Property

 The Amended Bayside Economic Redevelopment Program and TIF District
 includes both public and private property. The funds generated from this district
 will be used to support commercial investment on both public and private land,
 the latter through the use of CEA as noted II.(D) above.

 3. Plans for relocation of persons displaced by development activities.

 Though not contemplated at this point, any possible relocation costs of
 displaced persons resulted from one or more City projects funded through this
 Amended Development Program shall be covered by the City as required.




 7
 12 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 4. Transportation Improvements

 A description of the transportation-related improvements to be financed
 through this Amended Development Program is set forth above in Table 1 of the
 Development Program Section II(D).

 5. Environmental Controls

 The Amended Development Program proposes improvements that will
 comply with all federal, state and local rules and regulations and applicable land
 use requirements.

 6. Plan of Operation of Amended District

 During the life of the Amended Tax Increment Financing District, the City
 of Portland, City Council, or their designee, will be responsible for the
 administration of the District.

III. Physical Description

 As noted previously, properties that are to be designated as part of the Amended TIF
 District are shown on the attached map (Exhibit 4), totaling 129.18 acres
 The statutory threshold limits addressing the conditions for approval mandated by 30-
 A M.R.S.A. Section 5223(3) are set forth in Exhibit 6.

 Proposed Amendment #8 does not change the acreage numbers for the Bayside TIF
 District because the 178 Kennebec Street Unit 1 (ground level commercial space) will
 remain in the Bayside TIF District and Unit 2 (affordable residential units located in
 the upper floors) is proposed to be an Affordable Housing TIF District.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Amended TIF District in relation to
 geographic location of municipality (see new Exhibit 3(A)).

 2. Site map showing tax map locations of the Amended TIF District (see new
 Exhibit 4(A)).

IV. Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 With Amendment #6 to this TIF District, the acreage was increased to 129.18 acres,
 with an associated OAV set at $122,318,180 as set forth in Exhibit 11. Exhibit 11
 details the OAV from the inception of the Bayside TIF District, to its 1st expansion




 8
 13 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 via Amendment 1, and 2nd expansion via Amendment 6. Exhibit 4 is the map which
 highlights the District encompassing the entire 129.18 acres.

 The Amended Development Program provides for the new tax revenues generated by
 the increase in assessed value of the District to be captured and designated as TIF
 Revenues. The City will apply the retained revenues to the economic development
 activities described in the Amended Development Program. To date, these activities
 are included in Table 1, Section II(D) above.

 The attached Revised Exhibit 1, as revised and updated for Amendment 9, details the
 actual numbers from its inception – Tax Year 2003/City Fiscal Year 2003/2004 –
 through Tax Year April 1, 2018/City Fiscal Year 2018/2019; and estimates beginning
 Tax Year April 1, 2019/City Fiscal Year 2019/2020 through the life of District ending
 with Tax Year April 1, 2032/City Fiscal Year 2032/2033. The projections of retained
 revenues is based upon the anticipated assessed value increases within the District.
 for the remainder of the District term. Revised Exhibit 1 is a projection based upon
 best available information and is included for demonstration purposes only. No
 assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 This Development Program requires establishment of a Development Program
 Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment of the project costs in the manner
 outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5227(3).

 The Bayside TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project
 cost account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of
 project costs. The Project Cost Account shall consist of Company Cost Subaccounts
 (Company Cost Subaccount), pledged to and charged with payment to authorized
 companies under the terms of an approved Credit Enhancement Agreement for
 reimbursements for eligible project costs, and a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost
 Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of
 approved economic development expenses.

C. Financing Plan

 The original TIF District comprised an area of approximately 11 acres of real and
 personal property. The value of the real and personal property within the district as of
 March 31, 2002 was established as the original assessed value. With the subsequent
 expansion (Amendment 1), the value of the additional real and personal property
 within the district expansion as of March 31, 2007 was established as the original
 assessed value, with that value being $44,066,380. With the additional expansion via
 Amendment 6 from 62.18 to add 67 acres to the District, for a total of 129.18 acres,
 the value of real property within the expanded District of 67 acres has a March 31,
 2014 date established as the original assessed value, or $78,251,800 as detailed in
 Section IV.A. above, for a total OAV of the District at $122,318,180.



 9
 14 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9




 The developments within the described Amended Bayside TIF District will add
 significant new taxable value in the City of Portland. TIF revenues will be allocated
 as described on revised Exhibit 1 to finance the costs described in the Amended
 Development Program. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted
 based upon the applicable annual percentage retained, or a specific amount to be
 retained within the Amended District, and the actual annual assessed value within the
 Amended District, to be determined by the City Council on a yearly basis.

V. Amended Financial Data (See Statutory Requirements & Thresholds,
Exhibit 6)

A. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the
 development program: See Revised Exhibit 1

B. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the development program
 fund: See Revised Exhibit 1

C. Estimated annual tax increment: $1,717,654528,312 (Average)

D. Total average annual value of development program fund: $1,717,654528,312
(Average)

E. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: N/A at this
time$400,000

F. Financial assumptions and safeguards: The City of Portland is under no obligation
 to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the City’s full faith and credit.

VI. Tax Shifts (See Revised Exhibit 2)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $593,812530,331

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $47,75136,549

 County Tax Shift: $38,74534,468

 Total Average Annual Savings: $680,307$601,349

VII. Municipal Approvals

A. Public Hearing Notice




 10
 15 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 The City of Portland did giver proper Notice of Public Hearing in accordance with the
 requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A. §5253.5226(1). The notice was published on July
 3,________________, 2018, in a newspaper of general circulation (see new Exhibit
 8).

B. Public Hearing

 A Public Hearing at which the proposed Amended Bayside Municipal Tax Increment
 Financing District was discussed was held on July 16,______________, 2018, in the
 Portland City Council Chambers. A copy of the minutes of that meeting is included
 as new Exhibit 9.

C. Authorizing Votes

 An attested copy of the resolution of the Portland City Council designating the
 Amended Municipal TIF district created for the implementation of the Bayside
 Redevelopment Program is included as new Exhibit 10.

D. Assessor’s Certification

 An attested copy of the certification by the City of Portland Tax Assessor as to the
 revised Original Assessed Value of the expanded Bayside Municipal Tax Increment
 Financing District is included as Exhibit 11.




 11
 16 of 30
 of Portland
 Bayside Economic Redevelopment Program and Tax
 Increment Financing Program

 Prepared by:

 The City of Portland Economic Development Department




Enacted by the Portland City Council March 17, 2003
Amendment #1 from MDECD Includes City Council Actions on:
 July 6, 2005 – Expand Footprint and Amend OAV;
 November 21, 2005 – Reduce Footprint for Pearl Place Affordable Housing TIF;
 June 5, 2006 – Authorizing Credit Enhancement Agreements (CEA) with Capital
 LLC; and, Southern Maine Student Housing, LLC
Amendment #2 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 June 4, 2007 to Amend CEA with Atlantic Bayside Trust LLC (formerly
 Capital LLC)
Amendment #3 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 November 17, 2008 to Extend Term additional Ten Years to FY2033, and
 amended public projects.
Amendment #4 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 May 18, 2009 Amending Captured Value For FY10
Amendment #5 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 May 17, 2010 Amending Captured Value For FY11
Amendment #6 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 November 17, 2014 Expanding Bayside TIF Area
Amendment #7 from MDECD Includes City Council Action on:
 July 20, 2015 Amending Bayside TIF District for expanded Municipal
 allowable uses for TIF Revenue Investments
Amendment #8 Approved by City Council 7/16/2018 for Amended District Regarding
 178 Kennebec Street/MDECD Approval Pending
Proposed Amendment #9 to City Council for Additional Municipal TIF Revenue
 Investment Options



 17 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


I. Introduction/Updated 2018

East and West Bayside continue to be gateways to Portland’s peninsula. A lot of changes to
East and West Bayside have occurred since the Bayside (West) TIF District was adopted by
the City Council on March 17, 2003. Relocation of one scrap yard and the addition of new
medical office buildings, new housing for college students, , two new grocery stores,
pharmacies, and financial institutions have transformed West Bayside’s industrial heritage to
a more compact urban development pattern, which extends the Central Business District to I-
295. Additionally, City Council approval, during 2017 and 2018, of the sale of six Bayside
properties formerly occupied by the Public Works Department will continue to support area
wide economic revitalization.

East Bayside has been experiencing its own transformation with new coffee shops, artist
studios, and new housing. Continued attention to the West Bayside TIF District is needed to
fulfill the Bayside Vision.

History

In 1996, the process began when the City of Portland obtained funding from the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to undertake a Brownfield’s Pilot Project in
Bayside. The City designated a ten-lot, 14-acre parcel between Oxford Street and Marginal
Way as the Bayside Brownfield’s Project Area and has since created a $500,000 loan fund
for the express purpose of cleaning up the site to clear the way for future development. The
study area was subsequently enlarged to incorporate the area from Congress Street to I-295,
and from Franklin Arterial to Forest Avenue, which is approximately 129 acres.

Since 1996, the City of Portland has been working with a team of consultants on planning for
opportunities for the reuse of the Bayside land. An extensive public participation process,
which involved hundreds of participants, produced a plan entitled “A New Vision for
Bayside”. The Bayside plan identifies the following eleven development principles and five
critical actions in order to transform this area into a vital, productive and diverse urban
neighborhood:

Development Principles
  Urban Gateway  Multi-level Parking Structures
  Economic and Employment  A Neighborhood Center
 Opportunities  Recreation and Open Space
  A Walkable District  A Social Service Network
  A Critical Mass of Dwellings  Environmental Remediation
  Transit Oriented Development  Scrap yard Redevelopment




 1
 18 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


Critical Actions
  Acquire the Railroad Property  Create Transit Oriented
  Redevelop the Scrap yard Parcels Development
  Build More Housing  Secure the Future of Portland’s
 Social Service Network

Public participation continues to be an ongoing aspect of the Plan’s implementation. The
Bayside Neighborhood Association and the Bayside Community Development
Corporation include neighborhood property owners, residents, commercial owners and
tenants.

Since adopting the Bayside Vision Plan in December 1999 as a part of the
Comprehensive Plan, the City has moved forward on several of the identified critical
actions. After several years of complex negotiations with Guilford Transportation and
the Maine Department of Transportation, the City purchased the Railroad property.
Using Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and Economic Development
Administration (“EDA”) funding, this 6+ acre parcel made the City a major property
owner in the area of Bayside slated primarily for commercial redevelopment.

EDA and City Capital Improvement Funds have been used to rebuild the sewer system
along Somerset Street, adjacent to the railroad parcel, as well as to extend Chestnut Street
from Somerset Street to Marginal Way. These improvements were key infrastructure
investments for new development in Bayside. The City continues to be committed to
investing in Bayside as funding becomes available, but clearly a variety of financing
mechanisms have been and will continue to be needed.

With these first actions completed, attention has been focused on the need for structured
parking associated with the Federated Midtown Project. At meeting after meeting, then
Bayside Development Committee (BDC) members stated unequivocally that the Bayside
Plan cannot be implemented to its fullest without structured parking; and that the entire
redevelopment plan hinges upon the relocation of the scrap metal recycling facilities.
Furthermore, it is clear that the private sector cannot afford to make new investments in
Bayside that include the cost of creating structured parking, nor can the market alone bear
the cost of relocating the scrap metal recycling facilities.

The first such private development project which included constructing garages occurred
on property that was sold by the City to two private developers (Capital, LLC and
Southern Maine Student Housing, LLC) who planned a then estimated $38,400,000 in
new taxable commercial investment. The project consisted of a 72,000 sq. ft. office
building, perched upon a 430 space parking garage with ground floor retail, alongside a
405 bed student housing facility with a 130 space parking garage. The cost of
constructing the structured parking added more costs to the project than market rents
could support, so financing relief was sought through the use of Credit Enhancement
Agreements (Exhibit 5) so that the project moved forward with the density sought for
Bayside. This entire investment occupies just over 3 acres by reducing the footprint and
allowing for vertical expansion.


 2
 19 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9




Amendment #7 Approved by MDECD March 28, 2016

The purpose of Amendment #7 to this TIF application was to amend the Development
Program to include municipal use of TIF funds for costs of public transportation
improvement projects – including traffic signals, costs associated with environmental site
assessment and remediation work to support commercial development, costs associated
with environmental sea level adaptation planning and public infrastructure to support
commercial development, as well as other development principles and critical actions
items contained in the Bayside Vision Report I and II

 The public benefits associated with an amended Bayside TIF District include:

 - Provide support for Portland’s continued economic development;
 - Help increase the vibrancy and stability of the Bayside neighborhood;
 - Create employment opportunities for area residents;
 - Produce tax shift benefits averaging an estimated savings to the City of
 $680,307 annually at that time;
 - Improve the general economy of Portland and the State of Maine;
 - Improved public transportation infrastructure investment;
 - Clean up contaminated property to support commercial development;
 - Planning for environmental sea level adaptation, and public infrastructure to
 support commercial development.

Amendment #8 Approved by the Portland City Council July 16, 2018/MDECD Approval
Pending

Amendment #8 includes a single property in the Expanded Bayside TIF District located
at 178 Kennebec Street, Assessor Chart, Block, and Lot Number 034 F001001. The City
is in the process of selling this property to a private developer. This developer proposes
an elderly affordable housing project on that property with two condominium units. Unit
1 would be ground level commercial space and Unit 2 (air rights above Unit 1) is
proposed to be an elderly affordable housing project.

The amendments will exclude all floors above the first floor in a multi-story building to
be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres presently owned by the City of
Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris
Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant thereto
including without limitation in the land comprising said parcel. It is the intention of the
Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 2 in the Furman at Bayside Condominium
following acquisition of the land from the City of Portland. Such specified area is
referred to below as “178 Kennebec Street Unit 2” or “Unit 2”.

The amendments will provide that the following specified area will remain: the first floor
in a multi-story building to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres
presently owned by the City of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to



 3
 20 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


be conveyed to 100 Parris Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all
rights appurtenant thereto including without limitation in the land comprising said
parcel. It is the intention of the Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 1 in the
Furman at Bayside Condominium following acquisition of the land from the City of
Portland.

II. Amended Development Program

A. The Amended Project

 Amendment #8/Pending with MDECD

 With this amended and restated Development Program, the City of Portland seeks to
 amend the Bayside Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District to allow for 178
 Kennebec Street, Condominium Unit 1 on the ground level/commercial space to
 remain in the Bayside TIF District; and, Condominium Unit 2, floors above the
 ground level commercial space, to be an Affordable Housing TIF District.

 The amendments will exclude all floors above the first floor in a multi-story building
 to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22 acres presently owned by the City
 of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street, Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris
 Street, LP or its designee (the “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant
 thereto including without limitation in the land comprising said parcel. It is the
 intention of the Developer to declare this specified area as Unit 2 in the Furman at
 Bayside Condominium following acquisition of the land from the City of Portland.
 Such specified area is referred to below as “178 Kennebec Street Unit 2” or “Unit 2”.

 The amendments will provide that the following specified area will remain: the first
 floor in a multi-story building to be constructed on a parcel of approximately 0.22
 acres presently owned by the City of Portland located at 178 Kennebec Street,
 Portland and to be conveyed to 100 Parris Street, LP or its designee (the
 “Developer”), together with all rights appurtenant thereto including without limitation
 in the land comprising said parcel. It is the intention of the Developer to declare this
 specified area as Unit 1 in the Furman at Bayside Condominium following acquisition
 of the land from the City of Portland.

 Municipal uses of TIF revenue consistent Bayside Vision Plans I and II are detailed in
 Table 1 in Section II(D) below.

 The success of these efforts will enhance the City’s ability to attract new investment
 to Bayside, leading to a densely developed commercial district, which will create new
 taxable value and provide expanded opportunities for employment and housing.

 The City’s Economic Development Department will continue to market other City
 land as potential building sites to prospective businesses and developers, in addition
 to promoting Bayside as a whole.



 4
 21 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9




Amendment #9 – Proposed to Portland City Council

Amendment #9 would increase and clarify the allowable uses of Municipal TIF Revenue
in the District. Proposed additional uses include:

 - Professional service costs to administer the TIF District Program and to assist
 the City’s Economic Development Department to market and prepare for
 Bayside Redevelopment;
 - Pro-rated salaries of the City’s Finance Director, and the City’s Planning staff;
 - Workforce training funds.

B. The Development District

 Properties that are to be designated as part of the TIF District are shown on the
 attached map (Exhibit 4), containing approximately 129.18 acres with an original
 assessed value as shown on Exhibit 11 as $122,318,180

 The TIF District will apply to only new value generated within the District and will
 not affect the current property tax base.

C. The Amended Development Program

 The City of Portland, by designating the Amended Bayside Redevelopment TIF
 District, will capture all new investments made within the Amended District. The
 City is projecting to capture up to 100% of the new assessed value over the original
 assessed value, and retain from the district the new tax revenues generated from that
 captured assessed value. These revenues will be allocated to the Project Cost
 Account for the purposes described in II.A. above and further detailed in Section
 II(D) below. Each year, the City Council may adjust the specific amount to be
 captured and retained for purposes of this Amended TIF, based upon the needs of the
 Amended District, and the commitments made through Credit Enhancement
 Agreements, collateral for loan or bond repayment, and the like.

D. The Projects

The projects/public benefits associated with an amended Bayside TIF District include:

 - Provide support for Portland’s continued economic development;
 - Help increase the vibrancy and stability of the Bayside neighborhood;
 - Create employment opportunities for area residents;
 - Produce tax shift benefits averaging an estimated savings to the City of $1.3
 Million annually;
 - Improve the general economy of Portland and the State of Maine;
 - Improved public transportation infrastructure investment;
 - Clean up contaminated property to support commercial development;



 5
 22 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 - Planning for environmental sea level adaptation, and public infrastructure to
 support commercial development.

 The City of Portland seeks authorization to utilize the revenues generated from the
 Amended Bayside TIF District to support economic development in Bayside, all as
 more detailed in Table 1 below: See Table 1 Below for Municipal Use of TIF
 Revenues, Statutory Citation, and Cost Estimates – Citations all refer to Title 30-A,
 Chapter 206, Section 5225.
 Table 1

 Municipal Use of TIF Revenues Statutory Citation Cost Estimate
In District: Create Additional Parking (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $10,000,000
In District: Existing Credit Enhancement (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $6,000,000 over life
Agreements; others as negotiated, of TIF District for
executed with public process per City of existing CEAs
Portland TIF Policy as may be amended
from time to time
In District: Relocate one remaining scrap (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
metal recycling facility and acquisition of
scrap metal yard site
In District: Infrastructure and financing (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
costs (roadway, sidewalk, and
transportation improvement projects)
located in District
In District: Pledging TIF revenue as a (1)(A)(2) $6,000,000 over life
repayment source to HUD or any other of TIF District
agency or entity that finances public
Bayside investment
In District: Public infrastructure (1)(A) )(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)(8) T/B/D
improvements for both pedestrians and
transit, lighting, and open space/trails
In District: Funding the Economic (1)(A)(4)(5) $500,000
Development Department, including
salaries, to market and prepare for
Bayside Redevelopment and professional
service costs to administer the TIF District
Program
In and out of District:
 a.) Cover the City’s Economic (1)(A)(5) and (1)(C)(1) $250,000/annual or
 Development Department costs, $7,500,000 over life
 including pro-rated salaries of City of TIF District (30
 Manager, Finance Director, and Years)
 Planning and Urban Development
 Director and Planning staff*;




 6
 23 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 b.) Environmental site assessment and (1)(C)(2) $150,000
 remediation to support commercial
 development;
 c.) Environmental sea level adaptation (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 planning and public infrastructure
 to support commercial
 development;
 d.) Workforce training funds. Costs (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 of services and equipment to
 provide skills development and
 training, including scholarships to
 in-state educational institutions or
 to online learning entities when in-
 state options are not available, for
 jobs created or retained.
 e.) Professional services costs. (1)(C)(1) T/B/D
Total: $30,150,000
 *This item is not unique to this TIF District; it is also partially included in the
 Riverwalk TIF District, and is proposed to be fully included Downtown TIF District
 and the Waterfront TIF District.

 E. Operational Components

 1. Public Facilities

 The City will invest in projects to further goals of the Bayside Vision, and as
 outlined in Table 1 above.

 2. Uses of Private Property

 The Amended Bayside Economic Redevelopment Program and TIF District
 includes both public and private property. The funds generated from this district
 will be used to support commercial investment on both public and private land,
 the latter through the use of CEA as noted II.(D) above.

 3. Plans for relocation of persons displaced by development activities.

 Though not contemplated at this point, any possible relocation costs of
 displaced persons resulted from one or more City projects funded through this
 Amended Development Program shall be covered by the City as required.

 4. Transportation Improvements

 A description of the transportation-related improvements to be financed
 through this Amended Development Program is set forth above in Table 1 of the
 Development Program Section II(D).


 7
 24 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9




 5. Environmental Controls

 The Amended Development Program proposes improvements that will
 comply with all federal, state and local rules and regulations and applicable land
 use requirements.

 6. Plan of Operation of Amended District

 During the life of the Amended Tax Increment Financing District, the City
 of Portland, City Council, or their designee, will be responsible for the
 administration of the District.

III. Physical Description

 As noted previously, properties that are to be designated as part of the Amended TIF
 District are shown on the attached map (Exhibit 4), totaling 129.18 acres
 The statutory threshold limits addressing the conditions for approval mandated by 30-
 A M.R.S.A. Section 5223(3) are set forth in Exhibit 6.

 Proposed Amendment #8 does not change the acreage numbers for the Bayside TIF
 District because the 178 Kennebec Street Unit 1 (ground level commercial space) will
 remain in the Bayside TIF District and Unit 2 (affordable residential units located in
 the upper floors) is proposed to be an Affordable Housing TIF District.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Amended TIF District in relation to
 geographic location of municipality (see new Exhibit 3(A)).

 2. Site map showing tax map locations of the Amended TIF District (see new
 Exhibit 4(A)).

IV. Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 With Amendment #6 to this TIF District, the acreage was increased to 129.18 acres,
 with an associated OAV set at $122,318,180 as set forth in Exhibit 11. Exhibit 11
 details the OAV from the inception of the Bayside TIF District, to its 1st expansion
 via Amendment 1, and 2nd expansion via Amendment 6. Exhibit 4 is the map which
 highlights the District encompassing the entire 129.18 acres.

 The Amended Development Program provides for the new tax revenues generated by
 the increase in assessed value of the District to be captured and designated as TIF
 Revenues. The City will apply the retained revenues to the economic development



 8
 25 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 activities described in the Amended Development Program. To date, these activities
 are included in Table 1, Section II(D) above.

 The attached Revised Exhibit 1, as revised and updated for Amendment 9, details the
 actual numbers from its inception – Tax Year 2003/City Fiscal Year 2003/2004 –
 through Tax Year April 1, 2018/City Fiscal Year 2018/2019; and estimates beginning
 Tax Year April 1, 2019/City Fiscal Year 2019/2020 through the life of District ending
 with Tax Year April 1, 2032/City Fiscal Year 2032/2033. The projections of retained
 revenues is based upon the anticipated assessed value increases within the District for
 the remainder of the District term. Revised Exhibit 1 is a projection based upon best
 available information and is included for demonstration purposes only. No
 assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 This Development Program requires establishment of a Development Program
 Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment of the project costs in the manner
 outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5227(3).

 The Bayside TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project
 cost account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of
 project costs. The Project Cost Account shall consist of Company Cost Subaccounts
 (Company Cost Subaccount), pledged to and charged with payment to authorized
 companies under the terms of an approved Credit Enhancement Agreement for
 reimbursements for eligible project costs, and a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost
 Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of
 approved economic development expenses.

C. Financing Plan

 The original TIF District comprised an area of approximately 11 acres of real and
 personal property. The value of the real and personal property within the district as of
 March 31, 2002 was established as the original assessed value. With the subsequent
 expansion (Amendment 1), the value of the additional real and personal property
 within the district expansion as of March 31, 2007 was established as the original
 assessed value, with that value being $44,066,380. With the additional expansion via
 Amendment 6 from 62.18 to add 67 acres to the District, for a total of 129.18 acres,
 the value of real property within the expanded District of 67 acres has a March 31,
 2014 date established as the original assessed value, or $78,251,800 as detailed in
 Section IV.A. above, for a total OAV of the District at $122,318,180.

 The developments within the described Amended Bayside TIF District will add
 significant new taxable value in the City of Portland. TIF revenues will be allocated
 as described on revised Exhibit 1 to finance the costs described in the Amended
 Development Program. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted
 based upon the applicable annual percentage retained, or a specific amount to be



 9
 26 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 retained within the Amended District, and the actual annual assessed value within the
 Amended District, to be determined by the City Council on a yearly basis.

V. Amended Financial Data (See Statutory Requirements & Thresholds,
Exhibit 6)

A. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the
 development program: See Revised Exhibit 1

B. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the development program
 fund: See Revised Exhibit 1

C. Estimated annual tax increment: $1,528,312 (Average)

D. Total average annual value of development program fund: $1,528,312 (Average)

E. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: $400,000

F. Financial assumptions and safeguards: The City of Portland is under no obligation
 to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the City’s full faith and credit.

VI. Tax Shifts (See Revised Exhibit 2)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $530,331

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $36,549

 County Tax Shift: $34,468

 Total Average Annual Savings: $601,349

VII. Municipal Approvals

A. Public Hearing Notice

 The City of Portland did giver proper Notice of Public Hearing in accordance with the
 requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A. §5226(1). The notice was published on
 ________________, 2018, in a newspaper of general circulation (see new Exhibit 8).

B. Public Hearing

 A Public Hearing at which the proposed Amended Bayside Municipal Tax Increment
 Financing District was discussed was held on ______________, 2018, in the Portland




 10
 27 of 30
 PROPOSED BAYSIDE TIF DISTRICT CITY INVESTMENT OPTIONS –AMENDMENT 9


 City Council Chambers. A copy of the minutes of that meeting is included as new
 Exhibit 9.

C. Authorizing Votes

 An attested copy of the resolution of the Portland City Council designating the
 Amended Municipal TIF district created for the implementation of the Bayside
 Redevelopment Program is included as new Exhibit 10.

D. Assessor’s Certification

 An attested copy of the certification by the City of Portland Tax Assessor as to the
 revised Original Assessed Value of the expanded Bayside Municipal Tax Increment
 Financing District is included as Exhibit 11.




 11
 28 of 30
 Revised Exhibit 1 for Bayside TIF Amendment #9




City of Portland - Bayside TIF Model Total OAV ao 4/1/2001: $1,608,190
 Total OAV ao 4/1/2006: $44,066,380
 Total OAV ao of 4/1/2013: $122,318,180
Note: These numbers are actuals through FY2019 (Tax Year 4/1/2018); estimates for FY2020 through End of FY2033 (Tax Year 4/1/2032).
 9/7/2018

 Bayside TIF
 TIF Years 1 (FY2004) through 16 (FY2019) Actual Numbers; Years 17 (FY2020) through 30 (FY2033) Estimates
 Captured
 Revenue to Captured
 Municipal City Non- Revenue to
 Increased Total Projected Project and Captured Municipal Capture
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Assessed Value % of Value Captured Projected New Taxes CEAs General Fund OAV General Fund Project Revenue to
 TIF Year April 1 Year Real Prop. Captured Valuation Mill Rate Captured Account Revenues Revenue Account CEAs
 1 2003 FY2003/2004 $5,468,950 1.00% $54,690 26.80 $1,466 $1,466 $145,102 $43,099 $1,466
 2 2004 FY2004/2005 $7,295,740 1.00% $72,957 26.53 $1,936 $1,936 $191,620 $42,665 $1,936
 3 2005 FY2005/2006 $9,171,480 54.16% $4,967,274 20.13 $99,991 $99,991 $84,631 $32,373 $99,991
 4 2006 FY2006/2007 $11,052,960 27.74% $3,066,091 16.31 $50,008 $50,008 $130,266 $718,723 $50,008
 5 2007 FY2007/2008 $23,657,250 1.00% $236,573 17.10 $4,045 $4,045 $400,494 $753,535 $4,045
 6 2008 FY2008/2009 $49,496,900 100.00% $49,496,900 17.74 $878,075 $878,075 $0 $781,738 $452,194 $425,881
 7 2009 FY2009/2010 $69,217,260 78.00% $53,989,463 17.74 $957,773 $957,773 $270,141 $781,738 $602,773 $355,000
 8 2010 FY2010/2011 $68,355,920 71.00% $48,532,703 17.92 $869,706 $869,706 $355,232 $789,670 $395,064 $474,642
 9 2011 FY2011/2012 $62,808,110 73.00% $45,849,920 18.28 $838,137 $838,137 $309,996 $805,533 $483,137 $355,000
 10 2012 FY2012/2013 $66,477,790 47.00% $31,244,561 18.82 $588,023 $588,023 $663,089 $829,329 $141,688 $446,335
 11 2013 FY2013/2014 $65,716,350 97.72% $64,218,017 19.41 $1,246,472 $1,246,472 $29,083 $855,328 $800,235 $446,237
 12 2014 FY2014/2015 $65,131,890 83.00% $54,059,469 20.00 $1,081,189 $1,081,189 $221,448 $881,328 $634,952 $446,237
 13 2015 FY2015/2016 $67,362,090 54.58% $36,766,229 20.63 $758,487 $758,487 $631,193 $2,523,424 $294,738 $463,749
 14 2016 FY2016/2017 $70,121,790 54.97% $38,545,948 21.11 $813,705 $813,705 $666,566 $2,582,137 $349,899 $463,806
 15 2017 FY2017/2018 $82,037,690 58.27% $47,803,362 21.65 $1,034,943 $1,034,943 $741,173 $2,648,189 $571,631 $463,312
 16 2018 FY2018/2019 $80,301,620 63.27% $50,806,835 22.48 $1,142,138 $1,142,138 $663,043 $2,749,713 $817,138 $325,000 Actual Above This Line
 17 2019 FY2019/2020 $82,327,818 100.00% $82,327,818 22.93 $1,887,744 $1,887,744 $0 $2,804,707 $1,562,744 $325,000 Estimates Below This Line
 18 2020 FY2020/2021 $84,374,278 100.00% $84,374,278 23.39 $1,973,362 $1,973,362 $0 $2,860,801 $1,648,362 $325,000
 19 2021 FY2021/2022 $86,441,203 100.00% $86,441,203 23.86 $2,062,138 $2,062,138 $0 $2,918,017 $1,737,138 $325,000
 20 2022 FY2022/2023 $88,528,796 100.00% $88,528,796 24.33 $2,154,178 $2,154,178 $0 $2,976,377 $1,829,178 $325,000
 21 2023 FY2023/2024 $90,637,266 100.00% $90,637,266 24.82 $2,249,593 $2,249,593 $0 $3,035,905 $2,249,593
 22 2024 FY2024/2025 $92,766,821 100.00% $92,766,821 25.32 $2,348,497 $2,348,497 $0 $3,096,623 $2,348,497
 23 2025 FY2025/2026 $94,917,671 100.00% $94,917,671 25.82 $2,451,007 $2,451,007 $0 $3,158,556 $2,451,007
 24 2026 FY2026/2027 $97,090,029 100.00% $97,090,029 26.34 $2,557,245 $2,557,245 $0 $3,221,727 $2,557,245
 25 2027 FY2027/2028 $99,284,111 100.00% $99,284,111 26.87 $2,667,335 $2,667,335 $0 $3,286,161 $2,667,335
 26 2028 FY2028/2029 $101,500,134 100.00% $101,500,134 27.40 $2,781,408 $2,781,408 $0 $3,351,884 $2,781,408
 27 2029 FY2029/2030 $103,738,317 100.00% $103,738,317 27.95 $2,899,595 $2,899,595 $0 $3,418,922 $2,899,595
 28 2030 FY2030/2031 $105,998,882 100.00% $105,998,882 28.51 $3,022,036 $3,022,036 $0 $3,487,301 $3,022,036
 29 2031 FY2031/2032 $108,282,053 100.00% $108,282,053 29.08 $3,148,872 $3,148,872 $0 $3,557,047 $3,148,872
 30 2032 FY2032/2033 $110,588,055 100.00% $110,588,055 29.66 $3,280,250 $3,280,250 $0 $3,628,187 $3,280,250
 30 Year TIF Total $2,150,149,224 $1,876,186,426 $45,849,352 $45,849,352 $5,503,077 $62,620,736 $39,884,153 $5,965,199
30 Year Average $71,671,641 $62,539,548 $1,528,312 $1,528,312 $183,436 $2,087,358 $1,329,472 $198,840




 O:\TIF\Bayside\Amendments Fall 2018-Spring 2018 TIF Model Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update-Actual and Est
 29 of 30
 Revised Exhibit 2 for Bayside TIF Amendment #9




City of Portland Bayside TIF Model
9/7/2018




  Tax Shifts-Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation: City of Portland- Bayside TIF Model
  TIF Years 1 (FY2004) through 16 (FY2019) Actual Numbers with Varying Percentage Captures; Years 17
 (FY2020) through 30 (FY2033) Estimates at 100% Capture

 Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation


 Avoided Loss of Avoided Loss of
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Total Added Sheltered State Aid to for  State Municipal Avoided Increase Total Avoided
 TIF Year April 1 Year Valuation Valuation Education Revenue Sharing in County Tax Impacts
 1 2003 FY2003/2004 $5,468,950 $54,690 $0 $32 $30 $62
 2 2004 FY2004/2005 $7,295,740 $72,957 $0 $43 $40 $83
 3 2005 FY2005/2006 $9,171,480 $4,967,274 $0 $2,906 $2,742 $5,649
 4 2006 FY2006/2007 $11,052,960 $3,066,091 $13,046 $1,794 $1,693 $16,533
 5 2007 FY2007/2008 $23,657,250 $236,573 $2,013 $138 $131 $2,282
 6 2008 FY2008/2009 $49,496,900 $49,496,900 $421,219 $28,959 $27,300 $477,478
 7 2009 FY2009/2010 $69,217,260 $53,989,463 $459,450 $31,587 $29,775 $520,813
 8 2010 FY2010/2011 $68,355,920 $48,532,703 $413,013 $28,395 $26,769 $468,177
 9 2011 FY2011/2012 $62,808,110 $45,849,920 $390,183 $26,825 $25,291 $442,299
 10 2012 FY2012/2013 $66,477,790 $31,244,561 $265,891 $18,280 $17,240 $301,412
 11 2013 FY2013/2014 $65,716,350 $64,218,017 $546,495 $37,572 $35,408 $619,475
 12 2014 FY2014/2015 $65,131,890 $54,059,469 $460,046 $31,628 $29,814 $521,488
 13 2015 FY2015/2016 $67,362,090 $36,766,229 $312,881 $21,511 $20,284 $354,676
 14 2016 FY2016/2017 $70,121,790 $38,545,948 $328,026 $22,552 $21,266 $371,843
 15 2017 FY2017/2018 $82,037,690 $47,803,362 $406,807 $27,968 $26,367 $461,142
 16 2018 FY2018/2019 $80,301,620 $50,806,835 $432,366 $29,725 $28,022 $490,113
 17 2019 FY2019/2020 $82,327,818 $82,327,818 $700,610 $48,167 $45,375 $794,152
 18 2020 FY2020/2021 $84,374,278 $84,374,278 $718,025 $49,365 $46,500 $813,890
 19 2021 FY2021/2022 $86,441,203 $86,441,203 $735,615 $49,365 $47,637 $832,616
 20 2022 FY2022/2023 $88,528,796 $88,528,796 $753,380 $51,795 $48,785 $853,961
 21 2023 FY2023/2024 $90,637,266 $90,637,266 $771,323 $53,029 $49,945 $874,297
 22 2024 FY2024/2025 $92,766,821 $92,766,821 $789,446 $54,275 $51,116 $894,836
 23 2025 FY2025/2026 $94,917,671 $94,917,671 $807,749 $55,533 $52,298 $915,581
 24 2026 FY2026/2027 $97,090,029 $97,090,029 $826,236 $56,804 $53,493 $936,533
 25 2027 FY2027/2028 $99,284,111 $99,284,111 $844,908 $58,088 $54,699 $957,695
 26 2028 FY2028/2029 $101,500,134 $101,500,134 $863,766 $59,384 $55,917 $979,067
 27 2029 FY2029/2030 $103,738,317 $103,738,317 $882,813 $60,694 $57,147 $1,000,654
 28 2030 FY2030/2031 $105,998,882 $105,998,882 $902,050 $62,016 $58,389 $1,022,456
 29 2031 FY2031/2032 $108,282,053 $108,282,053 $921,480 $63,352 $59,644 $1,044,476
 30 2032 FY2032/2033 $110,588,055 $110,588,055 $941,104 $64,701 $60,911 $1,066,717
 30 Year TIF Total $2,150,149,224 $1,876,186,426 $15,909,942 $1,096,484 $1,034,030 $18,040,457
 30 Year Average $71,671,641 $62,539,548 $530,331 $36,549 $34,468 $601,349




O:\TIF\Bayside\Amendments Fall 2018-Spring 2018 TIF Model Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update-Actual and Est

 30 of 30
 Economic Development Department
 Gregory A. Mitchell, Director

 MEMORANDUM

TO: Economic Development Committee

FROM: Greg Mitchell
 Brendan O’Connell

DATE: September 11, 2018

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to City Downtown Transit Oriented Development
 Area-wide Tax Increment Financing District

I. ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY

 A public hearing will be held at the September 18, 2018 EDC meeting for a vote, in the form
 of a recommendation to the City Council, to approve the Proposed Amendments to the
 Downtown Transit Oriented Development Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District.

II. AGENDA DESCRIPTION

 Amendments to the Downtown Transit Oriented Development TIF District are proposed to
 maximize utilization of the TIF District revenue by adding more public investment options for
 use of TIF revenue, along with increasing the TIF District Annual Capture Rate from 22% to
 100%. It is noted that the City staff proposed amendments do not involve credit enhancement
 agreements.

III. BACKGROUND

 Downtown Transit (Existing and Proposed Amendments)

 Geography. 421.52 acres generally bounded by State Street, Bayside TIF District and I-295,
 Washington Avenue, and the Waterfront TIF District.

 TIF Term. Fiscal Years 2016-2045

 Overview of TIF District Expenditures to Date.

 Downtown TOD TIF Expenditures from FY2016 thru FY2018
 Uses Expenditures
 Public Infrastructure $346,595
 Creative Portland $300,000
 Staff $20,000
 Total Invested: $666,595


 1 of 29
 Existing and Proposed Amendments to Uses of Revenue. See attached Downtown Transit
 TIF District Program which shows existing and proposed amendments to allowable uses of
 TIF District revenue in a strike through and underline format.

 Capture Rates

 >Existing. 22%

 >Proposed. 100%. City staff’s recommendation is to increase the “allowable” capture to
 enable maximum use of TIF revenue. It is noted that increasing the “allowable” capture rate
 does not require the City to annually capture the full amount. Final decisions related to use of
 TIF revenue are made annually through the City budget process.

 There are no proposed changes to the geography of the Downtown Transit TIF District.

IV. INTENDED RESULT AND/OR COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED

 City Council approval of the proposed amendments to the Downtown Transit Oriented
 Development TIF District to support increased private sector investment and associated job
 creation.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACT

 TIF District Estimates. See attached spreadsheets for estimates of property tax revenue and
 funds available to the General Fund. Tax projections are provided for 22% and 100% TIF
 capture rates for the remainder of the Downtown Transit TIF District term.

 Tax Shelter (Financial Benefits). Probably the most important, but least understood public
 benefit associated with TIF districts, is the tax shelter or local financial benefits.

 Municipalities realize “savings” from the tax sheltering effect of TIF Districts. The following
 direct financial impacts occur when municipal valuation increases:

 A. State Education Aid is reduced,
 B. State Municipal Revenue Sharing is reduced, and
 C. A municipality pays a higher percentage of the County budget.

 This amount of “savings” is significant and one of the most important benefits of
 establishing TIF Districts.

 For Portland, tax shelter savings is conservatively estimated at 30%, meaning that for every
 new tax dollar, Portland saves 30 cents which would otherwise be lost for property tax value
 not included in a TIF District. The estimated tax shelter savings for the remainder of the
 Downtown Transit TIF District term is as follows:

 22% - $18,600,000, or $715,000 Annually
 100% - $84,500,000 or $3,250,000 Annually




 2 of 29
 Net Impact to the General Fund

 The savings referenced above is a direct benefit to the general fund – both to the City and the
 School Department via an increase in revenue from the State of Maine for education,
 increased revenues for the City from municipal revenue sharing, and decreased expenses for
 county tax. It is important to note that whenever the TIF capture rate is adjusted upward
 there will change in how property tax revenue flows between the general fund and the area
 TIFs. Via careful TIF budgeting, subject to annual budget approval by City Council, certain
 types of approved expenditures can be moved from the general fund into area TIFs. If the
 impact of the revenue shift is able to be fully offset the end result is the 30 cent savings on the
 dollar. A good example is what was done in the FY19 budget. TIF capture rates were
 adjusted upward by approximately 5% in the Waterfront and Bayside TIF. Although this
 resulted in slightly less revenue to the general fund, expenses related to Economic
 Development Department staff, in an amount approximately equal to the revenue shift, were
 shifted into the TIF. The net result was an increased capture rate in both TIFs, more sheltering
 savings (approximately 30% in benefits) and no other negative impact on the City or School
 budgets. It is this type of calculated TIF budgeting which is expected to continue to be
 utilized moving forward to increase capture rates, maximize sheltering, and ensure only
 positive impacts to the City and School budgets.

VI. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION

 City staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Downtown Transit
 Oriented TIF District.

VII. LIST ATTACHMENTS
 - Updated Spreadsheets for Actual and Estimated TIF Revenue and Tax Shelter Savings
 - Marked Revision and Clean Version of TIF Narrative and updated Spreadsheets; additional
 attachments noted in the Narrative are available upon request.




 3 of 29
 Revised Downtown TOD TIF Exhibit D-1




City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Model
Actual IAV FY2016 through FY2019
Estimates FY2020 through FY2045
 Annual mil rate increase FY2020 through FY2045: 2%
 Annual valuation increase FY2020 through FY2045: 1%
Original Assessed Value ao 4/1/2013: $968,136,850

9/6/2018

 City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Projection Table
 Captured Captured
 Revenue to Revenue to City Non-
 Increased Total Projected Business Municipal Captured
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Assessed Value % of Value Captured Projected New Taxes Project Project General Fund OAV General Fund
 TIF Year April 1 Year Real Prop. Captured Valuation Mill Rate Captured Account Account Revenues Revenue
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 12.00% $8,669,441 20.63 $178,851 $0 $178,851 $1,311,571 $19,972,663
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 22.00% $18,500,431 21.11 $390,544 $0 $390,544 $1,384,656 $20,437,369
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 22.00% $27,871,560 21.65 $603,419 $0 $603,419 $2,139,396 $20,960,163
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 22.00% $37,364,994 22.48 $839,965 $0 $839,965 $2,978,058 $21,763,716 Actuals Above
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 22.00% $39,868,544 22.93 $914,170 $0 $914,170 $3,241,147 $22,198,991 Estimates Below
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 22.00% $42,397,130 23.39 $991,592 $0 $991,592 $3,515,645 $22,642,971
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 22.00% $44,951,002 23.86 $1,072,349 $0 $1,072,349 $3,801,965 $23,095,830
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 22.00% $47,530,412 24.33 $1,156,561 $0 $1,156,561 $4,100,535 $23,557,747
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 22.00% $50,135,617 24.82 $1,244,353 $0 $1,244,353 $4,411,796 $24,028,901
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 22.00% $52,766,873 25.32 $1,335,853 $0 $1,335,853 $4,736,206 $24,509,479
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 22.00% $55,424,443 25.82 $1,431,195 $0 $1,431,195 $5,074,237 $24,999,669
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 22.00% $58,108,588 26.34 $1,530,516 $0 $1,530,516 $5,426,376 $25,499,662
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 22.00% $60,819,574 26.87 $1,633,959 $0 $1,633,959 $5,793,128 $26,009,656
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 22.00% $63,557,670 27.40 $1,741,670 $0 $1,741,670 $6,175,014 $26,529,849
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 22.00% $66,323,147 27.95 $1,853,802 $0 $1,853,802 $6,572,570 $27,060,446
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 22.00% $69,116,279 28.51 $1,970,510 $0 $1,970,510 $6,986,355 $27,601,655
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 22.00% $71,937,343 29.08 $2,091,958 $0 $2,091,958 $7,416,941 $28,153,688
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 22.00% $74,786,616 29.66 $2,218,312 $0 $2,218,312 $7,864,924 $28,716,762
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 22.00% $77,664,383 30.26 $2,349,745 $0 $2,349,745 $8,330,915 $29,291,097
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 22.00% $80,570,927 30.86 $2,486,437 $0 $2,486,437 $8,815,549 $29,876,919
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 22.00% $83,506,537 31.48 $2,628,571 $0 $2,628,571 $9,319,479 $30,474,457
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 22.00% $86,471,503 32.11 $2,776,338 $0 $2,776,338 $9,843,382 $31,083,946
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 22.00% $89,466,118 32.75 $2,929,936 $0 $2,929,936 $10,387,956 $31,705,625
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 22.00% $92,490,680 33.40 $3,089,568 $0 $3,089,568 $10,953,922 $32,339,738
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 22.00% $95,545,487 34.07 $3,255,443 $0 $3,255,443 $11,542,025 $32,986,532
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 22.00% $98,630,843 34.75 $3,427,779 $0 $3,427,779 $12,153,035 $33,646,263
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 22.00% $101,747,052 35.45 $3,606,800 $0 $3,606,800 $12,787,746 $34,319,188
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 22.00% $104,894,423 36.16 $3,792,738 $0 $3,792,738 $13,446,980 $35,005,572
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 22.00% $108,073,267 36.88 $3,985,831 $0 $3,985,831 $14,131,583 $35,705,684
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 22.00% $111,283,900 37.62 $4,186,327 $0 $4,186,327 $14,842,431 $36,419,797
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $2,020,474,785 $61,715,093 $0 $61,715,093 $219,485,523 $830,594,035
  30 Year TIF Average $307,227,170 $67,349,160 $2,057,170 $0 $2,057,170 $7,316,184 $27,686,468




 O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 22%
 4 of 29
 Tax Shifts-Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation: City of Portland- TIF Model
 30 years: Year 1 - 12% to Municipal Project Account, 88% to City General Fund; Years 2 through 30:
 12% to Municipal Project Account, 78% to City General Fund

 Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation


 Avoided Loss of Avoided Loss of Avoided
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Total Added Sheltered State Aid to for State Municipal Increase in Total Avoided
 TIF Year April 1 Year Valuation Valuation Education Revenue Sharing County Tax Impacts
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 $8,669,441 $0 $5,072 $4,786 $9,858
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 $18,500,431 $0 $10,824 $10,211 $21,035
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 $27,871,560 $0 $16,307 $15,380 $31,687
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 $37,364,994 $158,988 $21,861 $20,615 $201,464
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 $39,868,544 $339,281 $23,326 $21,995 $384,602
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 $42,397,130 $360,800 $24,805 $23,388 $408,993
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 $44,951,002 $382,533 $26,299 $24,796 $433,628
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 $47,530,412 $404,484 $27,808 $26,217 $458,509
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 $50,135,617 $426,654 $29,333 $27,652 $483,639
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 $52,766,873 $449,046 $30,872 $29,102 $509,020
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 $55,424,443 $471,662 $32,427 $30,566 $534,655
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 $58,108,588 $494,504 $33,997 $32,044 $560,545
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 $60,819,574 $517,575 $35,583 $33,537 $586,695
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 $63,557,670 $540,876 $37,185 $35,044 $613,106
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 $66,323,147 $564,410 $38,803 $36,567 $639,780
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 $69,116,279 $588,180 $40,438 $38,104 $666,722
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 $71,937,343 $612,187 $42,088 $39,657 $693,932
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 $74,786,616 $636,434 $43,755 $41,225 $721,415
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 $77,664,383 $660,924 $43,755 $42,809 $747,488
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 $80,570,927 $685,659 $47,139 $44,408 $777,206
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 $83,506,537 $710,641 $48,857 $46,023 $805,520
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 $86,471,503 $735,872 $50,592 $47,654 $834,118
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 $89,466,118 $761,357 $52,344 $49,301 $863,001
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 $92,490,680 $787,096 $54,113 $50,964 $892,173
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 $95,545,487 $813,092 $55,900 $52,644 $921,636
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 $98,630,843 $839,348 $57,706 $54,340 $951,394
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 $101,747,052 $865,867 $59,529 $56,053 $981,449
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 $104,894,423 $892,652 $61,370 $57,782 $1,011,804
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 $108,073,267 $919,704 $63,230 $59,529 $1,042,463
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 $111,283,900 $947,026 $65,108 $61,293 $1,073,428
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $2,020,474,785 $16,566,850 $1,180,428 $1,113,685 $18,860,963
 30 Year TIF Avg. $307,227,170 $67,349,160 $552,228 $39,348 $37,123 $628,699



O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 22%
 5 of 29
 Revised Downtown TOD TIF Exhibit D-1




City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Model
Actual IAV FY2016 through FY2019
Estimates FY2020 through FY2045
 Annual mil rate increase FY2020 through FY2045: 2%
 Annual valuation increase FY2020 through FY2045: 1%
Original Assessed Value ao 4/1/2013: $968,136,850

9/6/2018

 City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Projection Table
 Captured Captured
 Revenue to Revenue to City Non-
 Increased Total Projected Business Municipal Captured
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Assessed Value % of Value Captured Projected New Taxes Project Project General Fund OAV General Fund
 TIF Year April 1 Year Real Prop. Captured Valuation Mill Rate Captured Account Account Revenues Revenue
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 12.00% $8,669,441 20.63 $178,851 $0 $178,851 $1,311,571 $19,972,663
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 22.00% $18,500,431 21.11 $390,544 $0 $390,544 $1,384,656 $20,437,369
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 22.00% $27,871,560 21.65 $603,419 $0 $603,419 $2,139,396 $20,960,163
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 22.00% $37,364,994 22.48 $839,965 $0 $839,965 $2,978,058 $21,763,716 Actuals Above
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 100.00% $181,220,655 22.93 $4,155,317 $0 $4,155,317 $0 $22,198,991 Estimates Below
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 100.00% $192,714,227 23.39 $4,507,237 $0 $4,507,237 $0 $22,642,971
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 100.00% $204,322,735 23.86 $4,874,314 $0 $4,874,314 $0 $23,095,830
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 100.00% $216,047,328 24.33 $5,257,096 $0 $5,257,096 $0 $23,557,747
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 100.00% $227,889,167 24.82 $5,656,149 $0 $5,656,149 $0 $24,028,901
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 100.00% $239,849,425 25.32 $6,072,060 $0 $6,072,060 $0 $24,509,479
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 100.00% $251,929,285 25.82 $6,505,432 $0 $6,505,432 $0 $24,999,669
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 100.00% $264,129,943 26.34 $6,956,893 $0 $6,956,893 $0 $25,499,662
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 100.00% $276,452,609 26.87 $7,427,088 $0 $7,427,088 $0 $26,009,656
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 100.00% $288,898,501 27.40 $7,916,684 $0 $7,916,684 $0 $26,529,849
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 100.00% $301,468,851 27.95 $8,426,372 $0 $8,426,372 $0 $27,060,446
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 100.00% $314,164,906 28.51 $8,956,865 $0 $8,956,865 $0 $27,601,655
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 100.00% $326,987,921 29.08 $9,508,899 $0 $9,508,899 $0 $28,153,688
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 100.00% $339,939,166 29.66 $10,083,236 $0  $10,083,236 $0 $28,716,762
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 100.00% $353,019,923 30.26 $10,680,660 $0  $10,680,660 $0 $29,291,097
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 100.00% $366,231,488 30.86 $11,301,985 $0  $11,301,985 $0 $29,876,919
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 100.00% $379,575,169 31.48 $11,948,050 $0  $11,948,050 $0 $30,474,457
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 100.00% $393,052,286 32.11 $12,619,720 $0  $12,619,720 $0 $31,083,946
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 100.00% $406,664,175 32.75 $13,317,892 $0  $13,317,892 $0 $31,705,625
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 100.00% $420,412,182 33.40 $14,043,490 $0  $14,043,490 $0 $32,339,738
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 100.00% $434,297,670 34.07 $14,797,468 $0  $14,797,468 $0 $32,986,532
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 100.00% $448,322,013 34.75 $15,580,814 $0  $15,580,814 $0 $33,646,263
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 100.00% $462,486,598 35.45 $16,394,547 $0  $16,394,547 $0 $34,319,188
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 100.00% $476,792,830 36.16 $17,239,718 $0  $17,239,718 $0 $35,005,572
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 100.00% $491,242,124 36.88 $18,117,414 $0  $18,117,414 $0 $35,705,684
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 100.00% $505,835,911 37.62 $19,028,757 $0  $19,028,757 $0 $36,419,797
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $8,856,353,513 $273,386,936 $0 $273,386,936 $7,813,681 $830,594,035
 30 Year TIF Average $307,227,170 $295,211,784 $9,112,898 $0 $9,112,898 $260,456 $27,686,468




 O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 100% FY2020 thru 2045
 6 of 29
 Revised Downtown TOD TIF Exhibit D-2




 City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Model
 Actual FY2016 through FY2019
 Estimates FY2020 through FY2045
 Annual mil rate increase FY2020 through FY2045: 2%
 Annual valuation increase FY2020 through FY2045: 1%
 Original Assessed Value ao 4/1/2013: $968,136,850



 Tax Shifts-Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation: City of Portland- TIF Model
 30 years: Year 1 - 12% to Municipal Project Account, 88% to City General Fund; Years 2 through 4: 12% to
 Municipal Project Account, 78% to City General Fund; Years 5 through 30: 100% to Municipal Project
 Account

 Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation


 Avoided Loss of Avoided Loss of
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Total Added Sheltered State Aid to for  State Municipal Avoided Increase Total Avoided
 TIF Year April 1 Year Valuation Valuation Education Revenue Sharing in County Tax Impacts
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 $8,669,441 $0 $5,072 $4,786 $9,858
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 $18,500,431 $0 $10,824 $10,211 $21,035
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 $27,871,560 $0 $16,307 $15,380 $31,687
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 $37,364,994 $158,988 $21,861 $20,615 $201,464
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 $181,220,655 $1,542,188 $106,026 $99,656 $1,747,869
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 $192,714,227 $1,639,998 $112,751 $105,948 $1,858,697
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 $204,322,735 $1,738,786 $119,542 $112,301 $1,970,630
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 $216,047,328 $1,838,563 $126,402 $118,714 $2,083,679
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 $227,889,167 $1,939,337 $133,330 $125,187 $2,197,854
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 $239,849,425 $2,041,119 $140,328 $131,722 $2,313,168
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 $251,929,285 $2,143,918 $147,395 $138,318 $2,429,632
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 $264,129,943 $2,247,746 $154,534 $144,977 $2,547,256
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 $276,452,609 $2,352,612 $161,743 $151,698 $2,666,053
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 $288,898,501 $2,458,526 $169,025 $158,483 $2,786,034
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 $301,468,851 $2,565,500 $176,379 $165,332 $2,907,211
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 $314,164,906 $2,673,543 $183,807 $172,246 $3,029,596
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 $326,987,921 $2,782,667 $191,310 $179,224 $3,153,201
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 $339,939,166 $2,892,882 $198,887 $186,268 $3,278,038
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 $353,019,923 $3,004,200 $198,887 $193,379 $3,396,466
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 $366,231,488 $3,116,630 $214,270 $200,556 $3,531,456
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 $379,575,169 $3,230,185 $222,077 $207,801 $3,660,063
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 $393,052,286 $3,344,875 $229,962 $215,114 $3,789,951
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 $406,664,175 $3,460,712 $237,926 $222,496 $3,921,133
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 $420,412,182 $3,577,708 $245,969 $229,947 $4,053,623
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 $434,297,670 $3,695,873 $254,093 $237,467 $4,187,433
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 $448,322,013 $3,815,220 $262,298 $245,058 $4,322,577
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 $462,486,598 $3,935,761 $270,585 $252,720 $4,459,067
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 $476,792,830 $4,057,507 $278,955 $260,454 $4,596,916
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 $491,242,124 $4,180,470 $287,409 $268,260 $4,736,140
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 $505,835,911 $4,304,664 $295,948 $276,139 $4,876,750
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $8,856,353,513 $74,740,178 $5,173,902 $4,850,458 $84,764,538
 30 Year TIF Avg. $307,227,170 $295,211,784 $2,491,339 $172,463 $161,682 $2,825,485




O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 100% FY2020 thru 2045

 7 of 29
I. Introduction – Portland Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal Development
 and Omnibus Tax Increment Financing District Amendment #2
 On February 19, 2015, the City of Portland (the “City”) designated the Portland
Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal Development and Omnibus Tax Increment Financing
District (the “District”) and adopted this Development Program (the “Development
Program”) for the District in an effort to fully realize the visions and goals of the City of
Portland Downtown Revitalization Investment Plan (“Downtown Plan”); the Downtown Plan
is attached as Exhibit A. The duration of this District will be 30 years beginning July 1, 2015
(Tax Year 4/1/2015; FY2015-16) ending June 30, 2045 (Tax Year 4/1/2044; FY2044-45).
 a. District Amendment #1 Approved by MDECD February 27, 2018: The purpose
 of this District amendment is was to remove the parcel designated by the City
 Assessor as 22-F-1 at 54 Lancaster – a tax exempt parcel (so no value attributed
 to the Original Assessed Value) with approximately .48 acres, which will be
 turned into a free-standing Affordable Housing TIF District. Portland’s amended
 District remaineds the same at approximately 422 acres and is bounded by
 Washington Avenue to the east, State Street to the west, following the edges of
 the adjacent Bayside and Waterfront Capital Improvement TIF Districts to the
 north and south. The District encompasses the central business district of
 Portland and the abutting east and west ends of the District. In creating the
 District, the outlying residential areas of the Eastern and Western Promenades
 have been purposely excluded.

 b. Proposed District Amendment #2: District Amendment #2 is to increase the
 allowable uses for Municipal TIF Revenue and increase the percentage capture
 from 22% to 100%, all as more detailed in Section II below.
 The Downtown Plan includes a listing of current projects and categories of future
investment. It is recognized that meeting the infrastructure needs of Portland’s downtown
will be a dynamic process that will be updated locally on an annual basis or as needed.
Though the specific public projects prioritized and undertaken from year to year will change,
with the exception of this District funding up to $100,000 annually for the Creative Portland
Corporation, categories of investment for the purpose of eligible uses of the TIF Revenues
will remain consistent. Actual project selections and prioritization for funding will continue
to be made on an annual basis during the City budget and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
process, based on categories contained in Table 1 hereinbelow. The CIP is the document that
presents the City’s capital needs in the current year and plans for capital needs in future
years. As a five year plan that is annually updated, the CIP is a dynamic planning document;
the FY2015 to 2019 CIP document is included in the Downtown Plan as an appendice.
II. Development Program Narrative

 A. The Development Program as Amended with Amendment #2




 8 of 29
 The Amended Development Program for the Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal
Development and Omnibus TIF District is structured and proposed pursuant to Chapter 206
of Title 30-A of the Maine Revised TIF Statutes, as amended (the “TIF Statute”), and
remains the same. The City’s designation of the District, combined with the adoption of this
Amended Development Program, creates a single municipal TIF district in order to capture
the value of the real property improvements made within the District and enable the use of
TIF revenues for various municipal and other development projects.
 Under this Amended Development Program, the City may captured up to 12% in year
one, and up to and 22% in years 2 through 304. This Amended Development Program would
now allow for the City to capture up to 100%, of the new real property value located in the
District for remainder of the term of the District, or through Tax Year April 1, 2044/City
Fiscal Year 2044/2045.a total of thirty (30) years. The City may retain those tax revenues
generated by the captured assessed value (the “TIF Revenues”) to fund infrastructure
improvements and other administrative costs, all as further described in Table 1 hereinbelow.
The City reserves the right to capture less than the full 10012% in year one and less than the
22% in years 25 through 30, depending on the then-current needs of the City with respect to
the approved project costs. Any reduction in the captured value percentage shall adjust the
amount of assessed value eligible for sheltering with respect to the tax shift benefit
correspondingly. Although all TIF Revenues will be retained by the City at this time, the City
reserves the right in the future to negotiate and execute commercial credit enhancement
agreements pursuant to City Council approved TIF Policy as may be amended from time to
time. CEAs would be limited, however, to the of up to twenty years, or limited to the balance
of District term at that time., and up to sixty-five percent (65%) of the TIF Revenues, within
sole Council discretion. Such future credit enhancement agreements would require a public
hearing and City Council approval.

 Proposed Amendments to City TIF Policy is attached as Exhibit B, and they were
approved by the City Council on November 20, 2017. Amendments include allowing
Affordable Housing TIF District credit enhancement agreements to have a maximum term
allowed as 30 years (or if in this District limited to balance of District term at that time), and
also allowing up to 75% capture for the term.

 In designating the District and adopting this Amended Development Program, the City
can accomplish the following goals:
 - Maintain existing tax revenues;
 - Invest in the Downtown public infrastructure;
 - Invest in the Creative Portland Corporation annually;
 - Invest in new and enhanced transit services;
 - Enjoy enhanced future tax revenues generated by new development within the
 District; and
 - Create long-term, stable employment opportunities for area residents because of these
 TIF investments.




 9 of 29
 In addition, by creating the District, the City will “shelter” the increase in municipal
  valuation that development in the District will bring about. This tax shift benefit mitigates the
  adverse effect that the District’s increased assessed property value has upon the City’s share
  of state aid to education, municipal revenue sharing, and its county tax assessment. An
  estimate of the tax shift benefits is shown in Revised Exhibit D-2 attached hereto.
 The City’s designation of the District and pursuit of this Amended Development Program
constitute a good and valid public purpose pursuant to Chapter 206 of Title 30-A because it
represents a substantial contribution to the economic well-being of both the City and the region
by providing jobs, contributing to property taxes, and diversifying the region’s economic base.
 B. The Projects
 Development within the District will provide a revenue source for the City’s economic
development projects. The City intends to use TIF Revenues to further its overall plan to attract
and retain businesses that want to take advantage of Portland’s business-friendly location, while
offering their employees a rich, dynamic, and high quality of life. This includes funding of
Creative Portland Corporation, of which the City of Portland is the Corporator, of up to $100,000
annually, as well as City plans to invest in its public infrastructure in these investment focus
areas:
 - Sidewalk and Other Pedestrian Enhancements
 - Streetscape
 - Lighting
 - Street Alignment
 - Utilities
 - Bicycle Improvements
 - Public Transit
 - Wayfinding
 - Multi-modal surface and structured parking
 - Work force training
 - Professional service costs
 - Economic Development Department administrative costs and staff salaries, and
 prorated salaries of the City Manager, Finance Director, and Planning and Urban
 Development Director, and Planning staff.




 10 of 29
 The District projects at this time are highlighted in Table 1 below:


 TABLE 1
NOTE 1: All Citations refer to Title 30-A, Chapter 206, Section 5225
NOTE 2: While this Amended Development Program lists particular projects, the Amended
Development Program shall not serve as an appropriation of TIF Revenues for any of these
specific purposes, nor shall it commit the City to completing any particular project. The projects
will only be undertaken following proper appropriation through the annual budget process and
any other applicable required approvals.
 Project Downtown Statutory Citation Estimated Cost
 Revitalization
 Plan Reference
 by page no.
 In District: Capital
 Infrastructure Investments,
 including Financing Costs, for
 example:
  - Multi-modal surface and 19, 47 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $1,000,000
 structured parking
 - Sidewalk and Other Pedestrian 19, 205, 6, 7, 9, (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $200K annually;
 Enhancements 34,35, 48 $6 Million over
 - Roadway Realignments/Paving 19,205, 6,34,35 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) life of District
 - Crosswalks 19, 46 (1)(A)(1)(a)(i)
 - Traffic Signals 34, 46 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)
 - Intersection Redesigns 19,20,34,355, 6 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 - Bicycle Infrastructure 195, 9, 1134,47 (1)(A)(1)(a)(i)
 - Stormwater Management, 195, 334 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 including water and sewer
 upgrades
 - Communications Infrastructure 195, 363 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(7)
 improvements/enhancements
 - Wayfinding (signage) 195,9,23, 353,47 (1)(A)(1)
 - Public plaza intersection 228, 46 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 improvements
 In and out of District: New
 and Enhanced Transit
 Services, including operational
 costs, for example (see Exhibit
 K – Transit Map):
 - Creation of high frequency bus 317, 20, 21, 6, 32, (1)(A) and (1)(C)(7) $110K annually;
 service on Congress Street at 33 $3.3 Million over
 15-minute intervals between life of District
 the Portland Transportation



 11 of 29
  Center (PTC) and Washington
  Avenue;
- Enhancing Stevens Avenue- 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  Allen Avenue- Congress Street (1)(C)(7)
  bus service areas;
- Corresponding costs for these 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  enhancements, including (1)(C)(7)
  transit operator salaries; transit
  vehicle fuel, and transit vehicle
  parts replacements.
- Transit capital costs including 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  transit vehicles and related (1)(C)(7)
  equipment; bus shelters and
  other related structures;
  benches; signs, and other
  transit-related infrastructure.
- Shuttle service to downtown 17, 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  businesses. (1)(C)(7)




In and out of District: City
Marketing and Promotion
through Creative Portland
Corporation (CPC), for
example (see Exhibit M Arts
District Map within
Downtown TOD TIF District):
- In District: Center for the Arts, 20, 21,477 (1)(C)(1)(2) Up to $100K
including rental residential annually; $3
space; 20, 21,47 (1)(C)(1)(2) Million over life
- In District: capital, financing, of District
real property assembly and
professional service costs; 20, 21, 47 (1)(C)(1)(2)
- In and out of District: CPC
staffing, administrative and
marketing expenses; revolving
loan or investment fund.
In and out of District:
- Economic Dev. Dept. 217, Also TIF (1)(A)(5) and $250K annually;
administrative costs and staff App. P. 3 (1)(C)(1) $7.5 Million over
salaries at 100%, and prorated life of District
salaries of City Manager,
Finance Director, and Planning



 12 of 29
 Urban Development Director,
 and Planning staff *;, including
 - Pprofessional services costs; See TIF App. P.3 (1)(A)(4);(1)(C)(1) T/B/D
 - Workforce training funds. See TIF App. P. 3 (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 Costs of services and equipment
 to provide skills development
 and training, including
 scholarships to in-state
 educational institutions or to
 online learning entities when in-
 state options are not available,
 for jobs created or retained.
 In District: Small Public
 Capital Infrastructure and
 Equipment, for example
 (Downtown Plan pp. 6 and 7)
 - Parking meters 197 (1)(A)(1)(a) $100K
 - Vehicles for Public Services 21, 36 to 44 (1)(A)(1)(a)
 Dept. (formerly Public Works
 Dept.), and Fire Dept., including
 ambulances
 In District: Relocation of (see TIF 1(A)(6) Not budgeted/not
 Displaced Persons (TIF application, p. 6) anticipated at
 Application, p. 6) time of TIF
 application
 In District: CEAs as (see TIF (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) Unknown at time
 Approved by City Council application p. 2) of TIF application
 (TIF application p. 2)

Total Estimate of TIF Revenue $2019,900,000
Expenditure over 30 year
term:
*This item is not unique to this TIF District, it is also included in the Bayside TIF District,
Waterfront TIF District, and partially included Riverwalk TIF District.
 C. Strategic Growth and Development
 This Amended Development Program and the Downtown Plan meld various studies and
plans for the District into one document, thereby promoting those studies and plans and making
investments at the appropriate time. The studies and plans noted in the Downtown Plan
represent a series of community initiatives, both completed and underway, or in planning
process. The Amended Development Program and Project List (Table 1) noted hereinabove
represents the best thinking of City staff about current opportunities for realizing the City’s
longstanding, evolving vision for its Downtown.
 D. Improvements to the Public Infrastructure




 13 of 29
 As further set forth in Table 1 hereinabove, the City may use certain TIF Revenues for
sidewalk and other pedestrian improvements including crosswalks, roadway
realignments/paving, intersection redesigns, traffic signals, bicycle infrastructure, stormwater
management improvements (including water and sewer maintenance), communications
infrastructure improvements/enhancements, wayfinding, multi-modal surface and structured
parking, and public plaza intersection improvements that are directly related and made necessary
by development in the District.
 E. Operational Components
 1. Public Facilities
 The City may use a portion of the TIF Revenues to fund certain projects approved within
the District, outlined in Table 1 hereinabove.
 2. Commercial Improvements Financed through the Development Program
 At this time, no commercial improvements will be financed through the Development
Program. The City may, in the future, reimburse a percentage of the TIF Revenues from any
particular lot within the District to future developers through a credit enhancement agreement.
Future credit enhancement agreements are authorized only if the City Council meets and holds a
public hearing and votes to authorize, negotiate, and execute the credit enhancement agreement
pursuant to City Council approved TIF Policy. Such credit enhancement agreements would be
approved under the City’s TIF Policy, as may be amended from time to timemay provide a
reimbursement of up to sixty-five percent (65%) of the TIF Revenue for up to twenty (20) years
in the District, but limited to the balance of the term of this District.
 3. Relocation of Displaced Persons
 It is not anticipated that any persons will be relocated; however, the City has provided
that if, in the future, relocation of persons is necessary to accommodate future redevelopment
within the District, the one-time relocation costs of such displaced persons can be paid for with
TIF Revenues, exclusive of rent.
 4. Transportation Improvements
 The City may fund road/transportation improvements made necessary by the increased
traffic to the District. Please see Table 1 hereinabove for more details.
 5. Environmental Controls
 The improvements made under this Development Program will meet or exceed all
federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, and ordinances and will comply with all
applicable land use requirements for the City.
 6. Plan of Operation




 14 of 29
 During the term of the District, the City Manager or his designee will be responsible for
all administrative matters within the purview of the City concerning the implementation and
operation of the District.
 III. Physical Description
 The 422-acre District is bounded by Washington Avenue to the east, State Street to the
west, following the edges of the adjacent Bayside and Waterfront Capital Improvement TIF
Districts to the north and south. The District encompasses the central business district of
Portland and the abutting east and west ends of the District. In creating the District, the outlying
residential areas of the Eastern and Western Promenades have been purposely excluded. The
amended District is shown on Exhibit C. The statutory threshold limits addressing the conditions
for approval mandated by 30-A M.R.S.A. Section 5223(3) are set forth in Exhibit E.
 IV. Financial Plan

 A. Amended Financial Characteristics
 The collective original assessed value of the real property in the District is $968,136,850 as
of March 31, 2014 (Tax Year April 1, 2013) remains unchanged. Please see the Assessor’s
certificate of the original assessed value attached as Exhibit F. It is noted that Downtown
TOD/TIF acreage and value calculations are exempt from State TIF law limits.
 The City may captured up to 12% in year 1, and up to 22% in years 2 through 430, of the
increased assessed value of the real property located within the District. This Amendment would
provide for the City to capture up to 100% for the duration of the 30-year term of the District.
Personal property tax value will not be captured within the District. The TIF Revenues so
collected will fund and/or contribute to the funding of the approved projects, including each of
the projects described on Table 1 hereinabove, which collectively increase the City’s ability to
stand out in a competitive marketplace as a dynamic municipality in which to grow a business.
All assessed real property value captured in the District will be added to the general tax rolls at
the end of the District’s term. Please note that at any time during the term of the District, the
municipality can vote to reduce the captured value percentage and instead deposit the tax
revenues into the General Fund so long as the municipality does not receive the tax shift benefit
associated with the tax revenues so deposited.
 Upon each payment of real property taxes for property located inside the District, the
City will deposit into a development program fund (the “Development Program Fund”) the
entirety of the property tax payments constituting TIF Revenues. The percentage of increased
assessed value of real property within the District that will be captured shall be determined
annually during the municipal budget process; however, the City may capture up to 100% in
Years 5 through 3012% in year one, and up to 22% in years 2 through 30, of the increased
assessed value of real property as captured assessed value. The Development Program Fund is
pledged to and charged with the payment of the project costs in the manner and in the order
provided in 30-A M.R.S.A. Section 5227(3). The Development Program Fund will consist of a
development sinking fund account (the “Sinking Fund Account”) to the extent municipal bonded



 15 of 29
indebtedness is used to pay for projects costs, and a project cost account (the “Project Cost
Account”). From the Development Program Fund, the City will deposit the TIF Revenues into
the City’s Sinking Fund Account and/or the Project Cost Account to be used to fund projects
listed in Table 1 hereinabove. If future credit enhancement agreements are approved by the City
Council, then a subaccount within the Project Cost Account shall be created for any payments
required to be made by the City pursuant to such credit enhancement agreement, dedicated to
each credit enhancement agreement.
 Estimates of the increased assessed property values of the Amended District, the
anticipated TIF Revenues generated by the District, and the estimated tax shifts are shown in
Revised Exhibit D-1 and Revised Exhibit D-2.
 B. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The current and future developers owning or leasing properties located within the
Districted are intended to pay for and/or finance all private improvements located in the District
through private sources. Table 1 hereinabove provides estimated costs of the municipal projects
costs to be undertaken with TIF Revenues.

 C. Indebtedness

 The City reserves the option to fund the project costs through public indebtedness.

 V. Statutory Requirements and Thresholds

 The statutory requirements and thresholds for approval required by Section 5223(3) of
the TIF Statute are set forth in Exhibit E.

 VI. Municipal Approvals

 A. Notice of Public Hearing

 Attached as Exhibit G hereto is a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing regarding amending
the Development Program for the District, published in the Portland Press Herald, a newspaper
of general circulation in the City, on ________________November 9, 2017, a date at least ten
(10) days prior to the public hearing. The public hearing on the amended District was held on
_________________November 20, 2017, in accordance with the requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A.
Section 5226(1).

 B. Minutes of Public Hearing Held by City Council

 Attached as Exhibit H hereto is a certified copy of the minutes of the public hearing held on
_________________November 20, 2017, at which time this amended District was discussed by
the public.

 C. Authorizing Votes



 16 of 29
 Attached as Exhibit I hereto is an attested copy of the City of Portland Order approving this
amended District with the results of the vote noted on this Order duly called and held on
___________________November 20, 2017.




 17 of 29
 of Portland
 Downtown Transit Oriented Development and
 Omnibus Municipal Tax Increment Financing
 And Development Program


 Enacted by the Portland City Council on February 9, 2015.

 Amendment #1: Approved by the Portland City Council on
 November 20, 2017, To Take Out Parcel 22-F-11

 Amendment #2: Proposed to City Council October 2018 to Increase
Allowable Uses of Municipal TIF Revenue and Increase Capture Rate
 up to 100%




 Prepared by:

 The City of Portland Economic Development
 Department




 18 of 29
I. Introduction – Portland Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal Development
 and Omnibus Tax Increment Financing District Amendment #2
 On February 19, 2015, the City of Portland (the “City”) designated the Portland
Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal Development and Omnibus Tax Increment Financing
District (the “District”) and adopted this Development Program (the “Development
Program”) for the District in an effort to fully realize the visions and goals of the City of
Portland Downtown Revitalization Investment Plan (“Downtown Plan”); the Downtown Plan
is attached as Exhibit A. The duration of this District will be 30 years beginning July 1, 2015
(Tax Year 4/1/2015; FY2015-16) ending June 30, 2045 (Tax Year 4/1/2044; FY2044-45).
 a. District Amendment #1 Approved by MDECD February 27, 2018: The purpose
 of this District amendment was to remove the parcel designated by the City
 Assessor as 22-F-1 at 54 Lancaster – a tax exempt parcel (so no value attributed
 to the Original Assessed Value) with approximately .48 acres, which will be
 turned into a free-standing Affordable Housing TIF District. Portland’s amended
 District remained the same at approximately 422 acres and bounded by
 Washington Avenue to the east, State Street to the west, following the edges of
 the adjacent Bayside and Waterfront Capital Improvement TIF Districts to the
 north and south. The District encompasses the central business district of
 Portland and the abutting east and west ends of the District. In creating the
 District, the outlying residential areas of the Eastern and Western Promenades
 have been purposely excluded.

 b. Proposed District Amendment #2: District Amendment #2 is to increase the
 allowable uses for Municipal TIF Revenue and increase the percentage capture
 from 22% to 100%, all as more detailed in Section II below.
 The Downtown Plan includes a listing of current projects and categories of future
investment. It is recognized that meeting the infrastructure needs of Portland’s downtown
will be a dynamic process that will be updated locally on an annual basis or as needed.
Though the specific public projects prioritized and undertaken from year to year will change,
with the exception of this District funding up to $100,000 annually for the Creative Portland
Corporation, categories of investment for the purpose of eligible uses of the TIF Revenues
will remain consistent. Actual project selections and prioritization for funding will continue
to be made on an annual basis during the City budget and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
process, based on categories contained in Table 1 hereinbelow. The CIP is the document that
presents the City’s capital needs in the current year and plans for capital needs in future
years. As a five year plan that is annually updated, the CIP is a dynamic planning document;
the FY2015 to 2019 CIP document is included in the Downtown Plan as an appendice.




 19 of 29
II. Development Program Narrative

 A. The Development Program as Amended with Amendment #2
 The Amended Development Program for the Downtown Transit Oriented Municipal
Development and Omnibus TIF District is structured and proposed pursuant to Chapter 206
of Title 30-A of the Maine Revised TIF Statutes, as amended (the “TIF Statute”). The City’s
designation of the District, combined with the adoption of this Amended Development
Program, creates a single municipal TIF district in order to capture the value of the real
property improvements made within the District and enable the use of TIF revenues for
various municipal and other development projects.
 Under this Amended Development Program, the City captured 12% in year one, and 22%
in years 2 through 4. This Amended Development Program would now allow for the City to
capture up to 100% of the new real property value located in the District for remainder of the
term of the District, or through Tax Year April 1, 2044/City Fiscal Year 2044/2045.. The City
may retain those tax revenues generated by the captured assessed value (the “TIF Revenues”)
to fund infrastructure improvements and other administrative costs, all as further described in
Table 1 hereinbelow. The City reserves the right to capture less than the full 100% in years 5
through 30, depending on the then-current needs of the City with respect to the approved
project costs. Any reduction in the captured value percentage shall adjust the amount of
assessed value eligible for sheltering with respect to the tax shift benefit correspondingly.
Although all TIF Revenues will be retained by the City at this time, the City reserves the right
in the future to negotiate and execute commercial credit enhancement agreements pursuant to
City Council approved TIF Policy as may be amended from time to time. CEAs would be
limited, however, to the balance of District term at that time.Such future credit enhancement
agreements would require a public hearing and City Council approval.

 In designating the District and adopting this Amended Development Program, the City
can accomplish the following goals:
 - Maintain existing tax revenues;
 - Invest in the Downtown public infrastructure;
 - Invest in the Creative Portland Corporation annually;
 - Invest in new and enhanced transit services;
 - Enjoy enhanced future tax revenues generated by new development within the
 District; and
 - Create long-term, stable employment opportunities for area residents because of these
 TIF investments.
 In addition, by creating the District, the City will “shelter” the increase in municipal
valuation that development in the District will bring about. This tax shift benefit mitigates the
adverse effect that the District’s increased assessed property value has upon the City’s share
of state aid to education, municipal revenue sharing, and its county tax assessment. An
estimate of the tax shift benefits is shown in Revised Exhibit D-2 attached hereto.


 20 of 29
 The City’s designation of the District and pursuit of this Amended Development Program
constitute a good and valid public purpose pursuant to Chapter 206 of Title 30-A because it
represents a substantial contribution to the economic well-being of both the City and the region
by providing jobs, contributing to property taxes, and diversifying the region’s economic base.
 B. The Projects
 Development within the District will provide a revenue source for the City’s economic
development projects. The City intends to use TIF Revenues to further its overall plan to attract
and retain businesses that want to take advantage of Portland’s business-friendly location, while
offering their employees a rich, dynamic, and high quality of life. This includes funding of
Creative Portland Corporation, of which the City of Portland is the Corporator, of up to $100,000
annually, as well as City plans to invest in its public infrastructure in these investment focus
areas:
 - Sidewalk and Other Pedestrian Enhancements
 - Streetscape
 - Lighting
 - Street Alignment
 - Utilities
 - Bicycle Improvements
 - Public Transit
 - Wayfinding
 - Multi-modal surface and structured parking
 - Work force training
 - Professional service costs
 - Economic Development Department administrative costs and staff salaries, and
 prorated salaries of the City Manager, Finance Director, Planning and Urban
 Development Director, and Planning staff.
 The District projects at this time are highlighted in Table 1 below:




 21 of 29
 TABLE 1
NOTE 1: All Citations refer to Title 30-A, Chapter 206, Section 5225
NOTE 2: While this Amended Development Program lists particular projects, the Amended
Development Program shall not serve as an appropriation of TIF Revenues for any of these
specific purposes, nor shall it commit the City to completing any particular project. The projects
will only be undertaken following proper appropriation through the annual budget process and
any other applicable required approvals.
 Project Downtown Statutory Citation Estimated Cost
 Revitalization
 Plan Reference
 by page no.
 In District: Capital
 Infrastructure Investments,
 including Financing Costs, for
 example:
  - Multi-modal surface and 19, 47 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $1,000,000
 structured parking
 - Sidewalk and Other Pedestrian 19, 20, 34,35, 48 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $200K annually;
 Enhancements $6 Million over
 - Roadway Realignments/Paving 19,20,34,35 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) life of District
 - Crosswalks 19, 46 (1)(A)(1)(a)(i)
 - Traffic Signals 34, 46 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)
 - Intersection Redesigns 19,20,34,35 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 - Bicycle Infrastructure 19, 34,47 (1)(A)(1)(a)(i)
 - Stormwater Management, 19, 33 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 including water and sewer
 upgrades
 - Communications Infrastructure 19, 36 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(7)
 improvements/enhancements
 - Wayfinding (signage) 19,23, 35,47 (1)(A)(1)
 - Public plaza intersection 22, 46 (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7)
 improvements
 In and out of District: New
 and Enhanced Transit
 Services, including operational
 costs, for example (see Exhibit
 K – Transit Map):
 - Creation of high frequency bus 17, 20, 21, (1)(A) and (1)(C)(7) $110K annually;
 service on Congress Street at $3.3 Million over
 15-minute intervals between life of District
 the Portland Transportation
 Center (PTC) and Washington
 Avenue;




 22 of 29
- Enhancing Stevens Avenue- 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  Allen Avenue- Congress Street (1)(C)(7)
  bus service areas;
- Corresponding costs for these 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  enhancements, including (1)(C)(7)
  transit operator salaries; transit
  vehicle fuel, and transit vehicle
  parts replacements.
- Transit capital costs including 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  transit vehicles and related (1)(C)(7)
  equipment; bus shelters and
  other related structures;
  benches; signs, and other
  transit-related infrastructure.
- Shuttle service to downtown 17, 20 (1)(A)(1)(a) and T/B/D
  businesses. (1)(C)(7)




In and out of District: City
Marketing and Promotion
through Creative Portland
Corporation (CPC), for
example (see Exhibit M Arts
District Map within Downtown
TOD TIF District):
- In District: Center for the Arts, 20, 21,47 (1)(C)(1)(2) Up to $100K
including rental residential annually; $3
space; 20, 21,47 (1)(C)(1)(2) Million over life
- In District: capital, financing, of District
real property assembly and
professional service costs; 20, 21, 47 (1)(C)(1)(2)
- In and out of District: CPC
staffing, administrative and
marketing expenses; revolving
loan or investment fund.
In and out of District:
- Economic Dev. Dept. 21, Also TIF App. (1)(A)(5) and $250K annually;
administrative costs and staff P. 3 (1)(C)(1) $7.5 Million over
salaries at 100%, and prorated life of District
salaries of City Manager,
Finance Director, and Planning
Urban Development Director,
and Planning staff*;



 23 of 29
 - Professional services costs; See TIF App. P.3 (1)(A)(4);(1)(C)(1) T/B/D
 - Workforce training funds. See TIF App. P. 3 (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 Costs of services and equipment
 to provide skills development
 and training, including
 scholarships to in-state
 educational institutions or to
 online learning entities when in-
 state options are not available,
 for jobs created or retained.
 In District: Small Public
 Capital Infrastructure and
 Equipment, for example
 (Downtown Plan pp. 6 and 7) $100K
 - Parking meters 19 (1)(A)(1)(a)
 - Vehicles for Public Works 21, 36 to 44 (1)(A)(1)(a)
 Dept., and Fire Dept., including
 ambulances
 In District: Relocation of (see TIF 1(A)(6) Not budgeted/not
 Displaced Persons (TIF application, p. 6) anticipated at
 Application, p. 6) time of TIF
 application
 In District: CEAs as (see TIF (1)(A) Unknown at time
 Approved by City Council application p. 2) of TIF
 (TIF application p. 2) application

Total Estimate of TIF Revenue $20,900,000
Expenditure over 30 year
term:
*This item is not unique to this TIF District, it is also included in the Bayside TIF District,
Waterfront TIF District, and partially included Riverwalk TIF District.
 C. Strategic Growth and Development
 This Amended Development Program and the Downtown Plan meld various studies and
plans for the District into one document, thereby promoting those studies and plans and making
investments at the appropriate time. The studies and plans noted in the Downtown Plan
represent a series of community initiatives, both completed and underway, or in planning
process. The Amended Development Program and Project List (Table 1) noted hereinabove
represents the best thinking of City staff about current opportunities for realizing the City’s
longstanding, evolving vision for its Downtown.
 D. Improvements to the Public Infrastructure
 As further set forth in Table 1 hereinabove, the City may use certain TIF Revenues for
sidewalk and other pedestrian improvements including crosswalks, roadway
realignments/paving, intersection redesigns, traffic signals, bicycle infrastructure, stormwater



 24 of 29
management improvements (including water and sewer maintenance), communications
infrastructure improvements/enhancements, wayfinding, multi-modal surface and structured
parking, and public plaza intersection improvements that are directly related and made necessary
by development in the District.
 E. Operational Components
 1. Public Facilities
 The City may use a portion of the TIF Revenues to fund certain projects approved within
the District, outlined in Table 1 hereinabove.
 2. Commercial Improvements Financed through the Development Program
 At this time, no commercial improvements will be financed through the Development
Program. The City may, in the future, reimburse a percentage of the TIF Revenues from any
particular lot within the District to future developers through a credit enhancement agreement.
Future credit enhancement agreements are authorized only if the City Council meets and holds a
public hearing and votes to authorize, negotiate, and execute the credit enhancement agreement
pursuant to City Council approved TIF Policy. Such credit enhancement agreements would be
approved under the City’s TIF Policy, as may be amended from time to time, but limited to the
balance of the term of this District.
 3. Relocation of Displaced Persons
 It is not anticipated that any persons will be relocated; however, the City has provided
that if, in the future, relocation of persons is necessary to accommodate future redevelopment
within the District, the one-time relocation costs of such displaced persons can be paid for with
TIF Revenues, exclusive of rent.
 4. Transportation Improvements
 The City may fund road/transportation improvements made necessary by the increased
traffic to the District. Please see Table 1 hereinabove for more details.
 5. Environmental Controls
 The improvements made under this Development Program will meet or exceed all
federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, and ordinances and will comply with all
applicable land use requirements for the City.
 6. Plan of Operation
 During the term of the District, the City Manager or his designee will be responsible for
all administrative matters within the purview of the City concerning the implementation and
operation of the District.




 25 of 29
 III. Physical Description
 The 422-acre District is bounded by Washington Avenue to the east, State Street to the
west, following the edges of the adjacent Bayside and Waterfront Capital Improvement TIF
Districts to the north and south. The District encompasses the central business district of
Portland and the abutting east and west ends of the District. In creating the District, the outlying
residential areas of the Eastern and Western Promenades have been purposely excluded. The
District is shown on Exhibit C. The statutory threshold limits addressing the conditions for
approval mandated by 30-A M.R.S.A. Section 5223(3) are set forth in Exhibit E.
 IV. Financial Plan

 A. Amended Financial Characteristics
 The collective original assessed value of the real property in the District is $968,136,850 as
of March 31, 2014 (Tax Year April 1, 2013) remains unchanged. Please see the Assessor’s
certificate of the original assessed value attached as Exhibit F. It is noted that Downtown
TOD/TIF acreage and value calculations are exempt from State TIF law limits.
 The City captured 12% in year 1, and 22% in years 2 through 4, of the increased assessed
value of the real property located within the District. This Amendment would provide for the
City to capture up to 100% for the duration of the 30-year term of the District. Personal property
tax value will not be captured within the District. The TIF Revenues so collected will fund
and/or contribute to the funding of the approved projects, including each of the projects
described on Table 1 hereinabove, which collectively increase the City’s ability to stand out in a
competitive marketplace as a dynamic municipality in which to grow a business. All assessed
real property value captured in the District will be added to the general tax rolls at the end of the
District’s term. Please note that at any time during the term of the District, the municipality can
vote to reduce the captured value percentage and instead deposit the tax revenues into the
General Fund so long as the municipality does not receive the tax shift benefit associated with
the tax revenues so deposited.
 Upon each payment of real property taxes for property located inside the District, the
City will deposit into a development program fund (the “Development Program Fund”) the
entirety of the property tax payments constituting TIF Revenues. The percentage of increased
assessed value of real property within the District that will be captured shall be determined
annually during the municipal budget process; however, the City may capture up to 100% in
Years 5 through 30 of the increased assessed value of real property as captured assessed value.
The Development Program Fund is pledged to and charged with the payment of the project costs
in the manner and in the order provided in 30-A M.R.S.A. Section 5227(3). The Development
Program Fund will consist of a development sinking fund account (the “Sinking Fund Account”)
to the extent municipal bonded indebtedness is used to pay for projects costs, and a project cost
account (the “Project Cost Account”). From the Development Program Fund, the City will
deposit the TIF Revenues into the City’s Sinking Fund Account and/or the Project Cost Account



 26 of 29
to be used to fund projects listed in Table 1 hereinabove. If future credit enhancement
agreements are approved by the City Council, then a subaccount within the Project Cost Account
shall be created for any payments required to be made by the City pursuant to such credit
enhancement agreement, dedicated to each credit enhancement agreement.
 Estimates of the increased assessed property values of the Amended District, the
anticipated TIF Revenues generated by the District, and the estimated tax shifts are shown in
Revised Exhibit D-1 and Revised Exhibit D-2.
 B. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The current and future developers owning or leasing properties located within the
Districted are intended to pay for and/or finance all private improvements located in the District
through private sources. Table 1 hereinabove provides estimated costs of the municipal projects
costs to be undertaken with TIF Revenues.

 C. Indebtedness

 The City reserves the option to fund the project costs through public indebtedness.

 V. Statutory Requirements and Thresholds

 The statutory requirements and thresholds for approval required by Section 5223(3) of
the TIF Statute are set forth in Exhibit E.

 VI. Municipal Approvals

 A. Notice of Public Hearing

 Attached as Exhibit G hereto is a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing regarding amending
the Development Program for the District, published in the Portland Press Herald, a newspaper
of general circulation in the City, on ________________, a date at least ten (10) days prior to the
public hearing. The public hearing on the amended District was held on _________________, in
accordance with the requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A. Section 5226(1).

 B. Minutes of Public Hearing Held by City Council

 Attached as Exhibit H hereto is a certified copy of the minutes of the public hearing held on
_________________, at which time this amended District was discussed by the public.

 C. Authorizing Votes

 Attached as Exhibit I hereto is an attested copy of the City of Portland Order approving this
amended District with the results of the vote noted on this Order duly called and held on
___________________.




 27 of 29
 Revised Downtown TOD TIF Exhibit D-1




City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Model
Actual IAV FY2016 through FY2019
Estimates FY2020 through FY2045
 Annual mil rate increase FY2020 through FY2045: 2%
 Annual valuation increase FY2020 through FY2045: 1%
Original Assessed Value ao 4/1/2013: $968,136,850

9/6/2018

 City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Projection Table
 Captured Captured
 Revenue to Revenue to City Non-
 Increased Total Projected Business Municipal Captured
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Assessed Value % of Value Captured Projected New Taxes Project Project General Fund OAV General Fund
 TIF Year April 1 Year Real Prop. Captured Valuation Mill Rate Captured Account Account Revenues Revenue
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 12.00% $8,669,441 20.63 $178,851 $0 $178,851 $1,311,571 $19,972,663
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 22.00% $18,500,431 21.11 $390,544 $0 $390,544 $1,384,656 $20,437,369
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 22.00% $27,871,560 21.65 $603,419 $0 $603,419 $2,139,396 $20,960,163
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 22.00% $37,364,994 22.48 $839,965 $0 $839,965 $2,978,058 $21,763,716 Actuals Above
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 100.00% $181,220,655 22.93 $4,155,317 $0 $4,155,317 $0 $22,198,991 Estimates Below
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 100.00% $192,714,227 23.39 $4,507,237 $0 $4,507,237 $0 $22,642,971
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 100.00% $204,322,735 23.86 $4,874,314 $0 $4,874,314 $0 $23,095,830
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 100.00% $216,047,328 24.33 $5,257,096 $0 $5,257,096 $0 $23,557,747
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 100.00% $227,889,167 24.82 $5,656,149 $0 $5,656,149 $0 $24,028,901
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 100.00% $239,849,425 25.32 $6,072,060 $0 $6,072,060 $0 $24,509,479
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 100.00% $251,929,285 25.82 $6,505,432 $0 $6,505,432 $0 $24,999,669
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 100.00% $264,129,943 26.34 $6,956,893 $0 $6,956,893 $0 $25,499,662
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 100.00% $276,452,609 26.87 $7,427,088 $0 $7,427,088 $0 $26,009,656
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 100.00% $288,898,501 27.40 $7,916,684 $0 $7,916,684 $0 $26,529,849
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 100.00% $301,468,851 27.95 $8,426,372 $0 $8,426,372 $0 $27,060,446
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 100.00% $314,164,906 28.51 $8,956,865 $0 $8,956,865 $0 $27,601,655
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 100.00% $326,987,921 29.08 $9,508,899 $0 $9,508,899 $0 $28,153,688
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 100.00% $339,939,166 29.66 $10,083,236 $0  $10,083,236 $0 $28,716,762
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 100.00% $353,019,923 30.26 $10,680,660 $0  $10,680,660 $0 $29,291,097
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 100.00% $366,231,488 30.86 $11,301,985 $0  $11,301,985 $0 $29,876,919
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 100.00% $379,575,169 31.48 $11,948,050 $0  $11,948,050 $0 $30,474,457
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 100.00% $393,052,286 32.11 $12,619,720 $0  $12,619,720 $0 $31,083,946
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 100.00% $406,664,175 32.75 $13,317,892 $0  $13,317,892 $0 $31,705,625
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 100.00% $420,412,182 33.40 $14,043,490 $0  $14,043,490 $0 $32,339,738
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 100.00% $434,297,670 34.07 $14,797,468 $0  $14,797,468 $0 $32,986,532
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 100.00% $448,322,013 34.75 $15,580,814 $0  $15,580,814 $0 $33,646,263
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 100.00% $462,486,598 35.45 $16,394,547 $0  $16,394,547 $0 $34,319,188
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 100.00% $476,792,830 36.16 $17,239,718 $0  $17,239,718 $0 $35,005,572
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 100.00% $491,242,124 36.88 $18,117,414 $0  $18,117,414 $0 $35,705,684
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 100.00% $505,835,911 37.62 $19,028,757 $0  $19,028,757 $0 $36,419,797
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $8,856,353,513 $273,386,936 $0 $273,386,936 $7,813,681 $830,594,035
 30 Year TIF Average $307,227,170 $295,211,784 $9,112,898 $0 $9,112,898 $260,456 $27,686,468




 O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 100% FY2020 thru 2045
 28 of 29
 Revised Downtown TOD TIF Exhibit D-2




 City of Portland - Downtown TOD TIF Model
 Actual FY2016 through FY2019
 Estimates FY2020 through FY2045
 Annual mil rate increase FY2020 through FY2045: 2%
 Annual valuation increase FY2020 through FY2045: 1%
 Original Assessed Value ao 4/1/2013: $968,136,850



 Tax Shifts-Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation: City of Portland- TIF Model
 30 years: Year 1 - 12% to Municipal Project Account, 88% to City General Fund; Years 2 through 4: 12% to
 Municipal Project Account, 78% to City General Fund; Years 5 through 30: 100% to Municipal Project
 Account

 Avoided Formula Impacts from Sheltering of Valuation


 Avoided Loss of Avoided Loss of
 Tax Year- City Fiscal Total Added Sheltered State Aid to for  State Municipal Avoided Increase Total Avoided
 TIF Year April 1 Year Valuation Valuation Education Revenue Sharing in County Tax Impacts
 1 2015 FY2015/2016 $72,245,340 $8,669,441 $0 $5,072 $4,786 $9,858
 2 2016 FY2016/2017 $84,092,870 $18,500,431 $0 $10,824 $10,211 $21,035
 3 2017 FY2017/2018 $126,688,910 $27,871,560 $0 $16,307 $15,380 $31,687
 4 2018 FY2018/2019 $169,840,880 $37,364,994 $158,988 $21,861 $20,615 $201,464
 5 2019 FY2019/2020 $181,220,655 $181,220,655 $1,542,188 $106,026 $99,656 $1,747,869
 6 2020 FY2020/2021 $192,714,227 $192,714,227 $1,639,998 $112,751 $105,948 $1,858,697
 7 2021 FY2021/2022 $204,322,735 $204,322,735 $1,738,786 $119,542 $112,301 $1,970,630
 8 2022 FY2022/2023 $216,047,328 $216,047,328 $1,838,563 $126,402 $118,714 $2,083,679
 9 2023 FY2023/2024 $227,889,167 $227,889,167 $1,939,337 $133,330 $125,187 $2,197,854
 10 2024 FY2024/2025 $239,849,425 $239,849,425 $2,041,119 $140,328 $131,722 $2,313,168
 11 2025 FY2025/2026 $251,929,285 $251,929,285 $2,143,918 $147,395 $138,318 $2,429,632
 12 2026 FY2026/2027 $264,129,943 $264,129,943 $2,247,746 $154,534 $144,977 $2,547,256
 13 2027 FY2027/2028 $276,452,609 $276,452,609 $2,352,612 $161,743 $151,698 $2,666,053
 14 2028 FY2028/2029 $288,898,501 $288,898,501 $2,458,526 $169,025 $158,483 $2,786,034
 15 2029 FY2029/2030 $301,468,851 $301,468,851 $2,565,500 $176,379 $165,332 $2,907,211
 16 2030 FY2030/2031 $314,164,906 $314,164,906 $2,673,543 $183,807 $172,246 $3,029,596
 17 2031 FY2031/2032 $326,987,921 $326,987,921 $2,782,667 $191,310 $179,224 $3,153,201
 18 2032 FY2032/2033 $339,939,166 $339,939,166 $2,892,882 $198,887 $186,268 $3,278,038
 19 2033 FY2033/2034 $353,019,923 $353,019,923 $3,004,200 $198,887 $193,379 $3,396,466
 20 2034 FY2034/2035 $366,231,488 $366,231,488 $3,116,630 $214,270 $200,556 $3,531,456
 21 2035 FY2035/2036 $379,575,169 $379,575,169 $3,230,185 $222,077 $207,801 $3,660,063
 22 2036 FY2036/2037 $393,052,286 $393,052,286 $3,344,875 $229,962 $215,114 $3,789,951
 23 2037 FY2037/2038 $406,664,175 $406,664,175 $3,460,712 $237,926 $222,496 $3,921,133
 24 2038 FY2038/2039 $420,412,182 $420,412,182 $3,577,708 $245,969 $229,947 $4,053,623
 25 2039 FY2039/2040 $434,297,670 $434,297,670 $3,695,873 $254,093 $237,467 $4,187,433
 26 2040 FY2040/2041 $448,322,013 $448,322,013 $3,815,220 $262,298 $245,058 $4,322,577
 27 2041 FY2041/2042 $462,486,598 $462,486,598 $3,935,761 $270,585 $252,720 $4,459,067
 28 2042 FY2042/2043 $476,792,830 $476,792,830 $4,057,507 $278,955 $260,454 $4,596,916
 29 2043 FY2043/2044 $491,242,124 $491,242,124 $4,180,470 $287,409 $268,260 $4,736,140
 30 2044 FY2044/2045 $505,835,911 $505,835,911 $4,304,664 $295,948 $276,139 $4,876,750
 30 Year TIF Total $9,216,815,087 $8,856,353,513 $74,740,178 $5,173,902 $4,850,458 $84,764,538
 30 Year TIF Avg. $307,227,170 $295,211,784 $2,491,339 $172,463 $161,682 $2,825,485




O:\TIF\Downtown TOD TIF\Amended Fall 2018 TIF Models w Spring 2018 Update\Portland TIF Model - Revised 2018 Spring Update - For 2018 Amdmts Act & 100% FY2020 thru 2045

 29 of 29
 Economic Development Department
 Gregory A. Mitchell, Director

 MEMORANDUM


TO: Economic Development Committee

FROM: Greg Mitchell
 Brendan O’Connell

DATE: September 11, 2018

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to City Waterfront Tax Increment Financing
 District, including Proposed Amendments to the Waterfront Capital
 Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone and Ordinance


I. ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY

 A public hearing will be held at the September 18, 2018 EDC meeting for a vote, in the form
 of a recommendation to the City Council, to approve the Proposed Amendments to the
 Waterfront Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District, including the Waterfront Capital
 Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone and Ordinance.

II. AGENDA DESCRIPTION

 Amendments to the Waterfront TIF District and Growth areas are proposed to maximize
 utilization of the TIF District revenue by adding more public investment options for use of
 TIF revenue, along with adding additional properties to expand the Waterfront TIF District.

 Also, Amendments to the Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment
 Zone and Ordinance are proposed to expand the future “growth” area for the Waterfront TIF
 District. Housekeeping and clarifying amendments to the ordinance are also proposed to
 align the ordinance with current practice and avoid confusion with other sections of the Land
 Use Code. To promote clarity within the ordinance and to avoid confusion with other
 sections of the Land Use Code, the amendments include changing the title of the program
 from the Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone and Ordinance
 to WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT GROWTH AREA ORDINANCE

 Lastly, it is noted that the City staff proposed amendments do not involve credit enhancement
 agreements.




 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683

 1 of 63
III. BACKGROUND

 Geography. 6.62 acres. This District includes seven non-contiguous properties. It is noted
 the Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone (WREZ) and
 Ordinance establishes the area on Portland’s waterfront which is “reserved” for future
 expansion of the Waterfront TIF District. If the attached amendments are adopted, this area
 will be referred to as the Waterfront Development Growth Area. Individual properties
 selected within the Growth Area that are included within the TIF program will continue to be
 referred to as parcels within the Waterfront TIF District.

 TIF Term. Fiscal Years 2003-2032.

 Capture Rate. 100%

 Overview of TIF District Expenditures to Date:

 Waterfront TIF Expenditures from FY2016 thru FY2018
 Uses Revenue
 Public Infrastructure $46,100
 Credit Enhancement Agreement $574,646
 Debt Service $549,650
 Staff $319,467
 Total Invested: $1,489,863


 Existing and Proposed Amendments to Uses of Revenue. See attached Waterfront TIF
 District Program which shows existing and proposed amendments to allowable uses of TIF
 District revenue in a strike through and underline format.

 Proposed Amendments - New Geography. See attached map for additional properties to
 expand the Waterfront TIF District to increase the amount of TIF funds to support waterfront
 public infrastructure needs.

 No change is proposed to the capture rate

 Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone and Ordinance
 (Existing and Proposed Amendments)

 The existing Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment Zone and
 Ordinance was adopted in 2001 to implement those provisions of the Waterfront Economic
 Development Task Force Report entitled “Investing in Our Working Waterfront: Final Report
 to the Mayor’s Waterfront Task Force on Economic Development,” dated September 2000, as
 adopted by the City Council on June 4, 20001 and as amended by the City Council on
 December 1, 2008.




 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683

 2 of 63
 Proposed Amendments include:

 Area. Expanding the growth area for the Waterfront TIF District to add the entire western
 waterfront from the Casco Bay Bridge to include Sprague Energy.

 Individual Parcels. Within the existing and expanded Waterfront Development Growth Area
 (currently the WREZ), staff is recommending individual parcels for inclusion within the
 Waterfront TIF District. Each of these highlighted parcels has an anticipated development
 program. Private parcels and developments would be subject to new tax value capture. City
 parcels and infrastructure highlighted would be eligible for “in district” use of funds as
 outlined in the development program improvements.

 Reporting Amendments. The current ordinance requires that an extensive set of reports be
 prepared. Multiple City departments are active in the areas listed providing input to the
 Council on a project-by-project basis. Staff recommends that the Waterfront TIF ordinance
 limit reporting requirements to the financial activity of the program, as is provided in the
 Annual TIF District Activity Report.

 Housekeeping Revisions. Title changes and terminology consistency is applied to create a
 more unified document and avoid duplicative uses of terms such as “zone” within the
 ordinance. The metes and bounds description of the Growth Area is replaced with a map
 within the ordinance.

 Note: At the request of the Planning and Urban Development Director, it is proposed that this
 Ordinance be relocated out of the Land Use Chapter of the City Code.

IV. INTENDED RESULT AND/OR COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED

 City Council approval of the proposed amendments to the Waterfront TIF District, including
 amendments to the Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment
 Ordinance, to support increased public and private sector investment and associated job
 creation.

V. FINANCIAL IMPACT

 TIF District Estimates. See attached spreadsheet for estimates of property tax revenue, funds
 available to the City General Fund, and one credit enhancement agreement included in the
 Waterfront TIF District.

 Tax Shelter (Financial Benefits). Probably the most important, but least understood public
 benefit associated with TIF districts, is the tax shelter or local financial benefits.

 Municipalities realize “savings” from the tax sheltering effect of TIF Districts. The following
 direct financial impacts occur when municipal valuation increases:

 A. State Education Aid is reduced,
 B. State Municipal Revenue Sharing is reduced, and
 C. A municipality pays a higher percentage of the County budget.
 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683

 3 of 63
 This amount of “savings” is significant and one of the most important benefits of
 establishing TIF Districts.

 For Portland, tax shelter savings is conservatively estimated at 30%, meaning that for every
 new tax dollar, Portland saves 30 cents which would otherwise be lost for property tax value
 not included in a TIF District. The estimated tax shelter savings for the remainder of the
 Waterfront TIF District term – FY2020 through FY2032 - (including all additional properties
 to expand the Waterfront TIF District) is $34,485,000, or a yearly average of $2,652,000.

 Net Impact to the General Fund

 The savings referenced above is a direct benefit to the general fund – both to the City and the
 School Department via an increase in revenue from the State of Maine for education,
 increased revenues for the City from municipal revenue sharing, and decreased expenses for
 county tax. It is important to note that whenever the TIF capture rate is adjusted upward
 there will change in how property tax revenue flows between the general fund and the area
 TIFs. Via careful TIF budgeting, subject to annual budget approval by City Council, certain
 types of approved expenditures can be moved from the general fund into area TIFs. If the
 impact of the revenue shift is able to be fully offset the end result is the 30 cent savings on the
 dollar. A good example is what was done in the FY19 budget. TIF capture rates were
 adjusted upward by approximately 5% in the Waterfront and Bayside TIF. Although this
 resulted in slightly less revenue to the general fund, expenses related to Economic
 Development Department staff, in an amount approximately equal to the revenue shift, were
 shifted into the TIF. The net result was an increased capture rate in both TIFs, more sheltering
 savings (approximately 30% in benefits) and no other negative impact on the City or School
 budgets. It is this type of calculated TIF budgeting which is expected to continue to be
 utilized moving forward to increase capture rates, maximize sheltering, and ensure only
 positive impacts to the City and School budgets.

VI. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION

 City staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Waterfront TIF District,
 including amendments to the Waterfront Capital Improvement and Economic Redevelopment
 Ordinance.

VII. LIST ATTACHMENTS
 - Map of Proposed Expansion Area
 - Spreadsheet of Proposed Properties to be Added
 - Updated Spreadsheets for Actual and Estimated TIF Revenue and Tax Shelter Savings
 - Proposed Amendments to WREZ Ordinance
 - Marked Revision and Clean Version of TIF Narrative and updated Spreadsheets; additional
 attachments noted in the Narrative are available upon request.




 CITY OF PORTLAND/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT./389 CONGRESS ST./PORTLAND, ME 04101/(207) 874-8683

 4 of 63
Legend Parcel Address
 Map ID Common Name
 Potential Expansion of Growth Area 400 West Commercial,
 1 Portland Yacht Services
 Current TIF Districts and Growth Areas 2 IMT Cold Storage Site
 3 "Angelo's Acre"
 Dasco Development,
 TIF District Parcels 4
 5
 Rufus Deering Site
 Portland Fish Pier Lot #1
 6 60 Portland Pier
 Potential Property for TIF District Inclusion 7 Shipyard Brewery
 100 Fore St
 8 Hamilton Marine Site
 Pier Infrastructure for In-district Capture and Use of TIF Funds 58 Fore St, Portland
 9 Foreside
 Public Roadway for Use of TIF Funds 10 Thames St Lot, Phase II
 Ocean Gateway Land,
 11 Parking and Queuing
 Portland Ocean Terminal
 12 and the Maine State Pier
 13 New Pier
 14 Ocean Gateway Pier
 West Commercial St


 #7
 Commericial St
 15 Thames St Corridor


 #8 #10
 #15 #15
 #15
 #4 #9
 #3 #5 #11
 #1 #14
 #6 #13
 #2
 #12

 Portland Waterfront Development Growth Area
 Potential Waterfront TIF District Expansion
 F T
 A
 DR
Map produced by the City of Portland Economic Development Department. Intended for discussion purposes only.




 ¯
Boundaries and area calculations are estemates and require validation prior to implementation. Do not use for valuation.
September 2018


2,500 1,250 0 2,500 Feet
 5 of 63
 Waterfront TIF District Expansion: Current and Future Values DRAFT 9-13-18

Map ID Parcel Address Common CBL Land Area Ownership Assessed Value Notes Development Program Total Phasing Assumption: Future Year New Future Year New Future Year New
 Name +/- SF a/o 4/1/2017 Build Out Value Year 2020 Value Year 2025 Value Year 2030

 1 400 West Commercial, PYS 060 F001 234,384 Private $2,314,500 Portions of larger holdings / Marine Industrial 81,000q ft 2 phases $ 5,000,000 $ 7,500,000 Same
 assessed value based on CBLs 060 Marine Retail 31,000sq ft More
 F001 and 060 F003.Planning Developent potential on site
 " " 060 F003 258,772 Private $1,956,300 applications uner 059-A003 $ 4,000,000 $ 6,000,000 Same

 2 IMT Cold Storage Site Multiple, inlcuding: 059 270,500 State of Maine $0 Lot to be divided by lease. Area Marine Industrial 60,000sq ft 1 phase $ - $ 10,000,000 Same
 A002, 059 A005 may change Marine Office 10,000sq ft
 3 "Angelo's Acre" 043 C009, plus others 60,175 City of Portland $0 Currently used for pay parking No current plans NA $ - $ - $ -
 and recycling
 4 Dasco Development, Rufus 042 A001 106,331 Private $2,336,860 Development pending/may not 469,000 gross sq ft Residential, 3 phases $ 30,000,000 57,000,000 85,000,000
 Deering Site use entire sf of CBL/assessed Hotel, Retail, Office,
 383 Commercial Street value based on entire holdings. Parking


 5 Portland Fish Pier Lot #1 041 A013 15,000 City of Portland $0 Active interest by multiple parties Marine Industrial 8,000 sq ft 1 phase $ 1,200,000 Same Same
 Restaurant/Retail 2000 sq ft
 6 60 Portland Pier 030 B004, plus others 19,220 Private $1,273,400 Area includes addition of to be Marine Industrial Restaurant 1 phase $ 1,775,000 Same Same
 discontinued ROW/assessed value
 based on CBL 030 B004 only.

 7 Shipyard Brewery 020 C009, plus others 93,786 Private $4,283,010 Development pending/assessed 258,000 gross sq ft Retail , 3 phases $ 16,000,000 $ 28,000,000 $40,000,000
 value based on CBL 020 C009. brewery, office, pharmacy, tech, hotel,
 residential
 8 100 Fore St Hamilton 019 A010 130,232 Private $2,820,600 Development pending/assessed 290,000 gross sq ft Parking 2 phases $ 20,000,000 $ 38,000,000 Same
 Marine Site value based on CBL 019 A010. Garage, Office

 9 58 Fore St, Portland Foreside 018 A001, plus others 394,014 Private $5,065,200 Development pending. Hashed 960,000 gross sq ft 3 phases $ 47,000,000 $ 88,000,000 $130,000,000
 "triangle" of City land to be Residential, Hotel,
 added/assessed value based on Retail/Restaurant
 CBL 018 A001. Office
 Parking


 10 Thames St Lot, Phase II 019 A014, Portion 46,209 City of Portland $0 Remnant of lot after WEX divison No current plans $ - $ - $ -
 and Thames St Expansion

 11 Ocean Gateway Land, Parking 444 A003 378,349 City of Portland $0 Excluding "park" development No current plans $ - $ - $ -
 and Queuing 445 A001
 446 A001
 12 Portland Ocean Terminal and 444 A001, plus others 248,488 City of Portland $0 Including portions of CBITD No current plans $ - $ - $ -
 the Maine State Pier Leasehold. Excluding "park"
 Development
 13 New Pier 444 A004 30,000 City of Portland $0 Including associated dredging. Public Facility $ - $ - $ -
 Design and size TBD

 14 Ocean Gateway Pier 445 A002 81,748 City of Portland $0 Including associated dredging. Public Facility $ - $ - $ -
 Image is approximate

 15 West Commercial St NA 963,091 City of Portland $0 ROW and Area are approximate Public Facility $ - $ - $ -
 Commericial St
 Thames St Corridor
 Above is 76 Acres.
NOTES: Current assessed values are taken from April 2017 tax assessments. Future values are broad estimates based on conservative evaluations of publicly reported development programs. Phasing of new value provided to reflect long-term build out of complex developments
on larger sites. Phasing is not based on known schedules. Actual assessed value and timing of new development will vary significantly from these estimates depending on market conditions, program evolution, tenant needs, and private developer decisions. Future site-by-site
assessments with up to date information on development program and timing will be conducted prior to use of this information for budgeting and tax assessment purposes.




 6 of 63
7 of 63
8 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-907 Rev.6-4-2001


 ARTICLE XV. WATERFRONT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND ECONOMIC
 REDEVELOPMENT ZONEDEVELOPMENT GROWTH AREA ORDINANCE

Sec. 14-905. Title.

 This ordinance shall be known as the Waterfront Capital
 Improvement and Economic RedevelopmentDevelopment Growth
 Area Ordinance.
(Ord. No. 249-01, 6-4-01)

Sec. 14-906. Purposes.

 The purpose of this ordinance is to implement those provisions
of the Waterfront Economic Development Task Force Report,
(Waterfront II) entitled “Investing in Our Working Waterfront:
Final Report of the Mayor’s Waterfront Task Force on Economic
Development,” dated September 2000, as adopted by the Portland City
Council on June 4, 2001 which create a capital improvement plan for
redevelopment on the Portland Waterfront. That plan includes
funding the loan fund described in that report, the financing and
installation of infrastructure to support the economy of that area
of the City of Portland, such as parking facilities, utilities,
traffic and congestion management installations, operating
facilities for the cargo, fishing and other water-dependent, marine
related industries, environmental protection and improvement,
including the management and abatement of combined sewer overflows,
appropriate assistance in the permitting and completion of dredging
of siltation at piers, wharfs and weirs, and such other matters,
such as climate change adaptation, as the City Council shall
approve from time to time. These activities shall be collectively
known as the redevelopment program.
(Ord. No. 249-01, 6-4-01)

Sec. 14-907. Creation of the Waterfront Redevelopment Economic
Zone (WREZ)Development Growth Area (WDGA).*

 The Waterfront RedDevelopment Growth AreaEconomic Zone is

hereby created and shown on the attached map titled the Portland

Waterfront Development Growth Area, which is incorporated as a

component of this ordinance, as may be amended from time to time..

Beginning at a point on the southerly side of the Eastern Promenade

 at the intersection of the Westerly side of the Portland

 9 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-907 Rev.6-4-2001

House

 Condominium and the Easterly sideline of land now or

formerly of

 Dan Haley.



 Thence Southwesterly along the Southerly side of Eastern

Promenade to Fore Street.



 Thence Westerly along the Southerly side of Fore Street

to the intersection of Fore Street and Mountfort Street.



 Thence Northerly along Mountfort Street to the Southeast

corner of the lot referenced as 20-C-2 on City of Portland Tax

maps as of April first, 2001.

 Editor’s Note: The WDGA replaces the Waterfront Redevelopment Economic Zone


(WREZ) as originally named within this ordinance.




 Thence Westerly along lot 20-C-2 about 72 feet. Thence

Northerly along 20-C-2 to 20-C-5.

 Thence Westerly along 20-C-5 to the south corner of 20-C-5.



 Thence Northwesterly along 20-C-5 to Newbury Street.



 Thence Southwesterly along Newbury Street to Hancock Street.


 10 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-907 Rev.6-4-2001

Thence Southeasterly along Hancock Street to Middle Street.

Thence Southwesterly along Middle Street to 20-C-27.

 Thence Southeasterly along the Northeast sideline of 20-C-27

about 99.99 feet.

 Thence Southwesterly along the Southeast sideline of 20-C-

27 to India Street.

 Thence South along India Street to the Northern corner of 29-

N-26. Thence Westerly along the Northern side of lot 26 to lot

24.

 Thence Westerly, Northerly, Westerly, and Southerly along

29-N-24 to Bradbury Court.

 Thence Westerly along Bradbury Court to the

 Franklin Street Arterial.

 Thence Northerly along Franklin Street Arterial to Fore

Street. Thence Westerly along Fore Street to Pearl Street.

 Thence Southerly along Pearl Street to Gold Street.

 Thence Westerly along Gold Street to Silver Street. Thence

Northerly along Silver Street to Fore Street. Thence Westerly

along Fore Street to Market Street.

 Thence Southerly along Market to the dividing line between

32-S-3 and 32-S-4 & 5.



 Thence Northerly along Moulton Street to Wharf Street.




 11 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-907 Rev.6-4-2001

 Thence Westerly along Wharf Street to a passage between

Assessor’s map 32 blocks “T” and “U” leading to Commercial

Street.

 Thence Southerly along said passage about 28 feet to the

dividing line between lots 32-U-3 and 32-U-5.

 Thence Westerly, Southerly, and Westerly along the Southerly

line of lot 5 to Dana Street.

 Thence Westerly across Dana Street and following the

Northern boundary of lots 32-V-2, 4, 5, 8, and 12 to Union

Street.

 Thence Northerly on Union Street to Fore Street. Thence

Westerly on Fore Street to parcel 38-F-8.

 Thence Southerly along the Easterly sideline of 38-F-8.

 Thence Westerly along the Southerly sideline of 38-F-8 to

Cross Street.

 Thence Northerly to Fore Street

 Thence Westerly along Fore Street to 38-G-7.

 Thence Southerly along the Easterly sideline of 38-G-7.

 Thence Westerly along the Southerly sideline of 38-G-7

to the Easterly sideline of Center Street.

 Thence Northerly along Center Street to the Southerly

sideline of 40-F-11.

 Thence Southwesterly along the Southerly sideline of 40-F-

11 and 40-E-1.


 12 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-907 Rev.6-4-2001




 Thence Westerly along the South side of 42-A-8.

 Thence Northerly along the Westerly line of 42-A-7 to York

Street. Thence Westerly along the Southerly side of York Street

to High Street.

 Thence Southerly along High Street 44 feet + to Southern

sideline of 42-B-7.

 Thence Westerly along the Southerly sideline of 44-B-2 to

Park Street.

 Thence Westerly across Park Street to the Southerly sideline

of 43- C-7.

 Thence Westerly along the Southern sideline of 43-C-7 to the

edge of proposed State Street.

 Thence Westerly across proposed State Street to the

Southerly sideline of 43-E-8.

 Thence Westerly along the Southerly sideline of 43-E-8 to the

Casco Bay Bridge.

 Thence Southeasterly along the Casco Bay Bridge to the

Harbor Commissioner’s Line.

 Thence Northeasterly along the Harbor Commissioner’s line to

a point which is the intersection of the Harbor Commissioner’s

line and a line which is the extension of the lot line between

the Southeasterly line of land now or formerly of Dan Haley and

the Southwesterly line of the Portland House Condominium.


 13 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-908 Rev.12-1-2008




 Thence Northwesterly along said line to the Southerly side

of the Eastern Promenade at the point of beginning.

 All as shown on a map dated April 13, 2001 entitled

“Proposed Waterfront Redevelopment Area” on file in the Planning

Office.

 Any inconsistencies between this description and the map

shall be controlled by the map.

 (Ord. No. 249-01, 6-4-01)

Sec. 14-908. Financing Activities.

 The following financing activities are authorized for the
creation of funds to be used for the activities approved for
funding by this ordinance:

 (a) Tax Increment Financing Districts Revenues.

 1. Within the Waterfront Redevelopment Economic Zone
 (WREZ)Development Growth Area (WDGA) all activity
 except minor changes as defined below, which
 results in an increase in assessed value due
 to new construction, development or
 redevelopment, renovation, refitting or other
 physical change to structures or uses, including
 acquisition of equipment, shall be subject to
 designation as a Tax Increment Finance (TIF)
 District to support redevelopment activities within
 the WREZ WDGA pursuant to 30-A M.R.S.A. §§ 251-
 526, as amended.

 Minor changes shall mean those physical changes,
 minimal in scope or purpose, which when accumulated
 with previous and anticipated other changes, over a
 period of two years, increase the assessed value of
 the affected property by a cumulative total of
 $400,000 or less.


 14 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-908 Rev.12-1-2008
 2. Affected properties shall mean those properties
 within the WGDAzone which through revaluation or
 by undertakingke activity, except minor changes as
 defined above, which results in a change in
 assessed value due to new construction,
 development or redevelopment, renovation, refitting
 or other physical change to structures or uses,
 including acquisition of equipment.

 Affected properties within the WREZ WDGA
 shall be designated for inclusion in this
 redevelopment program as a TIF District, and the
 tax increment from the captured assessed value
 shall be applied to the redevelopment program
 purposes, subject to approval by the City Council
 on a TIF-by-TIF basis.

 A property is an affected property if it otherwise
 so qualifies, and the total aggregate amount of
 captured assessment in the TIF Districts devoted to
 this redevelopment program does not exceed 1.25%
 (.0125) of the total taxable valuation of the City
 of Portland, when adjusted as necessary to reflect
 100% valuation, as determined by the City Assessor.

 3. Paragraphs (1) and (2) notwithstanding, the Council
 may by Council order determine that the increases
 in assessed value that  would otherwise be
 designated for the first time as TIF districts
 under (1) and (2) above for the next succeeding
 fiscal year shall not be so designated.

 4. The redevelopment program shall be that series of
 investments, expenditures, guarantees and supports
 which are planned for project fund expenditures.

 (b) Program Income and Other Revenues.

 The City Manager will budget and implement the program
 activities, including the program income and expense,
 of the redevelopment program annually for approval and
 implementation by the City Council. The redevelopment
 program is authorized to receive program income, grants,
 participations, joint ventures, investments and other
 revenues for the purposes of the redevelopment program as
 approved by the City of Portland from time to time.

 (c) Updates to development plan and annual TIF District
 reporting.

 15 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-908 Rev.12-1-2008

 Periodically, the city manager shall evaluate and propose
 updates to the Development Plan, and identify properties
 developed in the redevelopment zone which qualify as
 additional TIF District properties. The city manager
 shall report to the council on conditions and changes
 in conditions addressing the economic circumstances of
 the waterfront economy, and shall include in said
 report detail on at least the following issues when
 proposing the addition of properties for inclusion in
 the Waterfront TIF District. :

 Additionally, the City Manager through the Economic
 Development Department shall report to the City Council
 on financial activity related to the Development
 Program within  an Annual  TIF District  Activity
 ReportProgram report.

 1. The utilization, adequacy and capital and operating
 position of the enterprise loan fund designed to
 assist water-dependant, marine-related properties
 and businesses;

 2. The state of the fishing industry, the adequacy and
 demand for berthing space and operating facilities,
 financing, local markets and opportunities, and the
 operations of public operations pertaining to the
 fishing industry;

 3. The status of other water dependant industries and
 operations along the Portland waterfront, including
 opportunities to develop or promote water dependent
 and marine resource dependant economic
 opportunities;

 4. The status of dredge operations and needs at public
 and private piers, the nature of impediments to
 maintaining full depths at all working Portland
 piers;

 5. The status of cargo operations in the Port of
 Portland, including analysis of surface
 transportation capacities serving the Port cargo
 operations, whether public or private;

 6. The status of parking availability, public access
 to the  waterfront and to water dependent
 recreational activities and pursuits;


 16 of 63
City of Portland Land Use
Code of Ordinances Chapter 14
Sec. 14-908 Rev.12-1-2008
 7. The status of environmental concerns, programs and
 issues along the Portland waterfront,  and
 particularly in the inner harbor; and

 8. Such other information, data or findings concerning
 conditions as affects the economic and
 environmental health of the waterfront area, or
 recommendations concerning the operations of the
 loan fund or the capital improvement program.

 (d) Recommendations.

 As often as he or she deems prudent, the city manager
 shall submit to the city council a recommended capital
 improvement plan, utilizing the revenues of the
 WREZWDGA. The finance committee of the city council or
 such other committee as the Council shall designate
 shall conduct public hearings on the recommended plan
 and refer the matter to the council for action.

 (e) Adoption.

 The City Council shall adopt amendments to the
 WREZWDGA, designate TIF Districts  and authorize
 expenditures and take such other actions as are
 necessary each year to implement this redevelopment
 plan and administer its revenues and expenses.
(Ord. No. 249-01, 6-4-01; Ord. No. 151-02/03, 2-3-03; Ord. No. 116-08/09, 12-1-
08)

--------
*Editor’s Note: Sec. 14-909 Waterfront economic development advisory committee
was repealed in its entirety per council order no. 116-08/09 and passed on
12/1/08.
--------




 17 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA




 City of Portland
 Waterfront Economic Redevelopment Program
Application for FY02 and FY10 Amended Waterfront Tax Increment Financing Development
 District Approved by City Council March 18, 2002

AMENDMENTS:


 1. AMENDED AND RESTATED PER CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
 ON JUNE 7, 2010 – INCREASE TERM AND CREATE SUBDISTRICT;

 1.2. AMENDED AND RESTATED PER CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL ON
 MARCH 6, 2018 – ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES

 2.3. AMENDMENTS TO INCREASE INVESTMENT OPTIONS, ADD
 ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY
 – SEPTEMBER 2018




 Prepared by:

 The City of Portland Economic Development Department
March 13, 2002/Amended and Restated as of June 7, 2010; Amended and Restated March 6,
 2018; Amended and Restated ___________



 18 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

I. Introduction

The Portland City Council on March 18, 2002, designated five properties as tax increment
financing districts (the “Original TIF Districts”) as more specifically described below and adopted
the Waterfront Tax Increment Financial Development District Program (the “Original
Development Program”). The Original TIF Districts program was designed for the City to
capture 100% of the tax increment for specified allowable uses.

Amendment #1: On June 7, 2010, the Portland City Council amended approved the Amended and
Restated the Original Development Program (“Amended Development Program”), which was
approved by the Maine Department of Economic Development and Community Development
(“MDECD) on June 28, 2010, as follows:

  Extend the term by twenty (20) years;
  Reduce the number of TIF investment options;
  Authorize the use of Credit Enhancement Agreements within the Waterfront Central
 Zone; and
  Establish a Sub-District (the “Sub-District”) within the District and to authorize a
 Credit Enhancement Agreement with the Developer with respect to the Sub-District in
 furtherance of the Cumberland Cold Storage Project.

Amendment #2: On March 6, 2018, the Portland City Council further amended the Original TIF
Districts to add three properties with the following Chart, Lot, and Block (CBL) numbers (“Added
TIF District Properties of 2018”):

 - 019-A-014001;
 - 031-K-003001; and,
 - 031-K-103001.

The three additional properties include two projects under construction as follows:

 WEX Headquarters (019-A-014001)

 Union Wharf Mixed Use Development (031-K-003001 and 031-K103001)

MDECD approved Amendment #2 on May 29, 2018.

History:

The history of the City of Portland is inextricably tied to the waterfront. From tourism to
shipbuilding to national defense, the waterfront has been a vital part of the social and economic
fabric of Portland. Always, Portland has worked to recognize the unique needs of the harbor, to
protect its authentic marine heritage and to provide public access. The product of this commitment
comes from the work of a Mayoral Taskforce report entitled “Investing in Our Working
Waterfront – Final Report of the Mayor’s Waterfront Task Force on Economic Development”,
dated October 2000 (herein referred to as the “Task Force II Report”). An excerpt from its


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 2
 19 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

Executive Summary is included here, and the full Report is attached to this application labeled as
Attachment #1.

 “Portland is a waterfront city. Its harbor is one of the deepest on the East Coast
 and served as the staging area for the Atlantic Fleet during World War II. Today, it
 accommodates the largest petroleum trans-shipment operation on the East Coast.
 The inner harbor is very limited in geography; it is only about two miles in length
 from Bath Iron Works to Merrill’s Marine Terminal. The wharves that serve the
 needs of water-dependent businesses are both publicly and privately owned. Over
 the course of its long history, the Portland waterfront has served as a center of
 commerce, shipbuilding, cargo and passenger transport, fishing and defense. It has
 also supported a range of mixed uses, the character of which has changed over time
 as the City of Portland and its waterfront have evolved.

 Portland has a 30-year history of commitment to its working waterfront. The City
 began planning the future of its waterfront in the early 1970’s, culminating in 1982
 with multi-faceted development strategies, including zoning amendments,
 construction of public facilities, and policies to address berthing and public access.
 Despite these initiatives, the emergence of the Old Port as a vital retail center and
 tourist attraction threatened to drive traditional industries from their waterfront
 locations. A citizen-initiated referendum in 1987 passed by a 2-1 margin, clearly
 demonstrating the public’s commitment to a working waterfront, and significant
 limitations were placed on development of the water side of Commercial Street.

 Before the development moratorium expired in 1992, the City asked waterfront
 interests to review the zoning and recommend any changes that might provide more
 flexibility in renting space, while protecting water-dependent and marine-related
 uses (The Waterfront Alliance Report, 1992). While some may argue otherwise, the
 existing zoning structure, based on the 1992 Report, strikes a reasonable balance
 between preserving the "working waterfront" and allowing property owners
 necessary flexibility in managing their assets. Since the 1980’s, Portland and the
 State of Maine have invested significant public dollars in supporting traditional
 waterfront activities such as ship repair, commercial fishing, and cargo transfer. At
 the same time, some private property owners have, for a variety of reasons, lacked
 the revenues to maintain their piers, resulting in a serious infrastructure problem,
 which threatens the viability of certain piers as elements of the waterfront economy.

 Despite investments in publicly owned waterfront facilities, the City has done little
 to assist private owners of waterfront property, the uses of which have been limited
 by public policy, as noted above. This report is the result of a charge issued by
 then-Mayor Tom Kane to “focus on economic support for the waterfront…and to
 make the working waterfront work.” It is the second of a three-phase process for
 defining the City’s vision for its waterfront.”

The Task Force II Report was presented to the City Council and the public, and the Council voted
to incorporate it into the Comprehensive Plan on June 4, 2001.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 3
 20 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


The Task Force II Report identified the unique needs of the waterfront from both an infrastructure
and a business development perspective, and several recommendations were made. In order to
turn these recommendations into waterfront economic development opportunities, a program to
create a funding mechanism through Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) Districts was put in place.

 Since the adoption of Waterfront Task Force II report, the City has systematically conducted area
specific planning and re-zoning processes for the three waterfront sub-areas identified in the 1992
Waterfront Alliance Report: Eastern Waterfront, Central Waterfront, and Western Waterfront.
These processes have resulted in an updated framework of regulation that reflects the industries,
infrastructures, water depths, and ownership patterns on the Portland Waterfront. Current
regulations continue to prioritize and protect water dependent uses while allowing reasonable
flexibility to promote investment. While new zoning promotes waterfront investment, barriers
remain. Deferred pier maintenance, shifting industry needs, dredging needs, traffic congestion,
and parking shortages continue to challenge public and private piers and the industries that depend
on them.

II. Development Program

A. Amended Development Program

 With the incorporation of the Task Force II Report into the Portland Comprehensive Plan, the
 City Council formally recognized the unique business development needs of the waterfront.
 Since a funding mechanism was required to implement the recommendations of the Report, the
 City began crafting what ultimately became the Waterfront Capital Improvement and
 Economic Redevelopment Zone (“WREZ”) Ordinance (see Attachment #2 as passed June 4,
 2001, and Attachment #3 as amended December 1, 2008; and Attachment 3(A) as amended
 ________________.) whereby any property within the WREZ geographic area, delineated on
 the attached map (see Revised Attachment #4), that increased in value by an amount greater
 than $400,000 over a two-year period would be subject to inclusion in a TIF application.

 By adopting the WREZ Ordinance, the City Council recognized that the non-marine
 commercial development that has occurred in the Old Port and the surrounding area has
 benefited through the years from the authenticity of the working waterfront. Said another way,
 Portland’s downtown became a desirable destination for tourists, retailers, restaurants and
 high-end office users in part because of the vibrant business of those that depend upon the
 water for their living. Portland blends a perfect mix of fishing vessels, shipbuilding, chandlery,
 cargo operations and the like with the lawyers, bankers, dot-com entrepreneurs and tourists. So
 when a revenue stream was required to maintain and improve the economic vibrancy of the
 Portland waterfront, the City Council acted in such a way as to nurture this symbiotic
 relationship by directing the incremental revenues of the new commercial development back to
 the working waterfront. The result of that action was the adoption of the WREZ Ordinance.

 The WREZ Ordinance is intended to be in effect for several years. As such, the designation of
 the five Original TIF Districts described in the Original Development Program were the first in
 what the City hopes to be a multiple year program where several additional TIF Districts will


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 4
 21 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

  be created. The common theme underlying the Original Development Program, this Amended
  Development Program, and future TIF applications is the implementation of the Task Force II
  Report findings. As such, the projects described in the Original Development Program and this
  Amended Development Program are intended to be greater in scope than the five Original TIF
  Districts could support by themselves.

 1. Amendment #2 – Three Added Parcels Approved by City Council March 16, 2018

 Therefore, the Original Development Program and the three Added TIF District
 Properties of March 2018 (CBLs 019-A-014001, 031-K003001, and 031-K-103001)
 will serve as the model for future amendments to the Original Development Program,
 as amended, as properties become eligible through the WREZ Ordinance.

 2. Amendment #3 – Additional Parcels to be Added – September 2018

 Additional Parcels to be added include those listed in Section II(D)(4).

 In addition, this proposed Amendment increases City TIF revenue investment options,
 as well as increases the geographic area by amending and renaming the WREZ to the
 “Waterfront Development Growth Area Ordinance”. See proposed amendments to the
 WREZ as noted on Attachment #____.


  The activities to be funded through the Original Development Program and, this Amended
  Development Program, and the three Added TIF District Properties of 2018 will be specifically
  determined on an annual basis upon recommendation by the City Manager for action by the
  City Council. Therefore, the City of Portland seeks authorization to fund all the activities
  described in this Amended Development Program so that each year the City Council could
  prioritize which specific activities to fund.

  B. The Projects

  The projects to be undertaken are derived from the recommendations of the Task Force II
  Report which are:

 1. Encourage private and public waterfront investments;
 2. Provide support to maintain a working waterfront;
 3. Support clean, working harbor.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 5
 22 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
 OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Generally, the activities to be undertaken and the approximate cost associated with each activity
 are described in Table 1 below.

 TABLE 1

 Note 1: All citations refer to Title 30-A, Chapter 206, Section 5225

 Project Statutory Citation Estimated Cost
 In District: Capital Infrastructure Investments and
 financing costs, for example:
 Pier and Wharf Structural Repair (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $3,200,000
 Local Match for Ocean Gateway Project (1)(A)(2) $1,000,000
 Street Studies and Improvements (Remedy Traffic (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $5,000,000
 Congestion)
 Pedestrian and Multi-Modal Circulation and Amenity (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $750,000
 Improvements
 Dredging (1)(A)(1)(2)(6)(7) $10,000,000
 New Publicly Owned Pier (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
 Multi-Modal Surface and Structured Parking (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(70 T/B/D
 Credit Enhancement Agreements (1)(A) $4,000,000
 Per Each Individual
 In and out of District: CEA Project
 (a) Funding the
a) City Economic Development Department, including (1)(A)(5) and (C)(1) $50,000 Annually
 prorated salaries of City Manager, Finance, and Planning effective 7/1/2010 for
 Urban Development Director and Planning staff;Staff 22 years, or $1,100,000
b) (b) Workforce training funds. Costs of services and total.
 equipment to provide skills development and training, (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 including scholarships to in-state educational institutions
 or to online learning entities when in-state options are not
 available, for jobs created or retained, of value to marine
 industry;
c) (c) Costs of funding economic development programs or (1)(C)(1) T/B/D
 events; and,
d) (d) Costs of funding environmental improvements (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 projects for commercial use, including sea level
 adaptation studies and infrastructure improvements; and
e) (e) Professional services costs.. (1)(A)(4); 1(C)(1) T/B/D
 (f) Dredg sediment disposal and CAD Cell development. (1)(A) and (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 Total Estimate of TIF Revenue Expenditure over 30-
 year term:
 $212,050,000 –
 excluding CEA
 Projects




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 6
 23 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 The City recognizes that the full scope of the needs of the Waterfront Economic
 Redevelopment Program is beyond the funds anticipated to be generated through this e five
 Original TIF Districts described in the OriginalAmended Development Program and the
 three Added TIF District Properties of 2018. Since the Original Development Program,
 this Amended Development Program, and the three Added TIF District Properties of 2018
 will serve as the template for future TIF District applications, however, the City again
 seeks authorization for the full “menu” of economic development activities described
 above. This is necessary to maintain flexibility and adaptability as the needs of the
 waterfront are prioritized throughout the life of this Amended Development Program.

 In District Use of Funds

 Pier and Wharf Structural Repair

 The waterfront infrastructure needs are considerable. The Task Force II Report
 estimates the need for $1.4 million in repairs to 14 wharves within three years, with an
 additional $1.8 million needed over the next 20 years.

 Local Match for Ocean Gateway Project

 The voters of the State of Maine approved an allocation of roughly $15 million for the
 construction of a marine passenger facility, requiring a local match of nearly $1 million.

 Street Studies and Improvements (Remedy Traffic Congestion)

 With the development of the Ocean Gateway facility, significant transportation
 improvements will be required to accommodate the increased traffic on the street
 network along and around the waterfront, with particular emphasis on Franklin Arterial,
 Commercial Street and India Street.

 Pedestrian Circulation and Amenity Improvements

 Invest in pedestrian and multi-modal infrastructure to support the working waterfront
 and improve public access to the waterfront.

 Dredging

 This recommendation recognizes the environmental and financial burdens caused by
 combined sewer overflows and storm water pipes that discharge into the harbor. The
 cost associated with disposing the contaminated dredge material jumps to more than
 $100 per cubic yard vs. as little as $12 per cubic yard for uncontaminated dredge
 disposal costs. Placing an additional financial burden on the marine industry, the
 significant cost of the disposal of the contaminated dredged material allows only a
 limited ability to recover those costs through increased berthing fees. Since there are
 public health and ecological benefits associated with removing contaminated sediment,
 the Report recommends that the City devise a strategy to dispose of contaminated


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 7
 24 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 sediments and to subsidize a portion of the costs of the dredging. See CAD Cell
 Development discussion below.

 New Publicly Owned Pier

 Located between the Portland Ocean Terminal and Ocean Gateway, a new deep-water
 pier will offer expanded berthing supporting cruise ship, home porting, tug boat, and
 transient berthing for current and future marine transportation industries.

 Multimodal surface and Structured Parking

 Existing and future waterfront industries and developments require shared parking
 resourcses to promote continued growth and opportunities for transportation choice.


 Economic Development Staffing, and prorated salaries of the Finance Director, Planning
 and Urban Development Director, and Planning Staff

 Fund a portion of the cost of City economic development staff involved in supporting
 waterfront business development activities and administration of the Original
 Development Program and this Amended Development Program, and prorated salaries
 of the Finance Director, Planning and Urban Development Director, and Planning staff.

 Credit Enhancement Agreements

 The City Council may approve credit enhancement agreements within the Waterfront
 Central Zone (as depicted on Attachment #5) within the remaining term of the
 Amended Development Program to support important private sector projects in
 compliance with adopted City TIF Policy and where the City Council determines that
 the public benefits associated with individual projects meet or exceed the current or net
 present value of the project’s share of the TIF proceeds for activities consistent with
 State law. City Council approved City TIF Policy limits the Credit Enhancement
 Agreements to not exceed 65% of the incremental taxes up to a 20-year term.

 In and Out of District Use of Funds

 Workforce Training Funds

 Marine Industries are increasingly challenged to find qualified workers to fill open
 positions and to capitalize on opportunities for growth. TIF funding can help expand
 the pool of applicants for current and future employment while improving employment
 options.

 Economic Development Programs and Events




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 8
 25 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Job fairs, technology conferences, industry open houses, and other such events to
 market and promote the waterfront and its industries.

 Environmental Improvement Projects

 Waterfront industries, such as fisheries and tourism benefit from water quality
 improvement studies and projects. Likewise, sea level rise and other climate change
 related stresses on industries will increasingly require studies and infrastructure
 improvements to adapt to changing conditions and promote resiliency.

 Professional Services Costs

 Waterfront TIF funds may be used to support consulting and professional services
 needed for special projects and to conduct the everyday ongoing work implementing
 the development program.

 Dredged Sediment Disposal Costs and CAD Cell Development

 While the dredging of piers and wharfs is considered “in-district,” disposal options for
 dredged sediments will all be located beyond the limits of the Waterfront TIF districts
 and growth areas. The City is working with State and local partners to construct a
 Contained Aquatic Disposal (CAD) cell in Portland Harbor to address the needs of pier
 dredging for both public and private piers.

 C. Sub-District Development Program

 The twenty (20) year Sub-District Development Program supports the redevelopment of the
 Cumberland Cold Storage 100,000+ square foot building into a Class A office building. A
 twenty (20) year Credit Enhancement Agreement with the property owner and developer
 assists with project costs.

D . The Development District Property

 The City Council created the WREZ Ordinance (see Attachments #2, and #3, and #3A)
 whereby any property within the geographic area, delineated on the attached map (see Revised
 Attachment #4), that increased in value by an amount greater than $400,000 over a two-year
 period would be considered for inclusion in a TIF application subject to the City Council
 approval.

 NOTE: This Amendment #3 also proposes to amend the WREZ Ordinance to expand the
 geographic area and rename the Ordinance the “Waterfront Development Growth Area
 Ordinance”, as noted on Attachment #___.

 1. Original Development District Property




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 9
 26 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Five such properties were given a TIF District designation by the City Council in 2002 as part
 of the Original Development Program.

 MAP BLOCK LOT
 019 A 008
 029 K 001
 029 S 001
 030 D 001
 041 A 005

 2. Sub-District Property

 Properties 041-A-016 (0.17 acres) and 041-A-17-18 (1.38 acres) are the Sub-District for the
 purposes of establishing the original assessed value and allocating tax increment pursuant to
 the Credit Enhancement Agreement with the Developer.

 The TIF Districts will apply to only new value generated within the Districts and will not affect
 the current property tax base.

 3. Three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018

 MAP BLOCK LOT
 019 A 014001
 031 K 003001
 031 K 103001


 4. Added TIF District Properties of September Fall 2018

 Additional Parcels to be added include: NOTE: a/o 9/14/2018, City is confirming the various
 parcels sizes, assessed values, and CBLs. A map, however, is attached showing the location of
 the subject properties.

E. Municipal Use of TIF Revenues

 The City of Portland seeks authorization to utilize the revenues generated from this Amended
 Development Programe five Original TIF Districts, the Sub-District, and the three Added TIF
 District Properties of 2018 that are created in the WREZ in support of the economic
 development activities called for in described in this Amended Development Program, and
 specifically, the activities outlined in Section II-A of this application.

F. Operational Components

 1. Public Facilities

 See Section IIA of this application.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 10
 27 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 2. Uses of Private Property

 Subject to the approval of the City Council, the City will consider entering into credit
 enhancement agreements to support private projects located in the Waterfront Central Zone
 which meet the criteria set forth in this TIF District Program.

 3. Plans for relocation of persons displaced by development activities.

 No displacement or relocation of persons is associated with this TIF District.

 4. Transportation Improvements

 See Section IIA of this application.

 5. Environmental Controls

 Thise Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program proposes
 improvements that will comply with all federal, state and local rules and regulations and
 applicable land use requirements.

 6. Plan of Operation

 During the life of this Amended Districte five Original Districts, the Sub-District, and the
 three Added TIF District Properties of 2018, the City of Portland, City Council, or their
 designee, will be responsible for the administration of the Districts.

III. Original Development Program Physical Description

A. Total acreage of the municipality: 12,386 (taxable acres)

B. Total acreage of five Original TIF Districts: 3.4 acres

C. Percent of line B of line A (line B divided by line A cannot exceed 2%): 0.03%

D. Total acreage of all existing and Original TIF Districts in the municipality: 77.6 acres

E. Percent line D of line A (cannot exceed 5%): 0.63%

F. Not less than 25%, by area, of the real property within a development district shall meet at
 least one of the following criteria:

 1. Blighted acres N/A . Line F1 divided by line B = _________.

 2. Acreage in need of rehabilitation, redevelopment or conservation N/A . Line F2
 divided by line B = _________.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 11
 28 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 3. Acreage suitable for commercial siting = 3.4 . Line F3 divided by line B = 100% .

G. Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the five Original TIF Districts in relation to
 geographic location of municipality (Attachment #6).

 2. Site map showing tax map locations and the five Original TIF Districts (Attachments
 #7A through 7E).

III-A. Sub-District Physical Description

 A. Total acreage of the municipality: 12,386 (taxable acres)

 B. Total acreage proposed for Sub-District: 1.55

 C. Percent of line B of line A (line B divided by line A cannot exceed 2%): 0.01%

 D. Total acreage of all existing and proposed TIF Districts in the municipality: 189.92

 E. Percent line D of line A (cannot exceed 5%): 1.53%

 F. Not less than 25%, by area, of the real property within a development district shall
 meet at least one of the following criteria:

 1. Blighted acres N/A . Line F1 divided by line B = _________.

 2. Acreage in need of rehabilitation, redevelopment or conservation N/A . Line
 F2 divided by line B = _________.

 3. Acreage suitable for commercial siting = . Line F3 divided by line B =
 100% .

III-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Physical Description

The total acreage of the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 is 1.675 acres. Exhibit
16 contains financial and statistical information relating to this Amendment required as a
prerequisite to designation of the Amended District by the City and approval by MDECD.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Sub-District, and the three Added TIF
 District Properties of 2018, in relation to geographic location of municipality
 (Attachment #8)



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 12
 29 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 2. Tax maps showing locations of the three Added TIF District Properties of
 March 2018 (Attachment #9).

III-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Physical Description

The total acreage of the added September 2018 TIF District Properties is estimated at 76 acres.
Exhibit 16 contains financial and statistical information relating to this Amendment required as a
prerequisite to designation of the Amended District by the City and approval by MDECD.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Added September 2018 TIF District
 Properties, in relation to geographic location of municipality (Attachment #-
 _______).

 2. Tax maps showing locations of the added September 2018 TIF District
 Properties (Attachments #______).

IV. Original Development Program Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The five Original TIF Districts comprise an area of approximately 3.4 acres of taxable real and
 personal property with an original assessed value of $6,716,410 as of March 31, 2001. The
 development within the Original TIF Districts is estimated to add an additional $26,221,692 of
 new assessed value to the City over the 30 years.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provides for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF Districts to be
 captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of retained revenues
 to the economic development activities described in the Amended Development Program, with
 the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific
 projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.

 Attachment #10 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the AmendedOriginal TIF Districts. Attachment
 #10 is a projection based upon best available information and is included for demonstration
 purposes only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 13
 30 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the described Original TIF Districts will add approximately $26.2
 million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over 30 years. TIF revenues will be
 allocated as described on Attachment #10 to finance the costs of this Amended Development
 Program. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the
 applicable annual percentage retained and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

IV-A. Sub-District Financial Plan

A. Cost and Sources of Revenue

 The one TIF Sub-District comprises an area of 1.55 acres of taxable real property with an
 original assessed value of $950,900 as of March 31, 2010. The development within the sub-
 district is estimated to add an additional $12,000,000 of new assessed value to the City.

 This Amended Development Program provides for the new tax revenues generated by the
 increase in assessed value of the Sub-District to be captured and designated as TIF Revenues.
 The City will apply the portion of retained revenues to a credit enhancement agreement with
 the Developer and the balance of retained revenues to the economic development activities
 described in this Amended Development Program, with the understanding that the City
 Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific projects to undertake that have been
 outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity with its allocable share of retained revenues that is
 allowable under the Amended Development Program.

 Attachment #11 details the projections and TIF revenue allocation schedule based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the Sub-District. Attachment #11 is a projection
 based upon best available information and is included for demonstration purposes only. No
 assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 14
 31 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 This Amended Development Program requires establishment of a Development Program
 Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment of the project costs in the manner outlined
 in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Cumberland Cold Storage TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of
 a project cost account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of
 project costs. The Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City
 Cost Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved
 economic development expenses and a and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost
 Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under the credit enhancement
 agreement to be entered into with the Developer.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the Sub-District will add approximately $12 million of new taxable
 value in the City of Portland. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment #11
 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program and to fund the City’s payment
 obligations to the Developer pursuant to the credit enhancement agreement to be entered into
 with the Developer. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon
 the applicable annual percentage retained and the actual annual assessed value within the
 Districts.

IV-B Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 comprise an area of approximately
 1.675 acres of taxable real property with an original assessed value of $616,430 as of March
 31, 2017. The development within the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 is
 estimated to add an additional $20.7 Million of new assessed value to the City over the
 remainder of the term through June 30, 2032.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provides for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF Districts to be
 captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of retained revenues
 to the economic development activities described in the Amended Development Program, with
 the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific
 projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.

 Attachment #12 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the three Added TIF District Properties of March



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 15
 32 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 2018. Attachment #12 is a projection based upon best available information and is included
 for demonstration purposes only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 will add
 approximately $20.7 Million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over the remainder of
 the term through June 30, 2032. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment
 #12 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program. Actual payments to the
 Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the applicable annual percentage retained
 and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

IV-C Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 comprise an area of approximately 76
 acres of taxable real property with an original assessed value of $20,049,870 as of March 31,
 2018. The development within the Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 is
 estimated to add an additional $300 Million of new assessed value to the City over the
 remainder of the term through June 30, 2032.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provide for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF and Amended
 Districts to be captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of
 retained revenues to the economic development activities described in the Amended
 Development Program, with the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis,
 determine which specific projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended
 Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 16
 33 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 Attachment #13 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the Added TIF District Properties of September
 2018. Attachment #13 is a projection based upon best available information and is included
 for demonstration purposes only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 will add
 approximately $300 Million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over the remainder of
 the term through June 30, 2032. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment
 #132 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program. Actual payments to the
 Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the applicable annual percentage retained
 and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

V. Original TIF Districts Financial Data

A. Total 2001 value of equalized property in the municipality: $3,873,900,000.

B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Original TIF districts:

 Existing $20,961,460
 Proposed $6,716,410
 Total $27,677,870

 Line B divided by line A = 0.71% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the Original
 Development Program: See Attachment #10

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the Original Development Program
 fund: See Attachment #10



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 17
 34 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $400,113 (Average)

F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $400,113 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: N/A

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

I. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #13.

V-A. Sub-District Financial Data

A. Total 2010 value of property in the municipality: $8,196,900,000.

B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing TIF Districts and proposed sub-
district:

 Existing $305,455,220
 Proposed $950,900
 Total $306,406,120
 Line B divided by line A = 3.73% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the development
 program: See Attachment #11

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the development program fund:
 See Attachment #11

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $143,503 (Average)

F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $143,503 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: N/A

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: The City of Portland seeks to implement its own
 Waterfront Economic Redevelopment Program and to fund its payment obligations to the
 Developer under the credit enhancement agreement with the Developer and is under no
 obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the City’s full faith and credit.
 The City’s participation in this development program is voluntary and notwithstanding any
 approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke its desire to implement the plan.



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 18
 35 of 63
  9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
 OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

I. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #14.

 V-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Financial Data

 A. Total 2018 value of taxable property in the municipality: $9,049,500,000.

 B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Amended TIF
 districts:


 Existing $1,106,422,670
 Proposed $616,430
 Sub-Total $1,107,059,100
 Less Exempt -$973,107,320
 Total $133,951,780
 Line B divided by line A = 1.48% (cannot exceed 5%).

 C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the three Added TIF
 District Properties of 2018: See Attachment #12.

 D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the three Added TIF District
 Properties of 2018 Development Program fund: See Attachment #12

 E. Estimated annual tax increment: $491,204 (Average)

 F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $491,204 (Average)

 G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: $200,000 N/A

 H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

 II. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #15.


 V-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Financial Data

 A. Total 2018 value of taxable property in the municipality: $9,049,500,000.

 B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Amended TIF
 districts:



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 19
 36 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 Existing $1,107,059,1006,422,670
 Proposed $20,049,870
 Sub-Total $1,127,108,970
 Less Exempt -$973,107,320
 Total $154,001,650133,951,780
 Line B divided by line A = 1.7% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the three Added TIF
 District Properties of September 2018: See Attachment #132.

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the three Added TIF District
 Properties of September 2018 Development Program fund: 100%

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $7,282,000 (Average)

F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $7,282,000 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: $200,000

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

III. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment
 #165.


VI. Original Development Program Tax Shifts (See Attachment #13)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $137,700

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $17,004

 County Tax Shift: $7,855

 Total Average Annual Savings: $162,560

VI-A Sub-District Tax Shifts (See Attachment #14)

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $49,822


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 20
 37 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $6,183

 County Tax Shift: $2,856

 Total Average Annual Savings: $58,860

VI-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Tax Shifts (See Attachment #15)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $122,721

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $11,772

 County Tax Shift: $10,522

 Total Average Annual Savings: $145,015

VI-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Tax Shifts (See Attachment #16)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $2,341,121

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $160,724

 County Tax Shift: $150,869

 Total Average Annual Savings: $2,652,714

VII. Amended Development Program Municipal Approvals

A. Public Hearing Notice

 The City of Portland did give proper Notice of Public Hearing in accordance with the
 requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A. §5226. The notice was published on
 __________________February 22, 2018 in a newspaper of general circulation (see Attachment
 #17).

B. Public Hearing

 A Public Hearing at which the proposed Amended Development Program for adoption was
 held on ________________March 6, 2018 in the Portland City Council Chambers. A copy of
 the minutes of that meeting is included as Attachment #18.



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 21
 38 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

C. Authorizing Votes

 An attested copy of the resolution of the Portland City Council amending the Waterfront
 Redevelopment Program is included as Attachment #19.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 22
 39 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA




 City of Portland
 Waterfront Economic Redevelopment Program
Application for FY02 and FY10 Amended Waterfront Tax Increment Financing Development
 District Approved by City Council March 18, 2002

AMENDMENTS:


 1. AMENDED AND RESTATED PER CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
 ON JUNE 7, 2010 – INCREASE TERM AND CREATE SUBDISTRICT

 2. AMENDED AND RESTATED PER CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL ON
 MARCH 6, 2018 – ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES

 3. AMENDMENTS TO INCREASE INVESTMENT OPTIONS, ADD
 ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL
 BOUNDARY – SEPTEMBER 2018




 Prepared by:

 The City of Portland Economic Development Department
March 13, 2002/Amended and Restated as of June 7, 2010; Amended and Restated March 6,
 2018; Amended and Restated ___________



 40 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

I. Introduction

The Portland City Council on March 18, 2002, designated five properties as tax increment
financing districts (the “Original TIF Districts”) as more specifically described below and adopted
the Waterfront Tax Increment Financial Development District Program (the “Original
Development Program”). The Original TIF District program was designed for the City to capture
100% of the tax increment for specified allowable uses.

Amendment #1: On June 7, 2010, the Portland City Council approved the Amended and Restated
the Original Development Program (“Amended Development Program”), which was approved by
the Maine Department of Economic Development and Community Development (“MDECD) on
June 28, 2010, as follows:

  Extend the term by twenty (20) years;
  Reduce the number of TIF investment options;
  Authorize the use of Credit Enhancement Agreements within the Waterfront Central
 Zone; and
  Establish a Sub-District (the “Sub-District”) within the District and to authorize a
 Credit Enhancement Agreement with the Developer with respect to the Sub-District in
 furtherance of the Cumberland Cold Storage Project.

Amendment #2: On March 6, 2018, the Portland City Council further amended the Original TIF
Districts to add three properties with the following Chart, Lot, and Block (CBL) numbers (“Added
TIF District Properties of 2018”):

 - 019-A-014001;
 - 031-K-003001; and,
 - 031-K-103001.

The three additional properties include two projects under construction as follows:

 WEX Headquarters (019-A-014001)

 Union Wharf Mixed Use Development (031-K-003001 and 031-K103001)

MDECD approved Amendment #2 on May 29, 2018.

History:

The history of the City of Portland is inextricably tied to the waterfront. From tourism to
shipbuilding to national defense, the waterfront has been a vital part of the social and economic
fabric of Portland. Always, Portland has worked to recognize the unique needs of the harbor, to
protect its authentic marine heritage and to provide public access. The product of this commitment
comes from the work of a Mayoral Taskforce report entitled “Investing in Our Working
Waterfront – Final Report of the Mayor’s Waterfront Task Force on Economic Development”,
dated October 2000 (herein referred to as the “Task Force II Report”). An excerpt from its


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 2
 41 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

Executive Summary is included here, and the full Report is attached to this application labeled as
Attachment #1.

 “Portland is a waterfront city. Its harbor is one of the deepest on the East Coast
 and served as the staging area for the Atlantic Fleet during World War II. Today, it
 accommodates the largest petroleum trans-shipment operation on the East Coast.
 The inner harbor is very limited in geography; it is only about two miles in length
 from Bath Iron Works to Merrill’s Marine Terminal. The wharves that serve the
 needs of water-dependent businesses are both publicly and privately owned. Over
 the course of its long history, the Portland waterfront has served as a center of
 commerce, shipbuilding, cargo and passenger transport, fishing and defense. It has
 also supported a range of mixed uses, the character of which has changed over time
 as the City of Portland and its waterfront have evolved.

 Portland has a 30-year history of commitment to its working waterfront. The City
 began planning the future of its waterfront in the early 1970’s, culminating in 1982
 with multi-faceted development strategies, including zoning amendments,
 construction of public facilities, and policies to address berthing and public access.
 Despite these initiatives, the emergence of the Old Port as a vital retail center and
 tourist attraction threatened to drive traditional industries from their waterfront
 locations. A citizen-initiated referendum in 1987 passed by a 2-1 margin, clearly
 demonstrating the public’s commitment to a working waterfront, and significant
 limitations were placed on development of the water side of Commercial Street.

 Before the development moratorium expired in 1992, the City asked waterfront
 interests to review the zoning and recommend any changes that might provide more
 flexibility in renting space, while protecting water-dependent and marine-related
 uses (The Waterfront Alliance Report, 1992). While some may argue otherwise, the
 existing zoning structure, based on the 1992 Report, strikes a reasonable balance
 between preserving the "working waterfront" and allowing property owners
 necessary flexibility in managing their assets. Since the 1980’s, Portland and the
 State of Maine have invested significant public dollars in supporting traditional
 waterfront activities such as ship repair, commercial fishing, and cargo transfer. At
 the same time, some private property owners have, for a variety of reasons, lacked
 the revenues to maintain their piers, resulting in a serious infrastructure problem,
 which threatens the viability of certain piers as elements of the waterfront economy.

 Despite investments in publicly owned waterfront facilities, the City has done little
 to assist private owners of waterfront property, the uses of which have been limited
 by public policy, as noted above. This report is the result of a charge issued by
 then-Mayor Tom Kane to “focus on economic support for the waterfront…and to
 make the working waterfront work.” It is the second of a three-phase process for
 defining the City’s vision for its waterfront.”

The Task Force II Report was presented to the City Council and the public, and the Council voted
to incorporate it into the Comprehensive Plan on June 4, 2001.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 3
 42 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


The Task Force II Report identified the unique needs of the waterfront from both an infrastructure
and a business development perspective, and several recommendations were made. In order to
turn these recommendations into waterfront economic development opportunities, a program to
create a funding mechanism through Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) Districts was put in place.

 Since the adoption of Waterfront Task Force II report, the City has systematically conducted area
specific planning and re-zoning processes for the three waterfront sub-areas identified in the 1992
Waterfront Alliance Report: Eastern Waterfront, Central Waterfront, and Western Waterfront.
These processes have resulted in an updated framework of regulation that reflects the industries,
infrastructures, water depths, and ownership patterns on the Portland Waterfront. Current
regulations continue to prioritize and protect water dependent uses while allowing reasonable
flexibility to promote investment. While new zoning promotes waterfront investment, barriers
remain. Deferred pier maintenance, shifting industry needs, dredging needs, traffic congestion,
and parking shortages continue to challenge public and private piers and the industries that depend
on them.

II. Development Program

A. Amended Development Program

 With the incorporation of the Task Force II Report into the Portland Comprehensive Plan, the
 City Council formally recognized the unique business development needs of the waterfront.
 Since a funding mechanism was required to implement the recommendations of the Report, the
 City began crafting what ultimately became the Waterfront Capital Improvement and
 Economic Redevelopment Zone (“WREZ”) Ordinance (see Attachment #2 as passed June 4,
 2001, Attachment #3 as amended December 1, 2008; and Attachment 3(A) as amended
 ________________) whereby any property within the WREZ geographic area, delineated on
 the attached map (see Revised Attachment #4), that increased in value by an amount greater
 than $400,000 over a two-year period would be subject to inclusion in a TIF application.

 By adopting the WREZ Ordinance, the City Council recognized that the non-marine
 commercial development that has occurred in the Old Port and the surrounding area has
 benefited through the years from the authenticity of the working waterfront. Said another way,
 Portland’s downtown became a desirable destination for tourists, retailers, restaurants and
 high-end office users in part because of the vibrant business of those that depend upon the
 water for their living. Portland blends a perfect mix of fishing vessels, shipbuilding, chandlery,
 cargo operations and the like with the lawyers, bankers, dot-com entrepreneurs and tourists. So
 when a revenue stream was required to maintain and improve the economic vibrancy of the
 Portland waterfront, the City Council acted in such a way as to nurture this symbiotic
 relationship by directing the incremental revenues of the new commercial development back to
 the working waterfront. The result of that action was the adoption of the WREZ Ordinance.

 The WREZ Ordinance is intended to be in effect for several years. As such, the designation of
 the five Original TIF Districts described in the Original Development Program were the first in
 what the City hopes to be a multiple year program where several additional TIF Districts will


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 4
 43 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

  be created. The common theme underlying the Original Development Program, this Amended
  Development Program, and future TIF applications is the implementation of the Task Force II
  Report findings. As such, the projects described in the Original Development Program and this
  Amended Development Program are intended to be greater in scope than the five Original TIF
  Districts could support by themselves.

 1. Amendment #2 – Three Added Parcels Approved by City Council March 16, 2018

 The Original Development Program and the three Added TIF District Properties of
 March 2018 (CBLs 019-A-014001, 031-K003001, and 031-K-103001) will serve as the
 model for future amendments to the Original Development Program, as amended, as
 properties become eligible through the WREZ Ordinance.

 2. Amendment #3 – Additional Parcels to be Added – September 2018

 Additional Parcels to be added include those listed in Section II(D)(4).

 In addition, this proposed Amendment increases City TIF revenue investment options,
 as well as increases the geographic area by amending and renaming the WREZ to the
 “Waterfront Development Growth Area Ordinance”. See proposed amendments to the
 WREZ as noted on Attachment #____.

  The activities to be funded through the Original Development Program and this Amended
  Development Program will be specifically determined on an annual basis upon
  recommendation by the City Manager for action by the City Council. Therefore, the City of
  Portland seeks authorization to fund all the activities described in this Amended Development
  Program so that each year the City Council could prioritize which specific activities to fund.

  B. The Projects

  The projects to be undertaken are derived from the recommendations of the Task Force II
  Report which are:

 1. Encourage private and public waterfront investments;
 2. Provide support to maintain a working waterfront;
 3. Support clean, working harbor.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 5
 44 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
 OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Generally, the activities to be undertaken and the approximate cost associated with each activity
 are described in Table 1 below.

 TABLE 1

 Note 1: All citations refer to Title 30-A, Chapter 206, Section 5225

 Project Statutory Citation Estimated Cost
 In District: Capital Infrastructure Investments and
 financing costs, for example:
 Pier and Wharf Structural Repair (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $3,200,000
 Local Match for Ocean Gateway Project (1)(A)(2) $1,000,000
 Street Studies and Improvements (Remedy Traffic (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $5,000,000
 Congestion)
 Pedestrian and Multi-Modal Circulation and Amenity (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) $750,000
 Improvements
 Dredging (1)(A)(1)(2)(6)(7) $1,000,000
 New Publicly Owned Pier (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(7) T/B/D
 Multi-Modal Surface and Structured Parking (1)(A)(1)(2)(3)(6)(70 T/B/D
 Credit Enhancement Agreements (1)(A) $4,000,000
 Per Each Individual
 In and out of District: CEA Project
a) (a) Funding the Economic Development Department, (1)(A)(5) and (C)(1) $50,000 Annually
 including prorated salaries of City Manager, Finance, and effective 7/1/2010 for
 Planning Urban Development Director and Planning staff; 22 years, or $1,100,000
b) total.
c) (b) Workforce training funds. Costs of services and (1)(C)(4) T/B/D
 equipment to provide skills development and training,
 including scholarships to in-state educational institutions
 or to online learning entities when in-state options are not
 available, for jobs created or retained, of value to marine
 industry;
d) (c) Costs of funding economic development programs or (1)(C)(1) T/B/D
 events;
e) (d) Costs of funding environmental improvements (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 projects for commercial use, including sea level
 adaptation studies and infrastructure improvements;
f) (e) Professional services costs. (1)(A)(4); 1(C)(1) T/B/D
 (f) Dredged sediment disposal and CAD Cell (1)(A) and (1)(C)(2) T/B/D
 development.

 Total Estimate of TIF Revenue Expenditure over 30- $12,050,000 –
 year term: excluding CEA
 Projects




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 6
 45 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 The City recognizes that the full scope of the needs of the Waterfront Economic
 Redevelopment Program is beyond the funds anticipated to be generated through this
 Amended Development Program. Since the Original Development Program, this Amended
 Development Program will serve as the template for future TIF District applications,
 however, the City again seeks authorization for the full “menu” of economic development
 activities described above. This is necessary to maintain flexibility and adaptability as the
 needs of the waterfront are prioritized throughout the life of this Amended Development
 Program.

 In District Use of Funds

 Pier and Wharf Structural Repair

 The waterfront infrastructure needs are considerable. The Task Force II Report
 estimates the need for $1.4 million in repairs to 14 wharves within three years, with an
 additional $1.8 million needed over the next 20 years.

 Local Match for Ocean Gateway Project

 The voters of the State of Maine approved an allocation of roughly $15 million for the
 construction of a marine passenger facility, requiring a local match of nearly $1 million.

 Street Studies and Improvements (Remedy Traffic Congestion)

 With the development of the Ocean Gateway facility, significant transportation
 improvements will be required to accommodate the increased traffic on the street
 network along and around the waterfront, with particular emphasis on Franklin Arterial,
 Commercial Street and India Street.

 Pedestrian Circulation and Amenity Improvements

 Invest in pedestrian and multi-modal infrastructure to support the working waterfront
 and improve public access to the waterfront.

 Dredging

 This recommendation recognizes the environmental and financial burdens caused by
 combined sewer overflows and storm water pipes that discharge into the harbor. The
 cost associated with disposing the contaminated dredge material jumps to more than
 $100 per cubic yard vs. as little as $12 per cubic yard for uncontaminated dredge
 disposal costs. Placing an additional financial burden on the marine industry, the
 significant cost of the disposal of the contaminated dredged material allows only a
 limited ability to recover those costs through increased berthing fees. Since there are
 public health and ecological benefits associated with removing contaminated sediment,
 the Report recommends that the City devise a strategy to dispose of contaminated



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 7
 46 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 sediments and to subsidize a portion of the costs of the dredging. See CAD Cell
 Development discussion below.

 New Publicly Owned Pier

 Located between the Portland Ocean Terminal and Ocean Gateway, a new deep-water
 pier will offer expanded berthing supporting cruise ship, home porting, tug boat, and
 transient berthing for current and future marine transportation industries.

 Multimodal surface and Structured Parking

 Existing and future waterfront industries and developments require shared parking
 resources to promote continued growth and opportunities for transportation choice.

 Economic Development Staffing, and prorated salaries of the Finance Director, Planning
 and Urban Development Director, and Planning Staff

 Fund a portion of the cost of City economic development staff involved in supporting
 waterfront business development activities and administration of the Original
 Development Program and this Amended Development Program, and prorated salaries
 of the Finance Director, Planning and Urban Development Director, and Planning staff.

 Credit Enhancement Agreements

 The City Council may approve credit enhancement agreements within the Waterfront
 Central Zone (as depicted on Attachment #5) within the remaining term of the
 Amended Development Program to support important private sector projects in
 compliance with adopted City TIF Policy and where the City Council determines that
 the public benefits associated with individual projects meet or exceed the current or net
 present value of the project’s share of the TIF proceeds for activities consistent with
 State law. City Council approved City TIF Policy limits the Credit Enhancement
 Agreements to not exceed 65% of the incremental taxes up to a 20-year term.

 In and Out of District Use of Funds

 Workforce Training Funds

 Marine Industries are increasingly challenged to find qualified workers to fill open
 positions and to capitalize on opportunities for growth. TIF funding can help expand
 the pool of applicants for current and future employment while improving employment
 options.

 Economic Development Programs and Events

 Job fairs, technology conferences, industry open houses, and other such events to
 market and promote the waterfront and its industries.


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 8
 47 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 Environmental Improvement Projects

 Waterfront industries, such as fisheries and tourism benefit from water quality
 improvement studies and projects. Likewise, sea level rise and other climate change
 related stresses on industries will increasingly require studies and infrastructure
 improvements to adapt to changing conditions and promote resiliency.

 Professional Services Costs

 Waterfront TIF funds may be used to support consulting and professional services
 needed for special projects and to conduct the everyday ongoing work implementing
 the development program.

 Dredged Sediment Disposal Costs and CAD Cell Development

 While the dredging of piers and wharfs is considered “in-district,” disposal options for
 dredged sediments will all be located beyond the limits of the Waterfront TIF districts
 and growth areas. The City is working with State and local partners to construct a
 Contained Aquatic Disposal (CAD) cell in Portland Harbor to address the needs of pier
 dredging for both public and private piers.

 C. Sub-District Development Program

 The twenty (20) year Sub-District Development Program supports the redevelopment of the
 Cumberland Cold Storage 100,000+ square foot building into a Class A office building. A
 twenty (20) year Credit Enhancement Agreement with the property owner and developer
 assists with project costs.

D . The Development District Property

 The City Council created the WREZ Ordinance (see Attachments #2, #3, and #3A) whereby
 any property within the geographic area, delineated on the attached map (see Revised
 Attachment #4), that increased in value by an amount greater than $400,000 over a two-year
 period would be considered for inclusion in a TIF application subject to the City Council
 approval.

 NOTE: This Amendment #3 also proposes to amend the WREZ Ordinance to expand the
 geographic area and rename the Ordinance the “Waterfront Development Growth Area
 Ordinance”, as noted on Attachment #___.

 1. Original Development District Property

 Five such properties were given a TIF District designation by the City Council in 2002 as part
 of the Original Development Program.



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 9
 48 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 MAP BLOCK LOT
 019 A 008
 029 K 001
 029 S 001
 030 D 001
 041 A 005

 2. Sub-District Property

 Properties 041-A-016 (0.17 acres) and 041-A-17-18 (1.38 acres) are the Sub-District for the
 purposes of establishing the original assessed value and allocating tax increment pursuant to
 the Credit Enhancement Agreement with the Developer.

 The TIF Districts will apply to only new value generated within the Districts and will not affect
 the current property tax base.

 3. Three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018

 MAP BLOCK LOT
 019 A 014001
 031 K 003001
 031 K 103001


 4. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018

 Additional Parcels to be added include: NOTE: a/o 9/14/2018, City is confirming the various
 parcel sizes, assessed values, and CBLs. A map, however, is attached showing the location of
 the subject properties.

E. Municipal Use of TIF Revenues

 The City of Portland seeks authorization to utilize the revenues generated from this Amended
 Development Program that are created in the WREZ in support of the economic development
 activities called for in described in this Amended Development Program, and specifically, the
 activities outlined in Section II-A of this application.

F. Operational Components

 1. Public Facilities

 See Section IIA of this application.

 2. Uses of Private Property




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 10
 49 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Subject to the approval of the City Council, the City will consider entering into credit
 enhancement agreements to support private projects located in the Waterfront Central Zone
 which meet the criteria set forth in this TIF District Program.

 3. Plans for relocation of persons displaced by development activities.

 No displacement or relocation of persons is associated with this TIF District.

 4. Transportation Improvements

 See Section IIA of this application.

 5. Environmental Controls

 This Amended Development Program proposes improvements that will comply with all
 federal, state and local rules and regulations and applicable land use requirements.

 6. Plan of Operation

 During the life of this Amended District, the City of Portland, City Council, or their
 designee, will be responsible for the administration of the Districts.

III. Original Development Program Physical Description

A. Total acreage of the municipality: 12,386 (taxable acres)

B. Total acreage of five Original TIF Districts: 3.4 acres

C. Percent of line B of line A (line B divided by line A cannot exceed 2%): 0.03%

D. Total acreage of all existing and Original TIF Districts in the municipality: 77.6 acres

E. Percent line D of line A (cannot exceed 5%): 0.63%

F. Not less than 25%, by area, of the real property within a development district shall meet at
 least one of the following criteria:

 1. Blighted acres N/A . Line F1 divided by line B = _________.

 2. Acreage in need of rehabilitation, redevelopment or conservation N/A . Line F2
 divided by line B = _________.

 3. Acreage suitable for commercial siting = 3.4 . Line F3 divided by line B = 100% .

G. Enclosed municipal maps:



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 11
 50 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 1. Area map showing site location of the five Original TIF Districts in relation to
 geographic location of municipality (Attachment #6).

 2. Site map showing tax map locations and the five Original TIF Districts (Attachments
 #7A through 7E).

III-A. Sub-District Physical Description

 A. Total acreage of the municipality: 12,386 (taxable acres)

 B. Total acreage proposed for Sub-District: 1.55

 C. Percent of line B of line A (line B divided by line A cannot exceed 2%): 0.01%

 D. Total acreage of all existing and proposed TIF Districts in the municipality: 189.92

 E. Percent line D of line A (cannot exceed 5%): 1.53%

 F. Not less than 25%, by area, of the real property within a development district shall
 meet at least one of the following criteria:

 1. Blighted acres N/A . Line F1 divided by line B = _________.

 2. Acreage in need of rehabilitation, redevelopment or conservation N/A . Line
 F2 divided by line B = _________.

 3. Acreage suitable for commercial siting = . Line F3 divided by line B =
 100% .

III-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Physical Description

The total acreage of the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 is 1.675 acres. Exhibit
16 contains financial and statistical information relating to this Amendment required as a
prerequisite to designation of the Amended District by the City and approval by MDECD.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Sub-District, and the three Added TIF
 District Properties of 2018, in relation to geographic location of municipality
 (Attachment #8)

 2. Tax maps showing locations of the three Added TIF District Properties of
 March 2018 (Attachment #9).




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 12
 51 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

III-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Physical Description

The total acreage of the added September 2018 TIF District Properties is estimated at 76 acres.
Exhibit 16 contains financial and statistical information relating to this Amendment required as a
prerequisite to designation of the Amended District by the City and approval by MDECD.

Enclosed municipal maps:

 1. Area map showing site location of the Added September 2018 TIF District
 Properties, in relation to geographic location of municipality (Attachment #-
 _______).

 2. Tax maps showing locations of the added September 2018 TIF District
 Properties (Attachments #______).

IV. Original Development Program Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The five Original TIF Districts comprise an area of approximately 3.4 acres of taxable real and
 personal property with an original assessed value of $6,716,410 as of March 31, 2001. The
 development within the Original TIF Districts is estimated to add an additional $26,221,692 of
 new assessed value to the City over the 30 years.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provides for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF Districts to be
 captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of retained revenues
 to the economic development activities described in the Amended Development Program, with
 the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific
 projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.

 Attachment #10 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the Amended TIF District. Attachment #10 is a
 projection based upon best available information and is included for demonstration purposes
 only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 13
 52 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the described Original TIF Districts will add approximately $26.2
 million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over 30 years. TIF revenues will be
 allocated as described on Attachment #10 to finance the costs of this Amended Development
 Program. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the
 applicable annual percentage retained and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

IV-A. Sub-District Financial Plan

A. Cost and Sources of Revenue

 The one TIF Sub-District comprises an area of 1.55 acres of taxable real property with an
 original assessed value of $950,900 as of March 31, 2010. The development within the sub-
 district is estimated to add an additional $12,000,000 of new assessed value to the City.

 This Amended Development Program provides for the new tax revenues generated by the
 increase in assessed value of the Sub-District to be captured and designated as TIF Revenues.
 The City will apply the portion of retained revenues to a credit enhancement agreement with
 the Developer and the balance of retained revenues to the economic development activities
 described in this Amended Development Program, with the understanding that the City
 Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific projects to undertake that have been
 outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity with its allocable share of retained revenues that is
 allowable under the Amended Development Program.

 Attachment #11 details the projections and TIF revenue allocation schedule based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the Sub-District. Attachment #11 is a projection
 based upon best available information and is included for demonstration purposes only. No
 assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 This Amended Development Program requires establishment of a Development Program
 Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment of the project costs in the manner outlined
 in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).



 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 14
 53 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 The Cumberland Cold Storage TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of
 a project cost account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of
 project costs. The Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City
 Cost Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved
 economic development expenses and a and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost
 Subaccount”) pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under the credit enhancement
 agreement to be entered into with the Developer.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the Sub-District will add approximately $12 million of new taxable
 value in the City of Portland. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment #11
 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program and to fund the City’s payment
 obligations to the Developer pursuant to the credit enhancement agreement to be entered into
 with the Developer. Actual payments to the Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon
 the applicable annual percentage retained and the actual annual assessed value within the
 Districts.

IV-B Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 comprise an area of approximately
 1.675 acres of taxable real property with an original assessed value of $616,430 as of March
 31, 2017. The development within the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 is
 estimated to add an additional $20.7 Million of new assessed value to the City over the
 remainder of the term through June 30, 2032.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provides for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF Districts to be
 captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of retained revenues
 to the economic development activities described in the Amended Development Program, with
 the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis, determine which specific
 projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.

 Attachment #12 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the three Added TIF District Properties of March
 2018. Attachment #12 is a projection based upon best available information and is included
 for demonstration purposes only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 15
 54 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


B. Development Program Account

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the three Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 will add
 approximately $20.7 Million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over the remainder of
 the term through June 30, 2032. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment
 #12 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program. Actual payments to the
 Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the applicable annual percentage retained
 and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

IV-C Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Financial Plan

A. Costs and Sources of Revenues

 The Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 comprise an area of approximately 76
 acres of taxable real property with an original assessed value of $20,049,870 as of March 31,
 2018. The development within the Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 is
 estimated to add an additional $300 Million of new assessed value to the City over the
 remainder of the term through June 30, 2032.

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program provide for the
 new tax revenues generated by the increase in assessed value of the Original TIF and Amended
 Districts to be captured and designated as TIF Revenues. The City will apply the portion of
 retained revenues to the economic development activities described in the Amended
 Development Program, with the understanding that the City Council will, on an annual basis,
 determine which specific projects to undertake that have been outlined in the Amended
 Development Program.

 The City of Portland reserves the right to amend this Financial Plan, subject to DECD
 approval, to undertake a different activity that is allowable under the Amended Development
 Program.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 16
 55 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Attachment #13 details the projections and proposed TIF revenue allocation based upon the
 anticipated assessed value increases within the Added TIF District Properties of September
 2018. Attachment #13 is a projection based upon best available information and is included
 for demonstration purposes only. No assurances are provided as to the results reflected therein.

B. Development Program Account

 The Original Development Program and this Amended Development Program requires
 establishment of a Development Program Account pledged to, and charged with, the payment
 of the project costs in the manner outlined in 30-A M.R.S.A. §5254 (3)(A)(2).

 The Waterfront TIF Development Program Account is established consisting of a project cost
 account (“Project Cost Account”) pledged to, and charged with, payment of project costs. The
 Project Cost Account shall consist of a City Cost Subaccount (the “City Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment to the City for the cost of approved economic
 development expenses and Developer Cost Subaccount (the “Developer Cost Subaccount”)
 pledged to, and charged with, payment by the City under any credit enhancement agreement.

C. Financing Plan

 The developments within the Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 will add
 approximately $300 Million of new taxable value in the City of Portland over the remainder of
 the term through June 30, 2032. TIF revenues will be allocated as described on Attachment
 #13 to finance the costs of this Amended Development Program. Actual payments to the
 Project Cost Account will be adjusted based upon the applicable annual percentage retained
 and the actual annual assessed value within the Districts.

V. Original TIF Districts Financial Data

A. Total 2001 value of equalized property in the municipality: $3,873,900,000.

B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Original TIF districts:

 Existing $20,961,460
 Proposed $6,716,410
 Total $27,677,870

 Line B divided by line A = 0.71% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the Original
 Development Program: See Attachment #10

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the Original Development Program
 fund: See Attachment #10

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $400,113 (Average)


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 17
 56 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $400,113 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: N/A

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

I. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #13.

V-A. Sub-District Financial Data

A. Total 2010 value of property in the municipality: $8,196,900,000.

B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing TIF Districts and proposed sub-
 district:

 Existing $305,455,220
 Proposed $950,900
 Total $306,406,120
 Line B divided by line A = 3.73% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the development
 program: See Attachment #11

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the development program fund:
 See Attachment #11

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $143,503 (Average)

F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $143,503 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: N/A

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: The City of Portland seeks to implement its own
 Waterfront Economic Redevelopment Program and to fund its payment obligations to the
 Developer under the credit enhancement agreement with the Developer and is under no
 obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the City’s full faith and credit.
 The City’s participation in this development program is voluntary and notwithstanding any
 approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke its desire to implement the plan.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 18
 57 of 63
  9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
 OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

I. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #14.

 V-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Financial Data

 A. Total 2018 value of taxable property in the municipality: $9,049,500,000.

 B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Amended TIF
 districts:

 Existing $1,106,422,670
 Proposed $616,430
 Sub-Total $1,107,059,100
 Less Exempt -$973,107,320
 Total $133,951,780
 Line B divided by line A = 1.48% (cannot exceed 5%).

 C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the three Added TIF
 District Properties of 2018: See Attachment #12.

 D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the three Added TIF District
 Properties of 2018 Development Program fund: See Attachment #12

 E. Estimated annual tax increment: $491,204 (Average)

 F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $491,204 (Average)

 G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: $200,000

 H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

 II. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #15.


 V-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Financial Data

 A. Total 2018 value of taxable property in the municipality: $9,049,500,000.

 B. Original assessed value of all properties in all existing and proposed Amended TIF
 districts:




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 19
 58 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 Existing $1,107,059,100
 Proposed $20,049,870
 Sub-Total $1,127,108,970
 Less Exempt -$973,107,320
 Total $154,001,650
 Line B divided by line A = 1.7% (cannot exceed 5%).

C. Estimate of increased assessed value by year after implementation of the Added TIF
 District Properties of September 2018: See Attachment #13.

D. Percentage of increased assessed value to be applied to the Added TIF District Properties
 of September 2018 Development Program fund: 100%

E. Estimated annual tax increment: $7,282,000 (Average)

F. Total average annual value of development program fund: $7,282,000 (Average)

G. Annual principal and interest payment of bonded indebtedness: $200,000

H. Financial assumptions and safeguards: Under the Original Development Program, the City
 of Portland only sought to implement its own Waterfront Economic Redevelopment
 Program and is under no obligation to repay any bonds that would involve a pledge of the
 City’s full faith and credit. The City’s participation in this development program is
 voluntary and notwithstanding any approvals from the appropriate state entity, can revoke
 its desire to implement the plan.

III. Statement of impact of TIF on taxing jurisdictions within the county: See Attachment #16.


VI. Original Development Program Tax Shifts (See Attachment #13)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $137,700

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $17,004

 County Tax Shift: $7,855

 Total Average Annual Savings: $162,560

VI-A Sub-District Tax Shifts (See Attachment #14)

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $49,822

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $6,183


 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 20
 59 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA


 County Tax Shift: $2,856

 Total Average Annual Savings: $58,860

VI-B. Added TIF District Properties of March 2018 Tax Shifts (See Attachment #15)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $122,721

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $11,772

 County Tax Shift: $10,522

 Total Average Annual Savings: $145,015

VI-C. Added TIF District Properties of September 2018 Tax Shifts (See Attachment #16)

A. Average Annual Amount:

 General Purpose Aid to Education Tax Shift: $2,341,121

 Municipal Revenue Sharing Tax Shift: $160,724

 County Tax Shift: $150,869

 Total Average Annual Savings: $2,652,714

VII. Amended Development Program Municipal Approvals

A. Public Hearing Notice

 The City of Portland did give proper Notice of Public Hearing in accordance with the
 requirements of 30-A M.R.S.A. §5226. The notice was published on __________________,
 2018 in a newspaper of general circulation (see Attachment #17).

B. Public Hearing

 A Public Hearing at which the proposed Amended Development Program for adoption was
 held on ________________, 2018 in the Portland City Council Chambers. A copy of the
 minutes of that meeting is included as Attachment #18.

C. Authorizing Votes




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 21
 60 of 63
 9/2018 – AMENDMENT #3 TO WATERFRONT TIF: INCREASE CITY INVESTMENT
OPTIONS, ADD ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, AND INCREASE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

  An attested copy of the resolution of the Portland City Council amending the Waterfront
  Redevelopment Program is included as Attachment #19.




 Editor’s Note: As of 9/14/2018, attachments need to be renumbered. 22
 61 of 63
62 of 63
63 of 63