05/12/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--- .... e Mr. Luel1 reviewed the parking program and the enterprise funds outlined on the first page of the brown handouts. He said that 60 percent of the DDD funds went to enterprise funds, and $312,000 of that $355,000 went directly for rental of spaces. He also noted that the Eugene Performing Arts Center and Conference Center garages are part of the entire program, but are not involved with the DDD. Mr. Luell reviewed the functions of enterprise funds, noting that the Overpark and Parcade both depended on commercial space to subsidize the parking func- tion. He also reviewed components of service. e Responding to questions from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Luell said parking revenues col- lected at the EPAC and Parcade garages during Hult Center events remained in each of those enterprise funds. He added that the EPAC and Conference Center funds did not receive money from the Downtown Development District. Mr. Luell showed development sites on the Downtown Parking Lot Summary and said development was expected to result in a decreased supply and an increased demand for parking. He said pay lots shown were either owned by the City or by Diamond Parking. Mr. Luell said that each enterprise fund was intended to be self-supporting. He reviewed the DDD Funds flow chart, noting that the changes to working capi- tal were negative in the first three funds, which he attributed to the current program's inability to generate revenue. He said debt servicing was not listed under expenditures for the Parcade or EPAC because it currently was being funded through tax increments and G.O. respectively. He said the City does not have the ability to support additional debt servicing. Mr. Luell said debt servicing for the EPAC was about $180,000, and for the Parcade was about $275,000. e Mr. Luell reviewed highlighted amounts on the subsidized parking program cost summary. He said the replacement reserve average of $4.80 was one-quarter of the industry standard for privately owned structures in Portland or Seattle. He noted that total costs were about $26 per space, while DDD contributed only about $19, including the $1 increase, but new development still required an even greater contribution. Responding to Ms. Ehrman's question, Mr. Luell said the Downtown Association had given no indication that it would pay more than a $1 increase. He said the policy group initially had indicated that it favored making the program self-supporting without a tax increase and had been about to recommend charg- ing for parking after the first two hours. The merchants then initiated the $1 increase in gross receipts to try and keep the program unlimited free. Responding to Mr. Hansen's question, Mr. Luell said that two taxes currently were collected: an ad valorem tax of about $3.50 per thousand on downtown property ownership, and a gross receipts tax of $2.50 per thousand on non-pro- fessional retail sales. He said the increase would affect the gross receipts tax, adding that it had been $2.50 since 1973 when the DDD was initiated. Mr. Luell also said an audit of the non-professionals was part of administra- tion costs. Mr. Wong said audits were done periodically, but, in the last year or two, only walk-throughs had been done. MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session May 12, 1986 Page 2