02/29/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e In response to a question, Mr. Pryor explained that an incorporation would allow the program to become a non-profit entity linked to the intergovernmental agencies but more or less freestanding. While the advantages of incorporation include allowing the entity to perform internal and external functions, he stated that some liabilities would include the need to purchase insurance and the potential for removing the close link between the agencies. Mr. Pryor explained that an intergovermental 190 agreement would require the three local governments to form a contract to establish a board which would administer the terms of the contract. He said the board would equally represent the three governmental agencies although the fundings might be allocated on a formula basis. The administrative board would also be the program administrator, reporting to the three agencies. In regard to staffing, Mr. Pryor reviewed the current staffing under Mr. Beyer and stated that a major question would be the level of sufficient staffing for the proposed SOA. Ms. Shelton commented that the Multnomah County PIC requested its Chamber of Commerce to take over the staffing and to contract the training. She said the Chamber of Commerce will make money from this arrangement. Mr. Pryor stated that one argument for incorporation is that internal staffing can be reduced by contracting work out. While this can also be done under the 190 agreement, he said that the real issues are: not reinventing the wheel, all the governmental agencies obtaining their fair share, and that all the concerns are properly addressed. In response to a question, Mr. Pryor stated that the Eugene/Springfield areas would comprise the metropolitan area while the rest of Lane County would fall under the "rural" definition. He said the proposed PIC would have representatives from each of the three PIC to ensure a true and balanced representation. Mr. Forbes commented that much time has been spent on discussing what the EPIC wants to achieve, the benefits and drawbacks of each existing SOA and how the ideal SOA would appear. He felt that it was a misnomer to get too involved in the mechanism at this meeting because the EPIC was already going through that process. Mr. Schafer suggested that staff develop a position paper which outlines the similarities and differences of the PICs at the present time. He said he was impressed with the good will generated by both PICs and the staff. He said a need exists to move on with the process. In response to Mr. Pryor's request for feedback on the proposed SOA merger, Ms. Schue stated that not much choice exists under the current federal legisla- tion. She said it was clear that the merger will eventually occur and that many good reasons existed in support of the merger. She said the actual debate is how the agencies should merge to achieve the goals set by each. Mr. Pryor stated that some flexibility has been given by the Governor in regard to the merger. Mr. Beyer stated that the City has at least another year in which to accomplish the merger. Mr. Gleason added that the Governor must certify to the federal government that the SOA is meeting the needs of the communities. While some concern existed with the area to the north having three SOAs, he said the situation is different than that of Eugene and Springfield. He said the Eugene model can be used for planning, economic development or other projects--the three governments being partners. He stressed that the opportunity which exists would be the driver of the program. MINUTES--Eugene City Council/Private Industry Council February 29, 1984 Page 4