Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />II. FINANCING RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />Mr. Smith said the grant was the real bridge between River Road/Santa Clara and <br />Eugene. People are committed to finding a solution. They have discussed the <br />need to soften the blow. He reviewed the recommendations. The first recommen- <br />dation was to do self-financing. It may be necessary to borrow $1.75 million <br />for three years to be paid back by a $.90 per month portion of the sewer user <br />fee. It will not affect property taxes. <br /> <br />The second recommendation is to develop financing that is appropriate to the <br />citizens of the area. Mr. Smith referred to Chapter 3 of the document. The <br />average median income for River Road/Santa Clara is higher than the average <br />median income of Eugene. River Road/Santa Clara has a higher proportion of <br />elderly poor than Eugene. The focus to soften the blow is targeted at the <br />elderly poor. They recommend a family of two making $9,500 would be eligible <br />for the assessment deferral program if they are over 62 years old. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith referred to page 12-13-14 of Chapter 8 and discussed the cost of <br />connection to a house. He said the homeowner will have to pay the cost of <br />connection and the cost of decommissioning the septic system ($1,100). These <br />costs are not Bancrofted because they are outside the public right-of-way. The <br />third recommendation is to change State law on Bancrofting, or to use CDBG funds <br />for a revolving loan fund, or sell revenue bonds for a revolving loan fund. <br /> <br />Mr. Hansen asked if Eugene was creating an opportunity for River Road/Santa <br />Clara greater than for the citizens of Eugene. Mr. Smith said no. He said the <br />folks have to pay $4,000. The only difference is the way it is paid. <br /> <br />Ms. Wooten said she was concerned about the low-income family not over 62 <br />years. She also asked about the annexation issue. She asked about the subsidy <br />for the River Road/Santa Clara residents by the residents of Eugene. Mr. Smith <br />referred to Chapter 7, page 7-2. <br /> <br />Mr. Obie suggested staff report on parity. Ms Nichols asked if the property <br />values would be raised. Mr. Smith said they had asked for an assessment. Mr. <br />Smith referred to Chapter 9. He reviewed the schedule for construction, the <br />planning process, and the issues. He said the residents want a balance between <br />volunteerism and expediting the process. Eugene would like to install 80 <br />percent by 1990. More practical limits would be 1995 or 850 hookups a year. <br />Mr. Smith showed a minimum schedule for construction--a rate of 420 houses a <br />year for the first ten years then 850 for the last five years. Everything would <br />be sewered by the year 2000 (see table 9-1). If annexation is not progressing <br />by 1986, Lane County would start a mandatory inspection of septic systems. If <br />in 1988 the schedule is behind, health hazard annexations could occur. By 1990 <br />if behind schedule, Eugene would use all of its annexation tools. The last <br />alternative is for Eugene to hook up houses beyond the city limits. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith covered three processes that could take place: large annexation <br />happening within the next years, incremental annexations, and a new city. He <br />referred to Chapter 9 on incorportation of a new city. <br /> <br />Mr. Keller complimented staff on the excellent work they had done. <br /> <br /> <br />p.m. <br /> <br />BC:db/CM23b10 <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Meeting <br /> <br />March 12, 1984 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br />