10/22/1990 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e for fire, building, and electrical inspections would require that the other permit processes be coordinated through that third party. Mr. Boles pointed out that the committee adjusted some of its preliminary suggestions in order to address imbalance and it has attempted to ease the burden on those who will bear the costs by phasing in the change over five years. Mr. Holmer observed that only one of the 26 separate fee items considered by the committee has been the subject of public concern. While he agreed that there is public benefit to plan inspections, he maintained that the party responsible for the costs incurred at a particular time by a particular project should bear the burden of those costs. He assured the public that progress is being made in reducing the amount of staff time spent in the building permit process. Ms. Schue commented on problems associated with local government financing in Oregon and noted that while new construction is welcome in this community, it produces more demand for services without providing sufficient additional income to pay for those services. Mayor Miller, speaking on behalf of himself and Councilor Rutan, opposed moving to 100-percent private support during a period of a receding economy. He supported a combination of tax and fee support for development services and advocated for initiating a dialogue with the development community and striving for a more acceptable and balanced solution. e Mr. Gleason clarified that the council was not considering implementation of fees at this time but was deciding whether to move in that direction. Admin- istrative regulations being implemented at this time that will bring Eugene in line with the State fee schedule have nothing to do with the recommenda- tions under consideration. Ms. Bascom wondered how Eugene's building fees would compare to those else- where in the state if the recommendations were implemented. Mr. Mounts re- sponded that most cities within Oregon operate within the State guidelines. Portland is currently exceeding the state ceiling and recovering 100 percent of its costs. Mr. Boles assured Ms. Bascom that the committee considered its proposals in line with other comparable municipalities. He favored involving the private sector in a review of costs after two years. Referring to comments on the public involvement process, Ms. Ehrman said that the committee met publicly for nearly a year, and many opportunities for public input were available. Ms. Schue concurred with Ms. Ehrman's remarks. Mr. Bennett described moving to cost recovery on a user-fee basis as council policy over the past several years. As a developer himself, Mr. Bennett said he was willing to pay user fees, but he wanted assurance that those fees would be comparable to those in other metropolitan areas of comparable size in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1990 Page 4