04/10/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Richard Unruh, 3225 Fillmore, said he personally found the tax pro- posal to be very offensive. He felt it woul d be a speci al asses'sment which would be levied only on some citizens in the community. He noted the city was not an island and he hoped Council would adopt some tax that would be equally dispersed throughout the community. Tom Slocum, 2125 Fairmount, said he agreed with the statements made by Mr. Gleaves and Mr. Unruh. Regarding the exempt area in the ordinance, he said the older neighborhoods are areas where there are older systems which will need replacement much sooner than the newer areas. Compacting growth in the central core area will increase the load on those systems and create the necessity for their replacement sooner than would take place normally. He felt the result of this tax would cause a movement to outside the city limit area and felt this to be unwise. He thought the amendments had attempted to make the payment program much easier, but it is not going to make any differ- ence as it would still be considered a lien against a house or property. This would add to the value of the house and thus would increase the cost of the house when it was sold. He felt there were much better ways of raising the money than creating an.inflationary situation which will compound the existing situation in the housing market. He also noted the high record for building permits, but said that would not always be the case and, therefore, the city would be faced with a fluctuating amount of income. He felt it would be much wiser to charge a small amount to everyone than to adopt this proposed tax. Vernon Gleaves noted there had been a rumor that the systems develop- ~~ ment tax would be no obstacle as far as annexation of the River Road/ Santa Clara area because it would be an exempt area. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Obie requested City Attorney to respond to his possible conflict of interest. Stan Long, City Attorney, said when a City Councilor was considering a legislative matter (such as this), it is governed by two general sets of rules: (1) If a Councilor has a direct substantial pecuniary interest that is particular to him; (2) if the Councilor has an indirect pecuniary interest (that is, there is some possibility a Councilor might benefit to some degree other than what other people would) then the Councilor is obligated to disclose that conflict. He noted in this particular instance, unless there was something unusual, he did not feel there was a conflict of interest in a legal sense. Ms. Smith asked for clarification regarding the conflict of this tax with the Oregon State Statutes and the City Charter vote requiring two-thirds approval of Council. . Mr. Long said with respect to the ordinance and possible conflict with the Charter, the prime author of the ordinance was Mr. Orval Etter, also the prime author of the Charter. 4/10/78--3 ~30 (. ~