05/30/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Obie said he was delighted with the Mayor's decision and that the decision was a wise one. He commended the Mayor for his courage and his leadership. Ms. Miller said if the veto is sustained it would be a great disappointment that the voters of Eugene would not get to vote on the tax measures. To say the public would not understand issues is to underestimate the voter. She hoped there would be further study and significant positive tax relief to the voter. Mr. Delay noted this was a veto of bills that refer the issues to the people. A consequence is to prevent the community from expressing its opinion. We are dealing with an electorate that is capable of understanding, he said. The gross receipts tax was studied three years ago and recommended as the best alternative. The majority of the Budget Committee then chose not to put it on the ballot. Mr. Delay asked those who would vote to sustain the veto to put their energies and their time and their efforts into passing this budget which they feel should stand alone without the other taxing choices for the voter. Ms. Smith said she would support the veto and she will study the budget problem. If it is decided to have an alternate source of revenue, that revenue will be shared by all and not by a few special interest groups. e Mayor Keller noted that one of the primary jobs of the Mayor is to support the budget and that is his intent. Vote was taken on the motion to override the veto, which was defeated with all Councilors present voting aye except Councilors Hamel, Smith, and Obie voting nay. 2. ~udget Committee Meeting, Monday, 7:30, June 4, 1979, McNutt Room. To consider capital outlay budget, the Community Development Block Grant program and the room tax budgets. 3. Report on ERA's Disposition of Parcel 125A (materials distributed) Manager noted some months ago the Council developed a process for accepting proposals for development of this parcel rather than designating an historic landmark group of buildings. The staff requested proposals. The proposals were reviewed by a special design review committee, by the ERA Board members and the Historic Review Board members. The decision was made by the ERA Board overriding the Historic Review Board's recommendation under their existing authority. The Park Willamette Associates were chosen and the reasons for their selection were outlined in the distri- buted material. The ERA makes their decisions under State law and cannot be overridden by the Council. - 30~ 5/30/79--3