CC Minutes - 11/12/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

changed. He asked staff to provide information to him regarding this. Mr. McVey said he would look into it and provide a memorandum to the Mayor. B. WORK SESSION: Update on Systems Development Change Legislation City Manager Dennis Taylor, noting the previous discussion, averred it would be beneficial to receive a legislative update on SDCs at this time. Mr. McVey noted that he had summarized the key changes and their relevancy for policy changes in the AlS. He reported that the primary legislation was Senate Bill 939 affecting SDCs. He added that a number of other bills had been introduced but had not gained ;;political traction." He related that he had participated in a work group to talk about this bill as it was written and rewritten. He commented that the bill that passed was less problematic for the City than some previous versions. Mr. McVey related the primary impact of the bill was to current transportation and parks SDCs, which were based on a methodology that was no longer allowed under the law as they use a level of service (LOS) methodology, which charged new development costs proportionate to the costs that the community had already incurred in establishing capacity. He said people in the building industry had concerns with that methodology and had been successful in eliminating it. He related that in the future, a methodology will be required to use a capital improvement project (CIP) list as a basis for the SDC. The parks and open spaces SDC was under current review and, in light of the change, he recommended a review of transportation SDCs be undertaken following review of the parks SDC. City Attorney Jerry Lidz stressed that the major effect of the changes Mr. McVey described was to elevate the importance of the CIP or a similar plan. He predicted a greater level of detail would be needed in the CIP. Ms. Bettman called it ironic that the Rates Advisory Committee (RAC) had initially recommended that transportation SDCs be based upon a CIP and had, ;;at the behest of the building industry," chosen to retain the LOS methodology. She opined that it ultimately would make the government more accountable as it would result in more vigilance when adopting a CIP. She asked Mr. McVey to speak to the stumbling blocks the RAC had encountered when trying to move toward a project-based methodology. Mr. McVey explained that, to a certain extent, a project-based methodology for the determination of SDCs was built upon future projects. He averred that the more contentious or controversial future projects were, the less comfortable certain people were with SDCs based upon them. He noted there at one time, there had been an expensive bridge over the river in the proposed TransPlan, and based on this the SDCs could be increased, although there was enough objection to the bridge that it was dropped from the plan. Ms. Bettman asked how a project-based methodology could be responsive to deletions or additions to the project list. Mr. McVey explained that, as the law was written, when such deletions or additions occurred and it affected the SDC rate, the City would be required to provide notice and potentially have a hearing on the SDC impact of the change on the CIP. He noted that previously the statutes allowed an agency to modify its project list at any time. Mr. Meisner remarked that regardless of the two comparative means, the legislation mandated a new process MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 12, 2003 Page 3 Regular Meeting