Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Ortiz said a lot of work went into the ordinance and she wanted to honor that effort. When she <br />considered how much it cost to develop, the proposed fee was a problem for her. If the ordinance took less, <br />such as 15 percent of the increase in fair market value, she might be able to support it. However, she <br />thought the proposed fee was an “amazing amount of money” to ask for on top of what the City charged for <br />doing business in the community. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor pointed out that the proposed fee was only 25 percent of the increase in value that the actions of <br />the council gave the property. It was merely “taking back part of what we gave by some action” and only <br />when the benefit was realized, not instantly. She thought it minimal, and demonstrated that at least the <br />council was doing something. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy praised Ms. Bettman and those who worked hard on the concept so that the City had money <br />and did not “roll over” for every claim that came through. She was not opposed to Eugene being first. <br />However, she had a sense that the idea had not “cooked enough.” Mayor Piercy noted that Governor Ted <br />Kulongoski expressed interest in dealing with the concept, as did Representative Floyd Prozanski. She <br />hoped that a work group could be formed to track the work of the legislature and help to develop a more <br />fully informed way to move forward. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy asked Mr. Klein what “jeopardy” the City would be in terms of regulating infill and other <br />Planning Commission work plan items if the council postponed action for five months. Mr. Klein said it <br />depended on the schedule those items were on. Most of the “jeopardy” arose from existing regulations not in <br />place prior to the establishment of the State land use system. Ms. Muir did not see any pending commission <br />actions that would give rise to additional Ballot Measure 37 claims. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman encouraged the governor and State legislature to do what they could to remedy the effects of <br />Ballot Measure 37. If they took action, her amendment would ensure the ordinance ceased to exist. In the <br />meanwhile, Ballot Measure 37 was the law and the City needed a revenue source to counter its effects. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Pryor’s comments, Ms. Bettman said the fee was based on the average real market value so <br />it would underestimate the benefit that accrued to a property after the City took action, which worked to the <br />benefit of the property owner. In a situation where the appraisal may be above the average, those property <br />owners were likely to appeal and do their own appraisal and they would get a reduction in the fee; when an <br />appraisal was below the average, those property owners would not need to appeal. The result would be that <br />the appraisal would be based on the average and below. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved that the ordinance be scheduled for a work <br />session following the 2007 legislative session. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon strongly objected to the direction the council was heading. She thought the ordinance needed <br />more work and it would have the same type of unintended consequences as Ballot Measure 37. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Mr. Papé, moved to substitute the motion with a motion to di- <br />rect the City Manager to perform no additional work on the real property value-added <br />charge and the ordinance shall not be scheduled for a future council meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly indicated his opposition to the substitute motion because he interpreted it as precluding the <br />council from discussing the issue again. He thought it would be foolhardy for the council, in the face of <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />