CC Minutes - 01/25/06 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Klein asked the maker of the motion if his intention was that the third option would include a trigger as opposed to all 50,000 affected properties. He noted that the analysis that staff would have to go through, including consultants that would need to be hired, would be very different. Mr. Kelly indicated his comfort with making this explicit. Ms. Bettman agreed. Ms. Taylor indicated her support for the motion. Ms. Ortiz thanked staff for the materials. She did not believe that the council and staff could afford to do nothing. She felt that doing nothing was not an effective form of planning in this instance. Mr. Papé agreed that it was good to be prepared. He asked how many cities were involved in Measure 37 claims. Mr. Klein responded that he had conducted a survey for the League of Oregon Cities there had been approximately 15 cities and approximately 50 claims. He said there were now around 3,000 claims statewide and the vast majority of them were rural. Mr. Papé surmised that Mr. Pryor’s point had some merit. He agreed that there was a lack of certainty that Measure 37 would create a problem. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, City Manager Taylor affirmed that the City relied on the County for land evaluation. He said to implement Option 1 would require City staff to do much work. He was concerned, given that he and staff were in the final phases of crafting a budget to recommend to the council for fiscal year (FY) 2007, about meeting the council priorities and supporting the current levels of service. He was not sure how staff could do all of the other things that the council had added to “the plate” by its action over the last year. He questioned the level of return the investment would provide. He did not believe that it would justify the amount of staff and consultant time. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Klein said the City would need appraiser expertise to conduct the evaluation required by option 3. He reiterated that the City would need consultant assistance for development of options 1 and 3. Mr. Papé predicted that option 3 would have multiple legal ramifications if brought into play. In response to Mr. Papé, Mr. Klein affirmed that it was not yet known whether a waiver would be transferable with the sale of a property. He noted that the Supreme Court would not likely address that question, given that it had not been raised in the proceedings. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to extend the discussion by five minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Ms. Bettman agreed that consultants and an appraiser would be needed to resolve Measure 37 issues. She found the City Manager’s position to be inconsistent as she believed these costs would be incurred and the City was “forced to do something.” She likened doing nothing to “averting our eyes from responsibility.” Mr. Kelly thought it could be six more months before the framework for options 1 and 3 would be completed and by then, the Supreme Court decision would likely be known. Mr. Kelly admonished the City Manager not to speak of a return on the investment without having conducted a fiscal analysis. The amendment passed, 4:3; Mr. Papé, Mr. Pryor, and Ms. Solomon voting in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2006 Page 4 Work Session