CCMinutes - 10/11/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

generally receive assistance from the federal government in cleaning such sites. Mayor Torrey solicited a third round of council comments. Ms. Bettman said Eugene would have to address the issue ofbrownfield sites. Much of the industrial land in the city's core was contaminated. She thought the City needed to give businesses willing to develop on brownfield sites more benefits than could be provided by an enterprise zone. Ms. Bettman agreed the majority of businesses in the zone were locally owned and small, but those businesses did not receive the majority of the tax exemption. Speaking to Ms. Solomon's contention that the City could not give tax breaks with money it did not have, Ms. Bettman said the cumulative impact of such zones across the state was significant. Residents had to pay more taxes to pay the shortfall. Mr. Kelly acknowledged the mayor's comments regarding the cost of developing on brownfields but pointed out the new boundary did not exclusively contain brownfields. There were also infill and redevelopment areas in the boundary. He noted that Jack Roberts, Director of the Lane Metropolitan Partnership, believed the mitigation costs of brownfields in Eugene could be relatively low. Mr. Kelly agreed with Mr. Meisner's comments about the need to consider the City's other economic development policies, such as the Growth Management Study policies. Mr. Pap6 said that until the City had more information about the amount of industrial land it had, he preferred to keep the boundaries as proposed by the advisory committee. Mayor Torrey solicited a fourth round of council comments. Speaking to the issue of the advisory committee, Ms. Bettman said the committee met about six months but its review had not been very broad. It had essentially analyzed the old tools the City used in the past. She had objected the make-up of the committee when it was formed because it was %o obviously" had a majority of business interests as opposed to a broad range of citizen interests. However, she would have supported it if it would have given the council the recommendations for which it had %onsensus minus one." That way the council would have been given recommendations with support from various community factions. That did not happen. Mayor Torrey called for the vote on the amendment. The vote on the amendment was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Meisner, and Ms. Bettman voting yes, and Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Pap6, Mr. Poling, and Ms. Solomon voting. The mayor voted against the amendment and it failed on a final vote of 5:4. Mr. Kelly regretted the vote. He said the council had the chance to have a united front on an important economic development issue but it was unable to achieve that. He was frustrated and angry that a council majority, rather than accepting what he believed to be 85 percent of the pie on which all could agree, instead took 100 percent of the pie, splitting the community down the middle. What happened in January, Mr. Kelly said, ~who knows?" MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 11, 2004 Page 12 Work Session