Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

and Charnelton streets. He explained that the plan currently allowed $33 million in maximum indebtedness and it had nearly all been spent, much of it on the downtown library. He stated that maximum indebtedness was defined as the spending cap during the life of the plan beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 1999. He said as a result of the council’s action and direction on May 29, 2007, the proposed plan amendments would increase the maximum indebtedness by $40 million, for a total of $73 million. The other amendment to the plan would change the termination date of the district from June 30, 2024, to June 30, 2030, which would provide a more adequate timeframe to finance the City’s portion of the West Broadway project. He noted that a more minor amendment would be to officially change the name of the district to the Downtown Urban Renewal District. Mr. Weinman stated that public comment had been solicited in numerous ways and listed them, as follows: ? A postcard was mailed to all property owners in Eugene that advertised the hearing, provided con- tact information, and directed people to a special Eugene Web site; ? An display advertisement for the hearing had been placed in the Register-Guard; ? Letters soliciting comments were mailed to all of the impacted taxing districts; ? Staff met with the Lane County Finance Committee, which included two County Commissioners, and a letter from the County was included in the council packet; ? Staff met with the Eugene Planning Commission to seek comments from them. Councilor Bettman asked if the Planning Commission recommended approval of the plan amendments. Mr. Weinman replied that the commission acknowledged receiving it. He noted that the commission did not have to recommend approval. Councilor Bettman asked what the funding source would have been for the parking garage that had been proposed for the east end of downtown. Mr. Weinman replied that the garage would have been located in the Riverfront Urban Renewal District, different from the downtown district. Sue Cutsogeorge, Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department, clarified that the garage would have been built using a combination of urban renewal funds and some General Fund money. Councilor Bettman asked how much the costs that would not be included in the maximum indebtedness would amount to. Councilor Bettman referred to Table 5 on page 93 of the AIS and asked what the private expenditure portion of the $160,000,000 figure listed by Projects Funded from Private Sources and Other Federal, State, and Local Government Resources would amount to. Ms. Cutsogeorge replied that the table represented the best guess of the overall cost and funding at this point in time. She underscored that the table was not part of the plan; rather, it was a report to help evaluate the plan. Councilor Bettman asserted that the council would then approve the plan amendments based on the information though the information was “incorrect.” She asked for an errata report. Ms. Cutsogeorge said she would provide one. Councilor Bettman wished to point out to her colleagues that there was a zero under the total estimated cost for pedestrian, bike, and transit improvements and for public parks, public plazas, rest rooms, and open spaces “just in case [they] had not noticed that.” Councilor Bettman asked what the West Broadway Development project was that was referenced in the report. Mr. Weinman replied that it was the same concept shaped in the discussion begun in the spring. He stressed that it was not fully defined at this point, but staff and the citizens on the committee were trying to proceed with improving the downtown per council direction. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 16, 2007 Page 6 Work Session