Laserfiche WebLink
4. ACTION: <br /> <br />Resolution 1044 Authorizing Issuance of Urban Renewal Bonds for Projects Receiving Funding <br />from HUD Section 108 Loan Proceeds <br /> <br />City Manager Dennis Taylor stated that the present action was the “other half of this transaction.” He asked <br />Ms. Cutsogeorge to speak to it. <br /> <br />Ms. Cutsogeorge explained that the resolution was a companion to the resolution that was just approved and <br />would authorize the agency to issue a bond to the City. She said in the past the City had made this kind of <br />agreement with the agency, most recently in relation to the library project. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman opposed the resolution. She averred that the financial mechanism would lead to the <br />inevitable expenditure of funds. She did not believe it would not have a demonstrable benefit. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz said she found this issue challenging because of the amount of money that was being talked <br />about and that the voters would not be asked to vote on it. She asked whether the City, after purchasing the <br />properties, could sell them to the “highest payer.” Mr. Braud replied that if the City sold the property to the <br />highest bidder and that entity “just sat on it” and the City did not meet the national objective, which he <br />would consider to be the worst case scenario, the City would have to repay the money with the proceeds <br />supplemented by the urban renewal funds. He said if the property was purchased by a hospital, using an <br />example Councilor Ortiz had cited, it would still meet the criterion related to job creation. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman commented that the City had not sold a property at a profit during her tenure. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Cutsogeorge explained that the $8 million estimated <br />for debt service was considered under land assembly. She clarified that the $40 million maximum <br />indebtedness figure included the $7,895,000 HUD loan, but it did not include the BEDI grant. She said she <br />would provide a chart for the councilors that would explain exactly what was included under maximum <br />indebtedness and what was included in the West Broadway project as it was conceived of at that point at the <br />August 13 meeting at which the urban renewal plan amendment would be considered. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka asked how much had been spent on the options the City had negotiated thus far. Mr. <br />Braud replied that the City had spent approximately $100,000. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka observed that several were coming up for renewal in September. He said the City could <br />potentially negotiate so that the City would spend several thousand dollars to extend the options to purchase <br />the properties until March. He surmised that this would be sufficient time to have a development agreement <br />in place so that the transfer of properties would go straight to the developers. Mr. Braud responded that this <br />would be the ideal scenario. Councilor Zelenka said in the worst case the City would have to buy some or <br />all of the properties, but it would be a decision the council would make. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy suggested, in line with the job creation component, that an opportunity for an apprenticeship <br />program could be a component of the project. <br /> <br />Urban Renewal Agency President Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to adopt <br />Resolution 1044 authorizing issuance of urban renewal bonds for projects receiving funding <br />from HUD Section 108 Loan proceeds. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors <br />Bettman and Taylor voting in opposition. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 23, 2007 Page 10 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />