My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 09/19/07 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2007
>
CC Minutes - 09/19/07 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:31:29 AM
Creation date
11/15/2007 9:16:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
9/19/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
“money,” general fund money, “GRLP” money, and HOME funds, for a total of $29 million. She called <br />this money “additional subsidies and incentives.” She opined that the discussion created the “illusion” that <br />the recommendations would influence the final product. She declared it to be a “lot of public relations or… <br />even propaganda.” She believed that if the ballot measure failed very different projects would move forward <br />and if it did pass the money on the ballot would not be enough. She postulated that the Mayor and the <br />“proponents on this council” would take a passed ballot measure as a “thumbs up for subsidies for private <br />development” and would return and ask for a further increase in the debt limit. She was certain that if the <br />proponents could interpret the passage of the ballot measure as support for the project it would be “no holds <br />barred.” <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to extend the discussion by five minutes. The <br />motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon observed that there seemed to be some assumptions at the table that the developers could “care <br />less” about the report. She understood that the developers had attended every meeting and asked Mr. <br />McLauchlan to speak to this. <br /> <br />Mr. McLauchlan confirmed that the developers involved were supportive of the process and wanted to know <br />what the City thought in regard to their proposals. He noted that representatives and principals of the two <br />developers had attended many of the BDAC meetings and had spoken to the committee, indicating that they <br />were impressed with the recommendations and perceived it as Eugene’s challenge to them to do the very best <br />development they were capable of. He felt the committee had gained an appreciation for the development <br />side as much as the developers had gained an appreciation for the public input side. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon said this was consistent with her understanding of the process. She felt optimistic about the <br />process. She felt the developers wanted to be in Eugene and wanted to make a difference in the community. <br />She trusted they would work within a budget. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka believed that good ideas had come out of the BDAC, such as a smaller grocery store and <br />smaller movie theater. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 19, 2007 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.