CC Minutes - 01/28/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Poling asked why the request was just now coming before the council when it was approved by the County Board of Commissioners last September. Mr. Braud replied that the matter was not time sensitive, as construction was not anticipated until 2009. Mr. Poling asked for clarification of the consequences if a business failed to meet enterprise zone require- ments. Mr. Braud said there were two levels of requirements: the basic State criteria that every company had to meet and local public benefit criteria established by the City and County. He said failure to meet those requirements would result in repayment of part of the tax exemption through a public benefit contribution. Mr. Poling commended GloryBee as exactly the type of company the City wished to encourage. He said it was a locally owned and operated business that had expanded to the limits of its current capacity. He said the increase in enterprise zone acreage would be nominal and the City should support the request from a local, sustainable business that wanted to establish a business park to encourage other sustainable businesses. Ms. Bettman said whether or not GloryBee was a good company was not the question before the council. She saw the proposal as "green washing" a real estate transaction. She said GloryBee needed to increase its profit in order to make the expansion profitable and that was not what the enterprise zone was for. She said focusing the public subsidy on redevelopment of brownfield sites was the one community benefit built into the enterprise zone application and greenfield sites were specifically excluded. She questioned why development of industrial land would be subsidized if there was such a shortage of it. Ms. Bettman opined that GloryBee had purchased far more property than it needed and was banking on being able to bring it into the enterprise zone so its value would be increased when the subdivided portion was sold. She said there was no way for the council to encode or enforce the green standards, as the agreements would be between GloryBee and the businesses that purchased lots. She said when the taxes were foregone by the City every other taxpayer had to make up the shortfall. Mr. Pryor remarked that brownfields and greenfields were one dimension of the enterprise zone discussion; creation of jobs was another dimension. He said GloryBee had shined over the years in increasing employment and could take advantage of the enterprise zone to continue to add jobs to the community. He said GloryBee was exactly the type of company the enterprise zone was designed to benefit and most businesses required some type of assistance to expand. He felt the request was reasonable and consistent with the purpose of the enterprise zone. Mr. Clark stated that he would support the request, as it would increase family-wage jobs in Eugene, which was the purpose of the enterprise zone. He said this was a perfect opportunity for the council to demon- strate a commitment to grow locally owned companies and increase local family-wage jobs to support a more vibrant, sustainable local economy. He hoped the council would support keeping GloryBee in Eugene. He said a false scarcity of land had been created, which drove up prices and made transactions like GloryBee was proposing necessary in order for a project to be financially feasible. Ms. Taylor asked what wages GloryBee paid. Mr. Braud said he did not have a wage scale, but GloryBee provided employees with a full benefit package and the entry-level wage was above minimum wage. Ms. Taylor asked why the council needed to make a decision at this point if construction was not planned until 2009. Mr. Braud responded that the company was going through a rigorous planning and design MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 28, 2008 Page 2 Work Session