Laserfiche WebLink
3. CONSENT CALENDAR <br /> <br /> A. Approval of City Council Minutes <br /> - November 8, 2004, Work Session <br /> - November 8, 2004, City Council Meeting <br /> - November 10, 2004, Work Session <br /> - November 15, 2004, City Council Meeting <br /> - November 22, 2004, Work Session <br /> - November 22, 2004, City Council Meeting <br /> - November 24, 2004, Work Session <br /> B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda <br /> C. Adoption of Resolution 4820 Repealing Resolution No. 4477 that Adopted the 1996 <br /> Housing Dispersal policy, and Providing an Effective Date <br /> <br /> Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved approval of the <br /> Consent Calendar. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly pulled Item C. He stated that he had previously submitted minutes corrections via email. <br />He also noted, on behalf of Councilor Bettman, that she had submitted corrections to the minutes <br />electronically. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections, without objections, approved. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the <br /> exceptions of Item C passed unanimously, 6:0. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy called for discussion on Item C. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly agreed with Mr. Hinkley's public testimony that this was not an item for the Consent <br />Calendar. Noting that the resolution was already on the table, he said it would either need to be approved, <br />denied, or tabled at this point. Having spent four years on the Housing Policy Board (HPB), he thought the <br />acceptance of subsidized housing in the community was due in part to the Housing Dispersal Policy. He fek <br />the goals of the policy were still valid. He did not find the reasons staff provided in the Agenda Item <br />Summary (ALS) to be sufficient to eliminate it. He believed the policies could need revision in some places, <br />such as finding a more relevant number for a maximum number of units. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling commented that his understanding was that the policy, when repealed, would be folded into <br />the Consolidated Plan. He asked if there were advantages for construction of low-income housing that the <br />City stood to lose by repealing the policy. Richie Weinman, Urban Services Manager for the Planning and <br />Development Division (PDD), responded that the City stood to gain something by repealing the policy. He <br />explained that this was the reason that both the HPB and the Planning Commission had supported the repeal. <br />He said the dispersal policy identified certain census tracks that were not eligible for family housing because <br />of population and, because of changes in federal funding, those census tracks happened to be located in <br />places where 30 percent more money could be gained for projects. He stated that lower income census <br />tracks had this bonus associated with them. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 9 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />